Archive for Biofuels
National Grid comes out for Biogas in a big way – 50% of UK gas demand
Posted by: | CommentsAcording to National Grid “Renewable gas has the potential to make a significant contribution to the UK’s renewable energy and carbon reduction targets for 2020. And in the longer term, with the right government policies in place, renewable gas could meet up to 50% of UK residential gas demand. Produced mainly via a process of anaerobic digestion (AD) or thermal gasification of the UK’s biodegradeable waste, renewable gas represents a readily implementable solution for delivering renewable heat to homes in the UK.
Renewable gas can also deliver greater security of energy supply for the country as well as a solution for waste management as UK landfill capacity declines. In terms of the cost to the UK of delivering renewable gas, it is estimated that the marginal cost (i.e. that over and above the cost of the waste infrastructure which must be built anyway in the UK to deal with reducing landfill capacity) would be in the region of £10bn. This cost compares well with the likely cost of delivering other large scale renewables such as wind.
Full report at: Renwable Gas
ASA bans renewable fuels ad
Posted by: | CommentsThe ad which claimed that biofuels were a sustainable answer to OPECs oil, was found to have breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 3.2 (Division of informed opinion), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 49.1, 49.2 and 49.3 (Environmental claims). The ASA said that the the ad must not appear again in its current form. ASA told RFA to remove the claim “BIOFUELS – A … SUSTAINABLE ANSWER TO OPEC’S OIL” from their ad.
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_45582.htm
Thanks for this to:
Dave Auty
Entec UK Ltd, Leeds
Office: 0113 280 6384
www.entecuk.com
The link represent DECC’s initial thinking. It is subject to change and may or may not be published.
They give for example the following costs, all in UK Pounds/kWe:
CCGT – 600 – 690
Coal 1250 – 1500
Onshore wind – 1074
Offshore wind – 1429
The table on the link gives a lot more detail.
http://claverton-energy.com/pipermail/claverton-group_claverton-energy.com/2009-January/000351.html
Surprisingly, perhaps (or perhaps not given the historical bias), there is no mention of the capital costs, or the running costs of the cheapest means of cutting CO2 and fuel costs – Combined Heat and Power with District Heating CHPDH for cities, and micro-CHP for suburbs.
If you have any evidence to suggest that any of the assumptions differ from what is attached in the spreadsheet, you may wish to contact Stephen Green, Senior Economist, Energy Strategy, Security and Markets Directorate Department of Energy and Climate Change, at DECC.
