Climate change

Yes, wind turbines really do save carbon emissions!

2013-05-20T13:02:00Z

Helen Blenkharn, Climate Change Policy Officer

I regularly get asked ‘do wind turbines save carbon emissions?’

A recent report by the Committee on Climate Change looks at the UK’s carbon footprint and the lifecycle emissions from different types of electricity supply and so answers the question once and for all. Taking a lifecycle emissions approach is important – it means that the emissions not just from combustion but also from materials, production, construction, operation and decommissioning all get counted. This gives a more accurate overall picture for the different fuels and technologies than just looking at their ‘in use’ emissions.

It’s clear that low carbon technologies ‘do what they say on the tin’ - they truly result in far lower carbon pollution than fossil fuels. The Committee on Climate Change says the average carbon intensity of UK electricity supply needs to be 50gCO2/KWh by 2030. It’s currently about 500gCO2/KWh - that’s a massive challenge in just 17 years. The table shows that the amount of electricity we can afford to produce from conventional gas fired power stations is going to be very limited, and even coal with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is going to push up the average emissions significantly.

What we need is a balance of renewable energy technologies – not just those listed above but wave and tidal too, alongside gas with CCS. However, CCS is still unproven at a commercial scale which is why we’re calling on Government to invest in cracking this technology as a priority. The report also says we need to reduce the UK’s carbon footprint by 70% by 2050 if we are going to meet our climate objectives. This is a staggering amount, and it proves that climate change isn’t going to be solved by leaving it to the energy sector – it needs a huge push from all of us to make it happen.

If this blog post leaves you with one message, it’s that we can’t afford to hang around. Decisions need to be taken, and put into action, quickly to change the way we power the UK. And we all need to look at our use of energy too, as individuals. Otherwise we’re going to be looking back in 2030 and thinking why on Earth didn’t we start sooner?

Calls for a Thames Estuary Airport rejected... for the 7th time since 1946

2013-05-10T14:06:00Z

The Transport Select committee’s rejection of a Thames Estuary Airport will not be the final word so we won’t be cracking open the fair-trade fizzy pop just yet – that should come later when the Davies commission (we hope) hammers home the final nail.

The Thames and its mighty estuary has been through a lot. Spanish armadas, centuries of international shipping, heavy industry, intensive farming, a sunken ship stuffed to the gills with explosives and the 6 million people who live around it have not yet overwhelmed the >1000 km² of mudflats and marshes sat on London’s doorstep.

Our work with the Thames estuary Futurescape, Wallasea Island and the multiple designations protecting these areas are all there for a reason. To protect and support the hundreds of waders, wildfowl, rare invertebrates and endangered mammals that depend upon these habitats. So it is fantastic that the committee specifically mention the impact a Thames Estuary Airport would have on wildlife in their explanation of its rejection - alongside the poor economic outlook.

Whilst everyone in the Thames Estuary will have collectively let out a sigh of relief today, the news was rather more alarming for west Londoners. The Select Committee firmly backed a new runway at Heathrow, and even encouraged an assessment of a proposal to move Heathrow West and build a fourth runway.

Its not just local residents who should be disappointed by this conclusion, however; Aviation emissions are currently increasing, and unconstrained aviation expansion will only accelerate this. Yet all countries in the world, including the UK, have committed to reduce emissions in line with keeping climate change to under an average global temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius It’s increasingly clear that achieving this goal will mean we need to make faster and deeper emission reductions, and a new hub airport or expanded Heathrow will make this harder to achieve. It’s time that MPs and Government began to connect the dots and prioritised keeping our climate safe over short-term growth.

We need to help UK wildlife adapt to climate change

2013-05-08T12:16:00Z

For a long time, climate change has felt like a distant problem; a cause of concern for our children’s children maybe, but not us. No longer, however, as our climate is changing before our eyes and we’re being forced to cope with a seemingly endless series of floods and droughts. But if you think it’s bad for us, then take a moment to think about how our wildlife is coping, because a major new report launched to today shows that it’s plants and animals that are on the frontline of our changing climate.

The ‘report card’ is compiled by Natural England and the Environment Agency in consultation with a wide range of experts to collate the latest scientific evidence, including ourselves at the RSPB. It provides a comprehensive overview of how nature is already being affected by climate change in the UK, and what is to come.

The picture at the moment is by no means uniformly negative; most of our butterflies do well out of warmer summers, and the UK has welcomed a range of new species spreading northwards over the Channel such as little egret and small red-eyed damselfly. But the negative impacts are already beginning to emerge. Spread of problem non-native species, pests and diseases is being aided by the changing climate, and we’re seeing coastal habitats such as saltmarsh being lost rapidly to sea-level rise. Individual species are also struggling with the changes – the spectacular black grouse and capercaillie show poor breeding success in response to high summer rainfall, for example.

That’s why we think conservation needs an adaptation strategy, and this strategy needs to be based on three pillars:

An enhanced protected area network of bigger, better sites that are well managed and ecologically connected across the landscape. These sites will continue to provide vital refuges that will help to accommodate the northwards advance of species in the face of climate change, but delivery at the scale needed will require new and innovative partnerships at the landscape scale, within the conservation sector and with others who can change how land is managed for the better.

Addressing existing problems to ensure populations are robust and able to withstand stress. In the uplands, for example, a combination of climate change and drainage is drying out the peat soil, reducing the number of craneflies that chicks of species like golden plover depend upon. With many others, we are working to restore these damaged ecosystems, putting the plovers and other species in the best position possible to successfully adapt.

A long-term perspective. Conservation has always been a long game, but climate change means that we now need to have our eyes on the future more than ever. If we don’t, then today’s conservation successes risk being swept away.

Even this, however, won’t work if climate change continues unbridled. Nature can only adapt so far and so fast. Reports this week that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rapidly approaching 400 parts per million - up from 280 before the industrial revolution – are a sobering reminder that current efforts to avoid ‘dangerous’ levels of climate change are inadequate. One major review in the journal Nature concluded that under a mid-range climate warming scenario, 15-37% of species would be 'committed to extinction' by 2050. We’re currently on a trajectory that would result in a greater level of change.

This leads us to the inescapable conclusion that anyone who wants to see the unique and wonderful wildlife of our country protected must step up to the climate challenge. That means doing everything we can to reduce our emissions, and challenging Government to do the same.

If climate change is starting to sound like a broken record...

2013-05-03T11:38:00Z

If you want the latest global climate statistics, here they are.

Last year was the ninth warmest on record, says the World Meteorological Organisation’s statement on global climate for 2012. At 0.45°C above the 1961-90 average, it’s the 27th consecutive year above the long term average global average temperature.

There’s just one year – 1998 – that interrupts the years from 2001 being the hottest we’ve had. The pattern of succeeding decades being warmer is apparent.from the graph, especially given the natural variability caused by the El Niño cycle, volcanic eruptions and other phenomena.

The years 2001 to 2012 were among the warmest 13 on record. A strong El Nino in 1998 made it an exceptionally warm year. Source: WMO Annual statement on the Status of the Global Climate in 2012

Globally, rainfall was slightly higher in 2012 than the 1961-90 average. But this overall average hides drier weather over much of the central United States, northern Mexico, northeastern Brazil, central Russia, and south-central Australia. In contrast, northern Europe, western Africa, north-central Argentina, western Alaska, and most of northern China saw wetter than average conditions.

2012 was also a year of extremes. While the United States and south-east Europe experienced extreme drought, west Africa and Pakistan were hit by extreme flooding. Europe, northern Africa and Asia were affected by extreme cold and snow.

The report also shows how Arctic sea ice is diminishing rapidly, reaching a record low with 18% less summer ice than the previous low point in 2007, 3.41 million square kilometres, compared to 4.17 million square kilometres.

Arctic sea ice in 2012 - and the next lowest extent in 2007 - compared to the 1979 to 2000 average. Source: WMO annual statement on the Status of the Global Climate in 2012.

Melting occurred over 97% of Greenland’s ice sheet in July 2012, the highest level in the 34-year satellite record. And whilst there was a slight increase in Antarctic sea ice Antarctica overall, like Greenland, is losing ice mass overall.

It’s pretty clear that something is happening, don’t you think?

Help us to protect wildlife, climate and jobs

2013-04-25T10:00:00Z

Today a coalition of green groups and businesses, including the RSPB, has written to the Secretaries of State for Business and for Energy and Climate Change, Vince Cable and Ed Davey.

We are calling on them to protect the wildlife, climate and jobs that are threatened by the rapid expansion of bioenergy based on burning trees. We want them to act to limit the size of the biomass industry to sustainable levels.

You can help as well. Please write to your MP today and call on them to support only sustainable biomass.

Here is the letter we have sent:

We believe that Government needs to act quickly to limit support for large-scale electricity-only biomass, both to protect our climate and environment, as well as the many British businesses that depend on affordable sources of wood, pulp and other forms of biomass.

Current plans to subsidise biomass electricity could see the sector consuming the equivalent of six times the UK’s annual forestry harvest by 2017. These plans threaten to increase our greenhouse gas emissions, and this increased pressure on a scarce and valuable natural resource will threaten the survival of existing industries – in wood, wood panels, packaging, construction, furniture and paper.

Over 40,000 jobs rely on these industries and many of these would be at risk thanks to the reckless pursuit of biomass electricity. 8,400 people rely on jobs in the wood panel industry. The sawmilling industry, which supports a further 12,000 jobs, could be jeopardised. In addition the paper industry in the UK represents at least 25,000 direct employees and, it is estimated, up to 100,000 indirect employees.

A growing body of evidence highlights the carbon debt created when a tree is harvested and burned. This debt can take between decades and centuries to repay as trees re-grow, meaning that this kind of energy fails to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the medium term; however, current calculations of the emissions from biomass electricity ignore this and the biomass industry does not have to count them when it receives subsidies. [You can read more about this in RSPB, Friends of the Earth & Greenpeace report, 'Dirtier than Coal: Why Government plans to subsidise the burning of trees are bad news for the planet, 2012'.]

Whilst bioenergy releases the carbon stored in wood into the atmosphere, the use of wood for products such as construction timber, packaging, fencing, wood panels and furniture plays an important role by locking that carbon up for very long periods, often well in excess of 60 years after harvesting, quite apart from extended carbon storage when wood fibre is recycled and re-used. A Forest Research report commissioned by the Department of Energy and Climate Change clearly concludes that using woody biomass for energy-only consistently performs worse from a carbon point of view than more traditional uses. When using forest biomass the underlying principle should be to maximise the beneficial use of this renewable but ultimately limited resource and to apply a cascading approach to resource use wherever possible and appropriate.

Bioenergy has an important role to play in the UK’s renewable energy strategy, but not through the use of wood (except genuine wastes) for electricity alone (as opposed to more efficient, good quality combined heat and power). It is clear that burning wood for electricity alone fails to provide the emission savings it is designed for while putting at risk other industries which perform far better from a carbon point of view. As such, we are calling on Government to use the UK Energy Bill to reflect environmental realities and to limit the scope of biomass in the energy sector and ultimately to put sustainability at the heart of the policy framework for biomass.

Mike Clarke, Executive Director, RSPB
John Sauven, Executive Director, Greenpeace
Andy Atkins, Chief Executive, Friends of the Earth
David Sulman, Executive Director, UK Forest Products Association
David Workman, Director General, Confederation of Paper Industries
Bob Livesey, Joint Managing Director, Egger
Karl Morris, Managing Director, Norbord
Mike McKenna, Director, Kronospan
Alistair Kerr, Director General, Wood Panel Industries Federation
John Dye, President, TIMCON
Hamish Macleod, Director of Public Affairs, BSW Timber
John White, CEO, Timber Trade Federation
Paul von der Heyde, Chairman, British Furniture Confederation
Jackie Bazeley, Managing Director, British Furniture Manufacturers
Michael Powell, Chairman, FIRA, Furniture Industry Research Association

Please do help by writing to your MPs and calling on them to support only sustainable biomass today if you can.

What’s more unstable - our climate or the economy?

2013-04-22T13:14:00Z

We all know that we can’t afford to burn all of our fossil fuel reserves if we’re to stay within the ‘safe’ climate change of around 2°C average global temperature rise, but a new report last week has revealed just how big the mismatch is between economic and environmental systems.

The new report estimates that burning the coal, oil and gas reserves listed on the world’s stock exchanges would release 762GtCO₂ – and this represents only a quarter of the world’s total reserves! Yet we can only burn between 16% to 30% of these ‘assets’ if we are to retain a safe climate. Carbon Tracker calls this mismatch a ‘Six Trillion Dollar carbon bubble’.

Meanwhile an EU report has put the annual cost of extreme weather at €100 billion by 2020, and 250 billion Euros by 2050. Worse, they warn that the failure to take measures to prevent the destruction of crops and property by extreme weather is likely to lead to instability and deeper social divisions.

For the 2002-2011 period, the temperature of the European land area was on average 1.3°C above the pre-industrial level. Southern countries such as Spain, Greece and Cyprus have experienced severe droughts. Other northern countries, including Denmark, have had increased flooding such as we’ve seen here in Britain. Our climate is becoming almost as unstable as our economy!

It seems that if there is one thing that unregulated markets will guarantee, it’s dangerous levels of climate change. We think it’s time to challenge the system and demand that Government takes a firm line, stopping new investment in infrastructure that might make the markets happy today, but at the expense of all of us tomorrow.

They could start with reversing their crazy decision on a new airport at Lydd. What do you think?

We need to talk about consumption...

2013-04-17T15:10:00Z

...Because when it comes to our climate change emissions, it seems that the Government isn’t telling the whole truth. Last month, for the first time in a few years, UK carbon emissions statistics showed an increase (a 4.5% rise in 2012), following a few years of a noticeable downward trend. We’re now, overall, emitting 26% less than in 1990.

But overall, that’s great news right? Not quite.

Yesterday evening I went along to a talk organized by the Public Interest Research Centre and featuring speakers such as Caroline Lucas. They pointed out why our seemingly exemplary action to tackle climate change is not all it appears to be. It’s all rather neatly summarized in this new animation which was launched at last night’s event.

(Please visit the site to view this video)

According to the film we've been told three fundamental lies about the UK's emissions and consumption, lies which could have consequences for wildlife and the climate:

Lie number one: we have succeeded in cutting UK carbon emissions

It’s true that the emissions from stuff that's both produced and consumed in the UK have declined (manufacturing has decreased and been replaced by services). That’s because a lot of what we use is now made abroad, in particular in China.

When the emissions caused by making that stuff are factored in, the UK’s emissions have actually increased by 20% (not decreased) compared to 1990. So, our domestic emissions balance sheets might be less carbon intensive, but our lifestyles certainly aren’t. We’re letting China take the heat for our consumer lifestyles.

Lie number two: current UK action on climate change is enough

Government is not investing enough in genuinely low-carbon renewable energy and other measures to reduce our emissions. True, the proportion of UK energy that comes from renewables is rising (in 2011 9.4% of the UK’s electricity same from renewable sources), and that’s to be applauded.

But more widely we’re happy to allow the consumption accounting fix to make it look like we’re doing very well at reducing our emissions overall when in fact they’ve gone up. We need to both honestly account for these emissions and to invest more in genuinely low-carbon energy and transport options and in energy efficiency.

Lie number three: more stuff can make us happier

A range of evidence shows that, beyond a certain point, having more things doesn’t actually make you any happier. In fact, the cycle of consumption can make people less happy. Speakers at last night’s event raised a couple of key points. One is that it’s important to think about how we could use stuff differently – repairing, sharing, loaning and recycling, for example. Alongside that, we can think about all the ways to be happy that don’t rely on buying more stuff: spending more time in nature being one of the more obvious.

For me, alongside these three lies, are three compelling reasons we could benefit from rethinking how much and the way consume:

Our consumption is resulting in climate change emissions that we’re not taking responsibility for and this will be bad news for wildlife and people in the long run.
Careless or excessive consumption could place unnecessary or unsustainable pressure on wildlife and habitats.
Reducing the amount we consume, and freeing up time for other pursuits will probably make us happier, healthier and give us the chance to reconnect with nature.

Burying our heads in the sand will only be bad news for wildlife, and for us, in the long run. What is it that brings you happiness, and could you be happier consuming less?

What connects your home with the wilds of Southern USA?

2013-04-12T07:00:00Z

Continuing our theme on bioenergy, we invited Danna Smith, Executive Director of Dogwood Alliance to share the threat it poses to America's forests and wildlife...

I was born and raised on the Atlantic coast of the Southern US. I spent most of my youthful years romping around in the woods, building forts, pretending to be lost in the wild and raised by animals, chasing butterflies, mimicking bird calls and otherwise reveling in the magical spaces created by the coastal forests that defined my place in the world… my home. And while most of my younger years were spent playing in these forests, I have spent the larger part of my adult life fighting to protect them from destructive industrial logging.

Today, one of the biggest threats to the forests in this part of the world is coming from European utility companies. At a time when scientific evidence is mounting that burning trees for electricity will actually result in increased carbon emissions when compared to coal over the next 30 to 50 years, utilities in Europe are converting coal burning power plants to wood, all in the name of “renewable energy.” Beyond the climate impacts, Europe’s use of wood to generate electricity threatens the survival of many unique species found in the forests of the Southern US.

In 2012, the Southern US emerged as the world’s largest exporter of wood pellets – the overwhelming majority of which are exported and burned in European power plants to generate electricity. Sixteen wood pellet facilities combined to export over 1.5 million tons or wood pellets to major European utility companies including Drax, RWE, Electrobel and E.On. An additional fifteen wood pellet facilities are currently proposed and market analysts project that wood pellet exports from the Southern US to Europe will more than triple to 5.7 million tons by 2015.

These wood pellet facilities, which are located within reasonable proximity to shipping ports, rely heavily on forests in the coastal plain of the South. These majestic forests with their intricate network of richly-diverse bottomland forested wetlands flanked by natural upland pine woodlands provide important habitat to countless species such as the black bear and the gopher tortoise. They are home to the world’s highest concentration of carnivorous plants, including the infamous Venus flytrap. Approximately 30% of threatened and endangered species in the Southeast depend on the bottomland hardwood wetland forests in the region.

In addition, about 85% of eastern North American bird species rely on these forests as well. Bird species at particular risk from industrial logging include the Red-eyed Vireo, Yellow-throated Vireo and Prothonotary Warblers. Swallow-tailed Kites, a threatened landbird in the Southeastern US, have become a flagship for the conservation of bottomland hardwood forests. This increasingly rare bird has undergone one of the most drastic range restrictions of all North American landbirds, declining to a mere 15 to 25 percent of its historic range. Extensive logging of bottomland hardwood forests is considered a primary cause.

Years of intense industrial logging by paper and wood products manufacturers has already taken a toll on countless species, many of which have been hanging on by a thread. Land trusts have helped to purchase and protect some of the most special places in the region, though most forests still lack adequate protection. In addition, a recent promising trend of improved forestry practices by the paper industry (brought about by pubic campaigns) might have given some of these species some much needed space to recover. But, sadly, their future remains uncertain as industrial logging accelerates due to the demand by European utility companies for wood pellets.

Burning trees to generate electricity is bad for climate and forests and converting coal burning power plants to wood is not the path to a clean energy future. There is a path forward to a clean energy future that does not involve burning fossil fuels. Conservation and efficiency combined with power generated by the sun and wind are much better options; but, unfortunately European utilities are on the wrong track in turning to forests as a primary fuel source for generating electricity.

Danna Smith is a founder and executive director of Dogwood Alliance. She holds a Doctorate of Jurisprudence from Emory University. Prior to founding Dogwood Alliance, she worked for Greenpeace US.

Since 1996, Dogwood Alliance has increased protection for millions of acres of Southern forests by transforming the way corporations, landowners and communities value them for their climate, wildlife and water benefits. Dogwood Alliance has revolutionized the environmental practices of some of the world’s largest corporations. In addition to long-term work on driving sustainability in the paper industry, for the past four years the group has increased its focus on the destructive practices of the bioenergy industry. For more information on the organization please visit, www.dogwoodalliance.org.

What are your thoughts on biomass? What do you think the Government should be doing to make our energy system better for the climate and for wildlife?

Wood... a burning issue?

2013-04-10T04:25:00Z

Guest blogger: Matt Williams, Climate Change Policy Officer

My final couple of weeks in the RSPB climate change team are set to be exciting, as MPs prepare to debate the UK’s Energy Bill, which will shape the energy sources used to power Britain for the next forty years. This vital piece of legislation could prove crucial in whether the UK meets its carbon reduction targets, and provides an opportunity for us to shape the way we generate our energy and reduce the impacts on nature.

It also provides an opportunity to address the increasing role of biomass, where energy is generated by burning organic material, usually wood. Using certain wastes or residues for energy can be sensible options that help to reduce emissions and meet our renewable energy targets, but not all bioenergy is a good idea - Government plans to burn wood from newly harvested trees are bad news for wildlife and the climate.

This is of particular concern to the RSPB and we, along with Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, recently published a report showing that burning whole trees in biomass power plants can be even more polluting than coal power, widely seen as the most polluting form of energy generation, and can also have a devastating impact on wildlife.

And it's not just us talking about it, the Economist have published an interesting article on the subject which you can read here.

UK demand for trees to burn will result in unsustainable pressure on forests, particularly in North America. Biodiversity rich forests there are under strain, with special wildlife such as the swallow-tailed kite and the Venus fly trap already threatened. We’ll have a blog on the dangers to this special wildlife in the coming days.

There is an overwhelming consensus between green groups and businesses that the best way to position the UK as a modern, efficient economy, attracting investment and creating jobs, while cutting carbon emissions and controlling energy prices, is to use the Energy Bill to decarbonise our electricity supply by 2030.

We are calling on the UK Government to use the Energy Bill to create a sustainable biomass sector that leads to genuine emissions reductions.

Please write to your MP today and call on them to only support sustainable biomass.

Ask them to support our vital amendments to the UK Energy Bill to help us ensure that our future energy generation is sustainable and takes the needs of wildlife and the environment into account.

Let us know if your MP replies and why not tell us what else you think the Government should be doing to make our energy system better for the climate and for wildlife, by commenting below?

Eurocrats save the World? – EC gets ball rolling

2013-03-27T17:04:00Z

John Lanchbery, Principal Climate Change Advisor

We are not on course to save the world from climate change. Emissions are not heading downwards so as to ensure an average global temperature rise of less than two degrees, the target agreed by all nations. Instead they are surging upwards towards a likely rise in temperature of between three and five degrees. This is bad news for people and bad news for the natural world; each one degree rise in temperature is likely to result in the loss of about one tenth of all species.

It is no longer just scientists and the environment groups that are warning of such dire consequences. The assessments above come from institutions not best known for their radical stance on environmental issues: the World Bank, the International Energy Agency, the United Nations and the European Commission.

In Durban, at the end of 2011, all of the 195 nations of the UN climate change treaty noted ‘with grave concern the significant gap between countries pledges in terms of emissions [reductions] and emission pathways consistent with a likely chance of holding the increase in global average temperature below 2 °C or 1.5 °C’. The UN Environmental Programme puts this ‘significant gap’ at between 8,000,000,000 and 13,000,000,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide - or about twice all emissions from the European Union. It’s a very large gap.

The threat of climate change is thus recognised by almost all of those in a position to do something about it. The problem is that not much is actually being done to address the emissions gap.

So full marks to the European Commission for getting the ball rolling this week.

Yesterday the Commission launched its consultation on shaping international climate policy beyond 2020, as well as before 2020. Today the Commission launched its green paper A 2030 framework for climate and energy policies. After discussions with the European Parliament and governments of member states, this paper will form the basis for much of the EU’s climate and energy policy after 2020. It is very important, not just for EU climate change policy but, hopefully, for showing leadership on tackling climate change to the wider world.

The Commission’s analysis and views about what needs to be done internationally have much in common with those of many environmental groups. However, its views on what actions the EU itself should take after 2020 fall a long way short of what is needed. It’s as if the Commission had not read its own analysis of the science in the international paper. The upshot is that this year and next will see heated debates in Europe about whether to extend the current system of mandatory targets on renewable energy beyond 2020, and whether to make energy efficiency targets binding.

Long term trend in global CO2 emissions (Netherlands EPA / JRC EU)

At the launch of the Green Paper, Energy Commissioner Gunther Oettinger, said we should wait to see if the recently introduced, non-binding, Energy Efficiency Directive has the desired effect. We hope that it will, but experience suggests sufficient action will not be taken in many countries unless it is made a requirement.

On binding targets for renewables, some countries such as the UK appear to favour a ‘technology neutral’ approach to energy, meaning climate targets would be met in whichever way member states choose. However we will be calling for ambitious and binding targets for renewables, in recognition that they are the only basis on which to build a truly sustainable future energy system. Only by requiring development and deployment of innovative renewables technologies will we be able to drive down their costs to a point where clean, sustainable energy is the natural option.

Smart measuring

2013-03-20T14:42:52Z

Sarah Alsbury, RSPB Environmental Management manager

Buildings, or more accurately what goes on inside them, are responsible globally for close to half of human produced greenhouse gas emissions. Although buildings could be seen as half the problem we should not feel disheartened, as there are many readily available solutions for quickly reducing emissions from buildings. Cost effective measures include heating controls, insulation, efficient lighting and appliances that implemented would reduce emissions from buildings by 40% and that is before switching to clean energy sources.

Climate change is already affecting birds and other wildlife in the UK and the Climate Change Act has legislative targets for reducing carbon pollution. So the RSPB has adopted an equivalent target for our own emissions – a 30% reduction between 2010 and 2020. Energy conservation, alongside renewables, is essential for us to achieve this target – and it’s the most cost-effective measure. We are keen to improve our understanding of how our buildings are working and our monitoring of energy consumption. As with habitat management, good monitoring data underpins successful energy conservation.

Pilio, a new spinout company from the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, is helping us understand the energy consumption patterns of our buildings. This knowledge makes it easier to identify energy saving opportunities, to evaluate the success of energy saving actions we take and to monitor our progress in reducing carbon emissions. Pilio prepared an energy audit report of our Lodge headquarters, using half-hourly data from smart meters, sent digitally, to compile a high-resolution profile of our buildings’ energy use. Pilio’s analysis identified some high electricity loads and patterns, which we are now investigating. We are installing smart meters at our larger sites so that we can extend this process.

We’ve also been trialling a Peer Group account in sMeasure (www.smeasure.com), Pilio’s online building energy management software. This lets us bring together energy consumption data across all the sites, comparing and ranking the energy efficiency of our buildings. sMeasure shows us how each building is performing against the weather conditions, enabling us to quickly spot if heating controls are well set or if there might be problems with a boiler. The Pilio team prepared a review on the results from two buildings to demonstrate how we can use the information coming through sMeasure to improve our energy management.

We are at the beginning of a journey to understand and manage the energy consumed across our nature reserve and office buildings. It is a process of learning and doing, which we want to share with our members, visitors and staff to encourage them to take energy saving steps at home. These combined efforts to reduce the emissions from our buildings will contribute towards the energy transformation necessary for environmental protection.

And it'd be great to hear from others who are also working to make their buildings greener

Making waves on the energy scene

2013-03-10T17:21:00Z

Helen Blenkharn, RSPB Climate Change Policy Officer

Last week we posted a blog on our concerns about proposals for a Severn Barrage that are being discussed by a Government committee. The project would involve a shore-to-shore barrage across the Severn Estuary, with potentially catastrophic consequences for the world-class habitats and wildlife that exist there. Barrages such as this are an engineering feat on a huge scale, and their impacts can extend far beyond their immediate location and for many years after they’ve been built.

What isn’t always clear though, is that the RSPB supports the development of wave and tidal technologies. However, we’d like to see a balanced, step-by-step approach that allows new systems to be tested and monitored, rather than leaping into a project on such a huge scale that it excludes all other options. In the longer term, we think taking this phased approach will mean we can deliver more renewable energy without unacceptable impacts on wildlife.

A barrage isn’t the only way to harness the renewable energy potential of the Severn, or other estuaries around the UK for that matter, and there are a range of more innovative, and potentially less damaging, technologies that need to be considered. For example, tidal lagoons use the same technology but apply them in an arc from a single point on the coastline. If sited appropriately this approach could have far fewer impacts than a barrage – they’re likely to affect the tidal patterns over a smaller area and should be less of a barrier to fish. They’re also smaller in scale so should have less impact on intertidal habitats like mudflats.

There are a range of new wave and tidal devices under development, like Pelamis below which uses the motion of waves to generate electricity. Tidal stream devices are currently dominated by machinery similar to wind turbines but positioned beneath the water. They use the energy in the tides to turn the turbines and can be arranged together in a ‘tidal fence’. You can read a good introduction to the different technologies that are currently under development in a report that RegenSW and partners produced for the Bristol Channel last year.

Pelamis wave device at the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney (copyright free)

However, it isn’t all plain sailing. The wave and tidal industry has two big problems and they’re closely linked. One is that it’s incredibly expensive to develop new technologies and roll them out on a commercial scale. They need willing investors, and that’s the second problem - lack of certainty about Government support for different renewable technologies means that investors are very hard to come by. Even if they manage to overcome both of these hurdles there’s still the difficulty of getting access to the electricity grid which can need expensive new infrastructure.

Yet the picture isn’t all doom and gloom. Over the last few weeks and months a number of big announcements suggest that the tide may be turning. Last year the Government announced the launch of two ‘marine energy parks’, one in the south west in Cornwall, and the other in the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters in the north of Scotland. These areas have shown leadership in driving forward the development of wave and tidal technologies and both have new research and testing facilities, including The Wave Hub in Hayle and the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney, which has just been granted £4.1million from the Scottish Government to boost their research.

New funding is also coming on stream. Last week the UK Government announced new funding to help drive forward growth in the UK’s marine energy industry. Two British companies, MeyGen Ltd and Sea Generation Wales Ltd were offered a share of £20 million under the Marine Energy Array Demonstrator scheme. They’ll use the money to test marine devices in arrays out at sea. And the Crown Estate has invited applications for a share of another £20 million to support the construction of projects involving several devices in an array.

In the UK we have a wealth of wave and tidal resources, and some of the best researchers in the world. It a no-brainer that we should support this developing industry and seek to establish the UK as a world leader.

Do you think the Government should be doing more to help new wave and tidal technologies get off the ground and ino the water?

Beacons: stories for our not so distant future

2013-03-07T09:28:00Z

Guest blogger: Jim Densham, Senior Land-Use Policy Officer (climate) at RSPB Scotland

Today a new short story book will be published. Beacons: stories for our not so distant future is a collection of fictional stories penned by some of the UK’s most well-known authors (including Adam Marek who used to work for the RSPB). Their theme, in the specially commissioned stories, is visions of our future and how we will live in a world where the climate is changing but it won’t be all doom and gloom, or science fiction. On the face of it, this book sounds like an interesting read but buying it has an added benefit as the royalties are going to the Stop Climate Chaos coalition in the UK (SCC) and Scotland (SCCS).

The RSPB is an active member of SCC and SCCS, adding our voice to 100 other member organisations to make it the UK’s largest group of people dedicated to action on climate change. With a combined supporter base of more than 11 million people, Governments in Westminster, Edinburgh and Cardiff tend to sit up and take notice when SCC speaks on climate issues. You might remember the impact of The Wave marches, the recent Green is Working campaigning in London or the Get Your Act Together lobby of the Edinburgh Parliament.

Here’s a bit of the blurb from the book’s publisher:

Never we been so uncertain about what the following years, decades and centuries might bring. This riveting and provocative collection of short fiction throws down the gauntlet to award winning writers, challenging them to devise original responses to the climate crisis. From Joanne Harris' powerful vision of a near future where venturing outside becomes a dangerous habit, to Nick Haye’s beautifully illustrated tale of the bond between man and nature. Here, our authors have created provocative, funny, sometimes satirical, and at times deeply moving stories that bring an immediate reality to the problems at hand. Beacons warns before have and inspires by offering stories that are as various as our possible futures.

So why not buy yourself a copy...and one for a friend...and a spare as a present for someone. Beacons is available at good bookshops and online here.

SUSTAINABLE SEVERN – MAKING THE MOST OF THE ESTUARY

2013-03-01T13:11:00Z

Tony Whitehead, RSPB South West Regional Office

With the DECC Minister Greg Barker saying yesterday that it’s not at all realistic that a Severn Barrage Bill will come before parliament this term we think now is the ideal time for everyone to take stock and look anew at generating power from the Severn. We look here at the issues in advance of a major sustainable Severn Conference in April at UWE Bristol, organised by Bristol Port, Regen SW and the RSPB.

We are living in challenging times. We are struggling to kick-start the economy, we are facing climate change and we are losing precious natural resources.

No wonder, then, that many eyes are turning to the Severn Estuary to find some solutions. The Severn is blessed with an abundance of wildlife; with important and innovative businesses and with the potential of huge amounts of clean energy - if it can be captured sustainably.

Bristol Port, Regen SW and RSPB all have huge ambitions for the Severn. We believe that it can become an example of how to create truly sustainable solutions for the 21st century. We are confident that the estuary can provide a significant amount of the clean energy that the country needs - without compromising the internationally significant habitats or the existing economy of the area. Furthermore, we believe that, by encouraging the use of the Severn Estuary as a test bed for a whole range of tidal technologies, we can help develop a strong sector capable of competing across the world.

It’s a big prize - and one worth fighting for.

ENERGY

With the second biggest tidal range in the world, the Severn Estuary could play a vital role to help the UK generate massive amounts of renewable energy and reduce the impact of climate change. It is estimated that up to 14 GW of clean energy capacity could delivered by deploying a combination of technologies to harness the tidal range, tidal stream, offshore wind and wave energy resources found across the Bristol Channel area.

As well as low carbon energy, new technologies could help to create jobs and economic growth for many companies based in the south west of England and South Wales, as the UK secures its position as a world leader in this exciting global industry.

The challenge however is to find a strategy to enable energy projects to be built whilst balancing the need to protect the environment and other users of the Severn Estuary.

ENVIRONMENT

The biggest threat to the natural environment is climate change. Therefore it is critical that the UK produces as much energy as possible from renewable sources - as quickly as possible. There is now a much greater awareness that, without healthy ecosystems, it will not be possible to stabilise the climate. However, in choosing the different energy options, there is a need to minimise the impact on major natural systems, habitats and wildlife.

The Severn Estuary is extraordinarily rich in nature - providing extensive feeding and roosting sites for large populations of waders and wildfowl. It also has important populations of migratory fish species, including salmon and lamprey. The tidal flats and coastal habitats are sensitive to changes in tidal flows, drainage and sediment loss.

Whatever schemes are adopted to capture power from the tides in the Severn, there are real risks to the complex ecosystems in the Estuary. However, finding an optimum blend of energy creation and natural environment outcomes has to be our goal.

ECONOMY

Both sides of the Severn Estuary are already home to some of the most exciting marine power companies in the world. There is an innovative mix of cutting-edge research and technology start-ups in the renewables sector. A solid supply chain, including some global leaders in energy consultancy, is supported by some of the best infrastructure in the country - an excellent rail and motorway network, development land and a number of ports including one of the biggest in the UK.

In a world hungry for energy, there is potential for the Severnside region to become a global centre for marine renewables - exploiting its natural resources, and a number of leading universities, to become a hub for clean energy innovation.

The prospect of a whole new generation of technologies, creating thousands of jobs over many decades, is tantalisingly close.

WHAT NEXT?

The idea of creating energy from the Severn Estuary is not new. It has been talked about many times over the past hundred years or so - yet nothing has happened - perhaps because most proposals have been too costly, too risky and too damaging.

It is becoming clear that the impacts of climate change are already being felt, and so the need to to move rapidly to cleaner, renewable forms of energy is urgent. We cannot wait.

There is a need to bring together industry leaders, local and national governments, environmental groups and economic development agencies to plan rapidly for and implement a sustainable future for the Severn. This is not a drag on development - it is about embracing it. It is about recognising the overwhelming need for clean energy and a vibrant economy and a resilient natural environment.

We believe that there are much more optimal solutions that do not compromise each other. We believe that we need to move fast - creating a new momentum and a road map for action.

A sustainable Severn is the only future we can honestly provide.

Many thanks to Bristol Port and Regen SW for the help in preparing this article

What do you think about a sustainable, energy-producing Severn? Do share you views and comment below

Trapped in the atmosphere – a cause of weather extremes?

2013-02-27T13:28:44Z

Researchers have found a common physical cause behind recent severe weather extremes, such as the heat waves in the United States in 2011 and Russia 2010, and the 2010 Pakistan flood. They say that man-made climate change repeatedly disturbs the patterns of atmospheric flow around the world’s northern hemisphere, through a subtle resonance mechanism.

Atmospheric ‘waves’ between tropical and Arctic regions are an important part of the global air motion. When they swing up, they suck warm air from the tropics to Europe, Russia, or the US, and when they swing down, they bring cold air from the Arctic.

These planetary waves almost froze in their tracks, for weeks, during several recent extreme weather events. So instead of bringing in cool air after having brought warm air in before, the heat just stays. Time is critical: two or three days of 30 degrees Celsius are no problem, but two or three weeks can lead to extreme heat stress. Many ecosystems and cities are not adapted to this, and prolonged hot periods can bring a high death toll, forest fires, and dramatic harvest losses.

Climate change is not uniform across the world. Greater warming in the Arctic, amplified by loss of snow and ice, is reducing the temperature difference between the Arctic and, for example, Europe – and temperature differences are a main driver of air flow. Also, continents generally warm and cool more readily than the oceans. Combining these two things results in an unnatural pattern of mid-latitude air flow, so that the normal slow waves get trapped for extended periods.

Scientists have been surprised by how far outside past experience some of the recent extremes have been. As an explanation of mechanism behind them, this research shows that the emergence of extraordinary weather is not just a linear response to the average warming trend.

The research, by V Petoukhov, S Rahmstorf, S Petri and H J Schellnhuber of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, will be published on line in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.