Posts Tagged ‘Energy Consumption’

China Dialogue has published a green guide to China’s new 5 year plan.

The 5 year plan will focus on issues such as pollution reduction, energy efficiency, large scale recycling and a more reliable and cleaner energy supply.

The environmental market is predicted at growing by 15% to 20% annually.

China’s aim at producing 15% of its energy from non-fossil fuels, from 8.3% in 2009.

The new energy industry development plan commits from £190b to £280b in renewable energy over 10 years.

In terms of energy efficiency, China will target a reduction of energy intensity of 16%, mainly focusing on heavy industry, construction and transportation.

National demand-side management will also be established as well as using public procurement to purchase products with energy saving labels.

China has pledge to reduce carbon intensity (carbon by unit of GDP) by 17% by 2017 and by 40% to 45% by 2020.

This will include piloting a carbon trading scheme, low carbon cities and provinces and a rise in forest coverage of 22%.

The UK has unveiled the Renewable Heating Incentive (RHI), which aims to support the use of renewables in the generation of heating. Around 70% of the heating comes from gas.

This is a great initiative but I think it misses a nice opportunity to combine the renewable part with the efficiency part.

Why not link the incentive to making changes in efficiency?

You can install biomass or solar thermal but what’s the point if that heat is wasted in a very inefficient building or factory? Is there a way to link the incentive also to efficiency? It may help to extend the government’s moneya bit .

Heating accounts for 47% of total UK final energy consumption. Now think whether there is more room for making this renewable or reducing it in the first place. We will spend lots of money later on in incentivising insulation (rightly), so why not linking the RHI to a condition for efficiency?

At least for homes, the RHI will be linked with the Green Deal for energy efficiency, to be launched in 2012.

Hopefully they are well-linked, not just launched at the same time.

Have you ever done the typical on-line exercise of calculating your carbon footprint?

Well, it’s likely to miss most of the day to day things you do and the associated impact. It’s not only your car and your house.  All activities have a carbon footprint.

What is the impact of facebook for one year? And the impact of all web searches? And your yearly text messages?

What about your phone charger, your TV, a night in a hotel, your (daily) bottle of wine, a shower or playing World of Warcraft?

GE has created a nice tool that tells you the carbon footprint of various things.


Great article by the BBC taking the retrofit challenge and putting it into a digestible article.

The idea of doing a study of a full terraced house is great both for the data and for PR (the type of tangible story that could get in the tabloids).

Nice work as always from Paul King from the UKGBC raising the issue of upfront cost finance and the role we all wish the green investment bank will have. Although we all fear it might look like a humble piggy bank…

WZ3XDNWJFMW2

1.Energy efficiency

Companies, countries and society have already figured out that tackling the negawatts is usually the most profitable way of cutting carbon. 2011 will the year where inneficiencies will be tackled in an impressive variety of ways. From companies profiting from selling innovative solutions to consumers, other companies and governments to green deals from governments. Even in Russia where climate change is not a popular topic, energy efficiency is one of the biggest topics for the year.

2. Full transparency will show up the true impacts

After the previous decade, people have had enough of carbon geezing, the term I use to include things such as companies saying they are carbon neutral even if it’s not the point, the abuse of offsets standars, the thousands of magic labels, etc. Full transparency (publishing all the impacts of all the life cycle stages of all your products) will be the only way your customers will trust you.

3. Legislation: leading companies will say ‘bring it on’

Tired of minimum-common-denominator business-association-led type of lobbying and advocacy, leading companies will tell governments yes to smart legislation. Yes, to efficiency standards, to a reasonable carbon price floor and well crafted bans (eg our wish of a ban on carpet landfill). Governments are realizing of how tiring and useless are voluntary agreements if there is no stick or threat attached to it. But smart legislation wont mean going back to the old school green legislation using the environment as an excuse for taxation.

4. The come back of the environmental geek

Companies will start hiring more people with ability to do proper LCAs because they need to understand their impacts at product life cycle level. And they will hire less in green spin doctors because the LCA facts will speak by themselves

After years and years of talking, finally the mobile phone industry will deliver a standardised micro USB charger. The agreement, made in 2009, means that some phones will already be launched this year with the standardised charger.

Read more about this article here

Some companies and government officials still think that voluntary agreements are the panacea that can solve environmental issues avoiding regulation. Some will still argue this is a great example of industry collaboration.

Now, would this have happened without the EU Commission nudging about it? Not sure, perhaps the industry would still be talking…

My ex-colleague Mats Pelback-Scharp from Sony Ericsson presented their green strategy in the latest LCA conference in London.

Interestingly around 60% of the impact of a mobile phone is embodied already in the raw materials and components.

So the myth that phones were a very small part of the whole mobile phone network is gone because it only takes account 16% of the phone’s impact.

Another myth was true but is being managed. Phone chargers used to keep on consuming energy when plugged in the switch even if the phone is fully load or unplugged.

The no-load power at Sony Ericsson has decreased from 1.4 watts in 2000 to less than 0.2 today.

Well done to Sony Ericsson, it would be great to have the data from other manufacturers as well.

The Economist has published an article worrying that solid-state lighting (including LEDs), which is more efficient than the usual lighting, might contribute towards more electricity consumption rather than saving.

http://economist.com/node/16886228

They are based on a study from Jeff Tsao, who argues that the efficiency gained by the new technology will be outpaced by the growth in increasing luminosity. Because there is still a huge amount of room for increasing the level of lumens in interiors and night, compared to exteriors, LEDs will lead us to want more luminosity in interiors at at night, instead of the same amount of lumens but more efficiently.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/46467/20100826/led-boosts-electricity-use.htm

I think this is a good point but rather than slowing the technology for being too good, we should take action to prevent that these gains in technology are only translated in performance rather than savings. Gains on efficiency that went against the environment have been common, like computer processors gains translated in more processing power rather in the same power with less electricity use.

How can we manage this?

I think the cheapest way of handling this would be higher prices of electricity because higher price of carbon. Failing that, any increase on electricity price would deal with it, again not popular for governments. Then you can regulate the amount of lumens in certain spaces (eg office, retail, supermarkets). The same sort of thing we should have done with temperatures. Going in summer to a supermarket or retail in hot countries and you get freezing temperatures, often much lower than needed. Why, because it is relatively cheap to waste electricity for your air-conditioning.

It’s all about the facts. Overestimate just one parameter, like how the wind changes with height, and the investment in a wind turbine can all go wrong.

How do they it?  There is now a new technology from Scottish company Sgurr which uses pulsed laser technology for wind speed and direction measurement.  This steerable beam can reach 4km! For those who have studied physics you might remember the Doppler effect? Well, this machine measures the Doppler shift of the light back scatter by particles carried by the wind, therefore obtaining their speed. This means it can calculate wind speed, direction, flow inclination, turbulence, shear & veer. Amazing stuff, and all very useful if you are just about to invest in the development of a very expensive wind turbine and want to make sure that you get the right position!

Read more about the Sgurr Galion Lidar here.

This type of engineering-led innovation, based on providing better facts to make decisions, can according to the company increase the internal rate of return of a wind project by around one percent.

There is a great article in the Economist at the moment about how people underestimate their energy consumption. They point out that people give too much emphasis to light bulbs and tweaking thermostats but forget large energy consuming devices such as heaters and dryers.

What is their suggestion to combat that? More of ‘Just the facts’: increased information and making energy consumption clearer.

defraEarlier this week, the UK Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra to you and me) joined the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the Home Office in publishing real-time energy consumption data online. If you go to this page on their web site   you can see a graph spiking up and down showing energy units used per hour and use over the past 24 hours at its main London headquarters building. It is also clever enough to disclose the energy cost per hour and carbon emissions.

Whether this is simply a gimmick or real progress towards full transparency – I think it is certainly a good start. The government has committed to cutting carbon emissions across all central departments by 10% by next May, so it will be interesting to what Defra does next (and which departments follow suit). It has already promised that as more data is collected, it will publish results for different time periods (use per week, month and year).

So, Defra is definitely making a move in the right direction, but it needs to look at more than just energy consumption. Real carbon transparency will depend on reporting total carbon emissions during the whole life cycle of a building – including the energy used to produce building materials and furniture (and carpet!). Also, it’s not just carbon emissions that have a negative impact on the environment. Hopefully, one day in the not too distant future, government departments will also report on waste production and water usage in a similar way.

In my opinion, the best way for the Government (or any organisation for that matter) to get reliable and validated information on its full environmental impact, including carbon emissions is to use Environmental Product Declarations  and continue to provide just the facts.

The EU adopted a recast of The Directive on energy performance of buildings (2002/91/EC) on 18 May 2010. This was done in order to strengthen the energy performance requirements and better organise its provisions. 

Find out more

 Buildings account for around 40% of energy consumption and 36% of CO2 emissions.  As much as 80% of the operational costs could be saved through integrated design solutions.

View the current state of low energy buildings across Europe.