05 November 2010
E.ON's P2 wave power device has generated renewable energy for the first time at its offshore Orkney site.
It will generate as much as 750kW of power and is undergoing testing, the first P2 to be tested in the world.
Amaan Lafayette, marine development manager at E.ON, explained that testing will take around three years and will determine what needs to be done to deploy marine energy on the global renewable energy market.
The energy supplier has also announced that it will collaborate on a trial of two wave power machines off Orkney with ScottishPower Renewables.
Mr Lafayette commented: "If we're to bring marine energy to the market then it's absolutely vital that we take a collaborative approach to ensure this technology is able to fulfil its potential and contribute significantly to the UK's renewable future."
In England, the Wave Hub off the Cornwall coast began to feed energy back to the grid this week.
The £42 million test site will see a number of wave power devices attached to the hub, providing information on their performance.
Posted by Mark Stephens
Monday, 8 November 2010
Crops that reflect sunlight could offset global warming, scientists claim
Planting ''climate friendly'' crops that reflect sunlight could help offset the effects of global warming, a study suggests.
Published: 7:00AM GMT 08 Nov 2010
The crops, spread across large fertile regions of North America and Europe, would send a small percentage of the sun's light and heat back into space.
Different strains of crops such as wheat have significantly different levels of reflectivity, or albedo, say scientists.
Selecting those that reflect the most could make summers in Europe more than 1 per cent cooler, they claim.
Lead researcher Dr Joy Singarayer, from the University of Bristol, said: ''Our current studies on crop reflectivity are at an early stage, but our initial results are really encouraging, as they suggest that simply by choosing to plant specific strains of crops, we could alter the reflectivity of vast tracts of land and significantly reduce regional temperatures.
''The concept of using increased reflectivity to manipulate our climate is, in fact, an ancient one - humankind has for centuries painted settlements white to reflect the sun and keep cool. We could now realise the opportunities to do this on a much bigger scale via our agricultural plantations.''
The findings were outlined in London today at the Royal Society discussion meeting ''Geoengineering - Taking Control of our Planet's Climate''.
Arable land makes up more than 10 per cent of global land use, said the scientists. Particularly dense agricultural regions covered Europe, North America and Southern Asia.
A global climate computer simulation was used to assess the potential for planting crops with high reflectivity.
The study found that a 20 per cent increase in crop albedo could provide Europe with an average summertime cooling of more than 1 per cent.
This was a fifth of the change needed to offset a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in the next century.
Under a more moderate global warming scenario, the method could offset up to half of the predicted summer warming over Europe.
Published: 7:00AM GMT 08 Nov 2010
The crops, spread across large fertile regions of North America and Europe, would send a small percentage of the sun's light and heat back into space.
Different strains of crops such as wheat have significantly different levels of reflectivity, or albedo, say scientists.
Selecting those that reflect the most could make summers in Europe more than 1 per cent cooler, they claim.
Lead researcher Dr Joy Singarayer, from the University of Bristol, said: ''Our current studies on crop reflectivity are at an early stage, but our initial results are really encouraging, as they suggest that simply by choosing to plant specific strains of crops, we could alter the reflectivity of vast tracts of land and significantly reduce regional temperatures.
''The concept of using increased reflectivity to manipulate our climate is, in fact, an ancient one - humankind has for centuries painted settlements white to reflect the sun and keep cool. We could now realise the opportunities to do this on a much bigger scale via our agricultural plantations.''
The findings were outlined in London today at the Royal Society discussion meeting ''Geoengineering - Taking Control of our Planet's Climate''.
Arable land makes up more than 10 per cent of global land use, said the scientists. Particularly dense agricultural regions covered Europe, North America and Southern Asia.
A global climate computer simulation was used to assess the potential for planting crops with high reflectivity.
The study found that a 20 per cent increase in crop albedo could provide Europe with an average summertime cooling of more than 1 per cent.
This was a fifth of the change needed to offset a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in the next century.
Under a more moderate global warming scenario, the method could offset up to half of the predicted summer warming over Europe.
Honda Looks to Grass to Resolve Its Power Needs
By MICHAEL WEIR
LONDON—Honda Motor Co. believes a fast-growing African grass may be the solution for fueling an as-yet-unbuilt power station at its car factory near Swindon, in the southwest of England. A big hurdle: getting local farmers on board.
The plan to use miscanthus, a low-maintenance grass that can reach three meters tall and which is already burnt alongside coal in some U.K. power stations, is driven by environmental concerns as well as uncertainty over U.K. power supplies. Honda is aiming to build an on-site power station capable of producing between 5 and 30 megawatts by 2015, a year before the government forecasts Britain will run short of power capacity, and wants to help power the station with miscanthus —a biomass, or renewable energy crop.
"Obviously, everyone's read the stories about power shortages and we're aware of that situation but our biggest single driver is carbon reduction," says Jeremy Edwards, a manager at Honda Trading Europe Ltd, a unit of the Japanese auto giant. "We could pay extra for our electricity from a supplier who gets it from a clean source but we don't want to go down that road. We want to take ownership of the problem, ask how we can find at least part of the solution and get our own hands dirty."
Powering the Swindon plant, with its annual capacity of up to 250,000 vehicles, by burning grass rather than mains electricity will require much more than the 26 hectares (65 acres) of miscanthus currently under cultivation around the plant. Honda is seeking to lock in local farmers to long-term growing contracts to supply the factory with the crop. Miscanthus works well because it thrives in the Southwest's high rainfall and plentiful sunshine.
Brian Hunt, a Honda agricultural technical specialist, says a number of technologies as well as the use of oilseed rape, straw and virgin wood waste are being examined, but Honda hopes a substantial contribution will come from miscanthus. "We're still at the feasibility study stage but we are getting together the supply chain and technology," he says.
The company has offered farmers 15-year growing contracts and could eventually require between 5,000 and 15,000 hectares of farmland. But some farmers are reluctant to grow the crop. Farmers expect a return within 12 months but miscanthus takes three years to generate its first income, says Honda's Mr. Edwards. And "a lot of biomass projects have encountered unanticipated problems and not gone ahead." Despite this, he says, "I think the erratic nature of wheat prices and the rising cost of traditional farming will actually make miscanthus more attractive."
But Robert Loughton, who farms in the Southwest, says: "I've grown miscanthus on test plots and it's been a disaster. It didn't establish well and it takes potash out of the soil, which costs a lot to replace. From an economic point of view, it's a nonsense."
Jonathan Scurlock, chief adviser on renewable energy with the National Farmers Union, says farmers are nervous about locking up their land to grow biomass crops like miscanthus because too much risk is pushed onto them.
Phillip Bennion, who farms 12 hectares of miscanthus in the English Midlands, says many people lost confidence when Bical, the main miscanthus dealer, went under. "I ended up with two years' crop and no buyer, but some farmers had their crop collected then didn't get paid at all, so they had it worse than me. I think we'll see gradual growth. We expect to have more choice in who we sell to over the next few years."
Bical, which collapsed after its credit facilities were withdrawn, was taken over by former shareholders and now trades as Renewable Energy Crops. Its general manager, David Croxton, farms miscanthus in the Southwest and acknowledges the crop's supply and demand imbalance. But he points out that, unlike the U.K.'s power supply, the biomass industry is growing.
We see the miscanthus market doubling every two or three years. Demand for miscanthus is high but farmers are not supplying it, although that should change as new incentives are introduced. We see a potential market of 300,000 hectares, but only 10,000 hectares are under cultivation," Mr. Croxton says. "The government was wrong to put all its money into wind because we don't just use electricity when it's windy. Biomass works all the time."
Miscanthus is already burnt alongside coal in some U.K. power stations, which consume about 40% of the national crop. Much of what the power stations don't take is used for horse bedding. Unlike fossil fuels, which provide most of the country's power, miscanthus is seen as carbon-neutral.
If Honda does build a power station producing 30MW, it would be one of the biggest built in Britain by an industrial manufacturer. Dozens of similar, albeit smaller, projects are also in the pipeline.
Honda officials say a miscanthus-fueled power station, along with wind turbines and the use of solar panels could, in theory, satisfy all its factory's electricity needs. That would allow it to carry on operating if electricity to industrial power users had to be cut to preserve household supplies, as suggested in a 2009 report by the regulator of Britain's electricity and gas markets.
Estimates of the size of the energy shortfall facing the U.K. from 2016 vary depending on assumptions about demand, but on current trends the gap could reach 30 gigawatts, equivalent to a third of current capacity.
"It's like watching a slow-motion train crash and the behavior of successive governments has been extremely disappointing," says Professor Ian Fells, a nuclear-power advocate and a fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering, an independent organization.
Energy Secretary Chris Huhne said last month that there would be a second consultation on the U.K.'s power supply, but British businesses seem to be starting to take the view that consultations don't power factories and are going their own way. One of Ford Motor Co.'s three plants in the London suburb of Dagenham, for example, will see its diesel-engine factory entirely wind-powered by next year. But, to date, Honda looks like the biggest company to be considering installing a plant on such a scale for supplying power to its primary operation—building cars.
Caroline Henshaw contributed to this article
LONDON—Honda Motor Co. believes a fast-growing African grass may be the solution for fueling an as-yet-unbuilt power station at its car factory near Swindon, in the southwest of England. A big hurdle: getting local farmers on board.
The plan to use miscanthus, a low-maintenance grass that can reach three meters tall and which is already burnt alongside coal in some U.K. power stations, is driven by environmental concerns as well as uncertainty over U.K. power supplies. Honda is aiming to build an on-site power station capable of producing between 5 and 30 megawatts by 2015, a year before the government forecasts Britain will run short of power capacity, and wants to help power the station with miscanthus —a biomass, or renewable energy crop.
"Obviously, everyone's read the stories about power shortages and we're aware of that situation but our biggest single driver is carbon reduction," says Jeremy Edwards, a manager at Honda Trading Europe Ltd, a unit of the Japanese auto giant. "We could pay extra for our electricity from a supplier who gets it from a clean source but we don't want to go down that road. We want to take ownership of the problem, ask how we can find at least part of the solution and get our own hands dirty."
Powering the Swindon plant, with its annual capacity of up to 250,000 vehicles, by burning grass rather than mains electricity will require much more than the 26 hectares (65 acres) of miscanthus currently under cultivation around the plant. Honda is seeking to lock in local farmers to long-term growing contracts to supply the factory with the crop. Miscanthus works well because it thrives in the Southwest's high rainfall and plentiful sunshine.
Brian Hunt, a Honda agricultural technical specialist, says a number of technologies as well as the use of oilseed rape, straw and virgin wood waste are being examined, but Honda hopes a substantial contribution will come from miscanthus. "We're still at the feasibility study stage but we are getting together the supply chain and technology," he says.
The company has offered farmers 15-year growing contracts and could eventually require between 5,000 and 15,000 hectares of farmland. But some farmers are reluctant to grow the crop. Farmers expect a return within 12 months but miscanthus takes three years to generate its first income, says Honda's Mr. Edwards. And "a lot of biomass projects have encountered unanticipated problems and not gone ahead." Despite this, he says, "I think the erratic nature of wheat prices and the rising cost of traditional farming will actually make miscanthus more attractive."
But Robert Loughton, who farms in the Southwest, says: "I've grown miscanthus on test plots and it's been a disaster. It didn't establish well and it takes potash out of the soil, which costs a lot to replace. From an economic point of view, it's a nonsense."
Jonathan Scurlock, chief adviser on renewable energy with the National Farmers Union, says farmers are nervous about locking up their land to grow biomass crops like miscanthus because too much risk is pushed onto them.
Phillip Bennion, who farms 12 hectares of miscanthus in the English Midlands, says many people lost confidence when Bical, the main miscanthus dealer, went under. "I ended up with two years' crop and no buyer, but some farmers had their crop collected then didn't get paid at all, so they had it worse than me. I think we'll see gradual growth. We expect to have more choice in who we sell to over the next few years."
Bical, which collapsed after its credit facilities were withdrawn, was taken over by former shareholders and now trades as Renewable Energy Crops. Its general manager, David Croxton, farms miscanthus in the Southwest and acknowledges the crop's supply and demand imbalance. But he points out that, unlike the U.K.'s power supply, the biomass industry is growing.
We see the miscanthus market doubling every two or three years. Demand for miscanthus is high but farmers are not supplying it, although that should change as new incentives are introduced. We see a potential market of 300,000 hectares, but only 10,000 hectares are under cultivation," Mr. Croxton says. "The government was wrong to put all its money into wind because we don't just use electricity when it's windy. Biomass works all the time."
Miscanthus is already burnt alongside coal in some U.K. power stations, which consume about 40% of the national crop. Much of what the power stations don't take is used for horse bedding. Unlike fossil fuels, which provide most of the country's power, miscanthus is seen as carbon-neutral.
If Honda does build a power station producing 30MW, it would be one of the biggest built in Britain by an industrial manufacturer. Dozens of similar, albeit smaller, projects are also in the pipeline.
Honda officials say a miscanthus-fueled power station, along with wind turbines and the use of solar panels could, in theory, satisfy all its factory's electricity needs. That would allow it to carry on operating if electricity to industrial power users had to be cut to preserve household supplies, as suggested in a 2009 report by the regulator of Britain's electricity and gas markets.
Estimates of the size of the energy shortfall facing the U.K. from 2016 vary depending on assumptions about demand, but on current trends the gap could reach 30 gigawatts, equivalent to a third of current capacity.
"It's like watching a slow-motion train crash and the behavior of successive governments has been extremely disappointing," says Professor Ian Fells, a nuclear-power advocate and a fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering, an independent organization.
Energy Secretary Chris Huhne said last month that there would be a second consultation on the U.K.'s power supply, but British businesses seem to be starting to take the view that consultations don't power factories and are going their own way. One of Ford Motor Co.'s three plants in the London suburb of Dagenham, for example, will see its diesel-engine factory entirely wind-powered by next year. But, to date, Honda looks like the biggest company to be considering installing a plant on such a scale for supplying power to its primary operation—building cars.
Caroline Henshaw contributed to this article
Ministers' meetings with nuclear lobby raise concerns of favouritism
The renewable energy industry is concerned that the government has spent thousands meeting nuclear lobbyists
Juliette Jowit guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 20.18 GMT
Thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money have been spent on special meetings between ministers and the nuclear industry in Britain, prompting allegations the government is giving the sector an unfair advantage over renewable energy.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) has paid more than £8,000 this year for meetings outside government offices with the Nuclear Development Forum – set up to "secure the long-term future of nuclear power generation in the UK", and help make Britain "the best market in the world for companies to invest in nuclear power".
Two of those three external meetings with leading energy and engineering companies were attended by the secretaries of state at the time, Labour's Ed Miliband in March, and Chris Huhne in July, and the third meeting in October by the minister of state, Charles Hendry. Further meetings at the department's headquarters in Whitehall Place took place, for which costs were not provided.
Concern about the preferential treatment given to the nuclear industry by successive governments is likely to be heightened by the decision last month to abolish the parallel Renewables Advisory Board, which met every quarter at the department and once a year outside, as part of spending cuts. The work of the renewables board will be taken on by the Office for Renewable Energy Deployment, for which there is a parallel Office for Nuclear Development.
The developments are likely to fuel concerns among the many environmental campaigners who oppose nuclear power that the industry has unfair access to the government, as well as benefiting from hidden subsidies.
"They [government] have to come clean about all the money spent on assisting nuclear – and this would be part of that," said Mike Childs, head of climate campaigns for Friends of the Earth. "It's important ministers come clean about who they are meeting, when they are meeting, and the issues they are discussing."
In response to a Freedom of Information request from consultant and anti-nuclear campaigner David Lowry, Decc said that it had costed three external meetings with the NDF in 2010, spending £3,910 in March, £2,820 in July, and £1,416 in October.
The coalition has promised there will be no subsidies for nuclear, but more than half Decc's £3bn budget last year was spent cleaning up nuclear waste through the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and despite savage cost cuts across the rest of government in last month's spending review, the NDA budget will continue to rise up until 2014-15. There is widespread expectation that minsters will find other ways to ensure new reactors are built, including by setting a "floor" price for carbon that would make nuclear – and other non-carbon emitting renewable energy sources – more cost competitive.
Another common claim is that assessments of the environmental benefits of nuclear power ignore many of the "upfront costs such as mining and the on-going row over how to dispose of radioactive waste, and that claims nuclear power offers more security of supply are undermined by predicted shortages of uranium.
"To be honest, we had concerns about the Renewables Advisory Board, how effective it was," added Childs. "They can set up an advisory board, but nobody's listening. It depends whether the secretary of state and ministers care about an issue."
However not all environmental groups see nuclear and renewable energy in opposition. "I don't think it's a competition about who can have however many committees," said Matthew Spencer, director of the Green Alliance of lobby groups. "The question is: is policy going to be well formed by a regular interaction with people who are delivering on the ground?"
A Decc spokesman also rejected claims that the government was unfairly favouring nuclear power, adding that there were also forums for offshore wind and carbon capture and storage, the hope of catching and storing greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power stations.
"We do not believe this will lead to an unfair playing field and we are keen to see a diverse energy mix," said the spokesman. "As the UK remains the global leader in operating offshore wind, we are committed to retaining this position by working closely with industry to overcome current barriers and help further investment."
Juliette Jowit guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 20.18 GMT
Thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money have been spent on special meetings between ministers and the nuclear industry in Britain, prompting allegations the government is giving the sector an unfair advantage over renewable energy.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) has paid more than £8,000 this year for meetings outside government offices with the Nuclear Development Forum – set up to "secure the long-term future of nuclear power generation in the UK", and help make Britain "the best market in the world for companies to invest in nuclear power".
Two of those three external meetings with leading energy and engineering companies were attended by the secretaries of state at the time, Labour's Ed Miliband in March, and Chris Huhne in July, and the third meeting in October by the minister of state, Charles Hendry. Further meetings at the department's headquarters in Whitehall Place took place, for which costs were not provided.
Concern about the preferential treatment given to the nuclear industry by successive governments is likely to be heightened by the decision last month to abolish the parallel Renewables Advisory Board, which met every quarter at the department and once a year outside, as part of spending cuts. The work of the renewables board will be taken on by the Office for Renewable Energy Deployment, for which there is a parallel Office for Nuclear Development.
The developments are likely to fuel concerns among the many environmental campaigners who oppose nuclear power that the industry has unfair access to the government, as well as benefiting from hidden subsidies.
"They [government] have to come clean about all the money spent on assisting nuclear – and this would be part of that," said Mike Childs, head of climate campaigns for Friends of the Earth. "It's important ministers come clean about who they are meeting, when they are meeting, and the issues they are discussing."
In response to a Freedom of Information request from consultant and anti-nuclear campaigner David Lowry, Decc said that it had costed three external meetings with the NDF in 2010, spending £3,910 in March, £2,820 in July, and £1,416 in October.
The coalition has promised there will be no subsidies for nuclear, but more than half Decc's £3bn budget last year was spent cleaning up nuclear waste through the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and despite savage cost cuts across the rest of government in last month's spending review, the NDA budget will continue to rise up until 2014-15. There is widespread expectation that minsters will find other ways to ensure new reactors are built, including by setting a "floor" price for carbon that would make nuclear – and other non-carbon emitting renewable energy sources – more cost competitive.
Another common claim is that assessments of the environmental benefits of nuclear power ignore many of the "upfront costs such as mining and the on-going row over how to dispose of radioactive waste, and that claims nuclear power offers more security of supply are undermined by predicted shortages of uranium.
"To be honest, we had concerns about the Renewables Advisory Board, how effective it was," added Childs. "They can set up an advisory board, but nobody's listening. It depends whether the secretary of state and ministers care about an issue."
However not all environmental groups see nuclear and renewable energy in opposition. "I don't think it's a competition about who can have however many committees," said Matthew Spencer, director of the Green Alliance of lobby groups. "The question is: is policy going to be well formed by a regular interaction with people who are delivering on the ground?"
A Decc spokesman also rejected claims that the government was unfairly favouring nuclear power, adding that there were also forums for offshore wind and carbon capture and storage, the hope of catching and storing greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power stations.
"We do not believe this will lead to an unfair playing field and we are keen to see a diverse energy mix," said the spokesman. "As the UK remains the global leader in operating offshore wind, we are committed to retaining this position by working closely with industry to overcome current barriers and help further investment."
Orders for wind turbines to fall by 93%, energy experts predict
• Wind power capacity to slump from 1,368Mw to 90Mw in 2013
• Ministers to announce overhaul of energy market this month
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 20.14 GMT
Orders for offshore wind turbines in Britain will slump next year, threatening to halt the industry's recent growth and the expected creation of up to 10,000 "green economy" jobs.
Analysts are forecasting a 93% drop in the installation of new offshore windfarms in 2013 compared with the previous year. As orders for cables, foundations and other equipment are typically made two to three years ahead of the project being completed, the slowdown will start to bite among UK suppliers next year.
Windfarm developers are worried that the hiatus in the industry will last several years, which could result in large-scale job losses if other related work cannot be found. One said this gap would cause "huge problems" for the supply chain and it would be hard for manufacturers to invest in new facilities in Britain without a steady stream of work.
Britain recently overtook Denmark to become the world's largest offshore windfarm player, implying the tripling of capacity in the next two years. But new projects will dry up in 2013. Only 90 megawatts (MW) of newly installed capacity, which is enough to supply 30,000 homes when the wind blows, is being forecast by energy experts at Douglas-Westwood, compared with 1,368Mw the year before.
Energy companies are expected to spend the next two years planning bids to build huge "Round 3" projects and these may not become operational much before the end of the decade.
There are other extra projects on the drawing board which are supposed to fill this gap. But planning problems, difficulties securing finance and cost overruns on existing projects mean that these plans could be scaled back. Swedish firm Vattenfall said last month that it would not take up the option of expanding its Thanet windfarm – the largest offshore project in the world – blaming problems securing access to the grid.
Analysts at Douglas-Westwood are forecasting a pick-up in activity in 2014, estimating 774MW of new capacity, and bigger increases beyond that, but this assumes that developers build these extra projects.
Huge problems
One offshore windfarm developer said: "The industry faces a gap mid-decade whilst it waits for Round 3 and this will cause huge problems for the supply chain. Projects such as Thanet have kicked off the programme after the Round 1 demonstrator projects but without a steady build-up of work the investments needed, for example in new manufacturing facilities, may be difficult to justify."
The industry received a huge boost last month when Siemens, General Electric and Gamesa said they would go ahead with plans to build new turbine manufacturing facilities in Britain. But the factories may not ramp up production until towards the end of the decade for Round 3 projects.
The availability of bank finance for offshore projects – at least twice as costly as onshore windfarms – has still not returned to pre-credit crunch levels. Now there are only 10-14 banks actively lending, compared with almost 40 before 2008, each lending about half what they were lending before. Andy Cox, head of KPMG's energy practice, said: "It takes more time to get their credit committees comfortable with the risks associated with these projects, particularly as they get bigger and bigger. A huge financing gap in the market is looming with Round 3."
Middle East funds such as Masdar, which took a stake in the London Array project when Shell pulled out, are in talks with cash-strapped utility firms about making further investments.
The government will outline this month how it will overhaul the energy market to make it more attractive to invest in low-carbon forms of generation such as gigantic offshore windfarms.
• Ministers to announce overhaul of energy market this month
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 20.14 GMT
Orders for offshore wind turbines in Britain will slump next year, threatening to halt the industry's recent growth and the expected creation of up to 10,000 "green economy" jobs.
Analysts are forecasting a 93% drop in the installation of new offshore windfarms in 2013 compared with the previous year. As orders for cables, foundations and other equipment are typically made two to three years ahead of the project being completed, the slowdown will start to bite among UK suppliers next year.
Windfarm developers are worried that the hiatus in the industry will last several years, which could result in large-scale job losses if other related work cannot be found. One said this gap would cause "huge problems" for the supply chain and it would be hard for manufacturers to invest in new facilities in Britain without a steady stream of work.
Britain recently overtook Denmark to become the world's largest offshore windfarm player, implying the tripling of capacity in the next two years. But new projects will dry up in 2013. Only 90 megawatts (MW) of newly installed capacity, which is enough to supply 30,000 homes when the wind blows, is being forecast by energy experts at Douglas-Westwood, compared with 1,368Mw the year before.
Energy companies are expected to spend the next two years planning bids to build huge "Round 3" projects and these may not become operational much before the end of the decade.
There are other extra projects on the drawing board which are supposed to fill this gap. But planning problems, difficulties securing finance and cost overruns on existing projects mean that these plans could be scaled back. Swedish firm Vattenfall said last month that it would not take up the option of expanding its Thanet windfarm – the largest offshore project in the world – blaming problems securing access to the grid.
Analysts at Douglas-Westwood are forecasting a pick-up in activity in 2014, estimating 774MW of new capacity, and bigger increases beyond that, but this assumes that developers build these extra projects.
Huge problems
One offshore windfarm developer said: "The industry faces a gap mid-decade whilst it waits for Round 3 and this will cause huge problems for the supply chain. Projects such as Thanet have kicked off the programme after the Round 1 demonstrator projects but without a steady build-up of work the investments needed, for example in new manufacturing facilities, may be difficult to justify."
The industry received a huge boost last month when Siemens, General Electric and Gamesa said they would go ahead with plans to build new turbine manufacturing facilities in Britain. But the factories may not ramp up production until towards the end of the decade for Round 3 projects.
The availability of bank finance for offshore projects – at least twice as costly as onshore windfarms – has still not returned to pre-credit crunch levels. Now there are only 10-14 banks actively lending, compared with almost 40 before 2008, each lending about half what they were lending before. Andy Cox, head of KPMG's energy practice, said: "It takes more time to get their credit committees comfortable with the risks associated with these projects, particularly as they get bigger and bigger. A huge financing gap in the market is looming with Round 3."
Middle East funds such as Masdar, which took a stake in the London Array project when Shell pulled out, are in talks with cash-strapped utility firms about making further investments.
The government will outline this month how it will overhaul the energy market to make it more attractive to invest in low-carbon forms of generation such as gigantic offshore windfarms.
Gas plants now eligible for £9bn carbon capture demonstration programme
Programme to store emissions rather than release them into atmosphere previously only open to coal plants
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 18.25 GMT
Gas plants will be eligible for the government's £9bn carbon capture demonstration programme, Chris Huhne, the energy and climate change secretary, will announce tomorrow. The programme had only been open to coal plants, which in future will be required to fit the technology to capture and store emissions rather than release them into the atmosphere.
The move follows a warning from an independent body, the Committee on Climate Change, that the UK will miss its target to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050 unless gas plants are subject to the same new emissions controls as coal. But Huhne will stop short of endorsing the committee's other recommendation to fit gas plants with the technology after 2020. Huhne will say only that new emissions controls will not apply to gas in the "short and medium term", although this leaves the door open for tougher action in a decade.
Huhne will say: "Today the government is reasserting its mission to lead the world on carbon capture and storage (CCS), by opening our funding process to what could be one of the first ever commercial-scale CCS projects on a gas-fired plant in the world. The UK looks set to rely on gas for years to come. We won't be able to take the carbon out of all gas plants overnight, but we hope to support the process by investment in new technology now."
Last month the government finally committed £1bn to building the first coal plant to demonstrate the CCS technology. It plans to subsidise up to three more projects, including one gas project, through a consumer levy, but there are serious doubts about when the funds will be made available.
Currently, about one third of the UK's generation capacity comes from gas plants, but this is expected to double later this decade as old coal and nuclear plants close. The emissions controls have in effect placed a moratorium on building coal plants, which means that new "unabated" gas plants will be built instead. Coal plants emit about twice as much carbon as gas.
Joss Garman from Greenpeace said: "To introduce new legal limits on pollution from power stations that exclude emissions from gas plants is like introducing rules for alcohol intake but excluding beer. Allowing gas plants to keep polluting indefinitely is perverse and represents a real threat to UK efforts to beat climate change."
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Sunday 7 November 2010 18.25 GMT
Gas plants will be eligible for the government's £9bn carbon capture demonstration programme, Chris Huhne, the energy and climate change secretary, will announce tomorrow. The programme had only been open to coal plants, which in future will be required to fit the technology to capture and store emissions rather than release them into the atmosphere.
The move follows a warning from an independent body, the Committee on Climate Change, that the UK will miss its target to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050 unless gas plants are subject to the same new emissions controls as coal. But Huhne will stop short of endorsing the committee's other recommendation to fit gas plants with the technology after 2020. Huhne will say only that new emissions controls will not apply to gas in the "short and medium term", although this leaves the door open for tougher action in a decade.
Huhne will say: "Today the government is reasserting its mission to lead the world on carbon capture and storage (CCS), by opening our funding process to what could be one of the first ever commercial-scale CCS projects on a gas-fired plant in the world. The UK looks set to rely on gas for years to come. We won't be able to take the carbon out of all gas plants overnight, but we hope to support the process by investment in new technology now."
Last month the government finally committed £1bn to building the first coal plant to demonstrate the CCS technology. It plans to subsidise up to three more projects, including one gas project, through a consumer levy, but there are serious doubts about when the funds will be made available.
Currently, about one third of the UK's generation capacity comes from gas plants, but this is expected to double later this decade as old coal and nuclear plants close. The emissions controls have in effect placed a moratorium on building coal plants, which means that new "unabated" gas plants will be built instead. Coal plants emit about twice as much carbon as gas.
Joss Garman from Greenpeace said: "To introduce new legal limits on pollution from power stations that exclude emissions from gas plants is like introducing rules for alcohol intake but excluding beer. Allowing gas plants to keep polluting indefinitely is perverse and represents a real threat to UK efforts to beat climate change."