DOCSLIB.ORG

The Economics of Renewable Energy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Economics of Renewable Energy HOUSE OF LORDS Select Committee on Economic Affairs 4th Report of Session 2007–08 The Economics of Renewable Energy Volume II: Evidence Ordered to be printed 12 November 2008 and published 25 November 2008 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 195–II CONTENTS Page Oral Evidence Professor Paul Ekins and Dr Neil Strachan, King’s College London Oral Evidence, 6 May 2008 1 Professor AbuBakr Bahaj, Southampton University, Professor Tony Bridgwater, Aston University and Dr Simon Watson, Loughborough University Oral Evidence, 6 May 2008 8 Mr Benet Northcote, Chief Policy Adviser, Greenpeace, Dr Tim Jenkins, Economics Campaigner, Mr Dave Timms, and Ms Robin Webster, Senior Energy and Climate Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Oral Evidence, 13 May 2008 17 Mr Malcolm Keay, Senior Research Fellow, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies Oral Evidence, 13 May 2008 26 Mr Campbell Dunford, Chief Executive and Dr John Constable, Policy and Research Director, Renewable Energy Foundation Oral Evidence, 3 June 2008 36 Supplementary Written Evidence 45 Mr Philip Wolfe, Chief Executive, Renewable Energy Association; Ms Maria McCaffery, Chief Executive, British Wind Energy Association; and Mr William Heller, Chief Executive, Falck Renewables Limited Written Evidence (British Wind Energy Association) 55 Oral Evidence, 10 June 2008 63 Professor David Newbery, Cambridge University, and Professor Dieter Helm, Oxford University Written Evidence (Professor David Newbery) 71 Oral Evidence, 10 June 2008 74 Dr Keith MacLean, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, Scottish and Southern Energy plc, Mr Sarwjit Sambhi, Director, Power Business Unit, Centrica and Mr Bob Taylor, Managing Director, Generation, E.ON UK Written Evidence (Scottish and Southern Energy plc) 85 Written Evidence (Centrica) 95 Written Evidence (E.ON UK) 104 Oral Evidence, 17 June 2008 110 Supplementary Written Evidence (E.ON) 118 Professor Gordon MacKerron, Sussex University Oral Evidence, 17 June 2008 120 Mr Chris Bennett, Future Transmission Networks Manager, and Ms Nicola Pitts, Head of UK and EU Public Affairs, National Grid Written Evidence 127 Oral Evidence, 24 June 2008 137 Supplementary Written Evidence 144 Dr David Clarke, Chief Executive Officer, Energy Technologies Institute Written Evidence 146 Oral Evidence, 24 June 2008 149 Ms Vivienne Cox, Executive Vice President and CEO of Alternative Energy, BP; and Mr James Smith, Chairman, Shell UK Oral Evidence, 1 July 2008 156 Mr Neil Hirst, Director for Energy Technology and R&D, International Energy Agency Oral Evidence, 1 July 2008 165 Mr Alistair Buchanan, Chief Executive, and Mr Stephen Smith, Managing Director, Networks, Ofgem Written Evidence 171 Oral Evidence, 8 July 2008 178 Supplementary Written Evidence 188 Mr Steve Read, Investment Manager, Ms Coralie Laurencin, Associate, Climate Change Capital, and Dr Karsten Neuhoff, University of Cambridge Written Evidence (Dr Karsten Neuhoff) 191 Oral Evidence, 8 July 2008 198 Supplementary Written Evidence (Dr Karsten Neuhoff) 208 Malcolm Wicks, a Member of the House of Commons, Minister of State for Energy, Mr Simon Virley, Head of the Renewable Energy and Innovation Unit, and Ms Tera Allas, Chief Economist Energy Group, Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) Written Evidence 210 Oral Evidence, 15 July 2008 217 Written Evidence Professor Andrew Bain 227 Ms Carolyn Barker 230 Mr Derek Birkett 231 Bishopton Village Hall Management Committee 233 Mr Philip Bratby 233 British Energy 237 British Hydropower Association 246 Campaign for Responsible Energy and Development in Tynedale (CREDIT) 248 Campaign to Protect Rural England, Devon 251 Campaign to Protect Rural England, Durham 253 Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA) 255 Peter and Maureen Caswell 258 Christofferson Robb & Company 261 Jane and Julian Davis 265 EDF Energy 271 EEF 282 Energy Networks Association 285 Energy Technology for Sustainable Development Group 288 Energywatch 290 Environmental Defense Fund 297 Environmental Industries Commission 300 Environmental Research Institute 303 Dr John Etherington 306 Mrs Barbara J Frey 307 Genersys plc 311 Mr Colin Gibson 313 Christiane Golling and Marco Nicolosi, Institute of Energy Economics, Cologne 316 Grünhaus Project, Liverpool 319 Mr Peter Hadden 324 J.H.R. Hampson 335 Highlands Against Wind Farms 339 Highlands Before Pylons 339 Rear Admiral Robin Hogg and Professor Leslie Bradbury 342 Mr Robert Horler 347 House of Bishops’ Europe Panel, Church of England 348 W.J. Hyde 350 Institute of Physics 355 Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) 361 Institution of Mechanical Engineers 372 Mrs Delia Jack 374 Professor Michael Jefferson 375 Professor Nick Jelley 378 John Muir Trust 380 Mr Neil Kermode 383 Professor Michael Laughton 387 Lawrence Graham LLP 393 Dr and Mrs J Lyne 398 Dr Rayner Mayer and Dr Roger Bentley 399 Sir Donald Miller 405 Mynydd Llansadwrn Action Group 410 Natural England 415 Mr Michael Negus 418 Mrs N Penk, Mr C Penk and Mr DPC Penk, Pitfield Farm 419 Mr Richard Phillips 420 Renewable Energy Association 424 Renewable Energy Finance-Policy Project, Chatham House 428 Renewable Energy Systems UK and Ireland Ltd 432 Research Councils UK 438 Royal Academy of Engineering 445 Royal Society of Edinburgh 453 Scientists for Global Responsibility 459 Scottish Power Limited 464 Scottish Sustainable Energy Foundation 472 Mr Alan L. Shaw 475 Professor Peter F Smith 476 Mr Paul Spare 480 Town and Country Planning Association 484 Two Moors Campaign 491 Wavegen 493 Revd. John Wylam 494 NOTE: The Report of the Committee is published in Volume I, HL Paper No. 195-I The Evidence of the Committee is published in Volume II, HL Paper No 195-II Processed: 17-11-2008 19:07:46 Page Layout: LOENEW[ex 1] PPSysB Job: 408616 Unit: PAG1 Minutes of Evidence TAKEN BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AFFAIRS TUESDAY 6 MAY 2008 Present Best, L Macdonald of Tradeston, L Griffiths of Fforestfach, L MacGregor of Pulham Market, L Kingsdown, L Paul, L Lawson of Blaby, L Vallance of Tummel, (Chairman) Layard, L Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Professor Paul Ekins and Dr Neil Strachan, King’s College London, examined. Q1 Chairman: Good afternoon and welcome to you interpret that particular third objective), and both. Many thanks for giving up some of your time to something to do with aVordability which might or be with us this afternoon. Welcome back to Professor might not be expressed in terms of fuel poverty. The Ekins; you were a witness last time round. Welcome balance to be accorded to those four objectives is of for the first time to Dr Strachan. I do not know if you course a political matter. My reading of the situation had in mind saying anything by way of introduction; at the moment is that the Government is giving most if you do not we will go straight into questions. attention to the reduction of carbon emissions, but Professor Ekins: Perhaps I could just say one thing energy security is coming up fast on the inside track which is to do with the results that come out of and may indeed overtake it at some point. I think that models. Some of the questions you addressed to me the concern about competitive markets and talk about forecasts. We are experienced in two competitiveness is always with us, so to speak, and models, one of them is a UK macro-economic model some commentators think that the objective of fuel with a sub-model of the energy system which is run poverty—specifically its eVective abolition by 2016— and operated by Cambridge Econometrics to whom has lost ground somewhat against the other I have been a senior consultant. That is the one to objectives. That is how I would characterise the which the forecast figures in the questions refer. objectives. Where do renewables fit into this? Through our work on the UK Energy Research Renewables have a role to play obviously as a low Centre we—mainly Neil—have been responsible for carbon energy source. It is conventional to say that building a MARKAL model of the UK energy the UK is one of the best endowed countries in system which gives much more detail about costs and Europe with regard to our resource of renewable so when you come to your questions about costs I will energy so we clearly could develop that and that refer you to him or you might like to refer the would reduce carbon emissions. It also has a role to questions to him because that is where those numbers play in energy security because most of these broadly come from. renewables are indigenous and were they to be developed to a significant degree they would give us Q2 Chairman: I think you acquainted us with the a stream of more or less secure energy for the lifetime MARKAL last time round. of the installations. They are relatively more Professor Ekins: Indeed. expensive than fossil fuel comparators, although if the oil price continues to go up and to drag other Q3 Chairman: May I start oV with a general prices with it that may become less true than it has question? What do you think are the key been in the past so in terms of competitiveness issues considerations for UK energy policy? How do and they perhaps do not score quite so well and because should renewables fit into that energy policy? Is their they are expensive, depending on the financing role likely to change between the medium term—by mechanisms for them, they can push up the price of which I mean to 2020—and the long term, to 2050 electricity and other fuels, and that of course makes and beyond? the fuels less aVordable. That is broadly what Professor Ekins: The key considerations for UK renewables can do. I think Neil has some figures oV energy policy I think were outlined in both the White the top of his head about the potential for renewables Papers which the Government has produced over the so I will pass over to him.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lewis Wave Power Limited
    Lewis Wave Power Limited 40MW Oyster Wave Array North West Coast, Isle of Lewis Environmental Statement Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary March 2012 40MW Lewis Wave Array Environmental Statement 1. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction This document provides a Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the Environmental Statement (ES) produced in support of the consent application process for the North West Lewis Wave Array, hereafter known as the development. The ES is the formal report of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken by Lewis Wave Power Limited (hereafter known as Lewis Wave Power) into the potential impacts of the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning of the development. 1.2 Lewis Wave Power Limited Lewis Wave Power is a wholly owned subsidiary of Edinburgh based Aquamarine Power Limited, the technology developer of the Oyster wave power technology, which captures energy from near shore waves and converts it into clean sustainable electricity. Aquamarine Power installed the first full scale Oyster wave energy convertor (WEC) at the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC) in Orkney, which began producing power to the National Grid for the first time in November 2009. That device has withstood two winters in the harsh Atlantic waters off the coast of Orkney in northern Scotland. Aquamarine Power recently installed the first of three next-generation devices also at EMEC which will form the first wave array of its type anywhere in the world. 1.3 Project details The wave array development will have the capacity to provide 40 Megawatts (MW), enough energy to power up to 38,000 homes and will contribute to meeting the Scottish Government’s targets of providing the equivalent of 100% of Scotland’s electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Communities and Wind Energy Project Acceptance in Massachusetts
    Sustainable Communities and Wind Energy Project Acceptance in Massachusetts Maria A. Petrova, PhD* I. Background ..................................................................... 530 II. Study Context ................................................................. 534 III. Literature Review and Research Questions .................. 539 IV. Methods ........................................................................... 543 V. Results............................................................................. 544 VI. Discussion and Conclusion ............................................. 551 The State of Massachusetts is one of the most progressive U.S. states in advancing sustainability through energy conservation and renewable energy. The Green Communities Act,1 signed into law by Governor Deval Patrick in 2008, has awarded 110 communities with the title “Green Communities” in the last five years.2 The title is earned after communities achieve “five clean energy benchmarks,”3 two of which are the provision of “as-of-right” siting for renewable/alternative energy generation and the adoption of an expedited application © 2014 Maria A. Petrova, PhD * Center for International Environment and Resource Policy, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, 160 Packard Ave, Medford, MA 02155, [email protected]. This work was done as a Postdoctoral Scholar at the Energy, Climate, and Innovation (ECI) Program in the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy (CIERP) at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. Financial support was provided through a grant to ECI from BP Group and Barbara Kates- Garnick. I am grateful for the review assistance of Professor Kelly Sims Gallagher and the research help of students Allison Thompson, Elena Nikolova, and Chantal Davis. 1. An Act Relative to Green Communities, 2008 Mass. Acts 308–80. 2. Press Release, Mass. Exec. Office of Energy & Envtl. Affairs, Patrick- Murray Administration Energy Officials Present Green Communities Award (Apr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economics of the Green Investment Bank: Costs and Benefits, Rationale and Value for Money
    The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money Report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills Final report October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 2 Acknowledgements This report was commissioned by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Vivid Economics would like to thank BIS staff for their practical support in the review of outputs throughout this project. We would like to thank McKinsey and Deloitte for their valuable assistance in delivering this project from start to finish. In addition, we would like to thank the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the Carbon Trust and Sustainable Development Capital LLP (SDCL), for their valuable support and advice at various stages of the research. We are grateful to the many individuals in the financial sector and the energy, waste, water, transport and environmental industries for sharing their insights with us. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors and not those of BIS or any other party, and the authors take responsibility for any errors or omissions. An appropriate citation for this report is: Vivid Economics in association with McKinsey & Co, The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money, report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 3 Executive Summary The UK Government is committed to achieving the transition to a green economy and delivering long-term sustainable growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy
    Renewable Energy Abstract This paper provides background briefing on renewable energy, the different types of technologies used to generate renewable energy and their potential application in Wales. It also briefly outlines energy policy, the planning process, possible problems associated with connecting renewable technologies to the electricity grid and energy efficiency. September 2005 Members’ Research Service / Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau Members’ Research Service: Research Paper Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau: Papur Ymchwil Renewable Energy Kath Winnard September 2005 Paper number: 05/032/kw © Crown copyright 2005 Enquiry no: 05/032/kw Date: September 2005 This document has been prepared by the Members’ Research Service to provide Assembly Members and their staff with information and for no other purpose. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information is accurate, however, we cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies found later in the original source material, provided that the original source is not the Members’ Research Service itself. This document does not constitute an expression of opinion by the National Assembly, the Welsh Assembly Government or any other of the Assembly’s constituent parts or connected bodies. Members’ Research Service: Research Paper Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau: Papur Ymchwil Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 2 Background .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics 2017
    DIGEST OF UNITED KINGDOM ENERGY STATISTICS 2017 July 2017 This document is available in large print, audio and braille on request. Please email [email protected] with the version you require. Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics Enquiries about statistics in this publication should be made to the contact named at the end of the relevant chapter. Brief extracts from this publication may be reproduced provided that the source is fully acknowledged. General enquiries about the publication, and proposals for reproduction of larger extracts, should be addressed to BEIS, at the address given in paragraph XXVIII of the Introduction. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) reserves the right to revise or discontinue the text or any table contained in this Digest without prior notice This is a National Statistics publication The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the UK Statistics Authority: Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics: ñ meet identified user needs ONCEñ are well explained and STATISTICSreadily accessible HAVE ñ are produced according to sound methods, and BEENñ are managed impartially DESIGNATEDand objectively in the public interest AS Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics it is a statutory NATIONALrequirement that the Code of Practice S TATISTICSshall continue to be observed IT IS © A Crown copyright 2017 STATUTORY You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium Isanaturallyoccurring,Verydense,Metallic Definition Andcharacteristics Deposits Definition, Mineralogyand Proportion Ofu-235Tobetween 3And5percent
    Uranium March 2010 Definition, mineralogy and Symbol U nt deposits Atomic number 92 opme vel Definition and characteristics Atomic weight 238.03 de l Uranium is a naturally occurring, very dense, metallic 3 ra Density at 298 K 19 050 kg/m UK element with an average abundance in the Earth’s crust ne mi of about 3 ppm (parts per million). It forms large, highly Melting point 1132 °C e bl charged ions and does not easily fit into the crystal struc- Boiling point 3927 °C na ai ture of common silicate minerals such as feldspar or mica. st Accordingly, as an incompatible element, it is amongst the Mineral Hardness 6 Moh’s scale su r last elements to crystallise from cooling magmas and one -8 f o Electrical resistivity 28 x 10 Ohm m re of the first to enter the liquid on melting. nt Table 1 Selected properties of uranium. Ce Minerals Under oxidizing conditions uranium exists in a highly soluble form, U6+ (an ion with a positive charge of 6), and is therefore very mobile. However, under reducing conditions Other physical properties are summarised in Table 1. it converts to an insoluble form, U4+, and is precipitated. It is these characteristics that often result in concentrations Mineralogy of uranium that are sufficient for economic extraction. Uranium is known to occur in over 200 different minerals, but most of these do not occur in deposits of sufficient Uranium is naturally radioactive. It spontaneously decays grade to warrant economic extraction. The most common through a long series of alpha and beta particle emissions, uranium-bearing minerals found in workable deposits are ultimately forming the stable element lead.
    [Show full text]
  • Movement of Radioactive Material Sellafield Site
    Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials PATRAM 2016 September 18-23, 2016, Kobe, Japan Paper No. 3034 Movement of Radioactive Material Sellafield Site Maz Hussain Sellafield Ltd., United Kingdom. Abstract Background The UK nuclear decommissioning priority is to reduce risk and hazard and to deliver the clean-up mission cost effectively. This is particularly relevant at Sellafield where the Legacy Ponds and Silos pose the most significant challenges. The availability of safe packaging for the movement and storage on the Sellafield site is a key enabler to meet the NDA mission for safe interim storage ahead of its subsequent treatment, packaging and final storage to a Geologic Disposal Facility (GDF). There are a significant number of packages and package design types operating on the Sellafield site. Some packages are licensed to the IAEA regulations for safe transport and others comply only with the Sellafield site specific requirements. Introduction Packages to and from the Sellafield site need to comply with the IAEA regulations for safe transport and must meet the Sellafield site requirements. However, the IAEA regulations do not apply to packages within a licensed site. For on-site safe package operations compliance is required against Sellafield site specific procedures, standards and guidance. Package Management System There are a significant number and types of package transfers routinely undertaken safely on the Sellafield site. The packages range from small (18Kg) hand held sample castles to large complex (100Te) packages some with in-built gamma gates, mechanical interlocks and hoisting drive mechanisms. The Sellafield Package Management System (SPMS) efficiently manages package operations and includes for asset register, package tracking, operational history and maintenance.
    [Show full text]
  • Onr Corporate Plan 2017/18 En Route to 2020
    ONR CORPORATE PLAN 2017/18 EN ROUTE TO 2020 Office for Nuclear Regulation Corporate Plan 2017/18 Financial year 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018 Presented to Parliament pursuant to Paragraphs 23 and 25(3) of Schedule 7 to the Energy Act 2013 July 2017 © ONR copyright 2017 The text of this document (this excludes, where present, the Royal Arms and all departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as ONR copyright and the document title specified. Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. Any enquiries related to this publication should be sent to us at [email protected] This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications Print ISBN 9781474145695 Web ISBN 9781474145701 ID P002881793 06/17 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK for Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office CONTENTS 1. Foreword .........................................................................................................1 2. About this plan ..............................................................................................3 3. Our Operating Environment .........................................................................9 4. Our Strategic Themes and Key Activities ....................................................15 Influencing improvements
    [Show full text]
  • Greencoat UK Wind PLC Prospectus April 2016
    GREENCOAT UKWIND Greencoat UK Wind PLC Prospectus April 2016 c111997CCL_COVER.pdf 1 15/04/2016 23:52:04 SUMMARY Summaries are made up of disclosure requirements known as ‘Elements’. These elements are numbered in Sections A – E (A.1 – E.7). This summary contains all the Elements required to be included in a summary for this type of security and issuer. Because some Elements are not required to be addressed there may be gaps in the numbering sequence of the Elements. Even though an Element may be required to be inserted into the summary because of the type of security and issuer, it is possible that no relevant information can be given regarding the Element. In this case a short description of the Element is included in the summary with the mention of ‘not applicable’. Section A – Introduction and warnings Element Disclosure Disclosure requirement A.1 Warning This summary should be read as an introduction to the Securities Note and Registration Document (together with this summary, the Prospectus). Any decision to invest in the securities should be based on consideration of the Prospectus as a whole by the investor. Where a claim relating to the information contained in a prospectus is brought before a court, the plaintiff investor might, under the national legislation of the Member States, have to bear the costs of translating such prospectus before the legal proceedings are initiated. Civil liability attaches only to those persons who have tabled the summary including any transaction thereof, but only if the summary is misleading, inaccurate or inconsistent when read together with the other parts of the prospectus or it does not provide, when read together with the other parts of the prospectus, key information in order to aid investors when considering whether to invest in such securities.
    [Show full text]
  • International Passenger Survey, 2008
    UK Data Archive Study Number 5993 - International Passenger Survey, 2008 Airline code Airline name Code 2L 2L Helvetic Airways 26099 2M 2M Moldavian Airlines (Dump 31999 2R 2R Star Airlines (Dump) 07099 2T 2T Canada 3000 Airln (Dump) 80099 3D 3D Denim Air (Dump) 11099 3M 3M Gulf Stream Interntnal (Dump) 81099 3W 3W Euro Manx 01699 4L 4L Air Astana 31599 4P 4P Polonia 30699 4R 4R Hamburg International 08099 4U 4U German Wings 08011 5A 5A Air Atlanta 01099 5D 5D Vbird 11099 5E 5E Base Airlines (Dump) 11099 5G 5G Skyservice Airlines 80099 5P 5P SkyEurope Airlines Hungary 30599 5Q 5Q EuroCeltic Airways 01099 5R 5R Karthago Airlines 35499 5W 5W Astraeus 01062 6B 6B Britannia Airways 20099 6H 6H Israir (Airlines and Tourism ltd) 57099 6N 6N Trans Travel Airlines (Dump) 11099 6Q 6Q Slovak Airlines 30499 6U 6U Air Ukraine 32201 7B 7B Kras Air (Dump) 30999 7G 7G MK Airlines (Dump) 01099 7L 7L Sun d'Or International 57099 7W 7W Air Sask 80099 7Y 7Y EAE European Air Express 08099 8A 8A Atlas Blue 35299 8F 8F Fischer Air 30399 8L 8L Newair (Dump) 12099 8Q 8Q Onur Air (Dump) 16099 8U 8U Afriqiyah Airways 35199 9C 9C Gill Aviation (Dump) 01099 9G 9G Galaxy Airways (Dump) 22099 9L 9L Colgan Air (Dump) 81099 9P 9P Pelangi Air (Dump) 60599 9R 9R Phuket Airlines 66499 9S 9S Blue Panorama Airlines 10099 9U 9U Air Moldova (Dump) 31999 9W 9W Jet Airways (Dump) 61099 9Y 9Y Air Kazakstan (Dump) 31599 A3 A3 Aegean Airlines 22099 A7 A7 Air Plus Comet 25099 AA AA American Airlines 81028 AAA1 AAA Ansett Air Australia (Dump) 50099 AAA2 AAA Ansett New Zealand (Dump)
    [Show full text]
  • Hydro, Tidal and Wave Energy in Japan Business, Research and Technological Opportunities for European Companies
    Hydro, Tidal and Wave Energy in Japan Business, Research and Technological Opportunities for European Companies by Guillaume Hennequin Tokyo, September 2016 DISCLAIMER The information contained in this publication reflects the views of the author and not necessarily the views of the EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation, the views of the Commission of the European Union or Japanese authorities. While utmost care was taken to check and confirm all information used in this study, the author and the EU-Japan Centre may not be held responsible for any errors that might appear. © EU-Japan Centre for industrial Cooperation 2016 Page 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to first and foremost thank Mr. Silviu Jora, General Manager (EU Side) as well as Mr. Fabrizio Mura of the EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation to have given me the opportunity to be part of the MINERVA Fellowship Programme. I also would like to thank my fellow research fellows Ines, Manuel, Ryuichi to join me in this six-month long experience, the Centre's Sam, Kadoya-san, Stijn, Tachibana-san, Fukura-san, Luca, Sekiguchi-san and the remaining staff for their kind assistance, support and general good atmosphere that made these six months pass so quickly. Of course, I would also like to thank the other people I have met during my research fellow and who have been kind enough to answer my questions and helped guide me throughout the writing of my report. Without these people I would not have been able to finish this report. Guillaume Hennequin Tokyo, September 30, 2016 Page 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the long history of the Japanese electricity market, Japan has often reverted to concentrating on the use of one specific electricity power resource to fulfil its energy needs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development and Improvement of Instructions
    COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUNDS AND WIND POWER: A SCOTTISH CASE STUDY Dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN WIND POWER PROJECT MANAGEMENT Uppsala University Department of Earth Sciences, Campus Gotland Adam Christopher Mathers COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUNDS AND WIND POWER: A SCOTTISH CASE STUDY Dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN WIND POWER PROJECT MANAGEMENT Uppsala University Department of Earth Sciences, Campus Gotland Approved by: Supervisor, Dr Sanna Mels Examiner, Dr Heracles Polatidis Oct 2018 iii ABSTRACT The Scottish government’s aim of deriving 100 per cent of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources is dependent on the utilisation of wind energy. Social barriers, however, have continued to threaten these targets. Community benefit funds have often been paraded as the most common way of improving public attitudes towards wind farms in the United Kingdom, although little empirical evidence exists to support this notion. Using the proposed Ourack wind farm, approximately three and a half miles north of Grantown-on-Spey in the Scottish Highlands, this case study, consisting of a sequential explanatory research design comprised of an initial close-ended survey followed by in-depth semi-structured interviews, sought to explore the community’s perceptions of community benefits, identify the type of fund that the community wanted, and investigate the role of such benefit provisions in altering perceptions of wind farms. The key findings indicated that the majority of participants were in favour of benefits being provided, they preferred funding to be directed towards community organisations, and approximately one third of research participants (31.6 per cent) perceived the proposed wind farm in a more positive light after considering the possible benefits the region would accrue.
    [Show full text]