Energy Independence In The UK  

Jeremy Leggett has an article in The Guardian on how to make the UK energy independent - Independence from the street up.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) is warning of an oil crunch by 2012, so we have to act immediately if we aren't to add peak oil to our credit-crunch woes. There is also a grave risk of major shortfalls in gas supply in the next few years. North Sea oil and gas production is plunging 7.5% a year at the same time as liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects are being cancelled around the world. Meanwhile, Moscow dangles the prospect of sending most of its gas exports east to China, rather than west to Europe.

Without government help, the global economic crisis may deter investors in climate technology. The UK government talks about building new gas pipes of different kinds – in an expanded national grid, and in import pipelines and regasification plants – but it cannot rely on having gas to put in them. It talks of allowing an expansion of coal burning, knowing carbon capture and storage is more than a decade from proving economic, or even workable. As for nuclear, we don't get one of those new reactors that are so far behind schedule and so over budget in Finland until 2018 at the earliest. Provided, that is, anyone can be found foolish enough to finance it.

We need to make ourselves energy independent from the street up – in transport, electricity and heating – starting today. The good news is that with today's technologies and the right kind of financing and workforce mobilisation, we could surprise ourselves about what we could achieve.

Everything must spring from energy efficiency. We have an ocean of electricity and heating profligacy to mine in this country. British Gas ran an interesting experiment recently. Eight British streets were asked to compete in cutting their fuel bills, using only the easiest of efficiency measures. In no time at all, they cut their CO2 by an average 20% and fuel bills by a third. The Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR), which monitored the exercise (pdf) for BG, suggests that 10,000 advisers be appointed nationwide, one per 20 streets. The cost would be £500m annually against national energy savings of £4.6bn. The IPPR gives a telling example of what householders, energy-services companies, and government could do could if they worked together. A £524 loan package for cavity wall and lost insulation would give annual savings of £395 per household. A quick payback indeed.

Then there are the new means of energy generation. Silicon Valley is not pouring billions of dollars into 50 families of clean technology (cleantech) for nothing. We were already entering a green industrial revolution as the credit crunch hit panic phase. True, there will be a race against time to create mass markets in cleantech. But these are highly disruptive technologies: they can displace fossil fuels far faster than most people appreciate. Once they really get going, the prize is huge. Consider this example. Modern solar electric and heating tiles, fitted to a maximally energy-efficient home, can take that property's emissions to zero. The whole thing can be put up in a matter of days using modern offsite methods of construction. More than half the UK's greenhouse gas emissions come from buildings; the majority from homes. We can cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero, we can get rid of the need for energy bills of any kind once the capital cost is paid, and we can dump gas, coal and nuclear alike.

Then there is transport. Car manufacturers are aligning behind electricity as the fuel of the future. They are already well into systemic change, even at $100-barrel oil. Renewable energy can charge the plug-in super-efficient vehicles of the near future, even as massive new public transport infrastructure is built by the carbon army.

Long term, we save much more money than we invest making this happen. It is all doable, if we just have the imagination and the will.

As the world's largest producer of plastics made from plants, we wish to clarify John Vidal's claims about bioplastics (Sustainable bioplastic can damage the environment, April 26). While bioplastics are still on a journey to full sustainability, we believe they are the greenest alternative to conventional oil-based plastics.

The advantages of bioplastic start in the manufacturing process. Peer-reviewed studies have found that making Ingeo - known generically as polylactic acid or PLA - generates less than half the greenhouse emissions of making oil-based plastics. New innovations in the manufacturing process mean Ingeo production will soon produce 75% less greenhouse emissions than making petro-plastics.

The environmental benefits continue through the life of the plastic. Unlike conventional plastics, PLA is infinitely recyclable: a PLA bottle can be made into another bottle again and again, whereas oil-based competitors are typically "down-cycled" into products of diminishing value and ultimately destined for landfill. Ingeo is also certified as fully compostable in specific conditions. The Association for Organics Recycling (formerly the UK Composting Association) supports the increased use of biodegradable material as a means of reducing the 4.6m tonnes of packaging disposed of annually in the UK.

Rising food prices are a serious concern today. At full capacity, we would use less than 0.1% of 2007 US corn production (all grown within 50 miles of our Nebraska plant). By contrast, about 30% of that crop went to make ethanol - a 300-fold difference.

Affordable food, reliable energy and a healthy environment are global problems that cannot be solved without fundamental changes in the way we treat limited natural resources. We believe that plants, rather than fossil fuels, are a good place to start.