Defra has recently announced that funding will become available to boost investor confidence in new anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities. This funding will amount to £10 million and it will be made available in a special loan fund [1]. The fund was announced as part of Defra’s Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan which was published to help overcome the barriers to adopting the technology [1]. Even though anaerobic digestion is not a new technology – for the past 100 years sewage sludge has been treated using the technology – what is new is the fact that it is used for treating other waste with purpose-grown crops [2].

What is anaerobic digestion?

Anaerobic digestion is the break down of organic matter by micro-organisms in the absence of oxygen [2]. The resultant products of the process are biogas and digestate (a nitrogen rich fertiliser) and these are what can be harnessed to produce energy.

The biogas which is produced can be used to power Combined Heat and Power plants or burned to produce heat [2]. The digestate can be used as a renewable fertiliser or soil conditioner [2]. Below is a diagram of an anaerobic digestion plant, explaining how it is configured to produce energy [2].

http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/anaerobic-digestion-strat-action-plan.pdf

Not only does anaerobic digestion result in less waste being diverted to landfill, it also means that we can create energy from it. By creating more plants such as these, the UK become more self reliant in terms of its energy supply. With the price of fossil fuels increasing, the UK needs to address issues of our energy security and technologies such as the above will help to provide the answer. However, work does need to be done to educate people more about the technology and break down the common ideas that such plants are purely burning waste. Yes, they are not always the most attractive features, but in times of increasing energy insecurity they provide a means for a home grown energy supply.

Anaerobic digestion uses organic waste which would otherwise be sent to landfill and release potent greenhouse gases such as methane. Another advantage is that anaerobic digestion provides a much more reliable source of energy compared with other renewable technologies such as wind and solar power [2].

While there is growth in anaerobic digestion plants, the government has recognised that it needs to do more to break down the barriers to such growth. This means not only providing funding but also addressing the public perception of such technology. There is no doubt that the UK is lagging behind other European countries in its take up of renewable technology and part of this is down to consumer perception. Government and society need to address the issues, otherwise the UK will be left lagging in a world where energy security is becoming an ever increasing concern.

References

[1] Sustainable Business Magazine (July 2011, issue 174) [Digital Edition].

[2] Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan: A commitment to increasing energy from waste through Anaerobic Digestion (2011). Department of Energy and Climate Change and Defra

The first weekend in October has seen the launch of Paris’ bubble-shaped electric car scheme, known as Autolib. The £202m project [1] was devised by the city’s mayor Bertrand Delanoe and is modelled on the very successful Velib scheme. As reported earlier this year, there were concerns that the new bubble car scheme may be halted in its tracks by a legal challenge from car rental firms, including Avis and Hertz, who argued that city hall had organised unfair and publically subsided competition [2]. However, the scheme has now been launched, starting with just 66 cars and 33 rental stations [1]. By December 2011, the scheme will operate fully and by the end of 2012 there are expected to be more than 1,000 stations and 3,000 cars. Electric cars can reduce your carbon footprint and reduce the amount of energy you are consuming.

The Autolib scheme works very much like the Velib scheme, as customers can pick up one of the electric cars at stations around the city to use for short journeys and deposit it at any of the battery points [1]. The cars can travel up to 250km before they need to be recharged [3]. All the customer needs to use one is of course a driving license. The cars can take up to four people and are powered by a lithium-metal polymer battery [1].

Car manufacturers are researching the enthusiasm that could be generated around the use of electric cars, and the concept of renting one for a short period of time. As Morald Chibout, General Manager of Autolib said, “We want to persuade people to shift from the concept of owning a car to that of using a car.” It is hoped that the new Autolib scheme will illustrate to people that what matters is not necessarily owning a car but having access to one when they need it. Judging by the success of the Velib scheme, Autolib should do very well and take Paris into a new era of electronic cars and sustainable transport.

References

[1] The Guardian (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/30/paris-bubble-car-scheme-launches

[2] The Independent (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/carhire-giants-in-uturn-over-electric-fleet-2295517.html

[3] The BBC (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15134136

There was concern after the campaigning by Eric Pickles to bring back weekly refuse collections that the government would spend around £100,000 to enable councils to do this [1]. Thankfully, the latest waste policy review has concluded that fortnightly weekly collections can stay and councils have been left to decide for themselves whether they bring back weekly collections; arguably a step towards localism. I can’t help thinking how wasteful it would have been to spend £100,000 on bringing back weekly collections. It would have also been very hard for the government to maintain its stance of being the ‘greenest’ government yet.

Some have argued that by only having fortnightly collections, we are witnessing a reduction in service and that people who pay a considerable amount in council tax should expect a regular, more frequent service [1]. However, we are in fact seeing more and more waste collections, just not those to do with general refuse in black bin liners. There are dry recycling collections, food collections and garden collections, which most councils now offer, so this is hardly a reduction in service. Yes, it may make us think a little harder about how we dispose of our waste but is that really such a bad thing? Gone are the days when we can just forget about the consequences of our rubbish the minute we discard it in a black bin liner. We are being educated about the adverse effects of landfill, including the release of methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide; and trans-boundary consequences of exporting our rubbish (sometimes illegally as recently highlighted by Panorama) to parts of the world that are already struggling to cope with the effects of climate change. Therefore, is it really too much to ask to only have fortnightly collections for our general refuse bags?

Whilst fortnightly collections may be considered more of a ‘stick’ than a ‘carrot’ approach in helping to increase recycling, the government has realised that while we are still in a transition phase of encouraging people to pursue more environmentally friendly behaviour, enforcement is not always the answer. The waste policy review also announced that the government has reviewed some of the enforcement policies, and is changing some criminal offences to civil penalties and reducing some of the fines to be more fair [2]. As the review states, it is not fair to fine someone who does not close their bin lid properly more than someone who shoplifts [2]. In order to change people’s behaviour, enforcement may be needed, but it has to be fair and appropriate. It takes time to change people’s behaviour and using excessive measures in the early stages will not help the transition. The government has realised that reward is also needed and that people who reduce and recycle their waste should be recognised [2].

However, some have argued that the government needs to make clearer the relationship between waste and our wallets [3]. Arguably, many people currently view waste reduction, such as recycling, as additional effort which is carried out to reduce environmental degradation. While this is obviously true, it could be argued that to gain more support among the population the relationship between waste and financial incentives should be exploited. For example, people need to be educated about the benefits of generating energy locally, which can then be sold into the national grid. Communities that have established technologies such as anaerobic digesters can also use the heat generated to heat their own homes, providing a direct financial benefit to each householder.

Overall, there seem to be positive measures coming out of the government’s waste policy review. There is always more that can be done and positive moves are being made to address the barriers that are often perceived to waste technologies. The government aims to invest in modern technologies to deal with waste, such as anaerobic digestion, which will help us to catch up with the rest of Europe. The government has also realised that it needs to address the issues and concerns that people have surrounding these technologies [2].

References

[1] The BBC News (2011) [Online]. Available from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13754206

[2] Government Review of Waste Policy in England 2011 [Online]. Available from: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13540-waste-policy-review110614.pdf

[3] The Guardian (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jun/14/waste-bin-collection-recycling?INTC

Boris Johnson is planning to turn London into one of the major centres for electric cars in the world. Currently there are only 150 [1] charging points in the capital, which realistically is not enough to encourage the majority of people to take up electric vehicles. To ensure that a new technology is adopted by the masses it has to be accessible and easy to use.

However, this is about to change with a new scheme, Source London, which will join together all the existing charging points in London [1]. By 2013, Boris Johnson plans to install a further 1,150 points around the capital in locations such as leisure centres, supermarkets, public car parks and streets [1]. Currently, the majority of charging points that you see around London are located on streets, but by introducing them into places such as public car parks and supermarkets, users can charge their vehicles while carrying out their daily tasks, so it does not have to become a major concern as to where and when they can charge. Membership of the charging schemes costs £100 per year and entitles the purchasers to plug in and charge their vehicles at any of the now standardised charging points [1].

There has been some criticism that the plans for electric cars have fallen short of earlier promises and whilst the extra 1,150 charging points is a large increase it is significantly less than the 7,500 figure that Boris promised earlier this year [2]. Whilst there has been a reduction in the number originally proposed, it is still a large increase and one that should encourage more people to adopt electric cars. There is also evidence that car manufactures are providing incentives for their customers to use such schemes. For example, Nissan has offered 12 months free membership of Source London to Leaf owners who live within 40 miles of a charging point [1]. Using an electric car will reduce your carbon footprint as well as reducing your overall environmental impact.

Whilst London is making considerable advances to encourage electric car users, it could be argued that France is leading the way with the introduction of low carbon and environmentally friendly transport schemes. Paris was the first city to introduce a cycle hire scheme and looks set to follow suit with an electric car hire scheme. The Autolib scheme, which is scheduled for introduction this autumn, will enable customers to hire electric vehicles for less than the price of an average bottle of wine [3]. Paris is set to be equipped with 1,000 self-hire points, which will provide 3,000 battery powered cars. The cars will be produced by the French company Bollore and will take on a bubble shape, seating four people. The cars will have a built-in GPS system to help its customers navigate the city and there will also be an emergency call button.

However, there has been a last minute legal challenge. Car rental firms, including Avis and Hertz, have called in an administrative tribunal to investigate their claims that city hall has organised unfair and publically subsidised competition [4]. A decision is likely to be made within weeks as to whether the scheme can go ahead [4].

References

[1] The Charging Point (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.thechargingpoint.com/2011/05/26/boris-johnson-brings-standardised-charging-to-londons-electric-car-owners/

[2] BBC News (2011) [Online}. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13548854

[3] The Guardian (2010) [Online}. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/16/paris-electric-car-scheme-autolib

[4] The Independent (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/carhire-giants-in-uturn-over-electric-fleet-2295517.html

What is Shale Gas?

Shale gas is a fossil fuel that is found in gas deposits that have formed over millions of years in tightly bound shale rock formations [1]. It is formed from sedimentary deposits, consisting of clays and silts (formed by the erosion and weathering of rocks), which become compacted [1]. Layers after layers form of these deposits and they eventually break down to form oil or gas [1]. A lot of the oil and gas can migrate if the layers are not too compacted but if they are then shale has formed in tiny pore spaces and the deposits cannot migrate away [1]. This source of gas is known as an unconventional reservoir as it is much harder to access [1]. Some of the largest gas deposits in the world are these kinds of deposits; hence there is great interest within the gas drilling industry at the prospect of being able to extract them.

It was in the 1990s that companies started to develop the technology of fracking, which is used to extract shale gas [1].

Fracking

Fracking is the technology whereby fractures are created in the shale rock to give access to deposits. After drilling vertically down to the deposits, the drill pipe curves into a horizontal position and it continues to drill [1]. This process creates a horizontal well through the shale band [1]. Controlled explosions are then used to open up fractures in the rock [1]. A mixture of water, sand and chemicals are then pumped under high pressure to open up the fractures – this is the actual fracking process – and the gas can be returned to the surface by flowing through the pipe [1].

Although this type of technology has only been developed relatively recently it has led to what has been dubbed the “new gold rush” in America [1]. It has meant that areas that had never been associated with gas drilling have become inundated with drilling sites across the United States, including New York State, Pennsylvania and Arkansas [1].

Uptake has been slower in the UK, but the company Cuadrilla Resources has developed a site near Blackpool and started drilling on 29^th March this year [1].

Hazards

While some argue that shale gas is an important find, as gas is much less environmentally harmful than coal and it could help us bridge the gap while transferring to a low carbon economy, there are serious concerns over the process.

One of the main concerns is water pollution and an increase in methane concentration in water around shale gas drilling sites. Both the vertical and horizontal wells have to be lined with alternate layers of sheathing and cement. If these are not completed correctly there is a danger that chemicals that are pumped under high pressure escape [2]. If methane leaks, the dangers are that it could lead to fires or explosions [2]. In 2010, Dimock in Pennsylvania reported water pollution problems in an aquifer that local people used for fresh water [2]. Many people became ill and a water well exploded, with others indicating dangerous levels of methane [2].

Production of gases such as methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas, is not the only concern. The waste water, which is a result of the water that is pumped in under high pressure, has to be dealt with. Some is recycled but most of it has to go to waste water treatment works [1]. There is also a risk that the waste water can contaminate surrounding land and agriculture [2].

Current developments in the UK

There is currently only one shale gas drilling site in the UK, near Blackpool in Lancashire. However, operations were suspended in May following an earthquake measuring 1.5 on the Richter scale [3]. Earlier in the month a quake measuring 2.3 magnitude was recorded by the British Geological Survey (BGS) [3]. There is no definite evidence that the drilling is directly related to the earthquakes, but operations have been halted and the BGS state that, “Any process that injects pressurised water into rocks at depth will cause the rock to fracture and possibly produce earthquakes” [3].

Therefore, it is clear that while there are plenty of deposits of shale gas around the world, enough to be called the “New Gold Rush” [1], there is still a lot of uncertainty surrounding the technology. The transition to a low carbon economy is not going to be easy and shale gas may provide a reasonable and feasible way to ease into that transition, but with such uncertainty there is a risk we are going to create even greater environmental concerns for ourselves.

References

[1] The Environmentalist (May 2011). Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, Lexis Nexis,

[2] The Guardian (2011) [Online]. Available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/20/shale-gas-fracking-question-answer

[3] The Times (2011) [Online]. Available from http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/

Ocean Acidification is the term that is given to the process of oceans becoming more acidic, i.e. their pH is decreasing. It is still a relatively new field of research but there is a growing understanding of the threats that it poses. It is thought that the main cause is the addition of carbon dioxide to the oceans from anthropogenic sources such as the burning of fossil fuels [1]. Oceans act as a ‘sink’, i.e. they absorb carbon dioxide, as do plants and vegetation. Therefore, climate change would actually be a lot worse in terms of the greenhouse effect if oceans did not act in this way [1]. However, while this saves the atmosphere from some of the adverse effects of increasing levels of carbon dioxide, it has an adverse effect on the oceans themselves.

Carbonic Acid is formed when carbon dioxide dissolves in sea water and the acid acts to decrease the pH level of the oceans [1]. It is thought that the pH level of the ocean has already decreased by about 30% from a more alkaline state and it is argued that if the current rate of ocean acidification continues, by 2100 ocean acidity will increase by 150% [1].

Seawater has a natural pH of around 8.1 (0.1 lower than pre-industrial times), however the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that levels could fall as low as pH 7.8 by the end of the century [2].

Implications

The changes described above will inevitably cause adverse effects in the ecosystems of the oceans. One of the more understood implications is the reduced ability of organisms such as crustations to form shells or skeletons [1]. To form their shells or skeletons they need calcium carbonate which is alkaline, but with increasing acidity in the oceans this will reduce.

It is also thought that Coral Reefs will be severely affected by this phenomenon as the increasing acidity will inhibit their ability to form their hard protective surfaces correctly [2]. Findings from research carried out by scientists at the ‘natural laboratory’ in seas off Papua New Guinea indicate that corals will be some of the more severely hit species, with few types able to grow at pH7.8 [2]. The findings even suggest that coral will not grow at all in carbon dioxide rich seas [2]. The ‘natural laboratory’ was set up to mimic the conditions that would exist if carbon dioxide levels continue as they are [2].

The BCC has also published a study, which found that Clownfish appear to lose their hearing in more acidic seawater conditions [3]. The study found that in levels of acidity that are expected by the end of the century, the fish did not respond to the sounds of predators [3]. Sounds are also important for mating, pack hunting and foraging and these will all be affected by the fish’s ability to hear [3]. While the scientists found no apparent physical damage to the fish’s ears, there was some indication that there could be damage to the nerves or that fish are stressed by the higher acidity and behave differently [3].

Overall, there is still much uncertainty about the effects and causes of ocean acidification, but it is clear that there are adverse effects. Time will tell the true effects of increasing carbon dioxide on the oceans but arguably it is time that we do not have and therefore warnings as to the effects should be well observed and taken on board before it is too late.

If you would like to learn more about environmental issues then why not take a look around our learning portal?

References

[1] UK Ocean Acidification Research Program (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.oceanacidification.org.uk/

[2] BBC News (2011) [Online] Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13569442

[3] BBC News (2011) [Online] Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13605113

Why is it important to use biodegradable plastics?

It is estimated that in the UK alone, we use over 4 million tonnes of plastic a year and around 35% of that is used in packaging [2]. The length of time that it takes for plastics to break down is dependent upon what type of plastic it is, but to give an idea, the everyday plastic bag can take over 1000 years [2]. This is only an estimate, as we have not been around long enough to put an exact figure on it [2] but the fact that they don’t break down in a lifetime is enough to cause concern and harm to the environment.

How is Baco BioWrap different?

The difference between Baco BioWrap and normal Clingfilm is that Baco BioWrap is made from a controlled-life, oxo-biodegradable polyethylene and a natural prodegradant is added to the product which means that micro-organisms can consume the low molecular mass products as a food source [1]. This is what makes it biodegradable in the presence of heat, light and oxygen.

Baco BioWrap can be used in the same way as conventional Clingfilm, i.e. in the fridge, freezer and microwave ovens to protect and cover food [1]. Once opened, the product should be used within 12 months . For more information visit Baco’s website at [1].

Explore our full range of eco friendly products, including kitchen products, here at Energy Saving Warehouse.

References

[1] http://www.baco.co.uk/products/biowrap.shtml

[2] http://www.greenlaunches.com/recycle/the-problems-of-plastic-recycling.php

Tuesday saw the announcement of a new green budget, which places the UK at the forefront of carbon reductions and the only country so far to have legally binding targets past 2020.

A year ago David Cameron promised that his government would be the greenest on record but until this week there were serious concerns that the promise may not be fulfilled. Last week a letter was sent to the Prime Minister from 15 environmental groups, including Friends of the Earth and the RSPB [1] warning the government that it was in danger of breaking this promise, resulting in green issues taking a backburner. The letter urged the coalition government to ‘…promote a green economy with “urgency and resolve” if it is to follow its vow to be the “greenest government ever” [1].’

The concern from the green campaign groups, which also include Green Alliance, Oxfam, WWF, Christian Aid and the Campaign for Better Transport, had grown from a reported split within the government on how a green economy should be pursued and whether it should take such precedence. Leading figures in the Cabinet such as the Chancellor, George Osborne and the Business Secretary, Vince Cable were concerned that such plans could inhibit the UK’s economic growth [2]. However, on Tuesday, the Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne announced to parliament that the government had accepted the recommendations from the Independent Committee on Climate Change, committing the UK to some of the most drastic carbon emissions cuts ever. David Kennedy, Chief Executive of the Committee said, “We have moved into unchartered territory and are going to be watched carefully by other countries. No one else has a target like this.” [2]. While there are concerns over whether the UK’s economy can take such investment at this time (some say such plans will require an investment of £16 billion per annum), it is argued that failure to decarbonise the economy now would result in a greater costs in replacing power plants in the future [2]. David Kennedy argues that, “If we have to pay more in the future that will slow economic growth, so we need to act now.” [2].

The Energy Bill

The bill itself has three main objectives, which are: tackling barriers to investment in energy efficiency; enhancing energy security; and enabling investment in low carbon supplies [3]. Some of the main components of the bill are:

• The Green Deal – a scheme to encourage energy efficiency improvements in buildings, paid for by savings in energy bills.
• Energy efficiency – the rollout of smart electricity and gas meters to domestic properties and small/medium non-domestic sites.
• Electricity security – proposal to obligate Ofgem to assess future capacity needs and increase effectiveness of monitoring of security of supply.
• Low carbon generation – delivery of an offshore electricity grid in order to support the development of a new generation of renewable energy sources from wind, wave and tide.
• Energy Performance Certificates – to allow greater access to energy performance data by extending the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency.

[3]

The policy initiatives listed above are just a few examples of what the government is expected to announce. The initiatives not only target the UK as a whole and how our energy is sourced nationally but also involve the individual, e.g. the provision of Smart Meters. It is essential that such measures are established if the UK is to make serious inroads into reducing carbon emissions and achieving our agreed targets. Involving people at the local scale demonstrates that reducing our carbon emissions is not only a national government responsibility but one where individuals can have an impact. People can start to believe that they can really make a difference.

References

[1] BBC News (2011) [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13398311

[2] The Guardian (2011) [Online] Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/14/historic-climate-change-deal-agreed-chris-huhne

[3] The Energy Bill (2010-2011). Available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/legislation/energybill/427-energy-security-and-green-economy-bill.pdf

]]> http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/new-green-deal/feed/ 0 http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/food-waste/ http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/food-waste/#comments Mon, 16 May 2011 09:32:12 +0000 http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/?p=271 Continue reading →]]> Food is one of the largest contributors to waste in this country and every year the UK throws away around 8.3 million tonnes [1]. Producing excessive amounts of food waste not only creates environmental problems and concerns but is estimated, on average, to cost a family with children around £680 a year.

Environmental Concerns

It is estimated that about 25-30% of waste collected by household waste collectors consists of food and proportionately more food waste ends up in landfill sites than any other form of waste [2]. This produces larger environmental problems because when food breaks down and decays, methane is produced [2]. Methane is a significant greenhouse gas which stays in the atmosphere for around 9-15 years [3]. Even though carbon dioxide is often the more cited and talked about greenhouse gas, methane is over 20 times more effective in trapping heat over a 100 year period and this trapping of heat is what produces the greenhouse effect [3]. Methane is emitted from several natural sources but due to its heavy influence on global warming it is imperative that initiatives are established to reduce the amount that is released into the atmosphere through waste going to landfill.

New Initiative

In an attempt to reduce the amount of food waste going to landfill, new guidance will be published on ‘best before’ and ‘use by’ dates that are on food packaging. “Consumers will be encouraged to adopt a ‘sniff it and see’ approach to old food under the Government plans to cut waste” [4]. People have been using the ‘best before’ date to dictate when food is thrown out but under this new guidance, which is set to be published in the coming weeks, consumers will be encouraged to use it merely as guidance [4]. With goods that are deemed more perishable such as prawns, a ‘use by’ date will be used to indicate by when they should be consumed. However, with foods such as biscuits, the ‘best before’ date will just act as an indicator as to when they may be eaten by but it is by no means a definitive date.

European law states that foods must have ‘best before’ and ‘use by’ dates so that consumers in all EU countries know what they are eating [4]. However, Defra is aiming to make it clearer that ‘best before’ is merely for guidance and not a final date and this should help to reduce the impact that food waste has on global warming. The impact of cutting the food that we throw away could be as much as taking 1 in 4 cars off the UK roads and the subsequent savings in carbon emissions [1].

Other initiatives consumers could adopt

Home composting is a brilliant way to reduce your individual food waste and many councils now either provide or charge a small fee for a home composter. Many of the everyday food waste items that we throw away can be easily composted. For example, items such as egg shells, tea bags and leaves, fruit peelings and coffee grounds can all be recycled. It is not solely food either; you can add items such as egg boxes, cotton wool and vacuum cleaner contents along with grass cuttings, annual weeds and house plants [5]. Many councils provide a food waste collection service and helpful advice on how to and what to compost. It is a cheap and easy method to recycle your waste and provides compost for your garden in the future.

Initiatives such as the above are imperative if we are going to reduce the amount of food that we send to landfill and waste overall. However, it is important to educate people about such initiatives, giving clear guidance and ensuring that they are easily accessible.

References

[1] http://www.lovefoodhatewaste.com/about_food_waste (2011)

[2] The Food and Grocery Experts (2011) http://www.igd.com/index.asp?id=1&fid=1&sid=17&tid=0&folid=0&cid=298#5

[3] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011) http://www.epa.gov/methane/

[4] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8456937/New-labelling-scheme-to-make-clear-the-difference-between-best-before-and-use-by.html

[5] Recycle Now (2011) http://www.recyclenow.com/home_composting/making_compost/can_i_compost_it.html

The improvement of energy efficiency of the home is something that successive governments have tried to tackle, yet in the past twenty years, carbon emissions have only fallen by 3% [1]. This would indicate that there are some fundamental hurdles in the way, which are hindering the reduction of emissions.

Energy Performance Certificates

The previous Labour Government introduced the mandatory use of Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) in 2007. There is a legal requirement to provide EPCs for all sales, lettings and sub-lettings of both commercial and domestic properties [2]. They were established in an attempt to indicate potential energy improvement measures that could be made to a property and to identify any that have already been completed [2]. They are also intended to give an indication of the potential energy bills that a property could incur and the level of carbon dioxide emissions. Properties are rated on a scale of 1-100 and in categories A-G. The Energy Saving Trust argues that such a scheme is confusing and means that any potential buyer has to be educated about the system in order to understand it [3].

An Alternative

A report carried out by the watchdog Consumer Focus said that only 18% of homebuyers and tenants took the EPC into consideration when looking at potential properties [2]. It is argued that, if people could easily compare energy bills of properties (in a way that is more understandable to the every day home buyer or tenant), then they are more likely to take the energy consumption of a property into consideration when looking at it as a potential home [2]. The Energy Saving Trust has voiced its concerns over the current system of EPC and argues that the energy performance of a house should be as easily understood and comparable as that of comparing motor vehicles [3]. Under a new plan, which the government’s energy efficiency watchdog is working on, it may become compulsory for estate agents to provide a home’s annual average energy bill [3]. It is thought that showing the average running costs of a home is a more understandable measure for potential buyers and it would increase the likelihood that people seriously consider greener methods for home energy consumption.

Next year, as part of the Green Deal, the government is planning to introduce loans, which people can apply for to upgrade the energy efficiency of their home. Repayment of the loan will be tied to the house and not to the individual who took out the loan. Making sure that the energy performance of a property is easily understandable will be crucial in gaining support for such a scheme. Choosing the greener option is still seen as the more expensive option by many people and is often one that people avoid because they know little about it. The revised scheme will go some way to help make it more approachable and understandable to those who are not engaged in green topics on an every day basis.

References

[1] Energy Efficiency News (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.energyefficiencynews.com/policy/i/3868/

[2] http://www.greendeal-providers.co.uk/how-green-deal-works/energy-performance-certificate/

[3]TheTimes(2011) http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article2988669.ece

]]> http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/energy-efficiency-of-new-homes/feed/ 0