Scandal sullies Spain's clean energy

Spain has to deal with a new phenomenon. They call it “eco-corruption”. 19 people have been accused of corruption and have been arrested. The arrest of the mayor of the town ‘La Muela’ is notable.

Ten years ago, La Muela was just an ordinary town in Spain, but today it has become one of Spain’s richest towns. This happened because of what is called the new gold for rural communities, also known as renewable energy. The small town counts 500 giant windmills. The windmills generate € 1 million a year in rent and local taxes to the town hall. Private landowners share a further €0.5 million a year. These money amounts are paid by energy companies.

There isn’t only a boom in wind energy but also in solar farms. People started asking questions about all of this and experts believe that energy is attracting dirty money. Luis Gomez, a journalist of El Paiz, commented: “Who got the licences? That is where the shadow of doubt appears. There have been no public tenders and no transparent decision-making.”

According to me this is a very delicate case. It is good that there are that many projects for renewable energy in Spain, but it isn’t right that people (who are high placed) are trying to take some personal advantages of it. I believe that the building of 500 windmills in La Muela brought a lot of benefits for the town, but of course it is possible that there was some corruption. It is possible that energy companies bribed the mayor, to may build that much windmills or to get the order to build the project. There can be corruption in every business, so I think there is a big chance that corruption is present in this strongly growing business. In my opinion, it will never be easy to banish corruption and many resources will be needed to try it.

Robby Lampens

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/22/la-muela-renewables-spain-corruption

Energy plant is backed by county

The community Northamptonshire had plans to build a renewable energy fuel plant. From now on, they will get the support of the local councillors. The plant is an idea of “Shore Energy” and the plans have been approved on Tuesday.

Building this plant means the creation of 24 full-time jobs and 100 construction posts. The plant would process rubbish to separate materials for recycling and produce a renewable fuel from the remaining biomass, which would be used to produce electricity. Yearly, the plant has to produce about 50,000 tonnes of fuel. This is enough to produce between five and eight megawatts of electricity.

Next to the support of the local government, a private finance initiative will help to build the plant.

The main target of the whole project is reducing waste. Ben Smith, a councilor, says that they are constantly under pressure to reduce the amount of waste, which is going to landfill. If this facility goes ahead, it will help enormously to ensure they meet their targets. Not only will waste be diverted from landfill and recycled while in the meantime the non-recyclable waste can be used to generate electricity from a renewable source.

Next to the environmental benefits, there is another benefit! In this time of recession, the creation of extra jobs means an extra for the county’s economy.

For me it’s clear that building this plant has a lot of advantages for Northamptonshire. Using useless rubbish to create a sort of energy… What can we ask more than that? So, in order to reach their target concerning energy waste, it’s a good thing and secondly because of economic development. Maybe more of these initiatives should be taken to reduce energy waste all over the world.

 Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/northamptonshire/7953445.stm

 Posted by Joachim De Zutter

Europe's energy chiefs aim for carbon-neutral electricity by 2050

The leaders of 61 power groups in the EU have made an agreement to achieve carbon-neutral electricity within an integrated power market by 2050.

There is said that Europe has lowered its ambitions to fight the climate change, and that they are reneging on efforts to help the poorest developing countries adapt to a low-carbon economy.

For the first time ever the chief executives made energy efficiency the most important item of the climate change policy.
According to the president of Eurelectric, Lars Josefsson, there is needed an investment of €1.8 in the period starting from now till 2030 to replace the ageing plants, develop smart grids, meet surging demand and to deliver on environmental targets.

The president of Eurelectric said that their belief has been reiterated that a competitive functioning market is the best way to deliver on the goal in a cost-effective manner.

Another chief executive stated that nuclear power is also a very important component of carbon-free supply.

The governments of the EU are thinking about a €5bn plan to spend unused EU budget lines on predominantly carbon-free energy, including CCS, offshore power grids.
Eurelectric urged the leaders to work for a global approach to the challenge of mitigating greenhouse gases, increase support for R&D and CCS and buttress market-based electricity prices. Consumers have already been warned that "green" energy will require price rises of up to 20%.


I think that this article shows that it isn’t easy to deal with the climate change. It takes a lot of work, and large investments are needed. Not everyone is happy with this. The consumer will be the victim of all this because of the price rises.
If we want to save our planet, all the people need to do an effort.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/19/europe-energy-power-climate

Kevin De Pauw

Maldives first to go carbon neutral

Mohamed Nasheed, the president of the Maldives, announced that he wants his country to be carbon-neutral within a decade. The president said that he has a plan to realize his wish and hopes that many countries will follow. It’s very important that everybody will realize that the global warming can be a big danger for many people. Scientists expect rising seas caused by climate change and this could endanger the Maldives and other low-lying nations.

A new renewable electricity generation and transmission infrastructure with 155 large wind turbines, half a square kilometre of rooftop solar panels, and a biomass plant burning coconut husks are all part of the plan. The plan includes a back-up system too, for when neither wind nor solar energy is available. President Nasheed wants a carbon-neutral nation so he also has to tackle the polluting cars and boats. The plan includes that cars and boats with polluting engines will be replaced gradually by electric versions.

I think that this is a very good and progressive plan. It’s a good idea of Mohamed Nasheed, but maybe it could be difficult to realize. I hope that it will succeed and that a lot of leading people will consider the plan too, to take it over on their own country. It will be harder to succeed for bigger countries of course, but every effort to reduce the carbon emissions and to use green, durable energy is worth a try.


Robby Lampens

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/15/maldives-president-nasheed-carbon-neutral

Energy efficiency impact queried

I already published a blog in which the UK government wants to tackle the problem of energy efficiency in the British households. A lot of measures are taken, a lot of plans are made. But MP’s are warning! The plans of the UK government are failing, unless builders are forced to comply with new regulations.

Energy consumption by UK households had fallen, but the efficiency levels lagged behind some EU countries. The MP also added the minsters have to set up clear plans. The government wants the energy use of the households to fall by 11% in 2010, another 2% in 2016, all compared with levels between 2001 and 2005.

More than 80% of efficiency savings by 2020 have to come from changes to building regulations. Till now, the work of builders and suppliers wasn’t under the direct control of Whitehall departments.
Households are still using 8% more energy than in 1990. It’s quite evident that the usage of energy will rise as more homes are getting built. Another problem is that most of the people are using more electric appliances than in the past.

The government wants to put more control on the building control officers. So they want them to be trained, so they could use their power more effectively to enforce the energy savings in the building regulations. The government established that little is known from the current building regulations in order to save energy. The consequence of this all: effectiveness of the regulations on energy performance in practice is uncertain.

It’s a good thing that the government really is concerned about the problem of energy waste. They want to introduce new measures, they want to be more strict. But I have the feeling that there is no cohesion between all the new introductions. The government should set up a clear plan, a plan for more than just a couple of months. A well-organised and structured plan for a couple of years should be a greathfull help for everyone. So the building control officers will know better what the government really is expecting…

SOURCE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7919352.stm

Posted by Joachim De Zutter

Energy rule effectiveness 'unclear'

Government plans to make homes more energy efficient may fail unless builders are forced to comply with new regulations, MPs have warned.

More than 80% of the expected efficiency savings by 2020 would have to come from changes to building regulations, the committee said.

The Commons public accounts committee also said households faced a "confusingly wide range of advice".

Houses were still using 8% more energy than in 1990 and usage would rise as more homes were built and people used more electrical appliances, the MPs said.

Energy consumption by UK homes had fallen encouragingly but efficiency levels lagged behind some EU countries. The government says household energy use must fall by 11% by 2010 and a further 2% by 2016, compared with 2001-05 levels.

The committee called on DCLG to check that all building control officers are fully trained and are using their powers effectively to enforce the energy savings requirements in the building regulations.

It added: "Little is known about the extent of compliance with the energy-saving parts of current building regulations, so the adequacy and effectiveness of the regulations on energy performance in practice is uncertain.

The Department for Communities and Local Government should set out a clear plan for testing energy performance routinely on a sample basis to check on compliance, the effectiveness of the buildings control regime and, ultimately, the effectiveness of building regulations in delivering reduced energy consumption.


Personally I think that the plans to make homes more energy efficient are a very good initiative of the government, because energy efficient buildings could reduce the needs of energy in the world, and these buildings can also help to control the global emissions of greenhouse gases, which is positive for the environment. Also the energy bills will be reduced because people are going to use less energy in the future because of these energy efficient buildings.


Source: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23656447-details/Energy+rule+effectiveness+'unclear'/article.do



Dominique Van Huffel

£50bn of European investment needed to kick-start Saharan solar plan

At a global warming conference in Copenhagen an expert has told that the European countries could transform their electricity from a giant network of solar panels in the Sahara desert. This project could be reached within a decade.

The only problem that there could be is the price tag, there is £50bn of government investment needed to make this project succeed.

If this project could be combined with the windfarms on the coast of North-Africa, there will be enough energy to supply energy

The reason why this scheme is so interesting, is that the sun can be used almost every day of the year. Even in the winter it's sunny in the desert. The sun is also very strong on that location, much stronger than in Spain for instance, with wich there can be created more engery than on another location with these solar panels.

Another advantage is that the cost of moving the energy (electricity) from one location to another one is not as high anymore than it was in the past. Even when there is a long distance from the Sahara to Europe.

Some experts are affraid that some people will not be very happy with this project, for instance because of the cables that will have to be installed near the homes of households.

Personaly I think this is one of the most interesting energy projects. First of all it's a renewable energy source wich is good for our planet.

Secondly this project will create some jobs wich is also good for the economy in Africa!

I'm a little bit affraid that a beautiful place in the world (the desert) will be polluted.

I also think that sandstorms could result in troubles for transporting the energy to Europe.

It's also dangerous to be 100% reliable of another country to have energy and electricity, when there is war for instance between these 2 continents, Europe won't have energy.

My conclusion is that this is a very interesting project, and is also good for our planet in one way, but I think it's very important that Europe isn't 100% reliable of anoher continent, that's to dangerous!!

BRON: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/11/sahara-solar-investment-copenhagen

Kevin De Pauw