Arriving at the Lodge, the RSPB’s headquarters in Bedfordshire, I pass a 50 metre high mast in a field. This is a constant reminder of the challenge we face to reduce our carbon emissions in a way that doesn’t harm the wildlife we are here to protect.
This mast has been up for well over a year collecting data on wind speeds, part of our project to construct a wind turbine in partnership with renewable energy company Ecotricity. This week the official planning application for the turbine went in to the district council and we now await its decision.
But is this the right thing for a conservation charity to be doing and why join a debate that has divided opinion across the UK (and further afield)?
Through this blog I want to outline why I think we must continue to engage in the energy debate.
Science has shown that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere leads to rising global temperatures. It is expected that forthcoming reports from the Independent Panel on Climate Change will not only increase the confidence of links of these emissions to human activity but also highlight the seriousness of impacts for both humans and the natural world. For example, for every one degree rise in global temperatures it is predicted that 10% of species will be at risk of extinction.
As an organisation whose core mission is to prevent common species becoming rare and threatened species from becoming extinct, working to prevent climate change isn’t optional, it’s essential. To avoid catastrophic climate change, global emissions need to reduce by 50% by 2050 and it is widely accepted that developed nations should take their fair share and decarbonise their economies over the next four decades. This demands a revolution in how we generate and consume energy. We want this revolution to happen, but we also want it to take place in harmony with nature.
Given the known risks to the natural world from different energy technologies, we have no option other than have a view about how we generate and consume energy.
I wrote a few days ago about our decision to object to two fracking proposals in Sussex and Lancashire. A fracking free-for-all could put at risk protected areas like Morecambe Bay which is close to the proposed drilling site at Singleton, Lancashire. Some who have posted comments on this blog have suggested we should continue to assess proposals on a case by case basis. Yet, even if the environmental risks can be mitigated, shale gas is still a fossil fuel. It may be lower carbon than coal but it isn’t low enough for us to use it in large quantities and still decarbonise electricity supply as much as we need to - unless we crack Carbon Capture and Storage, which is still unproven at a commercial scale.
We’re concerned that pursuing a new fossil fuel industry will jeopardise meeting UK emission reduction targets and also broader commitments to keep global climate change to within ‘safe limits’.
But, this doesn’t mean it’s as simple as saying yes to renewables and no to fossil fuels. Renewables can have negative impacts on wildlife too, and that’s why we spend so much time assessing proposals for wind farms, for example, both on land and at sea. I am acutely aware of the strength of feeling on both sides of the wind farm debate. Our position is that we want appropriate development to proceed in the right place, while having a thorough understanding of what does and doesn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
And, the renewable energy debate is not just about wind turbines. Those with a long memory will know that we have been fighting outdated tidal barrage proposals across the Severn for many years because of unacceptable environmental impacts (and unconvincing economics). Biofuels and biomass are also big issues for us and we have objected to regulations that would allow for habitat destruction overseas and, often, an increase in overall greenhouse gas emissions.
The solar panels that are appearing on more and more people’s roofs are a fantastic way of making a difference at home. And energy efficiency – described rather accurately by a colleague as the untrendy dancing dad of the energy debate – is also vital, yet a largely unsung part of the solution.
And that brings me back to wind. Sited away from vulnerable wildlife and at the right scale, we know wind farms can make a significant contribution to generating renewable electricity (for which the UK has binding targets) and helping to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.
That’s why we are submitting this planning application for a wind turbine at the Lodge. This turbine would produce the equivalent of two thirds of the RSPB’s electricity use across the UK. It will make a massive difference to our carbon footprint (we are committed to reducing our emissions by 3% per year), and I hope it will also be an example for others to follow.
There are are nearly 500 people that work at the Lodge and most are passionate about wildlife. We feel privileged to work in such a fabulous location and there is no way that we would put up with a development that causes harm to wildlife. This is why we have done the necessary tests to determine any potential harm the turbine might bring to The Lodge’s wildlife and why we now have confidence that our planning application can and should proceed.
I understand that our actions will create some debate amongst our members and supporters. So every day next week we will be looking at the issues surrounding this project on our Climate Blog – please come along and join the debate. It would be great to hear your views...
Hi Jane,
You ask some important questions which deserve a full response.
We’ve followed best practice in understanding the potential impacts of the turbine and have only proceeded to the point of submitting an application because we’re confident that there will be negligible impacts on birds and other wildlife. If it does go ahead then we won’t rest on our laurels, we’ll carry out regular monitoring to assess whether our predictions were accurate and if the impacts are greater than anticipated, we’ll take the necessary steps to mitigate for them.
Initial wind speed data suggests the turbine could produce 2.36 million kWh per annum. To put this in context, the RSPB’s total annual UK electricity usage is in the region of 3.5 million kWh/annum. It’s predicted to reduce our carbon emissions by just over 1,000 tonnes of CO2 every year. Based on the RSPB’s 2010/11 carbon emissions, this would equate to a 42% reduction in emissions from our UK buildings and a 13% reduction in the RSPB’s total UK carbon emissions.
Onshore wind has a carbon footprint of around 9gCO2equivalent/kWh - taking into account not only the emissions from generation of electricity but also those incurred during the manufacture, construction and decommissioning phases. This is considerably lower than gas at around 370gCO2/kWh and coal at around 850gCO2/kWh.
Spinning reserve, which is the name given to the back up you talk about, is needed not just for wind but to cope both with unexpected fluctuations in demand and with the fact that large coal-fired and nuclear power stations cannot just be turned on and off at the flick of a switch. They are huge engineering structures, operating at steam temperatures of about 550oC. They can take many hours or even days to run up and down, longer in the case of nuclear. Although wind generation is intermittent and fluctuating, it does displace fossil fuel generation, resulting in lower greenhouse gas emissions overall.
The development of new technologies is going to be critical in the transition to a low carbon economy – such as carbon capture and storage to make power stations cleaner and improved battery storage to enable higher levels of intermittent supply in the system.
Yes, this is a drop in the ocean compared to global emissions but if we only focus on the scale of the challenge then we’ll never get anywhere. We need action that’s top down and bottom up, and that means action from Government, action from business and action from individuals. The RSPB is getting involved at different levels. At an international level we engage with the process of negotiating international climate agreements, at a national level we lobby Government to support the development of renewable technologies that minimise the impacts on nature, and at the local level we’re taking action to minimise our own carbon footprint.