ENERGY - Some Macro and Micro Aspects of Spatial Planning1
I. INTRODUCTION
(i) Scope Policy approaches to the finding, generation and conservation of energy are enormous in scope. The issues which touch upon the policy approaches are global in nature and are significant drivers of international political events. Energy security is a primary consideration of all western governments and is a significant factor in political stability in developing countries and of course, in the oil producing countries. Likewise, questions of food security are closely related to fossil fuel availability and price. Political and social unrest in respect of both environmental and economic consequences of energy and food security issues has been evident in recent years.
Moreover, the policy drivers in respect of energy generation and conservation are intimately and closely linked to policy measures to address climate change. If there were one word which was most appropriate to start a discussion on how to ‘put the world to rights’, then “energy” might be that word.
In this paper I seek to set out something of the broad context which gives rise to a range of domestic policy approaches which materially and significantly affect land use in planning decisions. I seek to identify the range of impacts which energy related policies have upon planning decisions and then identify the present position and trends in respect of energy generation and design.
1 Paper published in the journal of the United Kingdom Environmental Law Association, May 2011 2
(ii) Context - Economic Growth and Sustainable Development
The tension between economic growth and development which is sustainable has long been identified2. The tension has been illustrated in this way:
“There is an old Persian legend about a clever courtier who presented a beautiful chessboard to his king and requested that the king give him in exchange one grain of rice for the first square on the board, two grains for the second square, four grains for the third square, and so forth.
The king readily agreed, and ordered rice to be brought from his stores. The fourth square on the chessboard required eight grains, the tenth square took 512 grains, the fifteenth required 6,384, and the twenty first square gave the courtier more than one million grains of rice. By the fortieth square a million million rice grains had to be piled up. The payment could never have continued to the sixty-fourth square; it would have taken more rice than there was in the whole world.”
Evidently, growth and the resources to sustain it are linked. Western governments are presently engaged in strenuous efforts to sustain economies to achieve growth and to avoid further recession. In many parts of the world, including China and the BRIC countries, there is significant growth. A growth rate of 3% equates to a doubling of production and consumption every 25 years. I leave the further debate of that point to the economists, and likewise avoid canvassing the impact of increasing world populations3.
2 See Meadows, D., Meadows, D., Randers, J., and Behrens, W. (1972). The Limits to Growth Earth Island Press, London
3 However, for those interested in the topic, see Lester Brown “World on the Edge – How to Prevent Environmental and Economic Collapse” – Earth Scan 2011, available via www.earth-policy.org. 3
(iii) Context - Climate Change
There ought not be any need to canvass climate change in this paper because the central features are so widely known. Indeed, they have been identified, if not accepted, for a long time4:
“To match the terrestrial limit there is a very clear atmospheric limit, in terms of the inability of the atmosphere to absorb an ever increasing amount of the greenhouse
gases we are emitting, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane. With the exception of the United States and some Middle East oil producers, there is not a country on earth that does not now subscribe to the international scientific consensus that global warming is a problem already with us and inexorably worsening.”
I have already made it clear that am not an economist and make it equally clear that I am not a meteorologist or climate scientist. However, perhaps you, like me, noted that during 2010 there were record high temperatures in Russia and that somewhere between 300 and 400 new fires were starting daily resulting in the loss of many millions of acres of forest. Likewise, it will be recalled that there were torrential rains in Northern Pakistan and massive destruction, the effects of which remain today. At the time of writing, the biggest cyclone to hit Eastern Australia is doing its damage5.
4 See Jonathan Porritt in Sustainable Development: Panacea, Platitude or Downright Deception? (the Linacre lectures 1991) published by OUP 1993.
5 In respect of the Pakistani experience the following is a startling summary (taken from Brown (2011), page 5): The destruction was everywhere. Some 2 million homes were damaged or destroyed. More than 20 million people were affected by the flooding. Nearly 2000 Pakistanis died. Some 6 million acres of crops were damaged or destroyed. Over 1 million livestock drowned. Roads and bridges were washed away. Although the flooding was blamed on heavy rainfall, there were actually several trends converging to produce what was described as the largest natural disaster in Pakistan’s history. On 26th May 2010, the official temperature in Mohenjo – Daro in south central Pakistan reached 128 degrees Fahrenheit, a record for Asia. Snow and glaciers in the western Himalayas, where the tributaries of the Indus River originate, were melting fast” 4
II. POLICY APPROACHES
(i) European Policies and Energy Strategy
Clearly, European and domestic energy policies are inter-related. Hence, I summarise the European position.
Energy security has been a matter of significant concern at the European level for some years. In September 2007 the Commission tabled the third internal energy market legislative package6. It aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, increase the share of renewables to 20% and improve energy efficiency by 20%, all by 2020; the so-called “20-20-20” initiative.
That approach was reviewed by the Second Strategic Energy Review7, which has itself now been superseded by the November 2010 document Energy 2020 – A Strategy for Competitive, Sustainable and Secure Energy8. The urgency and significance of the document are self-evident:
“Energy is the lifeblood of our society. The wellbeing of our people, industry and economy depends on safe, secure, sustainable and affordable energy. At the same time, energy related emissions account for almost 80% of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions. The energy challenge is thus one of the greatest tests which Europe has to face. It will take decades to steer our energy systems into a more secure and sustainable path. Yet the decisions to set us on the right path are needed urgently as failing to achieve a well functioning European energy market
6 COM (2007) 0528-32
7 COM (2008) 781
8 COM (2010) 639 5
will only increase the costs for consumers and put Europe’s competitiveness at risk.
Over the next ten years energy investments in the order of !1 trillion are needed, both to diversify existing resources and replace equipment and to cater for challenging and changing energy requirements… These choices will be felt over the next thirty years or more.”
The first priority in the Energy Strategy is achieving an energy efficient Europe. In that regard the strategy9 provides:
“Special attention should be given to the sectors with the largest potential to make energy efficiency gains, namely the existing building stock and transport sector.”
Figure 1 Renewables Growth - Energy Predictions by 202010
9 See page 6
10 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Renewable energy road map - Renewable energies in the 21st century: building a more sustainable future COM/2006/0848 final 6
The Commission has set out the roadmap to growth in renewable energy (Fig 1).
European policy in respect of nuclear power is neutral. Nuclear power stations currently produce around one-third of the electricity and 15% of the energy consumed in the European Union. The approach is to leave it to each member state to decide whether or not to pursue the option of nuclear power. The European intervention has been in the areas of furthering research and protecting the public by establishing common safety standards, both as to operation of nuclear sites and disposal of the resulting waste.
(ii) Targets The policy approaches to energy issues can be seen to follow similar trends between countries. Targets are a starting point. The Climate Change Act 2008 set
11 targets in respect of CO2 emissions . The renewable energy strategy, by way of example, makes the focus of policy quite clear:
“to meet the challenge of climate change, we need to save carbon in every sector of the economy – this will mean a rapid transition to renewable energy”12.
“This strategy will help us tackle climate change, reducing the UK’s emissions of carbon dioxide by over 750 million tons between now and 2030”13.
11 Section 1: (1) It is the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 80% lower than the 1990 baseline. (2) “The 1990 baseline” means the aggregate amount of— (a) net UK emissions of carbon dioxide for that year, and (b) net UK emissions of each of the other targeted greenhouse gases for the year that is the base year for that gas. And Section 5 (1) The carbon budget— (a) for the budgetary period including the year 2020, must be such that the annual equivalent of the carbon budget for the period is at least [34%] lower than the 1990 baseline;
12 See the Foreword to the 2009 Strategy.
13 See the Summary to the 2998 Strategy. 7
“The measures set out in the Strategy are: (i) more than 30% of our electricity generated from renewables; (ii) 12% of our heat generated from renewables; (iii) 10% of transport energy from renewables.
In order to deliver these savings the strategy proposes: (i) that £30 billion of financial support for renewable electricity and heat to 2020; (ii) clearing away barriers – including the planning system; (iii) increase investment in emerging technologies; (iv) increase opportunities for communities to harness renewable energy.”
The the number of countries with some type of policy target related to, for example, renewable energy, almost doubled during the period 2005 - 201014.
In 2008 all 27 countries in the European Union adopted national targets to the year 2020 following the EU wide target of 20% of final energy to be produced by renewables by 2020. The short point is that domestic policy is aligned to EU policy and both lead to: (1) energy conservation; (2) reduction in emissions, and; (3) increased use of renewables.
In order to promote renewable energy very many countries have adopted feed in tariffs or other systems of credit for renewable energy. It is evident that there is a rapidly changing policy framework which pervades all levels of politics and governance.
14 See Renewables 2010 – Global Status Report by Ren21 (Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century) – revised edition as of September 2010 8
(ii) Interaction Between UK Energy Policies and the Planning System
This topic area merits a thesis of its own. However, some generalised points assist by way of summary and background. The main interactions between energy policy and the planning system have been in the sphere of renewable energy and in particular wind energy. This led, during the last ten years or so, to a series of conflicts between a planning system which was based upon the 1990 Act and the Section 54(a) approach, and energy policy which was increasingly focused on promoting renewable energy development.
The catalyst was that the Electricity Act 1989 brought electricity generation into private ownership. Renewable energy projects were then developed and promoted. However, they found themselves in a planning system which was plan based, but which plans did not address the location of renewable energy development. In summary, there was strong policy from one part of government, which explained that there should be renewable energy development, but there was inadequate policy to explain where it should go, particularly for on-shore wind.
To some extent the government stepped in to address this via the publication of PPG22: Renewable Energy (February 1993). However, there remained significant conflict and wind energy companies often found it difficult to secure a consent.
This is not surprising, given that wind energy proposals essentially comprise the erection of very tall structures, in white metallic material, with eye catching moving features, in the open countryside, at points which are specifically chosen by reason of their elevation and the availability of a wind resource. In the context of long established policies for the protection of the countryside, for its own sake, 9
it is not difficult to see why such turbine technology was not embraced wholeheartedly.
Planning authorities continue to determine applications below the required threshold (50MW) while larger schemes progress through the development consent procedure with the Infrastructure Planning Commission (anticipated to be transferred to PINS in due course pursuant to the provisions of the Localism Bill).
(iv) Progress on Policy Implementation Wind In Europe, Member States have progressed in developing wind energy at significantly different rates. Spain and Germany remain the two largest annual markets for wind power, competing each year of the top spot (2459MW and 1917MW of new installations respectively in 200915).
In Germany, several states produce in excess of 40% of their electricity from wind. Germany has a national target of 25% to 30% of electricity from renewables, mainly wind by 2020.
In contrast, the United Kingdom has progressed rather more sedately. However, in 2008 and 2009 the extent of offshore wind capacity increased very significantly to 4GW.
Photovoltaics In Europe the total PV power installed was 16GW in 2009, including around 5.6GW installed in 2009. Photovoltaics have lagged behind wind power owing to the need to improve the technology and to lower the cost of installation. However,
15 EPIA Global Wind Energy Outlook 2010, Global Wind Energy Council, page 40 10
the rate of installation has increased dramatically. as can be seen from the fact of installation of some 5.6GW during the course of 200916.
The worldwide market is expanding rapidly including in China, India, Japan, and the USA (Figures 3 & 4). In the USA around 475Mw were installed in 2009.
Figure 2 - Historical development of World cumulative PV power, installed17
16 ibid, page 3
17 Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics until 2014 (May 2010 update), European Photovoltaic Industry - Fig 1 11
Figure 3 - Global Evolution of installed PV Capacity with 2010 high and low scenarios.
In the UK, the new feed in tariff in 2010 is thought to have the potential to substantially increase the rate of PV installation. It is anticipated that it may reach between 20 and 40MW in 2010 and up to 250MW in 201418.
18 2014 Study - ETIA 12
Figure 4 UK’s photovoltaic market history and forecast to 201419
East Lindsey District Council granted permission for the first UK solar PV farm in November 2010. It is a 1MW scheme which is to be installed adjacent to a five turbine wind farm.
Schemes have come forward throughout England.
The success of photovoltaics, in the UK as overseas, is very much dependent on the available feed-in-tariffs - small scale PV is currently particularly well supported: see below. However, the future of PV is very much affected by the prospect that feed in tariffs will be adjusted by the Coalition Government in favour of small scale PV and away from commercial scale operations.
Feed-in-tariffs (FITs) are a discipline of their own. Given that the total support for renewable electricity from 2009 to 2020 is estimated at £30 billion, it is easy to see why the topic attracts such interest.
19 Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics until 2014 (May 2010 update), European Photovoltaic Industry - Fig 17 13
I have not touched upon CSP (concentrating solarthermal power) which is a developing technology of particular interest in sun belt states in the US and in North Africa and potentially Spain, it is not anticipated to be a significant element of the UK renewable capacity.
Biomass Biomass power accounts for some 54GW of world electricity production20. There has been a rapid expansion in the number of applications for biomass power generation. The bulk of these, in terms of number and generating capacity have
20 See Renewables 2010 Global Status Report, page 54, Table R4. 14
been Section 3621 applications to the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Some have been below the 50Mw threshold and have been determined by local planning authorities. A recent inquiry into such a biomass power plant resulted in refusal, principally on visual impact grounds22. A further appeal scheme was recently withdrawn23.
The applications which DECC lists on its web-site as ‘applications under consideration’ are as follows (it seems doubtful that the table is up to date - for example, it still includes reference to the Kingsnorth coal fired power station application):
Application date Company / location Type of project / Maximum output consent required
18/05/10 Neptune Proteus, TWA Order 0.5MW River Humber Tidal Turbine 26/02/10 Gateway Energy Centre Ltd, CCGT - Section 900 MW Manorway, 36 Stanford-Le-Hope, Essex 25/02/10 SSE Generation Ltd, SCR - Section 36 n/a Fiddler’s Ferry' Warrington 25/02/10 Brunner Mond & E.ON EfW EfW - Section 36 60 MW Ltd, Lostock, Cheshire 25/02/10 Peel Energy, Onshore wind Max 60 MW Frodsham Marsh, farm - Section 36 Cheshire
21 S36 Electricity Act 1989
22 The King’s Dock scheme, Swansea
23 Coedbach Washeries 15
25/02/10 Thorpe Marsh Ltd (Acorn CCGT - Section 1,500 MW Power Developments), 36 Thorpe Marsh, Doncaster 24/02/10 British Energy, Dry Fuel Storage n/a Sizewell B - Section 36 23/02/10 RWE npower Renewables, Extension to n/a Stallingborough Biomass Station, Section 36 16/12/09 Dalkia BioEnergy Plc, Biomass - Section 52 MW 36 Pollington 15/12/09 Ecotricity, Onshore Wind 64.4 MW East Heckington, Farm - Section 3 Lincolnshire 09/12/09 RWE Npower, CCGT - Section 2,000 MW Willington C, 36 Derbyshire 25/11/09 Independent Power Systems, Onshore Wind 51 MW Esgair, Farm - Section 36 Cwmowen, Carno, Powys 19/11/09 Pen y Cymoedd Wind Farm Onshore Wind 299 MW Ltd (Nuon Renewables Ltd), Farm - Section 36 Pen y Cymoedd 17/11/09 Westermost Rough Limited Offshore Wind 245 MW (DONG Energy), Farm - Section 36 off Hornsea, Yorkshire 29/10/09 Tidal Energy Ltd, Tidal Energy - 1.2 MW Ramsey Sound, Section 36 Pembrokeshire 27/10/09 SSE Ltd, Multi Fuel - 108 MW Ferrybridge, Section 36 West Yorkshire 16
16/10/09 Drax Biomass (Immingham) Biomass - Section 290 MW Ltd, 36
Immingham,
North Lincolnshire 09/10/09 Blythe Park Power Ltd, CCGT - Section 950 MW Draycott, 36 Stoke on Trent, Staffordshire 01/09/09 Anglesey Aluminium, Biomass - Section 299 MW Holyhead, 36 Anglesey 28/08/09 E.On UK Plc, Biomass - Section 150 MW Royal Portbury Dock, 36 North Somerset 13/08/09 Wyre Power Ltd CCGT-OCGT 875 MW Fleetwood Lancashire 23/07/09 Drax Biomass (Selby) Ltd Biomass - Section 290 MW Selby 36 North Yorkshire 12/06/09 Warwick Energy, Offshore wind 560MW Dudgeon East farm 32 km off Cromer, Norfolk (Greater Wash) 16/04/09 E.ON UK Plc, CCGT extension 1,220MW Drakelow 27/03/09 RES UK & Ireland Limited Onshore wind 100MW between Llanerfyl and farm - Section 36 Llanbrynmair Powys 23/01/09 Centrica (RBW) Ltd Offshore wind 620MW Race Bank farm - Section 36 Greater Wash 11/12/08 Npower Renewables Ltd Onshore wind 130-250MW farm Carnedd Wen
Powys 17
09/12/08 Centrica (DSW) Ltd Offshore wind 540MW Docking Shoal farm - Section 36 Greater Wash 29/08/08 Abernedd Power Co Ltd CCGT 870MW
Abernedd Power Plant
Baglan Bay 09/05/08 CeltPower Limited Onshore wind 126MW Llandinam nr Newtown farm (repowering Powys and extension) – Section 36
07/05/08 Fferm Wynt Llaithddu Cyf Onshore wind 66.7MW Llaithddu farm – Section 36 Powys 28/03/08 Humber Wind Limited Offshore wind 300MW Humber Gateway farm - Section 36
30/11/07 Nuon UK Ltd Onshore wind 59.5 MW Llanbadarn Fynydd farm Powys 26/04/07 Wave Dragon Wales Ltd Wave energy 7MW Wave Dragon 11/12/06 E.ON UK Plc, Coal-fired 1,600MW+50MW Kingsnorth, 'black start' Medway 23/12/05 EDF Energy CCGT gas turbine1260MW+20MW New Sutton Bridge B 'black start'
The planning implications of biomass power plants extend beyond the power plant itself. On 9th November 2010 the West Midlands Region of the RTPI held a seminar to launch the development guidance produced by the Forestry Commission (Wood Fuel Development Guidance). Given the huge appetite for woody biomass which even a modest biomass power station creates, there will inevitably be a massive increase in the demand for wood fuel to mirror the 18
anticipated expansion in biomass power generation. The issue of sustainability of biomass fuels, and their relevance to consenting decisions remains a live one24.
(v) Discussion and Conclusions The scale of the challenge which the EU member states face, including the UK, is very substantial. It has yielded targets which require significant change in the manner in which energy is to be generated whether that be electricity, heat or for transport.
The range of energy sources will be much wider than hitherto. There will be more, smaller, installations for commercial energy production. In short, there will be more development proposals. Such proposals are a form of development which is inherently viable because of the support provided by the Renewables Obligation Certificates. Such development has both policy support and, in effect, public funding - a rare combination at present.
The impacts of those proposals are highly variable. The landscape, heritage, noise and amenity issues associated with onshore wind will continue to produce conflict. As more and other sources of renewable energy are consented, the weight to attach renewables policies (cf landscape and heritage) will reduce, but that point is not imminent. However, new issues will arise in respect of commercial-scale biomass. The forestry issues are only starting to be addressed. The sustainability criteria for the feedstock are in their infancy 25.
The impacts of solar PV farms are likely to be less pronounced than onshore wind. Such proposals are novel at present but will come forward at an increasing rate,
24 See, most recently, the Avonmouth biofuels decision
25 Statutory Consultation on the Renewables Obligation Order 2011 - DECC 19
particularly in the southern half of England, but only so long a FIT make them viable.
Microgeneration will become a much more important contributor. The GPDO now disposes of most planning issues. There are potential difficulties in the historic environment and conservation areas (see III below).
III. DESIGN (i) Policy National Planning Policies, Development Plan Policies and supplementary planning documents require that new development is undertaken in a manner which addresses the issues canvassed above.
Planning and Climate Change, supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1, sets out a Key Planning Objective to deliver sustainable development and in doing so, a full and appropriate response to climate change. At paragraphs 20 and 39, the supplement provides:
“In particular, planning authorities should:… expect a proportion of the energy supply of new development to be secured from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy sources.
In the interim period before the Development Plan is updated… planning authorities should ensure proposed development is consistent with the policies in this PPS… where proposals are inconsistent… consideration should be given to how proposals could be amended to make them acceptable or, where this is not practicable, to whether planning permission should be refused.” 20
So much is reflected, albeit in succinct form, in PPS 3 (June 2010), at paragraph 16:
“Matters to consider when assessing design quality include the extent to which the proposed development:… • Facilitates the efficient use of resources, during construction and in use, and seeks to adapt to and reduce the impact of, and on climate change.”
Development plans have frequently sought to accommodate similar planning objectives eg:
“All residential, business, industrial and storage and distribution development will be required to satisfy the following criteria:… (xii) take into account the requirements of energy conservation26.”
Particular targets are not at all unusual. Planning Policy Wales (July 2010) anticipates a move to more sustainable and zero carbon buildings in Wales. The Assembly government expects applications for five or more dwellings, received after September 2009, to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.
Attaining Code Level 3 is not especially difficult 27. Case studies show that Code Level 3 is achieved by the addition to residential buildings of solar thermal installations, a high level of insulation, low energy lighting, low water use sanitary ware and mechanical ventilation and heat recovery systems. The case studies show that the only real difficulty encountered by developers has been dealing with the
26 Reigate and Banstead’s Local Plan
27 See Code for Sustainable Homes – Case Studies December 2010, DCLG 21
relatively new technology associated with mechanical ventilation and heat recovery.
In terms of the additional build cost and fees, these range from £900 to £1,700 per square metre. The recent case studies have indicated that the costs of Code Level 3 have remained stable and are within the range of £3,000 to £4,000 per unit. There is relatively little data available to indicate how building to Code Level 3 affects sale values.
The Coalition government strongly promoted energy efficiency in new buildings via the Green Deal.
(ii) Microgeneration, Permitted Development Rights & the Historic Environment
Amendment of the General Permitted Development Order 1995 by insertion of Part 40 provided for permitted development rights for the installation of domestic microgeneration equipment. The classes of permitted development are:
Class A – the installation, alteration or replacement of solar PV or solar thermal equipment on (a) dwellinghouse or (b) buildings situated within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
Class B – the installation, alteration or replacement of stand alone solar within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse28.
Class C – the installation, alteration or replacement of a ground source heat pump within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
28 “Stand alone solar” means solar PV or solar thermal equipment which is not installed on a building. 22
Class D – the installation, alteration or replacement of a water source heat pump within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
Class E – the installation, alteration or replacement of a flue, forming part of a biomass heating system, on a dwellinghouse.
Class F – the installation, alteration or replacement of a flue, forming part of a combined heat and power system, on a dwellinghouse.
Solar PV or solar thermal equipment on a dwellinghouse or a building within the cartilage of a dwellinghouse, is restricted. Development is not permitted development within Class A if, broadly speaking:
(a) The equipment protrudes by more than 200mm. (b) It is higher than the highest part of the roof. (c) The equipment is visible from a highway on land within a Conservation Area or a World Heritage site. (d) The dwelling is a listed building.
English Heritage has produced its guidance in this topic area29. The guidance is founded in the key principles of PPS22 – renewable energy, namely “the wider environmental and economic benefits of all proposals for renewable projects, whatever their scale, are material considerations” and “development proposals should demonstrate any environmental and social impacts have been minimised through careful consideration of location, scale, design and other measures”.
English Heritage has produced its policy on microgeneration equipment which is attached to scheduled monuments, listed buildings or buildings in conservation
29 Microgeneration in the historic environment 23
areas. The policy is that microgeneration equipment will generally be acceptable if nine criteria are met. The principal amongst those are the requirement for there to be no loss of special interest, only minor visual impact, no damage to significant historic fabric, ancillary equipment can be accommodated without damage to significant historic fabric, the energy saving measures are justified and are preferable to other energy saving options, the setting is not compromised, and groundworks do not compromise historic significance.
This policy is in line with English Heritage’s document “Climate Change and the Historic Environment” which acknowledges that without action to adapt to a changing climate and limit further changes it is likely that these will be irreparably damaged and the cultural, social and economic benefits they provide will also be lost. Essentially, the policy is one of acknowledging the effects of climate change on the historic environment but to seek to minimise such impacts as might arise while still delivering the necessary changes.
In the light of this general policy, English Heritage has produced a series of guides to assist those wishing to install microgeneration equipment30.
More recently, the issue of microgeneration has been given a “localism” spin. DECC is consulting on a microgeneration strategy 31. The Minister says that a distributed energy economy will not succeed if it is only driven from the top down. He says that the desire for change must come from below. That is why the revolution that government needs in our energy system must start locally, in homes and communities. The coalition government has a vision for small scale electricity producers in homes, schools, offices and factories around the country. The
30 For example, Small Scale Solar Electric (Photovoltaics) Energy and Traditional Buildings - English Heritage 2010; and Micro Wind Generation and Traditional Buildings – English Heritage 2010.
31 Department of Energy and Climate Change – December 2010 24
government is looking for a step change in the use of renewable microtechnologies, such as heat pumps32.
(iii) Community Energy The government seeks community scale energy infrastructure as an example of localism at work33. Planning, and especially a forward planning policy, has been highlighted by many communities as a significant barrier, with communities unsure of, both what technologies their local authorities are willing to consider or support and, more importantly, where they would consider them. This variance between local aspiration and “official” opportunity makes the process of reaching planning agreement longer and more complex than necessary and often requires resources the community cannot provide34.
The government considers that local authorities have a vital role in shaping their communities to support the delivery of long term energy and climate change objectives. Local authorities already have the power to sell electricity. Communities will be able to keep the business rates from local renewable energy schemes.
Evidently, if such schemes are to be promoted, the use of neighbourhood planning (see the Localism Bill) is likely to be key.
(iv) Discussion and Conclusions Policy and practice in design for energy efficiency in buildings is evolving rapidly. The policy is driven from an EU level and is a particular focus of the Coalition
32 Greg Barker, Minister of State, DECC
33 See the consultation on A Microgeneration Strategy, Chapter 5 on Decentralisation and Cross Cutting Issues, DECC December 2010.
34 Ibid at para 5.3. 25
government. To date, the policy requirement has been relatively modest. Code 3 has not been shown to be too difficult to attain, though there are additional costs.
However, the trend is obvious - increasingly energy efficient buildings will be required and zero carbon buildings will be common place in the non too distant future. On site and off-site energy generation will be routine design issues.
Microgeneration will become a much more important contributor. The GPDO now disposes of most planning issues. There are potential difficulties in the historic environment and conservation areas.
Localism has raised its head in respect of smaller scale renewables. Both community groups and local authorities are receiving much encouragement to develop such schemes. There is unlikely to be a queue of residents groups seeking to promote waste to energy plants in their neighbourhoods. However, use of heat from small scale biomass electricity plants is a candidate. The infrastructure issues are, however, substantial.
RICHARD KIMBLIN35 April 2011