Energy crops The effectiveness of UK Policy

Transcription

1 Energy crops The effectiveness of UK Policy Kevin Lindegaard ENERGY CROPS HOW EU COOPERATION CAN HELP 19 March 2014

2 Miscanthus and short rotation coppice (SRC) could occupy areas of between 0.62 and 2.8 million hectares by 2050!! Ref: Anon (2012) UK Bioenergy Strategy. Department of Energy & Climate Change, April 2012

3 Historical background 1970s Trial plots and early research projects 1980s Supportive policy 1996 UK SRC willow breeding programme launched 1998 Arbre project in construction Late 90 s 1500 hectares of SRC planted in Yorkshire & East Midlands 2000 Ely Power station commissioned 2000 Energy Crops Scheme established 2001 Numerous proposed biomass plants (NFFO 4) Why did it all go so wrong?

4 A decade of downs (and a few ups) Ambient projects fails to get planning Arbre project fails Winkleigh project fails to get planning ECS 1 ends (18 month period with no support) Bical goes bust Bioenergy infrastructure scheme scrapped 10 million of ECS funding removed to set up Woodfuel Woodland Improvement Grant Slough Heat & Power closes ECS 2 ends Renewables Obligation introduced Miscanthus breeding at IBERs begins ROC banding introduced (double ROCs)/Drax sets up Green Shoots scheme Renewable Heat Incentive launched Terravesta set up / Iggesund offering SRC contracts

5 The spiral of failure Too ambitious Technically challenging projects Ill thought through schemes Too much money on the wrong things Hiatus period Very prescriptive and overly complicated schemes Inflexible (unless you know the right people!) No money available to plug the gaps Undersubscribed schemes No follow up schemes Reduced confidence Increased scepticism Increased ambivalence Stagnation

6 Energy crop planting in England Miscanthus SRC

7 Energy Crops Scheme ECS million budget ( 7.7 million spent) Flat rate grant 8,191 hectares planted ECS Managed by Natural England 47 million budget ( 5 million spent) 40-50% of eligible costs 3,937 hectares planted Simple, easily administered scheme Bureaucratic, time consuming scheme

8 Co-firing under the RO 2002 RO introduced o 75% of co-fired ROCs to be generated from ECs by review o Staggered phase in of 75% ECs requirement between review o ECs requirement removed 2009 review o Banding introduced 1 ROC /MWh for co-firing with ECs 2013 review o Co-firing ECs uplift removed Changing priorities Incentivise biomass supply chains and improve security of supply Achieve 2020 RE targets as simply and cheaply as possible. Biomass imports OK

9 Renewable Heat Incentive Introduced % of EC growers believe that the RHI is having a major effect on planting levels 85% believe that changes to the RHI to promote local production of ECs could provide a step change 2013 RHI emissions certificates required o 30 g/gj particulates o 150 g/gj NOx 2014 Sustainability criteria introduced o Woodfuel suppliers list introduced

10 Current situation 15,000 hectares of energy crops (4,500 SRC) 650 active growers (0.6% of farmers) Only 3 volume markets o Drax, Ely, Iggesund Big issues Unsupportive policies Bureaucratic scheme no scheme Not joined up o DECC, DEFRA, Natural England, Forestry Commission, Environment Agency Long term paybacks / age of farmers Not accepted by conservation groups World class research not transformed into policy

11 CAP reform Policy by lobby o 6 responses in favour of energy crops o 75 responses from conservation groups No Energy Crops Scheme 3 SRC in Ecological Focus Areas? Absent from New Environmental Land Management Scheme Biodiversity benefits and ecosystem services offered by SRC (and miscanthus) will be under exploited

12 Flood defence / Water quality Energy woodland crops such as SRC could be a particularly attractive option for mitigating nitrate leaching in NVZs by maximising nitrogen uptake and providing a high yielding crop for farmers..the rapid growth and multi-stemmed nature of these crops makes them ideally suited to flood risk management. energy crops can offer additional advantages for water protection, flood risk management and climate change mitigation by enhancing pollutant uptake and sediment retention, more rapid establishment of vegetation roughness (especially for SRC) and increased carbon sequestration, as well as a more attractive and faster economic return for landowners. BUT. there is no incentive to plant (energy) crops where they could benefit water most.

13 Hydraulic roughness Woodlands and flood risk workshop Focus woodland planting on floodplains where hydraulic roughness is key Ref: Typical Manning s n values for Floodplains. After Chow (1959)

14 Turning things around Multifunctional environmental crop delivering solutions to local issues and economic benefits o Local heat production in off gas areas o Assistance in flood prevention o Improve water quality o Create jobs o Increase wealth retention Ref: Focal Research Green Agenda Analysis

15 A possible solution Regional Energy Crops Scheme Supported by Local Enterprise Partnership Regional Growth Fund, Horizon 2020 Green Bank, Pension funds 2,500 hectares planted over 6 years Flat rate grant plus interim payments Includes infrastructure grants, training etc. Budget of 7.2 million Local economy 107 million better off over 27 years 51.6% return on investment

16 Rokwood EU Framework 7 research project 20 partners from 6 countries Each cluster includes: o SME, a research body and a local authority Duration: 36 Months

17 European platform for SRP Joint Action Plan Common Strategies Analysis of regional clusters state of play Identification of relevant RTD issues in participating regions Working with policy makers to create policy briefs Analysis of links to other European initiatives Industry Public bodies Research Institutions Ireland, UK, Spain, Sweden, Germany, Poland, Belgium

18 Things worth fighting for Sensible sustainability rules for woodfuel suppliers DECC Funding for infrastructure RDP funds EFAs for livestock farms (not just arable) EC/DEFRA Interest free loans for establishing crops DEFRA Better contracts o Interim payments during early years End users o Retirement option for farmers o Government backed contracts DEFRA Cost/benefit analysis of multifunctional applications DEFRA/ EA Demonstration projects LEPs/EU

19 The hardest nut to crack

20 Spatial diffusion pattern Sample output maps of energy crop selection and power plant locations between 2010 and Ref: Alexander P, et al. (2013) Modelling the perennial energy crop market: the role of spatial diffusion. Journal of the Royal Society Interface,

21 Contacts Kevin Lindegaard Crops for Energy Ltd 15 Sylvia Avenue Knowle Bristol BS3 5BX