Energy review ignores climate change 'tipping point'

Alok Jha, science correspondentMonday September 4, 2006Guardian Unlimited
The Severn river in flood in 2000. A tidal energy barrage across the river could generate more than 10% of the UK's peak energy demand. Photograph: PA
The world only has 10 years to develop and implement new technologies to generate clean electricity before climate change reaches a point of no return, something the British government has failed to appreciate in its energy review, according to an energy expert.
The UK must embark on a strategy to reduce energy use by insulating homes better and encouraging more micro-generation schemes, such as solar panels or biomass, Peter Smith, a professor of sustainable energy at the University of Nottingham, told the British Association festival of science in Norwich today.


The scientific opinion is that we have a ceiling of 440 parts per million (ppm) of atmospheric carbon before there is a tipping point, a step change in the rate of global warming," Professor Smith said. "The rate at which we are emitting now, around 2ppm a year and rising, we could expect that that tripping point will reach us in 20 years' time. That gives us 10 years to develop technologies that could start to bite into the problem."
He said the recent energy review failed to address the problem because it just reiterated two long-held assumptions: that wind power should provide 15% of the UK's electricity by 2020, but that renewable energy alone could not fill the energy gap left by the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the demise of traditional fossil-fuel power stations. The solution presented in the energy review was to build a new generation of nuclear power stations.
"Astonishingly, the review pays hardly any regard to the principle energy asset, which this country enjoys, namely its rivers, estuaries, coastal currents and waves," said Prof Smith. "Huge amounts of energy could be harvested using existing technologies, which could meet the nuclear shortfall several times over."
A tidal energy barrage across the Severn river, for example, could have a peak output of around 6 gigawatts, more than 10% of the country's peak demand.
"The technology is robust, simple, it's basically a water wheel," said Prof Smith. "To say it is too innovatory, which the government has done, is rubbish."
There are several sites around Britain with similar energy potential, including the Channel Islands.
According to the Energy Savings Trust, homes in the UK have the potential to provide 40% of electricity needs through various means, including micro-generation.
"The ultimate goal for our homes is to make them near carbon-neutral and, at best, make them net contributors of clean energy," said Prof Smith. "In the long term, a combination of demand reduction and the full complement of renewables could make the UK virtually carbon-free. By the latter part of the century, a fossil fuel society will not just be an option, it will be a necessity. To reach that goal, we need to be infinitely more ambitious than we are at the moment."
He was not optimistic, however, that the government would make the policy changes he advocates without some major weather event to bring the problem home to the public.
"What will overcome [government apathy] is when there's a 2 metre rise in the Thames so that the House of Commons is underwater," he said. "The tragedy is that there needs to be a fairly catastrophic event to motivate politicians to take action then they feel confident that the public will vote for them next time."
The Met Office predicts that the Thames estuary is the most vulnerable site in the whole of northern Europe for major storm surges before 2080. The existing barrage could be overwhelmed almost at any time - estimates suggest it could cause £30bn of damage to London and the surrounding area.