You are on page 1of 24

Bio-energy in the UK

Biomass energy – tasks for spatial planning


Leipzig
18th November 2008

Raphael Slade
E-mail: raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 7306
Outline

• UK policies and initiatives

• Bio-energy deployment in the UK

• Land use planning - tools and approach

• Conclusions

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
The UK has sought to lead on climate change

‘Climate change is probably, in the


long term, the single most important
issue we face as a global community’

‘We need to go beyond Kyoto…


climate change cannot be
ignored’

‘This is extremely urgent. A


50% cut by 2050 has to be a
central component’

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Bio-energy is seen as part of the solution…
… but more needs to be done
The [UK] approach can be
“The UK is in
characterised as: no targets; no
danger of being
concerted policy; no strategy; and,
left behind”
limited support for development

Royal Commission Environmental Sir Ben Gill – Biomass Taskforce


Pollution 22nd report

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
The existing policy framework is extensive…

Incentive schemes target all stages of the supply-chain and the innovation chain.
Supply chain
Feedstocks Conversion Distribution

R&D
16 incentive schemes identified* including:
Innovation
• Energy Crops • DTI technology • ROCs chain
Scheme programme Commercialisation
• Community
• Bioenergy • Community renewables
infrastructure energy initiative
Knowledge
scheme transfer

Numerous organisations are responsible for administration:

* Biomass Task Force 2005


Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
…but ambitious high level targets cannot be
disaggregated

12.5% cut in CO2, relative to 1990 levels, by 2012

UK Set the UK on a path to cut CO2 by 60% by 2050

20% cut relative to 1990 levels, by 2010

“Significant contribution”
Bio-energy
“Is important”

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Specific targets run counter to Government
policy…
The political mindset Implications for bio-energy

• Competition should be
supported
Is the current level of
• Technology options deployment desirable?...
should compete of price
• Support mechanisms
should be technology …or indicative of policy
blind failure?
• Policy cost should be
minimised

…bio-energy policies cannot be assessed


against objectives
Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
UK bio-energy development is likely to be
driven by the EU

Indicative, Renewable electricity directive (2001)


non-binding Biofuels directive (2003)
targets

Precise, legally binding targets Agreement for renewable


A co-ordinated approach energy directive (2008)
Minimum sustainability
standards

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
In 2007, renewables accounted for ~2% of
UK energy supply
~80% electricity, ~13%Heat, ~7% Transport

DUKES 2008 Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk


Deployment has increased, but
mostly using imported biomass
Co-fired biomass
2006
Electricity generated from renewable
Biomass Quantity
sources 2000 – 2006 (kt)
Co-firing Palm waste 449
Olive waste 283
MSW
Sewage Tall oil 120
Wood pellet 163
Landfill gas
Tallow 119
Cereal co- 102
Wind & hydro product
Wood 102
Sewage 21
Sludge
Sawdust 20
Sunflower 20
pellets
Other 10

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
So far, agricultural land use has been
minimal… but looks set to increase

Hectares
Crop
2004 2007
SRC 1500 1500
Miscanthus 295 10,000

Thousands of
hectares
2004 Drax plan 900MW
(total ~18MHa) biomass power plant
October 08

Rowe, R.L. 2007 Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk


Energy crops have generated some interest
from the NGOs…
We need…
• a pro-active and strategic approach
to the land-use planning system [to]
minimise adverse effects on the
historic environment.

• To introduce minimum standards


and certification

• To ensure that the planning system


is equipped to respond

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
…but little concern compared to wind
farms, GM crops, poly tunnels

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Forests and woodlands are controlled by
the UK Forestry Commission

• Felling Licences are required for harvesting operations


• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) – consent is
required for woodland creation, deforestation, road and
quarry operations
• Habitat Regulations - a licence may be required if
European Protected Species are affected: e.g. dormouse,
otter, great crested newt, sand lizard, bats
• Countryside & Rights of Way (CRoW) – approval is
required to restrict public access in a woodland that has
been dedicated under CRoW
• Plant Health - forestry material movements are controlled
• Forest Reproductive Material –The identification and
distribution of seeds, cuttings and planting stock is
controled

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Energy crops: SRC and Miscanthus, are
not controlled…

… but subsidies are contingent


on environmental conditions
being met
• Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs)
are required for all applications to the
Energy Crops Scheme

• Consent required for power plant > 50MW.


Issues include:
• Visual intrusion
• Noise
• Traffic

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Environmental designations may restrict
grant approval in sensitive locations

LONDON

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Joint Character Assessment Maps provide
a recognised national spatial network

• 159 JCAs divide the


countryside into areas of
similar landscape
character

• Form a national spatial


network

• Links to planning
guidance

• Used to target
environmental grants
e.g. stewardship scheme

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
The High Weald

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
The expected impact of energy crops is
described for each JCA area – along with
planning recommendations

PB – Potentially beneficial; N – Neutral;


Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
PA – Potentially Adverse
Agriculture, Settlements, Habitats

PB – Potentially beneficial; N – Neutral;


Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk PA – Potentially Adverse
Historic features, Rivers & coasts,
Visual impacts

PB – Potentially beneficial; N – Neutral;


Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
PA – Potentially Adverse
Conclusions

• UK bio-energy policy has done little to increase


domestic energy crop production, but this looks
set to change
• Little evidence of public concern… thus far
• A limited planning framework exists –
participation is motivated by the economics
• Planning tools are in place and could be
strengthened if required
• Land use can be expected to generate interest:
our farmland is our environment

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Thank you for your attention

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk
Funding initiative

Renewable energy / low carbon technology


Bio-energy only
Delivery (including bio-energy )
mechanism
Appro Appro
Programme x Units Programme x Units
Value Value
Clear Skies 3 £m.yr-1 Woodlands grant scheme 20 £m.yr-1

Community Energy Programme 5 £m.yr-1 Energy Crops scheme 3 £m.yr-1

Carbon Trust R&D 4 £m.yr-1 Farm woodland scheme 2 £m.yr-1

DTI technology programme 80 £m.yr-1 Farm woodland premium scheme 8 £m.yr-1

English woodland grant scheme 10 £m

Grant
Bio-energy infrastructure scheme 3.5 £m

Bio-energy capital grants scheme 66 £m

Common agricultural policy – energy


45 £.ha-1
crops

Information /
Community renewables initiative 0.5 £m.yr-1
facilitation

Renewable Obligation Certificates


33.3 £.MWh-1
(ROCs)

Market
Emissions trading scheme (EU) 16 £.tcarbon-1
mechanism

Climate change levy exemption


4.41 £.MWh-1
certificates

Raphael.slade@imperial.ac.uk

You might also like