Industry News-UK Bosses Tip Cleantech, Technology and Media to be the Three Highest Growth Sectors by 2020

Cleantech and renewables are expected to become two of the most important sectors of the economy according to a survey of UK business leaders, commissioned by the department for Business Innovation and Skills.

The new survey questioned business leaders from across eight sectors and found that nearly half (43 per cent) of those questioned believe that cleantech will grow at the fastest pace by 2020, followed by science and technology (20 per cent) and media and entertainment (15 per cent).

The survey highlights how the current economic climate presents new opportunities for new areas of the economy to thrive.

Combined with a growing awareness to find solutions for some of society’s greatest challenges – from tackling climate change to supporting an ageing population – investing now in innovative, high-growth areas will be essential for bolstering the UK economy once recovery kicks in.

Driving the awareness, investment and skills required to power these high-growth markets is essential for Britain’s future. Britain’s chance to showcase our strength to the rest of the world, including our cleantech innovations in the run up to Copenhagen 15, and how our digital strength will enable the first digital games in 2012, is essential for the UK’s ability to meaningfully contribute to the global economy.

It is therefore essential for both government and business to properly recognise and promote the importance of these sectors.

As part of meeting this need for recognition; Science and Innovation Minister Lord Drayson and entrepreneur James Caan recently launched the iawards - the first ever Government backed-awards to celebrate achievements in science, innovation and technology.

Science and Innovation Minister Lord Drayson said:

“Cleantech and renewables will play a huge part in helping the UK economy to grow sustainably, but we need to do more to encourage innovation in these and other high tech sectors.

“And that means recognising our best innovators, those who are creating the household names of tomorrow. The iawards will do just that, this inaugural year and in years to come. Make sure to get your entries in by 16 September!”

James Caan said:

“The UK is home to some of the most innovative minds in the world and we must continue to recognise and celebrate the work of these talented individuals. The iawards are all about recognising British achievements, the visionaries behind them and showcasing new the latest developments that will make the UK a better place to live and work. In doing so, we will continue to draw investment, energy and skills to the high-growth industries that will drive our economy forward.”

Further findings:

- 73 per cent of those polled believe that business and government must work together to promote the development of skills needed to bring the UK out of recession

- One in five of those surveyed chose web 2.0 as the best technological development of the last ten years

The iawards in association with QinetiQ includes 13 categories which are open to all organisations, but all entrants must specify the British involvement in any innovation - demonstrating that innovative thinking and development came from a British organisation or team.

Siemens sponsor the ‘Next Big Thing' category and Microsoft Bizspark sponsor the best technology start up category.

The awards categories reflect the greatest challenges we face as a country where science and innovation offer the best chance of developing viable solutions. Each entry must demonstrate how its innovative qualities relate to at least one of the following challenges:

Addressing the healthcare needs of an ageing society; Increasing international security from tackling global poverty to minimising the threat of terrorism; Preserving finite natural resources in the face of population growth and climate change; and Delivering public services which make best use of new technologies.

They must also demonstrate that the innovation has an impact on one of the Government’s grand challenges for science.

Winners of the awards will be helped by UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) to meet potential business partners at key industry events such as the giant Medica trade fair in Germany and Technology World in Coventry this autumn. They will also receive public relations support from the iawards team. All shortlisted entries and the winners will also have exclusive access to the iawards logo.

Science and technology has been a driving force behind Britain’s export success. Exports for life sciences, for example, rose 19 per cent in 2008.

Innovation is also important in keeping the UK as the number one destination for inward investment in Europe.
UKTI statistics show that the number of investment projects in creative industries increased by 65 per cent in 2008/9 and in software and computer services by 36 per cent.

Client News - AWS contributes to Marine Energy Report calling for more marine energy in Scotland.

More than 12,000 jobs in marine renewables could contribute £2.5 billion to Scotland's economy by 2020, according to a report published today.

The industry-led Marine Energy Group study charts a course for wave and tidal power around Scotland, and highlights actions to build further success in the sector. Its recommendations, for Government and its partners, include:

A call for the Scottish Government to repeat its Wave and Tidal Energy Support scheme A review of grid infrastructure required to support growth A fresh look at the levels of support available under the renewables obligation Calls for the Treasury to do more to help the sector, including the release of the Fossil Fuel Levy surplus funds to help promote renewables in Scotland Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth John Swinney is in Orkney today where he will visit Stromness based marine energy company Aquatera.

Mr Swinney said: "With unrivalled marine resources and a range of wave, tidal and offshore wind development already underway, Scotland leads the way in generating energy from the sea.

The £10 million Saltire Prize continues to attract global interest in the marine energy potential around our coast. We also have publicly funded world leading testing facilities here in Orkney which are hosting wave and tidal devices built with Scottish Government support.

"Marine energy will be key to Scotland's future energy mix and that's why we changed our support mechanisms to give greater assistance to wave and tidal energy in Scotland than anywhere else in the UK.

"The report, put together by industry, highlights the actions it believes we need to deliver a commercial scale industry. It confirms there could be 12,500 Scottish jobs in marine renewables by 2020, a huge boost for the economy and a long term platform for sustainable growth.

"Industry recognises, as this Government has always believed, that the Treasury should unlock Scotland's share of the Fossil Fuel Levy - currently over £150 million - to allow us to give additional support to our renewables industry, the economy and environment.

"This report is an excellent example of collaboration in the public and private sectors. The recommendations are very much industry driven and we will consider their views very carefully as we continue to build a world leading renewables sector."

The Marine Energy Group is part of Forum for Renewable Energy Development in Scotland and works to accelerate delivery of a world leading marine energy industry to provide a contribution to the sustainable economy and environment of Scotland.

Its members are:

Sian McGrath, Aquamarine Power (co-chair) Lynne Vallance, Scottish Government (co-chair)

Mike Barlow, Scottish & Southern Energy

Graham Bibby, AWS Ocean Energy

Alistair Birnie, Subsea UK

Duncan Burt, National Grid

Robin Burnett, Airtricity [from June 2009] Morna Cannon, Scottish Renewables/Scottish Government Gareth Davies, Aquatera Karen Fraser, Scottish Government Phil Gilmour, Scottish Government Neil Kermode, EMEC Audrey MacIver/Elain Cameron, Highlands & Islands Enterprise Tom Mallows, The Crown Estate Robin McGregor, Lunar Energy/Christie Griffith Alan Mortimer, ScottishPower Renewables Paul Neilson, Scottish & Southern Energy Brian Nixon, Scottish Enterprise Paul O'Brien, Scottish Development International Matthew Seed, Wavegen Robin Wallace,

Political News-Miliband takes action on queue to connect new power generation to the grid

New rules to revamp the way power plants get connected to the UK’s power grid are proposed today by Energy and Climate Secretary Ed Miliband.

The shake-up will help new projects waiting to get a date to feed electricity into the grid to get out of the queue, and will in particular help renewable energy projects such as wind farms.

There is currently over 60 GW of new generation capacity – around 200 projects – that are waiting to be connected to the grid, including around 17 GW from renewable sources.Ed Miliband announced as part of the Government’s Low Carbon Transition Plan in July that the Government would reform the previous system of projects getting a connection date on a first come, first served basis regardless of when the project would start generating energy. This meant some wind farms were given connection dates years after when they were due to start producing electricity. Today’s consultation offers industry a say on three options for how the new system will work.

The proposed scheme will also give investors confidence that projects will be given a connection date that fits in with their project development timeline.

Ed Miliband said:

“Access to the electricity grid has been one of the key barriers to the generation of renewable energy in this country. We are determined to resolve this issue. That is why we took powers to do so in the Energy Act and today we are setting out our proposals.

“We need these new projects to get hooked up to the grid as soon as they are ready – both to help tackle climate change and secure our future energy supplies.

“The government will do whatever is necessary to bring about the transition to a low carbon economy and to give investors the certainty they need so that new renewable energy generation is built.”

For the first time, the Government will be making the detailed reforms to grid access rules that are necessary to overcome the delays. Previously, reforms were proposed
by industry and then approved or rejected by the regulator, Ofgem.

There are three proposed models that DECC is consulting on from today that build on industry and Ofgem’s work over the last year.

The three models look at different ways to manage the queue and to share the cost of connecting more plants to the system that is to be expected from this system.

The models are:

1.Connect and Manage (Socialised): - costs will be shared between all users of the network.
2. Connect and Manage (Hybrid): A model that targets some, but not all, of the additional constraint costs on new entrant power stations.
3. Connect and Manage (Shared Cost and Commitment): A model that offers the choice to new and existing power stations to commit to the network (which is helpful to Grid in terms of long term management of system) in return for greater certainty over charges, or to opt out and be exposed to additional constraint costs.

Ofgem has already approved interim arrangements to help new power stations connect more quickly, and under these interim arrangements around 1 GW of renewable projects in Scotland have already been offered earlier connection dates. However this was only ever intended as an interim measure and Government is intervening to ensure enduring access arrangements are put in place by June next year. This will be essential for investor confidence that we have a long-term and sustainable framework in place.

Click Here to view the full consultation

Industry News-Objectors to wind farms to be bought off

A scheme to reward local people is being considered

Ministers are considering whether to establish a “conservation bank” to help overcome planning objections to wind farms and other

renewable-energy projects. Planning problems have held back British onshore wind farms. Vestas blamed nimby (not in my back yard) objections for its recent decision to shut Britain’s only wind-turbine plant, on the Isle of Wight.

Vestas and other energy groups say planning delays and uncertainties make it riskier to invest in Britain than in other countries, where planning approval can take half the time and there are more lucrative incentives for developers.

Now ministers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs think they might have found a way to speed up the system.

For Full details of this article in the Sunday Times Please click here

Political News- US Congress inquiry reveals fake letters from 'voters' opposed to climate bill

Bonner & Associates, lobbyists hired to campaign against climate change bill, admit letters sent by sacked employee

Don't blame it on granny. A US congressional inquiry has found more than a dozen forged letters to members of Congress purportedly from voters opposed to a climate change bill – including a number from old people's homes.

The house select committee on energy independence and global warming now says it has confirmed 13 fake letters to members of Congress apparently from old people's centres and Latino and African-American groups opposing climate change legislation.

The committee is still investigating 45 other letters sent by the lobbying firm Bonner & Associates, which was hired to campaign against the climate change bill. The fake letters unearthed so far were sent to three junior Democrats who represent conservative, coal-mining districts. At least nine bogus letters were sent to Tom Perriello of Virginia in the run-up to the vote in the house on climate change in late June purportedly from Latino organisations, a local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, and a senior citizens' centre in Charlottesville.

Two other Democrats - Kathy Dahlkemper of Ohio and Chris Carney of Pennsylvania - also received letters from old people's homes."We are concerned about our electricity bills. Many of our seniors, as you know, are on low fixed incomes," said a letter to Democratic Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper that claimed to be from the Erie Centre on Health and Ageing. "Please don't vote to force cost increases on seniors."

The committee released three different fake letters to Dahlkemper claiming to be from old people's homes. They used almost identical language.

Ed Markey, one of the authors of the bill, said the use of faked letters marked a new low. "We've seen fear-mongering with our nation's senior citizens with healthcare, and now we're seeing fraud-mongering with senior citizens on clean energy," the congressman said. "Lately, democratic debate has been deceptively debased by fake facts and harsh rhetoric. We must return to an honest discussion of the issues."

The prospect of Congress passing climate change legislation this year has led to a lobbying boom in Washington with industry groups – as well as environmental organisations, on a more modest scale – seeking to influence energy reform. More than 460 new organisations paid for lobbying on global warming in the run-up to the house vote on climate change in June, a report from the Centre for Public Integrity said this month.

There are growing signs that the campaign against climate change legislation is finding traction, with Barack Obama slipping in approval ratings and focused on the struggle to preserve his healthcare reform plans.

This month, a group of 10 Democratic Senators from midwestern states wrote to Obama demanding protections for American workers in the legislation.

"Any climate change legislation must prevent the export of jobs and related greenhouse gas emissions to countries that fail to take actions to combat the threat of global warming comparable to those taken by the United States," they said.

This week saw the launch in the oil capital of Houston of a series of "energy citizen" rallies against climate change reform. More than 3,000 people attended the lunchtime rally – many employees bussed in by Chevron and other oil companies.

Greenpeace, which obtained a memo last week from the American Petroleum Institute laying out a plan for the supposed grassroots uprising against climate change legislation, has called such rallies "astroturf" events.

The inquiry has yet to establish the full extent of involvement of major coal firms in the scandal. Bonner had been hired by a PR firm, the Hawthorn Group, to lobby against the bill by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

The lobbying firm acknowledged sending out the fake letters before the House of Representatives voted on the bill. However, its founder, Jack Bonner, said all 13 forgeries were the work of one employee who has since been sacked.

For more on this and the related article “BP and Shell warned to halt campaign against US climate change bill” published by the Guardian please click here

Political News-Irish ‘No to Lisbon’ camp faces an 'uphill struggle' say experts

As Ireland’s second vote on the Lisbon Treaty nears, concesssions won by the Irish government coupled with a resurgent civil society ‘yes’ movement could see the ‘No to Lisbon’ camp face an uphill struggle in the coming weeeks.

Background:

Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum in June 2008 effectively stalling the reforms contained in the treaty and causing widespread consternation among European politicians.

Following the result of the referendum, the Irish government conducted detailed research into why the public voted against the treaty and found concerns over military neutrality, the potential impact on Ireland's corporate tax rates, workers' rights and ethical issues related to the position of the family and abortion. Question marks over whether Ireland would lose its European commissioner were also said to be of concern.

Leaders meeting in Brussels in December 2008 agreed to find a legally-binding solution to clear up confusion over how the treaty would affect Ireland in the hope that this would allow a second referendum.

Following June’s European elections, where only one of Ireland’s 12 MEPs was elected on an anti-Lisbon platform, EU leaders reached a compromise in offering Ireland legally-binding guarantees on the Lisbon Treaty without requiring other countries to re-ratify the text.

The Irish government set Friday 2 October as the date for the second referendum.There is a precedent for Ireland having a second vote on a European treaty, as two referenda were required to pass the Nice Treaty.

With the second referendum six weeks away, both pro and anti-Lisbon campaigns are grinding into gear. While many of the 2008 arguments from both sides are being re-circulated this time around, experts told EurActiv that the political backdrop to this year’s referendum is profoundly different to that of last year.

According to the sources, who did not wish to be named given the politically sensitive nature of the current debates, many of the grounds for argument raised by the ‘no’ camp in 2008 are no longer in play, given that the guarantees and concessions granted to Ireland by EU leaders appear to have assuaged many of the fears expressed by Irish ‘no’ voters last June.

As a result, they indicated, the ‘no’ campaign could face an 'uphill struggle' to recreate its 2008 success.Given the changed context, the ‘no’ camp will largely have to base its arguments on issues they feel have not been addressed by the EU guarantees, using, in particular, workers’ rights as a spearhead for its campaign.

Indeed, the combined ‘no’ campaign was launched earlier this week with a warning that the treaty would leave workers worse off and more exposed to spending cuts.

A profoundly undemocratic document says ‘no’ camp

Speaking at the launch, Ireland’s sole anti-Lisbon MEP, Socialist Joe Higgins, argued that the Lisbon Treaty “is a profoundly undemocratic document, which seeks to turn right-wing economic policies into the only show in town”.

According to the MEP, if Lisbon is passed, “the EU Commission would uphold the right of big business to profit from public services, over and above the rights of workers to take action to defend these services”.

However, Andrew Byrne, Chief of Operations for pro-Lisbon advocacy group Ireland for Europe, dismissed the ‘no’ camp’s claims, arguing that its “scattergun approach” continues to falsely portray Lisbon as part of a “neoliberal economic agenda”.

According to Byrne, the ‘no side’ “will continue to misrepresent and distort the truth, playing on peoples’ fears and anxieties”.

Groundswell of groups adds legitimacy to ‘yes’ camp

But pro-Lisbon Byrne believes that despite what he sees as the fear-mongering on the ‘no’ side, the emergence of a plethora of civil society ‘yes’ bodies are giving a stronger legitimacy to the overall pro-Lisbon campaign.

“You only have to look at the number of groups out there to see that there is a groundswell of people who are not part of the normal political scene, who care about the future of the country and feel that Lisbon is a big part of that,” he said.

This “shows that there are people throughout Ireland who feel this issue is too important to leave to politicians and traditional groups”.

Byrne argued that the proliferation of civil society ‘yes’ groups “takes the wind out of the ‘no’ camp’s sails”, in that “it doesn’t allow the ‘no’ groups to paint Lisbon as merely an ambition of the political establishment”.

“We’re making the point to people that there is a new deal on the table and their concerns have been addressed. The loss of the Commissioner, for example, was a huge concern to people,” said Byrne.

The Ireland for Europe representative concluded that in his opinion, the ‘no’ camp is weaker this time around, but urged against “complacency,” among pro-Lisbon activists, arguing that all groups should remain active on the ground until the referendum.

Political News-Policy decisions on waste management need to support Ireland’s competitiveness

The 2009 update of the Forfás waste benchmarking report published today (Wednesday, 19 August 2009) confirms that Ireland continues to perform poorly relative to a selection of competitor countries and regions in meeting the waste management needs of enterprise. Waste management charges are higher in Ireland than in comparator countries, progress on developing new facilities is slow and we have a heavy reliance on landfill.

Declan Hughes, Competitiveness Division Manager, Forfás said, “In the context of the unprecedented challenges facing the Irish economy and the need to ensure that businesses operating in Ireland are competitive to support sustainable, export-led growth, policy decisions in relation to waste management infrastructures and costs need to support national competitiveness as well as environmental sustainability policy objectives”.

“To improve Ireland’s waste management performance and to ensure the provision of cost competitive, environmentally friendly waste management services to business, we need to address the barriers to infrastructure investment, such as reducing planning delays, joining up regional waste plans and ending the high level of uncertainty about the future direction of waste policy,” he continued.

The Forfás report advocates that a decision on the future regulatory structure for the waste sector should be taken that clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the State in the regulation and provision of waste management services at national, regional, and local level.

Other policy priorities identified by the report include the need to coordinate multiple regional waste management plans, to reduce planning lead times and to ensure that waste services are competitively priced.

Due to cost implications for business, the report recommends against further significant increases in the landfill levy and the introduction of an incineration levy, or a cap on incineration, until such time as adequate new alternative waste treatment facilities are operational. The report recommends the need for policy to focus on how favoured waste treatment solutions can be made more competitive.

The report also recognises the need for the State support agencies and enterprise to continue to work together to ensure that Ireland matches comparator countries in reducing the amount of waste generated.

Key Findings and Conclusions

* Ireland continues to have a relatively high reliance on landfill for waste treatment and Irish companies continue to have a limited choice of waste treatment solutions compared to their competitors. In 2007, almost two thirds of municipal and industrial waste was landfilled, putting Ireland in the bottom three of the ten countries/regions benchmarked. Despite significant gains in the past decade in improving Ireland’s recycling level, the levels of recycled municipal waste remained unchanged over the two year period 2006 and 2007.

* The cost of waste management in Ireland remains high when compared to competitors. While the market price for landfill gate fees has dropped more recently, landfill costs remain among the most expensive of the benchmarked countries/regions. Biological waste treatment fees in Ireland are the most expensive of the benchmarked countries/regions.

* Waste management infrastructure rollout in Ireland remains slow. A range of infrastructures necessary to meet Ireland’s waste management requirements need to be accelerated including: thermal treatment capacity to recover energy from municipal and industrial waste; thermal treatment or landfill capacity for hazardous waste; biological treatment (composting, anaerobic digestion) and reprocessing capacity for recovered materials (e.g. paper, glass, plastic, metal recycled materials).

Policy priorities from the report

Ireland’s comparatively poor performance in the cost and availability of waste management highlights the key policy challenges that need to be addressed to ensure waste is managed in an environmentally effective and cost efficient way. The international waste review by the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which has been ongoing since July 2008 is vital to creating this policy certainty and addressing the barriers to infrastructure delivery but will need to take into account national competitiveness concerns.

The policy priorities which the Forfás report sets out are:

* Addressing the current high level of uncertainty about the future direction of waste policy which is leading to further delays in progressing infrastructure rollout (particularly private investment in waste infrastructure).

* Coordinating regional waste management plans to maximise economies of scale and enable the market to offer more competitive pricing to businesses and households. Ireland’s regionally based waste planning framework is hindering the delivery of cost effective, commercially viable waste treatment options as it tends to result in smaller scale, less commercially viable facilities than would be the case if infrastructure planning were done at a national level.

* Due to the already high cost of landfill in Ireland it is critical from a cost competitiveness perspective that further increases in the landfill levy are not introduced until adequate alternative waste treatment facilities are operational and that any incineration levy or cap on incineration should not be introduced until such time as adequate new alternative waste treatment facilities are well established and the use of landfill is reduced significantly. Consideration should instead be given to how favoured waste treatment solutions can be made more competitive
(for example, through the use of planning laws, development of relevant skills, research and development, etc.), rather than reducing the cost competitiveness of already high cost landfill.

* Continuing to fast track decisions on strategic infrastructure projects, including those in the waste management sector is of key importance. Delays in the planning process have had a negative impact on the timely delivery of key waste management infrastructure. While the introduction of the Strategic Infrastructure Act, 2006 has been a welcome step in addressing this issue, it is too early to determine if it has led to an improvement in planning timelines. The introduction of a specialist "Infrastructure Court", to deal with medium to large-scale planning and
construction cases, modelled on the successful Commercial Court (a list of the High Court that handles commercial cases of high value), could assist in cutting time and costs of delivery of our much-needed infrastructure.

* Continued and enhanced efforts will be required by Government Departments, agencies and business representative associations to ensure that businesses are fully aware of how best to exploit waste management reduction processes and technologies. Given that many organisations are already working with companies on a range of energy efficiencies, pollution prevention or resource conservation initiatives, continued efforts should also be made to develop a more integrated approach across a range of related issues.

Politics News-Bonn climate talks ‘augur badly’ for Copenhagen summit

The latest round of international climate talks in Bonn last week ended with disappointing results, raising concerns that a lack of progress is now effectively making a comprehensive climate deal in Copenhagen in December unrealistic.

Background:

The global community is currently engaged in negotiations to agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

The first United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) talks in Bonn (29 March–8 April) launched negotiations for a draft agreement in view of the final conference in Copenhagen later this year.

The draft negotiating text, prepared ahead of June's second round of climate talks, revealed a divide between rich and poor countries. Developing nations are asking their industrialised counterparts to commit to sizeable CO2 reductions and to offer financial aid to help poor nations in their efforts. But developed countries have not made any firm commitments on funding, and only the EU has taken on a firm CO2 reduction target, which nevertheless fails to meet the developing world's demands.

In the meantime, the negotiating text has ballooned to hundreds of pages as all parties have reacted with amendments. No agreement was reached at the June talks on financing for developing countries to mitigate and adapt to global warming.

At the sidelines of a G8 meeting in Italy on 9 July, the Major Economies Forum, comprising 17 countries that are accountable for 75% of global emissions, agreed for the first time to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius but failed to come up with targets.

The informal talks under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 10-14 August were intended to cut down the negotiating text, which swelled to over 200 pages after the last talks in Bonn in June.

Only "selective" progress was made to consolidate the huge text, according to UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer stated. "If we continue at this rate, we are not going to make it," he warned.

Anders Turesson, climate negotiator for Sweden, which holds the EU's rotating presidency, agreed that progress is too slow. He argued that a dramatic change of gear will have to happen at the next round of talks in Bangkok in late September if a deal in Copenhagen is still in the cards.

Disagreement over who picks up the bill

Funding for climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing countries remains the main stumbling bloc.

Poor countries that are just going through with industrialisation insist that rich nations have a historical responsibility for climate change and should assist them in acquiring technologies needed to halt greenhouse gas emissions. But the EU and other industrialised countries want the developing countries to chip in, at the very least, by compiling national emission reduction strategies, before they put any money on the table.

Another central disagreement remains the scale of each party contribution to emissions reductions in the spirit of the principle of common but differentiated responsibility. Little progress was made however last week to define the respective responsibilities.

Figures released by the UNFCCC on 11 August showed that the emission reduction pledges so far tabled by industrialised countries would result in a 15-21% cut from 1990 levels. But this falls far short of the 25-40% that the UN scientific body Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says is necessary to halt global warming below the critical 2°C threshold.

Crucially, these numbers exclude the US, which did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Including the world's second largest greenhouse gas emitter after China would water down the overall goal as it only plans a return to 1990 emission levels by 2020 in its draft climate bill that pledges to cut emissions by 17% from 2005 levels.

Developing countries have called for the developed countries to shoulder their full responsibility by committing to at least 40% cuts in the midterm. The EU has so far made the most ambitious offer by pledging to raise its 20% goal to 30% in case other industrialised countries, notably the US, take on comparable targets.

The US has, however, clearly indicated that it will not budge from its 2020 targets, preferring to focus on the long-term instead.

"There has been a general feeling of unhappiness about the level of efforts that [developed nations] say they will take," China's climate ambassador Yu Qingtai told Reuters on the sidelines in Bonn. He accused the rich nations of trying to shift the burden to developing countries instead by demanding them to take action that might jeopardise their economic growth.

Industrialised countries, however, insist that developing countries make their contribution to the fight against climate change.

"We also need to see the cards of the developing countries," the EU's climate negotiator Artur Runge-Metzger argued. He said it is still not clear what these nations are prepared to contribute while developed countries have by and large already put their cards on the table.

Observers are now toning down their expectations for Copenhagen, as a complete agreement seems to be slipping out of sight in favour of a basic framework that could then be filled with substance in the course of 2010.

The next meeting carrying real political weight will be the Bangkok meeting at the end of September. Between now and the December climate conference in Copenhagen, only fifteen negotiating days remain, with the last meeting taking place in Barcelona in November.

Industry News-Green light for Cheshire waste fuelled power station

A new 95 Mega Watt power plant capable of turning 600,000 tonnes of waste each year into electricity and heat, to be built at Ince in Cheshire,was approved by the Government today.

The waste, which would have otherwise gone to landfill, will instead be used to generate electricity to power a new Resource Recovery Park.Excess electricity will also be exported to the National Grid.

The approval follows a public inquiry held into both the power plant and the Resource Recovery Park, which recommended that consent should be granted for the construction and operation of the plant and also that planning permission be given for the Resource Recovery Park.

Energy and Climate Change Minister Lord Hunt said:

“We need to increase our use of renewable energy and to find solutions to the UK’s waste problem. This power plant will convert over half a million tonnes of waste each year into energy.

“The Inspector recommended the power plant be granted consent after a thorough public inquiry. I am satisfied that the mitigation measures to be put in place will protect the amenity of local villages.”

The separate planning permission for the Resource Recovery Park was also given today by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, John Denham.

Client News-MGT Power Announce 295 biomass power station at the Port of Tyne

MGT POWER ANNOUNCE PLANS FOR 295MW BIOMASS POWER STATION AT THE PORT OF TYNE

Date of Issue: Monday 10th August 2009

MGT Power Ltd today announce plans to develop a second major biomass power generation project at the Port of Tyne in the North Tyneside.

The proposed 295MW Tyne Renewable Energy Plant (Tyne REP) will be located on industrial land in the Port of Tyne, North Shields and is 10 kms east of Newcastle City Centre. The site is on the north bank of the River Tyne. The scheme will generate carbon neutral electricity for around 600,000 homes in the North East of England.

Subject to planning, this major plant, generating power from sustainable sources of biomass, is targeted for commercial operation in 2014.

Chris Moore, Director of MGT Power said: “With the Government committed to more renewable electricity generation over the next decade, our Tyne biomass project along with our consented scheme at Teesport will make a significant contribution to the Government’s targets. Large scale biomass projects can operate at baseload and each scheme will produce in one year as much green electricity as the largest 1,000MW wind farm project. Each biomass project will also save 1.2 million tonnes of CO2 from being emitted every year.”

As a first stage in the Tyne REP planning process, MGT Power has outlined details of the project in a “Scoping Document” which has been circulated to a large number of local and national organisations, including North Tyneside Council, the Environment Agency and the Department of Energy & Climate Change. The Scoping Document outlines the rationale for the project, the energy and planning policy framework and the technical studies and consultations that MGT Power will undertake as part of the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

Chris Moore added: “Just as we did with our Tees Renewable Energy scheme, we are consulting widely from the start, both with key organisations and local people. We see the Tyne project as not only a major green power project for the UK, but one that will contribute positively to the local area and the North East economy, primarily in terms of local investment and employment. We intend to hold a public exhibition of our plans in September.”

North Tyneside Mayor, Linda Arkley, said: “Tyne REP would bring substantial benefits to the borough and the wider region, representing an investment of over £400 million, the creation of hundreds of construction jobs, future permanent on-site jobs, 300–400 indirect jobs and an annual spend of £30 million
in the local economy.

“We are committed to the regeneration of the North Bank of the Tyne and bringing jobs to the area. I welcome the fact that MGT Power Ltd have chosen North Tyneside as their preferred location and look forward to supporting them for the benefit of our residents.”

Andrew Moffat, Chief Executive of the Port of Tyne welcomed MGT Power’s plans: “Our mission is to provide a sustainable, vibrant Port of Tyne and the Tyne Renewable Energy Plant represents a major long term investment that will take full advantage of the excellent facilities, infrastructure and
capabilities offered by the Port.”

The biomass feedstock for the Tyne Renewable Energy Plant will be sourced from certified sustainable forestry projects developed by the MGT Power team and partners in North and South America and the Baltic States, and in the longer-term UK sources. The biomass is clean burning woodchip, which delivers 95% greenhouse gas savings in comparison to coal or natural gas through the life cycle and will not use high quality land suitable for food crops. The plant will use around 2.4m tonnes of woodchips per annum and will operate at baseload – 24 hours a day, all year round.

Notes to Editors:

1.Details of the Tyne Renewable Energy Plant and a copy of the Scoping Document can be obtained via a dedicated website www.mgttyne.com or by contacting MGT Power via email at info@mgttyne.com.

2.MGT Power (www.mgtpower.com) was established in December 2007 to develop biomass generation projects in the UK and Europe. The management team includes Chris Moore, Ben Elsworth, Thiago Azevedo and Noel Forrest who have backgrounds in UK power generation and the supply of renewable energy feedstocks. The company’s main shareholders include Trafalgar Asset Managers and MKM Longboat. The firm’s financial advisors are Ernst & Young and engineering consultants are Pöyry Energy and PB Power.

3.As a storable, concentrated energy form, wood biomass allows electricity generation 24 hours a day, all year round, in contrast to intermittent renewable sources such as wind or solar. MGT Power will use trees sustainably planted specifically for use as fuel, such as Short Rotation Forestry (eg. Eucalyptus, Pines) and Short Rotation Coppicing (eg. Willow, Poplar).


4.The Port of Tyne Authority, created by statute, is a trust port (www.portoftyne.co.uk). It is a deep river port, with round-the-clock access, 2.5 miles from the mouth of the river Tyne. Its main function is the improvement, maintenance and management of the Port. The Port is a commercial enterprise, but it is not funded by Government and has no shareholders. It has five main business areas: conventional and bulk cargoes; logistics;
car terminals; cruise and ferries; and estates. Any surplus is reinvested into a programme of continuous improvement to the benefit of the users, the community and the North East economy. The Port of Tyne Authority is chaired by Sir Ian Wrigglesworth.

5.MGT Power Ltd is the developer of the Tees Renewable Energy Plant, which secured planning consent from the UK Government on July 15th and is scheduled to start operating in 2012.

6.The Mayor and Cabinet have no involvement in the determination of planning matters and any application that is submitted by the developer will be dealt with in accordance with the Council's adopted planning process including if appropriate referral to the Planning Committee.

For further information:

MGT Power Ltd (www.mgtpower.com)

James Court (Taylor Keogh Communications): 020 3170 8467/07921330356

Call Jonny Mulligan (Taylor Keogh Communications): 07875019695

Political News-New Inquiry Adapting to climate change

Most of the changes in climate that will happen over the next 30 to 40 years have already been determined by past and present emissions of greenhouse gases. This means that changes in our climate are inevitable, even if we can successfully reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avoid dangerous levels of climate change.

The kind of changes we could see include warmer and wetter winters, hotter and drier summers, sea level rise, and more severe weather events such as storms, floods, droughts and heat waves. Adapting to climate change is the process of building resilience and preparing households, businesses, infrastructure, public services and vulnerable parts of our society to cope with the impacts of climate change, and to take advantage of any new opportunities that result.

The Committee has commissioned a review from the National Audit Office (NAO) on climate change adaptation (see http://www.nao.org.uk/what_we_do/support_to_parliament/select_committees.aspx).

This provides an overview of climate change adaptation policy in England, including the implications of the Climate Change Act 2008, the cross-government 'Adapting to Climate Change' programme and the current capacity across Government Departments to assess and manage risks to their objectives from future climate change impacts.

The NAO's review is the starting point for a new inquiry into adaptation that is launched today. The purpose of the inquiry is to assess whether the Government is on the right path to embedding effectively climate change adaptation, and management of risks from future climate change impacts, into Government programmes, policies and decision making, and into those of the wider public and private sectors.

The Committee will also examine whether climate change adaptation is being sufficiently funded and supported as a challenge for the long-term and the extent to which short-term pressures could prevent effective adaptation.

In particular the Committee is interested in receiving written evidence that looks at:

* the extent to which the Adapting to Climate Change Programme will increase resilience by embedding adaptation and climate change risk assessment into the work of Government Departments;

* the extent to which Government departments have identified the risks from a changing climate that will stop them from meeting their objectives;

* the suitability of the processes and structures in and across Government departments for identifying, mitigating and managing these risks and determining the future
priorities of central government's approach to adaptation (and the National Adaptation Programme);

* how well the overall direction for work on adaptation has been set, the effectiveness of the statutory framework (including the use of the Reporting Power and its accompanying statutory guidance),
the allocation of powers and duties and how well issues like social justice are addressed in adaptation policies;

* whether short-term priorities for action including identifying and protecting key infrastructure and systems
(for example power, food, water, transport infrastructure, defence and security), have been identified and how these are or might be addressed;

* the funding, support, training and other resources available, including at a local and regional level, for:

o building capacity to adapt to climate change

o specific actions to adapt to climate change, such as investment in flood risk management or the resilience of critical national infrastructure

o helping individuals and organisations conduct their own climate change risk assessments and judge what actions they need to take;

* the monitoring and evaluation of work on adaptation, including thoughts on how progress on adaptation can be quantified and success measured;

*the effectiveness of communication within and between departments; and between government, local government, business and the general public on adaptation;

* whether work on adaptation should be embedded into existing sustainable development frameworks and, if so, how this might be achieved.

Responses dealing with one or two of the issues above are as welcome as more wide ranging responses. Those responding to this call for evidence are encouraged to look at the work done for the Committee by the NAO

(see http://www.nao.org.uk/what_we_do/support_to_parliament/select_committees.aspx).

The Committee invites organisations and members of the public to submit written evidence setting out their views on these issues. Submissions should be sent to the Committee by Monday 5 October 2009.

For full details and to see the committee website please click here

Political News-Taxpayer may pay for green failures

The failure of Government departments to cut emissions could leave the taxpayer facing large bills under a new carbon trading scheme coming into force next year, MPs have warned.

The Environmental Audit Committee said it was "unconvinced" the Government would exceed its own targets to cut emissions by 12.5% on 1999 levels by 2010/11.A review has shown reductions of just half that (6.3%) were achieved by 2007/08.

The committee also warned the Government was "backsliding" on renewable energy use on its own estate, with the proportion used by departments down to 22% last year from 28.3% in the previous year.

As a result, departments could end up paying money to private companies who are doing better than them at cutting emissions under the new Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) scheme, in which the Government is participating.

MPs have urged the Government to invest now in insulation, solar panels and energy efficient combined heat and power boilers in its offices to save money in the long run. The committee also said the Government needed to lead the way on green issues, using its "enormous buying power" to drive the transition to a low carbon economy.

"Leadership on these issues is crucial - the Government can't have one prescription for the country and another for its own operations," EAC chairman Tim Yeo said.

The CRC will require around 5,000 organisations to buy "allowances" costing £12 per tonne for all the CO2 they emit each year, and be judged on how much they are doing to cut their emissions.

Under the scheme, the money for purchasing allowances will go into a central pot and those cutting their emissions the most will get their original payment back plus a bonus, while those doing worst will be penalised by getting less back than they paid in.

MPs are concerned that if the Government does not cut emissions enough, the taxpayer will end up contributing "large sums" to companies who have done more.

To review the full report 'Greening Government' click here

Indutry News-Warning: Oil supplies are running out fast

Catastrophic shortfalls threaten economic recovery, says world's top energy economist

The world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their peak production, a leading energy economist has warned.

Higher oil prices brought on by a rapid increase in demand and a stagnation, or even decline, in supply could blow any recovery off course, said Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the respected International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, which is charged with the task of assessing future energy supplies by OECD countries

In an interview with The Independent, Dr Birol said that the public and many governments appeared to be oblivious to the fact that the oil on which modern civilisation depends is running out far faster than previously predicted and that global production is likely to peak in about 10 years – at least a decade earlier than most governments had estimated.

But the first detailed assessment of more than 800 oil fields in the world, covering three quarters of global reserves, has found that most of the biggest fields have already peaked and that the rate of decline in oil production is now running at nearly twice the pace as calculated just two years ago. On top of this, there is a problem of chronic under-investment by oil-producing countries, a feature that is set to result in an "oil crunch" within the next five years which will jeopardise any hope of a recovery from the present global economic recession, he said.

In a stark warning to Britain and the other Western powers, Dr Birol said that the market power of the very few oil-producing countries that hold substantial reserves of oil – mostly in the Middle East – would increase rapidly as the oil crisis begins to grip after 2010.

"One day we will run out of oil, it is not today or tomorrow, but one day we will run out of oil and we have to leave oil before oil leaves us, and we have to prepare ourselves for that day," Dr Birol said. "The earlier we start, the better, because all of our economic and social system is based on oil, so to change from that will take a lot of time and a lot of money and we should take this issue very seriously," he said.

"The market power of the very few oil-producing countries, mainly in the Middle East, will increase very quickly. They already have about 40 per cent share of the oil market and this will increase much more strongly in the future," he said.

There is now a real risk of a crunch in the oil supply after next year when demand picks up because not enough is being done to build up new supplies of oil to compensate for the rapid decline in existing fields.

The IEA estimates that the decline in oil production in existing fields is now running at 6.7 per cent a year compared to the 3.7 per cent decline it had estimated in 2007, which it now acknowledges to be wrong.

"If we see a tightness of the markets, people in the street will see it in terms of higher prices, much higher than we see now. It will have an impact on the economy, definitely, especially if we see this tightness in the markets in the next few years," Dr Birol said.

"It will be especially important because the global economy will still be very fragile, very vulnerable. Many people think there will be a recovery in a few years' time but it will be a slow recovery and a fragile recovery and we will have the risk that the recovery will be strangled with higher oil prices," he told The Independent.

In its first-ever assessment of the world's major oil fields, the IEA concluded that the global energy system was at a crossroads and that consumption of oil was "patently unsustainable", with expected demand far outstripping supply.

Oil production has already peaked in non-Opec countries and the era of cheap oil has come to an end, it warned.

In most fields, oil production has now peaked, which means that other sources of supply have to be found to meet existing demand.

Even if demand remained steady, the world would have to find the equivalent of four Saudi Arabias to maintain production, and six Saudi Arabias if it is to keep up with the expected increase in demand between now and 2030, Dr Birol said.

"It's a big challenge in terms of the geology, in terms of the investment and in terms of the geopolitics. So this is a big risk and it's mainly because of the rates of the declining oil fields," he said.

"Many governments now are more and more aware that at least the day of cheap and easy oil is over... [however] I'm not very optimistic about governments being aware of the difficulties we may face in the oil supply," he said.

Environmentalists fear that as supplies of conventional oil run out, governments will be forced to exploit even dirtier alternatives, such as the massive reserves of tar sands in Alberta, Canada,which would be immensely damaging to the environment because of the amount of energy needed to recover a barrel of tar-sand oil compared to the energy needed to collect the same amount of crude oil.

"Just because oil is running out faster than we have collectively assumed, does not mean the pressure is off on climate change," said Jeremy Leggett, a former oil-industry consultant and now a green entrepreneur with Solar Century.

"Shell and others want to turn to tar, and extract oil from coal. But these are very carbon-intensive processes, and will deepen the climate problem," Dr Leggett said.

"What we need to do is accelerate the mobilisation of renewables, energy efficiency and alternative transport.

"We have to do this for global warming reasons anyway, but the imminent energy crisis redoubles the imperative," he said.

Oil: An unclear future

*Why is oil so important as an energy source?

Crude oil has been critical for economic development and the smooth functioning of almost every aspect of society. Agriculture and food production is heavily dependent on oil for fuel and fertilisers. In the US, for instance, it takes the direct and indirect use of about six barrels of oil to raise one beef steer. It is the basis of most transport systems. Oil is also crucial to the drugs and chemicals industries and is a strategic asset for the military.

*How are oil reserves estimated?

The amount of oil recoverable is always going to be an assessment subject to the vagaries of economics – which determines the price of the oil and whether it is worth the costs of pumping it out –and technology, which determines how easy it is to discover and recover. Probable reserves have a better than 50 per cent chance of getting oil out. Possible reserves have less than 50 per cent chance.

*Why is there such disagreement over oil reserves?

All numbers tend to be informed estimates. Different experts make different assumptions so it is under- standable that they can come to different conclusions. Some countries see the size of theiroilfields as a national security issue and do not want to provide accurate information. Another problem concerns how fast oil production is declining in fields that are past their peak production. The rate of decline can vary from field to field and this affects calculations on the size of the reserves. A further factor is the expected size of future demand for oil.

*What is "peak oil" and when will it be reached?

This is the point when the maximum rate at which oil is extracted reaches a peak because of technical and geological constraints, with global production going into decline from then on. The UK Government, along with many other governments, has believed that peak oil will not occur until well into the 21st Century, at least not until after 2030. The International Energy Agency believes peak oil will come perhaps by 2020. But it also believes that we are heading for an even earlier "oil crunch" because demand after 2010 is likely to exceed dwindling supplies.

*With global warming, why should we be worried about peak oil?

There are large reserves of non-conventional oil, such as the tar sands of Canada. But this oil is dirty and will produce vast amounts of carbon dioxide which will make a nonsense of any climate change agreement. Another problem concerns how fast oil production is declining in fields that are past their peak production. The rate of decline can vary from field to field and this affects calculations on the size of the reserves. If we are not adequately prepared for peak oil, global warming could become far worse than expected.

For the full text of this article please click here