| "Energy policy unrealistic" says Royal Academy | | Print | |
|
Government energy policy unrealistic, says Academy The Government's energy policy is hopelessly unrealistic, expecting far too much from renewable energy sources and ignoring serious concerns about reliable gas supplies, the Royal Academy of Engineering has told Energy Minister Brian Wilson MP in a report published today (30 August). The Academy's engineering assessment is highly critical of the Energy Review published by the Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit on 15 February. The Academy's most immediate concern is about security of gas supplies, which the Energy Review assumes will continue to be plentiful and relatively cheap. However, the DTI's own figures indicate that by 2020 the UK might need to import up to 90 per cent of its gas requirements. We could experience gas shortages as soon as 2004/5 in a severe winter. While Russia is expected to double its gas exports to the EU by 2010 the Government must address the planning, funding and operation questions involved in expanding the pan-European gas transmission network so that we can access imported gas. We will also need to build new storage facilities as we become a gas importer. The Academy estimates this could cost the Government up to £13 billion by 2020, as the market is not likely to bear the cost. The Energy Review sets a target of generating 20 per cent of our energy from renewable sources by 2020. While this is a laudable aim it is over-optimistic and fails to address the fundamental problem with all renewable sources - they are intermittent. "Experience on the Continent, especially in Denmark, has shown that grid stability can be adversely affected when the penetration of intermittent renewables reaches about 15 per cent," says the Academy's report. As yet the UK electricity grid is isolated, except for one interconnector to France - further interconnectors to Norway and the Netherlands are being investigated to help share electricity. As more renewable sources are connected to the grid electricity storage will become essential - our only current storage capacity is through hydroelectric storage schemes. The Energy Review places great faith in wind energy and proposes installing 22,000 MW of turbine capacity by 2020. However, Met Office data shows that the country's wind record is not dependable - the most likely power output in real life is less than 7,000 MW. To ensure the supply it would have to be backed up by 16-19,000 MW of conventional generation plant, adding an extra £1 billion to the cost. Biomass is another promising power source for the future but it needs more research to make it practical - the whole of Kent would have to be covered in coppiced willow to replace the output of Dungeness B power station. In order to meet our commitments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions we must replace the nuclear reactors coming to the end of their lives with non-carbon emitting energy sources.The Energy Review conceded that the nuclear option should be kept open in case we cannot find alternative sources. But it takes so long to build new power stations that we need to commission them in the next few years if they are to be on stream in time to prevent supply shortages. Skilled people are also retiring so rapidly from the nuclear industry that we will soon be totally reliant on the nuclear expertise of other countries. Nuclear waste disposal is clearly a problem but we have to deal with it irrespective of any decision on new build. "Replacing the whole of the current UK nuclear capacity with new units would add only around 10 per cent to the existing volumes of waste over the 40-year lifetimes of the reactors," says the Academy's report. The Academy is also very concerned about the Government's lack of attention to transport issues - 42 per cent of UK energy consumption goes on transport. Major support for research to develop the hydrogen economy is urgently needed. "The Energy Review appears to accept fuel switching, probably to hydrogen, as inevitable in the long term," says the Academy's report. "But it is unwilling to recommend early action or signal that this is the Government's preferred solution. Sustainable mobility is fast becoming a key political issue." ends Notes for editors 1. The Academy's Engineering Appraisal of the PIU Energy Review has been submitted to the Energy Minster, Brian Wilson MP. It was prepared by a working group of Academy Fellows: Dr Malcolm Kennedy CBE FREng FRSE (Chairman), Chairman of Parsons Brinckerhoff International Professor Ian Fells CBE FREng FRSE, Professor of Energy Conversion at the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne Dr Sue Ion OBE FREng, Director of Technology and Operations, BNFL plc Professor Michael Laughton FREng, Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of London Professor Nigel Lucas FREng, former Professor of Energy Policy at Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Christopher Price FREng, Director of Engineering and Technology - Operations, Rolls-Royce plc Professor Rod Smith FREng, Head of the Mechanical Engineering Department at Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine 2. The Royal Academy of Engineering aims to pursue, encourage and maintain excellence across the whole field of engineering in order to promote the advancement of the science, art and practice of engineering for the benefit of the public. The Academy comprises the UK's most eminent engineers and is able to use their combined wealth of knowledge and experience to meet its objectives. For more information, a copy of the full report or interviews with working group members please contact: Jane Sutton at the Royal Academy of Engineering tel: 020 7227 0536 (direct), mobile: 07989 513045, email: This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it Click here for the full report Click here for The Royal Academy of Engineering website: www.raeng.org.uk |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
