Waste from Energy Plant - Planning Struggle.

Proposals for 500 waste management plants will struggle to negotiate the planning system without incentives to communities, a parliamentary group said this week.

The UK is committed to diverting waste from landfill under European legislation, prompting the demand for new infrastructure by 2020. Following a five-month inquiry, the Associate Parliamentary Sustainable Resource Group said achieving permission "remains an acute challenge for the waste sector".

It called for fresh thinking on consultation to turn infrastructure planning into a win-win proposition. It cites the example of Europe, "where waste management has become associated with delivering social benefits".

It wants incentives imbedded in planning for infrastructure, with communities offered discounts on their energy bills or allowed to own waste plants to pave the way for their development.

The group urged the waste industry to consider the model of community-owned wind farms, which share the profits from electricity sold to the national grid.

It added that community funds tied to waste contracts and operated through a committee offer a more flexible way of delivering planning gain than section 106 agreements and the community infrastructure levy.

Europe's low-carbon vision requires more integrated climate policy.

European governments must incorporate climate change more fully into policy if they are to tackle it successfully, according to a new report published this month.

Climate change issues must be "better integrated" into general and specific policy, including planning, taxation, transportation and annual budgets, says the report published by the Partnership for European Environmental Research (PEER).

Professor Dr Pat Nuttall, director of the UK's Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, which chairs PEER, wrote in his foreword to the report called Climate Policy Integration, Coherence and Governance: "Policy makers need to place greater emphasis on climate-related issues than is currently the case in the planning and execution of general and sector specific policies.

"Annual budgets, impact assessments and spatial planning are examples of existing measures that should integrate climate concerns to a greater extent than they currently do."

The report says more comprehensive government policy will result in the "necessary changes" in production processes and consumption patterns to tackle climate change.

Lead author Dr Per Mickwitz, of the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), said, "Although the inclusion of climate change mitigation and adaptation in general governmental programmes and strategies has substantially increased in recent years, much more is needed in terms of integrating climate issues into specific policy measures."

The report looks at the degree of climate policy integration at national and local levels in six European countries, including the UK, Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain.

It sets out ways to boost integration and improve what it calls "policy coherence" to ensure climate change is given more political weight.
"The extent to which climate change issues are considered and integrated into existing policy fields is therefore a key issue to be tackled in the future," the report says.

"Furthermore, if European societies are to become low-carbon societies, and if their ability to adapt to a changing climate is to be enhanced, then the coherence between these policies and climate policy aims should be increased. If the low-carbon vision is to be achieved, it requires a comprehensive climate policy."

The report gives examples of the benefits of better climate policy.

Where previously climate change has "largely been perceived just in terms of restrictions and limitation on economic activity", many countries are now redefining it in terms of "innovation possibilities, business opportunities and potential profits" and better policy can maximise that potential, it says.

PEER is made up of seven of Europe's biggest environmental research institutes. To read the full report, click here

Feed-In Tariffs receive muted welcome

Plans to reward eco-friendly householders for the green energy that their solar panels produce have received a muted welcome.

The clean energy cashback plan, known as "feed-in tariffs", offers incentives from April for those who install small scale renewables on their homes. The government claims one in 10 homeowners could fit panels or small wind turbines by 2020.But the scheme has been criticised as not generous enough.

Payments

The UK gets about 5.5% of its electricity from renewable sources and, in order to hit green targets in 10 years' time, this would have to rise to 30%. Under the programme, people will be paid a fixed rate by their energy provider for electricity from small renewable power sources. They could also save money on their bills.

Homeowners who install photovoltaic panels could earn £900 a year when they first put in the technology, along with saving £140 a year on their bills, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) said.

Renewable energy groups suggest people will have a 5% to 8% rate of return on their initial green investment for up to 25 years, although this technology remains relatively expensive to install.

Solar panels and wind turbines of up to five megawatts will be paid for the electricity they generate, even if the homeowners used it themselves.

"The feed-in tariff will change the way householders and communities think about their future energy needs, making the payback for investment far shorter than in the past," said Energy Secretary Ed Miliband.

However, the cost of the scheme will come from higher charges for other customers who do not fit renewable energy sources. The typical customer will face an extra £11 on their annual bill by 2020, DECC said.

'Lack of incentive'

While many consumer groups have welcomed the move, they have also criticised the level of incentive payments provided under the scheme.

Different types of "green energy" suit different locations

"Ministers have been far too timid with a policy that could make a significant contribution to cutting emissions and boosting energy security," said Dave Timms, of Friends of the Earth.

The Solar Trade Association said the rate of return was half of that seen under other schemes.

And Liz Laine, of watchdog Consumer Focus, said that the scheme could help people make big savings and cut carbon emissions, but more ambitious targets were needed from the government.

"It needs to offer more attractive cashback rates to overcome the cost-barrier of installing this technology and provide better information and advice to consumers," she said.

Proposals for a second incentive scheme for renewable heat, which will pay people to install technology such as ground source heat pumps and biomass boilers, have also been published. Details will be published in the 2010 Budget.  

Worst-case scenario for climate change disaster.

The world is now firmly on course for the worst-case scenario in terms of climate change.

Average global temperatures will rise by up to 6C by the end of the century, leading scientists said yesterday. Such a rise – which would be much higher nearer the poles – would have cataclysmic and irreversible consequences for the Earth, making large parts of the planet uninhabitable and threatening the basis of human civilisation.

We are headed for it, the scientists said, because the carbon dioxide emissions from industry, transport and deforestation which are responsible for warming the atmosphere have increased dramatically since 2002, in a way which no one anticipated, and are now running at treble the annual rate of the 1990s.

This means that the most extreme scenario envisaged in the last report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, published in 2007, is now the one for which society is set, according to the 31 researchers from seven countries involved in the Global Carbon Project.

UK Airports could close as air travel becomes socially unacceptable.

Regional airports could be forced to close as the number of people flying halves over the next 30 years under a nightmare scenario highlighted by civil engineers.

The scenario is one of four suggested by the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) up to 2040. The number of people flying globally could fall to 118 million as air travel becomes socially unacceptable, although the government would prop up a niche long-haul airline sector.

In another scenario floated by ICE this week, global economic meltdown would lead to air transport stagnating. A third envisages the government encouraging people to switch to trains and introducing road pricing.

A laissez-faire scenario has technology gains reducing aircraft emissions and the world economy growing rapidly while the government uses light touch regulation of airport expansion. This envisages regions prospering around UK hubs, although the largest airports would have to build flood defences to adapt to sudden climate change.

ICE warned that the lack of a national strategic air transport policy means that too much debate on airport infrastructure is based around individual projects.

"The government's last strategic policy document on aviation was in 2003," said vice-president Peter Hanford. "There have been major developments since, notably the economic crisis. He added: "It is time to open a serious debate about the need for a long-term national strategy on the UK's airport infrastructure."

ASA decides EDF aren't claiming to be Green or British

The Advertising Standards Agency has cleared power company EDF over a TV, press and poster campaign promoting green electricity.

The campaign, which involved three different television adverts as well as a press and poster campaign promoting Green Britain Day.

Adverts also involved the use of a green union jack style flag and promoted EDF's work with renewable energy. The ASA, ruled on complaints claiming the adverts were misleadingly by stating that EDF was a 'green' energy company and British.

Defending the campaign EDF said, as an energy company, it had sought to take the 'lead in tackling environmental and social issues' facing the industry. It also believed it represented 'one of the biggest packages of environmental and sustainability initiatives' launched by any major British company.

The ASA sided with EDF noting the ads did not make 'direct claims' that it was a 'green' energy supplier or, more generally, a 'green' company. It also noted, while EDF was registered and based in the UK, it does have a French parent company. However, none of the ads stated explicitly that EDF was a British company, and the ASA said it would take no further action on either complaint.

NIMBY thinking behind drop in Windfarm approvals.

"Not in My Back Yard" thinking is to blame for the dramatic fall in wind farm planning approvals, the British Wind Energy Association has complained.

Figures revealed at its annual conference show that local authorities approved just 25% of such applications this year. This contrasts with 63% approved in 2007.

Coriolis Energy, a specialist independent windfarm company maintained that pressure from nimby campaigners is forcing councils to make incorrect decisions. "It would make more sense if authorities did not have the deciding say on these matters," company development director Vicky Portwain claimed.

But Campaign to Protect Rural England chief executive Shaun Spiers challenged the wind energy industry to engage local people and work within the planning system.

BWEA, the UK's leading renewable energy trade association, warns that a clear implication of the latest report from energy regulator Ofgem is that there is no alternative to going green.

The report, released last month, flags up four energy market scenarios to 2020. It states that having less renewables on the system, compared to targets, could end up costing consumers up to 60% more on household bills - due to fossil fuel price volatility. The report also states that the price of oil has quadrupled over the last 10 years, and the price of coal and gas has doubled. Significantly, the document does not offer a 'no renewables' model.

BWEA states that the 'Dash for Energy' scenario, which predicts only 15% of renewable electricity installed, or half of the UK's 2020 target, is also the costliest to consumers, as the cheap and plentiful energy we should be securing from renewables will have to be provided by expensive oil and gas. Only the so called 'Green Stimulus' scenario is set to deliver a triple whammy of modest price increases, renewable energy targets and carbon reductions.

Carbon reduction commitments could be met through "Environment Taxes"

An independent body set up two years ago to look into the viability of financial reforms that encourage environmentally friendly behaviour has published its findings.

The UK Green Fiscal Commission argues that environmental taxes could be used to raise significant revenues, help the UK achieve its 2020 carbon targets and the public could learn to love them - provided they were used instead of, rather than on top of, other taxes.

The report advocates a shift to green taxation - one that does not mean an overall change in tax levels, but with more emphasis on the "polluter pays" principle.

"Highly polluting households and businesses will see their tax bill increase where low pollution households and businesses will see their tax bill cut below what it would otherwise be," says the report.

Motorists would be those most obviously hit by the proposed reform, with a significant green tax on fuel seen as an equitable way of raising cash for government.

While nobody loves the tax man, it is reported that the commission's research suggests the public is happy with the concept of green taxes.

The report states "The public can be won round to green fiscal reform, A number of polls show majority public support for a green tax shift, which increases when people are persuaded that the green taxes really will be instead of other taxes."

The full report can be found on the commission's website here.

4.6 million UK households in fuel poverty

According to a Government projection, the number of households in fuel poverty in England could reach 4.6 million by the end of this year. The figure for the UK as a whole has risen by 500,000 to stand at around 4 million, data from the Department of Energy and Climate Change shows.

Around 3.25 million vulnerable households were fuel poor in 2007, an increase from around 2.75 million the previous year, according to the latest figures for England and Scotland, along with extrapolated estimates for Wales and Northern Ireland.

A household is said to be in fuel poverty if it needs to spend more than 10 per cent of its income on fuel for heating the home to an adequate standard. 

Spiralling energy prices are largely responsible for the increase in fuel poverty, although in some households these rises have been offset by rising incomes and improvements in energy efficiency at home. 

The Government yesterday promised to "redouble" its efforts, setting out its plans to tackle fuel poverty with measures that include helping the poor insulate their homes and action on prices for the most vulnerable. 

Energy and climate minister David Kidney said: "We recognise there is still a mountain to climb on fuel poverty. We plan to legislate to give new powers to the regulator to take action, make social tariffs (reduced rates) mandatory and are planning new measures on energy efficiency."

Dept of Energy & Climate Change have exaggerated UK emissions reduction.

DECC Ministers have been accused of exaggerating Britain's success in fighting climate change.

The Government's statistics watchdog said figures on carbon dioxide emissions could "mislead" the public.

Sir Michael Scholar, chairman of the UK Statistics Authority, said presentation of the data by the Department of Energy and Climate Change was "unsatisfactory".

In a letter to Tim Yeo, the chairman of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, he said a statistical bulletin released in February "fell short" of the government's code of practice.

Sir Michael raised serious concerns about the claim that CO2 emissions had fallen by 12.8% compared to 1990 levels, as nearly a third of that fall is made up of carbon credits purchased by polluters in an EU trading scheme and do not represent actual cuts in UK emissions. Without the credits, the fall is a much more modest 8.5%

Sir Michael said ministers should in future include a clearer explanation of how the figures are calculated.

He said: "In this case, the figures mentioned are, in our view, likely to be used by non-expert observers to judge progress in reducing CO2 emissions within the UK.

"We regard the quoted figures, and particularly the percentage change, as unsatisfactory in the context of that use."

Mr Yeo said the figures were not being used in a "straightforward way" and called on ministers to put right the problem "as soon as possible".