PDA

View Full Version : Renewable Energy Strategy Consultation


tp6626
07-01-2008, 10:42 AM
The UK government are in the process of consulting various institutions on their Renewable Energy Strategy for the long term future.

I am interested to pit the INTJ Forum as an institution against the likes of the UK Engineering Institutions, Government Thin-Tanks and Industrial Panels/Committees. I have an incling there is more sense spoken here than by alot of so-called 'professional consultants'.

If we could have a bit of a discussion and ideas sharing here, I am willing to condense the best points into a summary document and submit this via the IMechE or IET for review.

The main points the IMechE are focussing on include:

1. Current barriers to the deployment of renewable energy in the UK and how to remove them.

2. Distributed energy (particularly barriers to and opportunities for distributed energy)

3. Heat (particularly the potential for the better use of existing heat resources and opportunities for bulk and smaller scale renewable heat)

4. Transport (particularly the potential for biofuels and electric cars)

5. Feed-in tariffs (particularly if you have experience of them in action)

6. The UK's ability to deliver its 2020 targets (particularly in terms of skills levels and manufacturing capacity)

The full consultation report is at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Even though this is UK focussed, it would be good to hear the views from other countries; strategies already in place, what they're doing, how well they're working etc...etc...

Feel free to contribute as much or as little as you wish; there's no need to tackle every issue.





tp6626 added to this post, 8 minutes and 42 seconds later...

My own view initially (only received the email tonight), is that this consultation document is focussed too much on specific technology. It is going to be a strategic plan, and seems to me to be pinning hopes on certain technologies without necessarily considering what could be possible in terms of development in the future.

I think at this stage economics has a greater role to play. That is, by setting up the economic conditions to encourage sustainable progress, science and technology will provide the answers. And engineering will implement them at the right time, for the right reasons and more importantly for the right price. If the economic conditions are set up correctly, companies will profit by being more sustainable, and won't be able to afford not to be sustainable. Businesses are far more dynamic than Governments, and will be able to implement whatever is necessary to ensure profitability. All the Government has to do is set up the right conditions.

For instance BMW, say, are not stupid, and will do whatever is necessary to ensure profitability. If that means developing cars that emit no carbon, then you can rest assured that they'll achieve that, rather than go out of business. And they are muc better placed to achieve that than Governments telling them how to do it.

Just my opinion, whats everyone else think?

Mozzes
07-01-2008, 04:09 PM
My own view initially (only received the email tonight), is that this consultation document is focussed too much on specific technology. It is going to be a strategic plan, and seems to me to be pinning hopes on certain technologies without necessarily considering what could be possible in terms of development in the future.

The problem with "what could be possible" is that it doesn't exist yet and may not exist by the time it's needed. This is an issue that's going to affect everybody in the UK so they're probably just considering the most realistic scenarios so as to not muck things up too badly.

Don't get me wrong though, we still need people crackin' the whip so that "what could be possible" becomes "what is possible". A plan can be aggressive while still being realistic. It's aiming for mediocrity of which we need to be careful.

Jakalwarrior
07-03-2008, 07:05 AM
Money is what is needed. The big developments towards tech breakthroughs in solar power etc... take a LONG time to get finished and to market. There needs to be a "think tank" or program similar to what the US used to slap an atom bomb together back in the day. It wont happen though.