Yesterday, the UK Government produced its latest set of biodiversity indicators (see here). Not only did this demonstrate that nature remains in trouble but it also showed that government investment in nature conservation had declined by 26 per cent between 2009-10 and 2014-15 and the contribution from others (eg charities) had plateaued. We don't expect this funding picture to change any time soon which is why all the talk is of finding innovative sources of funding. Here, my colleagues Lynne Osgathorpe and Sally Mills highlight a RSPB project that offers a potential new sources of revenue by using the byproducts of wetland management for energy.
Investing in nature is an investment in our future, it makes implicit sense - our natural environment, when looked after, provides us with a wealth of benefits, from food and fuel, to clean water and places to unwind. However, it is often a challenge for conservationists to get this message across, as investing in nature is commonly seen as a luxury that conflicts with the Government's drive for economic growth. Our recent study Energy for Nature, published by Defra this week, demonstrates why investing in nature is the clever thing to do.
Energy for Nature was one of several projects funded through the third round of Defra’s Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) Pilot Scheme between 2014/2015. The project aimed to develop a PES based model that creates a sustainable funding stream to support essential conservation work whilst providing a reliable, and ecologically sustainable, source of energy to local communities. It focused on the wetland landscape area of the Somerset Levels and Moors in southwest England.
The idea is based on utilising the vegetation generated as a by-product of carrying out habitat management for conservation, and turning it into a saleable product. Energy for Nature focuses on updating management techniques and employing new technologies to convert wetland material (i.e. reeds and rush) into environmentally sustainable bioenergy products, such as briquettes for woodburners, loose material for biomass boilers, or electricity that can be fed directly into the National Grid.
Reedbed at RSPB Ham Wall by David Kjaer (rspb-images.com)
Our research shows that land managers investing in this concept could offset their management costs and make a profit, particularly if converting material into electricity through anaerobic digestion. This income can then be reinvested in the management of the land where the material originated from. For example, our estimates for Somerset suggest that work which currently costs the RSPB c. £70,000/year could, through the adoption of this concept, generate an income of £150,000/year if markets were developed for wholesale loose biomass, or over £5 million/year if converted into and marketed as a specialist product such as biochar and sold retail.
For the RSPB this means that we could fund more habitat management, and also improve the quality of management through the use of these new technologies. The idea is transferable too, and could be adopted by land managers or in other wetland landscapes. This model developed through the project has similarities to a traditional PES scheme with payments moving directly between buyers of the bioenergy product (e.g. local community) and sellers of the biomass (e.g. RSPB).
This concept has the potential to support rural communities too, providing an ecologically and economically sustainable alternative to fossil fuels, as many of the wildlife sites which would provide material for bioenergy products are located close to such communities. It also encourages entrepreneurialism within rural communities, providing opportunities for the development of co-operatives or community benefit societies to deliver such schemes. This could bring new employment for local people, and investment opportunities yielding a share of profits generated from the sale of the bioenergy products.
Whether the driver is land management or community enhancement Energy for Nature has the potential to increase the opportunities for delivering biodiversity at the landscape scale, whilst helping to promote a low carbon, more sustainable economy through providing communities with greener, locally sourced alternatives to fossil fuels.
I was delighted to read this blog because the conservation sector can get itself in a terrible tangle over making money from management, which some conservationists seem to see as almost immoral. At the same time, an approach to life where one index of success is how much you spend is facing pretty lean times in the 'age of austerity'. Already there, on a massive scale, is woodfuel, supported through the Government's Renewable Heat Incentive and topping 1 million tonnes of wood in 2015. RHI has transformed the economic prospects for harvesting small size wood - but many conservation bodies (not RSPB) are struggling to use it due to lack of expertise in woodland harvesting. With lack of management the single biggest cause of declines in woodland birds, we actually have the measures in place to reverse the decline on our second biggest habitat after agriculture - and probably at a profit, using existing Government funding !