Britain should lead the world by taking on a tough new climate change target to cut emissions by 60 per cent within 20 years which will see thousands of new wind turbines installed and millions of electric cars on the roads.
By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent Cancun 10:42PM GMT 06 Dec 2010
The move would mean thousands of new wind turbines and millions of electric cars on the roads.
As world leaders continued talks in Cancun aimed at thrashing out a deal that will bring down carbon emissions so that temperatures do not rise about 2C (3.6F), the advisers recommended an ambitious scheme to convert the country entirely to "green" energy.
It will mean building 25 new power stations by 2030. If the country relies solely on wind power, it could mean up to 20,000 wind turbines will be built between 2020 and 2030, on top of the 10,000 already planned.
New nuclear power stations and hydroelectric plants are also likely to come on stream.
To meet the emissions target, British transport will have to be overhauled by putting 13.5 million more electric vehicles on the road.
All buildings will need to be insulated properly and 3.5 million homes will install heat pumps, a system with low emissions. The Government is already committed to cutting emissions by 80 per cent from 1990 levels by the year 2050.
In a renewed effort to make sure the ultimate goal is met, the Committee on Climate Change yesterday issued the new interim target.
In doing so, Lord Turner, chairman of the committee, urged Britain to lead the world on climate change. He said: "The case for action on climate change is as strong as ever: climate science remains robust and suggests that there are very significant risks if we do not cut emissions."
Overall, the cost of going green is £14 billion a year, or £500 per household, by 2020. Lord Turner admitted that consumers would pick up some of the cost, including a short-term increase in fuel bills, but in the long-term he insisted bills would fall.
The Government now has less than a year to consider how the target will be met, before it is included in official legislation.
Ministers are expected to carry out reforms of the electricity market as part of the forthcoming Energy Bill and also to legislate to insulate homes and subsidise electric cars.
Yesterday, Carbon War Room, a green organisation for entrepreneurs co-founded by Sir Richard Branson, launched a shipping industry league table that will name the world's most polluting ships.
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Environmental benefits of the cloud
Relaxnews
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Research released December 6 by clean-tech market intelligence company Pike Research has found that the rise of cloud computing could have a positive environmental impact and help reduce the IT industry's massive carbon footprint, which is estimated to account for 2 percent of the world's total carbon emissions.
Cloud computing is simply internet-based computing in which resources, software and information are shared between computers on demand rather than being stored on a separate server.
Pike Research points out that while cloud computing has expanded quickly it has most often been seen as a compelling alternative to traditional data centers, while the energy saving benefits had not been seriously considered. However, based on its latest data, Pike Research calculates that the adoption of cloud computing could lead to a 38 percent reduction in energy usage in the world's data centers by 2020. The company estimates that due to the growth of cloud computing energy consumption will decrease from the current rate of 201.8 terawatt hours (TWh) (1012 Watt hours) to 139.8 TWh in 2020, which equates to a 28 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
However, while any environmental benefits of cloud computing won't be felt for a few years, a number of websites are already attempting to have a positive environmental impact. Green search engines such as eco-search and goodsearch.com work in partnership with giants such as Google, but they donate the majority of their profit to environmental or other charitable causes.
Larger companies such as Yahoo and Google are also taking steps to minimize their environmental impact. On September 20, 2010, Yahoo opened one of the world's most energy-efficient data centers, located outside of New York, and Google stores its servers in shipping crates in an attempt to reduce the amount of energy needed to cool them and even operates a "cooler-less" facility in Belgium.
For more information about Eco Search see: http://www.ecosearch.org/
For more information about Good Search see: http://www.goodsearch.com/
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
Research released December 6 by clean-tech market intelligence company Pike Research has found that the rise of cloud computing could have a positive environmental impact and help reduce the IT industry's massive carbon footprint, which is estimated to account for 2 percent of the world's total carbon emissions.
Cloud computing is simply internet-based computing in which resources, software and information are shared between computers on demand rather than being stored on a separate server.
Pike Research points out that while cloud computing has expanded quickly it has most often been seen as a compelling alternative to traditional data centers, while the energy saving benefits had not been seriously considered. However, based on its latest data, Pike Research calculates that the adoption of cloud computing could lead to a 38 percent reduction in energy usage in the world's data centers by 2020. The company estimates that due to the growth of cloud computing energy consumption will decrease from the current rate of 201.8 terawatt hours (TWh) (1012 Watt hours) to 139.8 TWh in 2020, which equates to a 28 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
However, while any environmental benefits of cloud computing won't be felt for a few years, a number of websites are already attempting to have a positive environmental impact. Green search engines such as eco-search and goodsearch.com work in partnership with giants such as Google, but they donate the majority of their profit to environmental or other charitable causes.
Larger companies such as Yahoo and Google are also taking steps to minimize their environmental impact. On September 20, 2010, Yahoo opened one of the world's most energy-efficient data centers, located outside of New York, and Google stores its servers in shipping crates in an attempt to reduce the amount of energy needed to cool them and even operates a "cooler-less" facility in Belgium.
For more information about Eco Search see: http://www.ecosearch.org/
For more information about Good Search see: http://www.goodsearch.com/
UK remains committed to zero-carbon homes
Grant Shapps, minister for housing, responds to George Monbiot's comment that the government has abandoned its green homes commitment
Grant Shapps guardian.co.uk, Monday 6 December 2010 13.02 GMT
George Monbiot is quite right that I've made a commitment to ensure that all new homes after 2016 can be built to a zero-carbon standard, and promised to get our approach nailed down as soon as possible to help housebuilders work to this date.
But to imply that the government is back-pedalling on its green commitments misunderstands the work we're doing to reach this goal. In getting our approach right, the consultation by the Zero Carbon Hub is important – it brings together academia, industry experts and green groups such as the WWF, the Energy Saving Trust, and the UK Green Building Council to get the evidence for what works, and what will deliver real-world carbon savings.
We are also exploring how housebuilders could reduce the carbon footprint of new homes by supporting renewable energy schemes in their local area, and the Hub is working closely with green groups to look at how reductions can be achieved beyond the bricks and mortar – building homes with renewable energy technologies on site, such as solar power and heat pumps.
This work will build on steps we're already taking on the road to 2016, such as introducing ambitious standards for the fabric energy efficiency of new homes, which will mean that new homes are better insulated, better built, and cost less to heat for the people living in them.
So plucking some figures from the Hub's consultation to suggest we're no longer aiming for zero carbon is misleading. As the people at the sharp end of delivering the government's commitment to tackle climate change we know attaining zero carbon status has always involved a flexible approach. And for good reasons – if we're serious about reducing our carbon emissions we need to find the most practical way of doing this, and ensure the people at councils and industry who are actually going to deliver these changes are on board.
A separate misunderstanding in George Monbiot's article concerns my recent decision not to take forward proposed Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Core Standards for new buildings. This is not a retrograde green step. These proposed standards were far-reaching, and went far beyond environmental considerations. They included a whole raft of separate standards for new homes built on HCA land and with HCA funding, and would have cost developers an estimated £8,000 per home to meet.
The reason for not introducing these standards is quite clear – we want to end the minefield of overlapping and confusing building standards that have built up in recent years, and instead have a system based on building regulations and a clear set of standards. Not introducing an entirely separate set of standards for housing built on some public land is a start to this process.
That's why last week I also called time on the cocktail of local building standards that developers have to meet, and invited the people on the frontline of delivering the homes this country needs to give me suggestions about cutting red tape and where the system can be improved.
So I want to reassure everyone who's eager to see greener homes – change is on its way, and very soon I'll be setting out our progress towards achieving a zero carbon approach, and the next steps we'll be taking.
Grant Shapps guardian.co.uk, Monday 6 December 2010 13.02 GMT
George Monbiot is quite right that I've made a commitment to ensure that all new homes after 2016 can be built to a zero-carbon standard, and promised to get our approach nailed down as soon as possible to help housebuilders work to this date.
But to imply that the government is back-pedalling on its green commitments misunderstands the work we're doing to reach this goal. In getting our approach right, the consultation by the Zero Carbon Hub is important – it brings together academia, industry experts and green groups such as the WWF, the Energy Saving Trust, and the UK Green Building Council to get the evidence for what works, and what will deliver real-world carbon savings.
We are also exploring how housebuilders could reduce the carbon footprint of new homes by supporting renewable energy schemes in their local area, and the Hub is working closely with green groups to look at how reductions can be achieved beyond the bricks and mortar – building homes with renewable energy technologies on site, such as solar power and heat pumps.
This work will build on steps we're already taking on the road to 2016, such as introducing ambitious standards for the fabric energy efficiency of new homes, which will mean that new homes are better insulated, better built, and cost less to heat for the people living in them.
So plucking some figures from the Hub's consultation to suggest we're no longer aiming for zero carbon is misleading. As the people at the sharp end of delivering the government's commitment to tackle climate change we know attaining zero carbon status has always involved a flexible approach. And for good reasons – if we're serious about reducing our carbon emissions we need to find the most practical way of doing this, and ensure the people at councils and industry who are actually going to deliver these changes are on board.
A separate misunderstanding in George Monbiot's article concerns my recent decision not to take forward proposed Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Core Standards for new buildings. This is not a retrograde green step. These proposed standards were far-reaching, and went far beyond environmental considerations. They included a whole raft of separate standards for new homes built on HCA land and with HCA funding, and would have cost developers an estimated £8,000 per home to meet.
The reason for not introducing these standards is quite clear – we want to end the minefield of overlapping and confusing building standards that have built up in recent years, and instead have a system based on building regulations and a clear set of standards. Not introducing an entirely separate set of standards for housing built on some public land is a start to this process.
That's why last week I also called time on the cocktail of local building standards that developers have to meet, and invited the people on the frontline of delivering the homes this country needs to give me suggestions about cutting red tape and where the system can be improved.
So I want to reassure everyone who's eager to see greener homes – change is on its way, and very soon I'll be setting out our progress towards achieving a zero carbon approach, and the next steps we'll be taking.
Iran unveils use of locally mined uranium for the first time
Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation reveals use of domestically produced refined ore in defiance of the west
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor guardian.co.uk, Sunday 5 December 2010 17.15 GMT
Iran took a step towards nuclear self-sufficiency today, using locally mined uranium for the first time in an act of defiance to the west on the eve of the resumption of talks over its atomic programme.
The Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran announced it had used domestically produced uranium yellowcake (refined ore) at its conversion plant in Isfahan. The mining and milling of uranium ore is not banned by UN resolutions (which focus on uranium enrichment), but one of the ways the international community has sought to close down Iran's nuclear programme is to stop it importing yellowcake.
Today'sannouncement appeared to a signal that such measures would not stop Iran pursuing its nuclear ambitions. For the time being, however, it is little more than a symbolic step as Iran's ore deposits are mostly low grade and its capacity to produce yellowcake is limited.
The timing of the announcement is unlikely to be accidental, observers said, coming the day before Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, is due to meet diplomats from six major powers in Geneva, to resume a dialogue over Iran's ambitions after a break of 14 months.
The diplomats – from the US, Britain, Russia, China, France and Germany – arrive for the talks in Geneva with low expectations. Rhetoric from the Iranian leadership has consistently played down the talks, and turned hostile after the assassination of a nuclear scientist and the wounding of another in attacks in Tehran on Monday.
The regime has shown no sign of making concessions over the central issue – UN demands for Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium. Tehran insists the programme is for entirely peaceful means, and portrays the UN sanctions against it as an attempt to deny its sovereign rights.
Although Tehran accepted the invitation to talks from Europe's foreign policy representative, Catherine Ashton, who specified that the discussion would focus on the nuclear programme, there is no guarantee that Jalili will even agree to discuss the topic. There is no set agenda, and Iranian delegates to such meetings have, in the past, brought a long list of other issues to discuss.
Jalili is expected to repeat allegations made by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the nuclear scientist killed on Monday, Majid Shahriari, and his wounded colleague, Fereidoun Abbasi, were victims of attacks by the west and Israel.
Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, linked the attacks to UN Security Council resolutions against Iran. "By adopting the UN resolutions against our country's nuclear scientists, in fact terrorist groups were given the mission to carry out these assassinations in Iran under the direction of spy services," Mottaki said at a conference in Bahrain on Saturday.
Abbasi was named in a 2007 UN resolution as involved in banned nuclear activities.
The intelligence minister, Heidar Moslehi, announced that several people had been arrested over the attacks and claimed they had links with western intelligence agencies and Mossad.
The international delegation on the Geneva talks (sometimes known as the P5+1 group, meaning the permanent five UN security council members plus Germany) will try to measure Iran's response to the latest wave of UN sanctions, imposed in June. They will also attempt to revive a proposal to exchange Iranian low enriched uranium (LEU) for ready-made fuel rods for a research reactor in Tehran. The proposed deal was the most important result of the last P5+1 meeting with Iran, in Geneva in October 2009.
Jalili initially accepted the deal, apparently with Ahmadinejad's backing, but it later fell apart following disagreement within the Tehran regime and subsequent Iranian attempts to renegotiate terms.
The P5+1 group may draw some comfort from today's announcement on the use of Iranian yellowcake, seeing it as confirmation that their efforts to cut Iran off from external supplies is working.
A year ago, it was reported that a clandestine attempt to import 1,350 tonnes of purified ore from officials in Kazakhstan was thwarted when the Kazakh government discovered the deal. Tehran denied the report as baseless.
The yellowcake delivered to Isfahan today came from the Gchine mine at Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf. It is an open-cast mine described by International Atomic Energy Agency of having "low but variable grade uranium ore". The agency predicted it would produce 21 tonnes of yellowcake a year – about one-tenth of the amount that an industrial reactor would require.
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor guardian.co.uk, Sunday 5 December 2010 17.15 GMT
Iran took a step towards nuclear self-sufficiency today, using locally mined uranium for the first time in an act of defiance to the west on the eve of the resumption of talks over its atomic programme.
The Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran announced it had used domestically produced uranium yellowcake (refined ore) at its conversion plant in Isfahan. The mining and milling of uranium ore is not banned by UN resolutions (which focus on uranium enrichment), but one of the ways the international community has sought to close down Iran's nuclear programme is to stop it importing yellowcake.
Today'sannouncement appeared to a signal that such measures would not stop Iran pursuing its nuclear ambitions. For the time being, however, it is little more than a symbolic step as Iran's ore deposits are mostly low grade and its capacity to produce yellowcake is limited.
The timing of the announcement is unlikely to be accidental, observers said, coming the day before Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, is due to meet diplomats from six major powers in Geneva, to resume a dialogue over Iran's ambitions after a break of 14 months.
The diplomats – from the US, Britain, Russia, China, France and Germany – arrive for the talks in Geneva with low expectations. Rhetoric from the Iranian leadership has consistently played down the talks, and turned hostile after the assassination of a nuclear scientist and the wounding of another in attacks in Tehran on Monday.
The regime has shown no sign of making concessions over the central issue – UN demands for Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium. Tehran insists the programme is for entirely peaceful means, and portrays the UN sanctions against it as an attempt to deny its sovereign rights.
Although Tehran accepted the invitation to talks from Europe's foreign policy representative, Catherine Ashton, who specified that the discussion would focus on the nuclear programme, there is no guarantee that Jalili will even agree to discuss the topic. There is no set agenda, and Iranian delegates to such meetings have, in the past, brought a long list of other issues to discuss.
Jalili is expected to repeat allegations made by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the nuclear scientist killed on Monday, Majid Shahriari, and his wounded colleague, Fereidoun Abbasi, were victims of attacks by the west and Israel.
Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, linked the attacks to UN Security Council resolutions against Iran. "By adopting the UN resolutions against our country's nuclear scientists, in fact terrorist groups were given the mission to carry out these assassinations in Iran under the direction of spy services," Mottaki said at a conference in Bahrain on Saturday.
Abbasi was named in a 2007 UN resolution as involved in banned nuclear activities.
The intelligence minister, Heidar Moslehi, announced that several people had been arrested over the attacks and claimed they had links with western intelligence agencies and Mossad.
The international delegation on the Geneva talks (sometimes known as the P5+1 group, meaning the permanent five UN security council members plus Germany) will try to measure Iran's response to the latest wave of UN sanctions, imposed in June. They will also attempt to revive a proposal to exchange Iranian low enriched uranium (LEU) for ready-made fuel rods for a research reactor in Tehran. The proposed deal was the most important result of the last P5+1 meeting with Iran, in Geneva in October 2009.
Jalili initially accepted the deal, apparently with Ahmadinejad's backing, but it later fell apart following disagreement within the Tehran regime and subsequent Iranian attempts to renegotiate terms.
The P5+1 group may draw some comfort from today's announcement on the use of Iranian yellowcake, seeing it as confirmation that their efforts to cut Iran off from external supplies is working.
A year ago, it was reported that a clandestine attempt to import 1,350 tonnes of purified ore from officials in Kazakhstan was thwarted when the Kazakh government discovered the deal. Tehran denied the report as baseless.
The yellowcake delivered to Isfahan today came from the Gchine mine at Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf. It is an open-cast mine described by International Atomic Energy Agency of having "low but variable grade uranium ore". The agency predicted it would produce 21 tonnes of yellowcake a year – about one-tenth of the amount that an industrial reactor would require.
Committee on Climate Change advises UK to cut emissions 60% by 2030
Britain is set world-leading carbon emissions cut target requiring complete overhaul of energy, farming and motoring
• The Guardian's Ultimate climate change FAQ
• WikiLeaks: US manipulated Copenhagen accord
Damian Carrington The Guardian, Tuesday 7 December 2010
The UK will cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2030 under world-leading proposals from the government's advisers on climate change.
Achieving the target proposed by the Committee on Climate Change requires a complete revamp of the nation's electricity market, making it virtually zero-carbon, as well as an overhaul of heat-leaking homes and the replacement of petrol-driven cars with 11m electric or plug-in hybrid models.
The CCC's 2030 target, if passed into law as previous CCC targets have been, would be the first legally binding 2030 target in the world. The target – which is a cut relative to 1990 emissions levels – is intended to lead the way to a legally binding 80% UK cut by 2050.
"We are recommending a stretching but realistic fourth carbon budget and 2030 target, achievable at a cost of less than 1% of GDP. We therefore urge the government to legislate the budget, and to develop the policies required to cut emissions," said Lord Turner, who is the CCC's chair, as well as chairman of the Financial Services Authority. "The case for action on climate change is as strong as ever: climate science remains robust and suggests that there are very significant risks if we do not cut emissions. And countries acting now will gain economic benefits in an increasingly carbon-constrained world."
Chris Huhne, the secretary of state for energy and climate change, said: "We know that the status quo will not be enough to cut carbon, which is why we are planning to undertake a comprehensive review of the electricity market, increase home energy-efficiency under the Green Deal and create a green investment bank. We will formally respond to the report in spring next year."
The CCC's carbon budgets are intended to reflect the levels of cuts required internationally to avoid the dangerous climate change, often defined as a rise of more than 2C above pre-industrial temperatures.
"If we don't do anything there are significant risks of dangerous climate change that we can't adapt to," said David Kennedy, the CCC's chief executive.
Kennedy accepts that the 2030 target proposed today is "highly ambitious". It will require 90% cut in power sector emissions, to be delivered by 40GW of new nuclear, wind and clean coal and gas power – equivalent to 25 large power stations. Delivering the investment needed to build this needs "fundamental changes" to the electricity market.
"We have had the most liberal electricity market in world – which had some benefits in a different era," said Kennedy. The market must be more "planned" he said, with the government putting out tenders for 25- to 40-year contracts to supply low-carbon electricity to cut investor risk and so the cost of capital. The government's proposals on electricity market reform are expected next week.
"What the government takes forward on this will be the most important test of their green credentials, said Kennedy. "It is absolutely crucial." He said there were three big tests of the coalition's pledge to be the "greenest government ever": radical energy market reform, a strong Green Deal bill to overhaul energy efficiency in homes and whether the government passes the 2030 target into law next year.
But David Porter, the chief executive of the Association of Electricity Producers, said: "If these huge sums [of required investment] are to be attracted to the UK, there must be a clear, credible and stable political and regulatory environment. We do not have that today, because our market is out of sync with the UK's highly demanding low-carbon agenda. It is [the electricity market] consultation which the industry awaits anxiously. The outcome will determine whether in the future we have a low-carbon electricity supply which not only meets environmental ambitions but is reliable and cost-effective."
• The Guardian's Ultimate climate change FAQ
• WikiLeaks: US manipulated Copenhagen accord
Damian Carrington The Guardian, Tuesday 7 December 2010
The UK will cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2030 under world-leading proposals from the government's advisers on climate change.
Achieving the target proposed by the Committee on Climate Change requires a complete revamp of the nation's electricity market, making it virtually zero-carbon, as well as an overhaul of heat-leaking homes and the replacement of petrol-driven cars with 11m electric or plug-in hybrid models.
The CCC's 2030 target, if passed into law as previous CCC targets have been, would be the first legally binding 2030 target in the world. The target – which is a cut relative to 1990 emissions levels – is intended to lead the way to a legally binding 80% UK cut by 2050.
"We are recommending a stretching but realistic fourth carbon budget and 2030 target, achievable at a cost of less than 1% of GDP. We therefore urge the government to legislate the budget, and to develop the policies required to cut emissions," said Lord Turner, who is the CCC's chair, as well as chairman of the Financial Services Authority. "The case for action on climate change is as strong as ever: climate science remains robust and suggests that there are very significant risks if we do not cut emissions. And countries acting now will gain economic benefits in an increasingly carbon-constrained world."
Chris Huhne, the secretary of state for energy and climate change, said: "We know that the status quo will not be enough to cut carbon, which is why we are planning to undertake a comprehensive review of the electricity market, increase home energy-efficiency under the Green Deal and create a green investment bank. We will formally respond to the report in spring next year."
The CCC's carbon budgets are intended to reflect the levels of cuts required internationally to avoid the dangerous climate change, often defined as a rise of more than 2C above pre-industrial temperatures.
"If we don't do anything there are significant risks of dangerous climate change that we can't adapt to," said David Kennedy, the CCC's chief executive.
Kennedy accepts that the 2030 target proposed today is "highly ambitious". It will require 90% cut in power sector emissions, to be delivered by 40GW of new nuclear, wind and clean coal and gas power – equivalent to 25 large power stations. Delivering the investment needed to build this needs "fundamental changes" to the electricity market.
"We have had the most liberal electricity market in world – which had some benefits in a different era," said Kennedy. The market must be more "planned" he said, with the government putting out tenders for 25- to 40-year contracts to supply low-carbon electricity to cut investor risk and so the cost of capital. The government's proposals on electricity market reform are expected next week.
"What the government takes forward on this will be the most important test of their green credentials, said Kennedy. "It is absolutely crucial." He said there were three big tests of the coalition's pledge to be the "greenest government ever": radical energy market reform, a strong Green Deal bill to overhaul energy efficiency in homes and whether the government passes the 2030 target into law next year.
But David Porter, the chief executive of the Association of Electricity Producers, said: "If these huge sums [of required investment] are to be attracted to the UK, there must be a clear, credible and stable political and regulatory environment. We do not have that today, because our market is out of sync with the UK's highly demanding low-carbon agenda. It is [the electricity market] consultation which the industry awaits anxiously. The outcome will determine whether in the future we have a low-carbon electricity supply which not only meets environmental ambitions but is reliable and cost-effective."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
