Winter is coming!

Temperatures set to hit 100-year low

You may have already noticed when you went to work this morning with three layers on and spent 20 minutes trying to defrost the car, but winter is here.

Temperatures have plummeted this week and are set to drop even further throughout December, with temperatures estimated at minus 3C in many places, and even as low as minus 20C in some northern areas. 

As has been in case during the last few winters, there are fears of snow blizzards closing roads and train lines, causing chaos for travellers during the festive period. Experts have also expressed concerns that the torrential rain, that has devastated many areas of Britain this week, will return early next month, hampering recovery efforts of those who have been flooded.

Snow has already hit mountainous areas, and could be on its way to the rest of us

(Image Source - The Daily Mail)

So, with temperatures dropping, now would be the time to crank up the heating. But many people are set to go without heating for extending periods over winter due to the increases in energy bills. If only there was a way to utilise and make the most of all of the heating you pay for…

Luckily, there is!

Our innovative Home Reheater recycles the warm air in your home (particularly the heat trapped in your ceiling as it naturally rises) and recirculates it back down to the rest of the room. This allows you to turn your heating down to a lower temperature and still stay warm, as the entire room will remain at one constant temperature, instead of the ceiling being the warmest, as is currently the case in homes across the country.

So there are three options this winter; turn your heating up and face the costs in the New Year, turn it off and stay horribly cold all Christmas, or invest in a Home Reheater and stay happily warm, whilst reducing your heating bill at the same time. Surely the answer is obvious?

Go to our website now and look at the 16 different designs available to find the one that suits your home. With its simple installation process your product will be up and running and saving you money in no time. And at a cost of just £39.95 it is a cheaper alternative to paying over the odds for heating that you'll only waste as it rises to the ceiling.

So stay warm and get your own back this Christmas with

Homes set to ration energy

As average bills increase, many plan to go without heat this winter

Despite temperatures set to hit a 100-year low this winter, many people will ration their heating due to price rises.

Figures show the average heating bill has increased by 63% since 2008, putting millions in ‘fuel poverty’ and leaving them with the choice of paying for heating or having money for food. Last winter, around 75% of people asked said they would turn the heating down at key times, even if they were cold, just to save money. This year, nearly 90% claim they will do this, with elderly people more likely to go without heating.

Elderly people will be hit harder by rising energy bills over winter

(Image source - This Is Money)

This is why there is worry, as it is feared many elderly people, who are more likely to stay at home for longer periods thus using more heating, might die as a result of the cold, especially those without family who live alone. There were 25,700 ‘excess winter deaths’ last year in England and Wales, with around 2500 of them said to be as a result of ‘fuel poverty’ (where over 10% of income is needed to cover energy costs).

Energy comparison site uSwitch.com believe that further the price increases that were announced by the ‘big’ energy companies like British Gas and Scottish Power last month will ‘add £753 million onto energy bills and push another 314,000 households into fuel poverty’.

UN talks on climate change

What will happen in Doha?

The UN climate change talks in Doho, Qatar get underway today, with negotiators from 194 different countries all meeting to discuss measures on how to deal with global warming on a world-wide scale. But many people don’t see anything productive coming from these talks. So why is this? Why is there a feeling of pointlessness to these discussions on climate change?

The general (and widely accepted) consensus is that the richer nations involved in the talks, mainly the US, the UK and most of the European powers, will refuse to commit to any more cuts to emissions and won’t be willing to provide any further money, whilst the poorer nations will try to hold onto the few agreements made during the last few climate talks. The stubbornness of richer countries is seen as the main reason why global climate change policies have yet to be fully implemented and accepted by everyone. 

Climate change talks take place in Doha this week

(Source - The Guardian)

In 2009, rich countries agreed to give $100bn to poorer nations to help them combat and adapt to climate change by 2020, with a minimum of £30bn being given as a down-payment. So far, not even the down-payment has been met, with the total amount of money actually given being less than the total amount of bonuses given out in the City of London. Many nations, especially in Europe, have used the economic crisis and recession of recent years as an excuse not to commit money to climate change proposals, and there are many officials and ministers in office across the world who are still sceptical about global warming. But with events such as Superstorm Sandy hitting the US recently, alongside heatwaves, droughts and wildfires in the country, as well the UK having its wettest summer and driest spring to date and October being the 333rd consecutive month global temperatures were above the 20th century average, it is hard to ignore the reality of climate change. Especially when even the World Bank has issued its own warnings, as they announced that the world is on course for a 4C temperature rise which they believe would ruin economies as well as people’s everyday lives.

However, despite all of the warning signs that global warming is a very real threat, nobody sees any of the richer countries truly committing themselves to taking action, which is why the levels of anticipation in Doha are somewhat muted.

Why hasn't solar taken off?

Form of renewable energy isn't as popular as it could be

Earlier this week, the chief executive of Desertsec Paul van Son denied his plans for a scheme to produce 15% of Europe’s energy from solar panels in North Africa was in turmoil following the withdrawal of two major investors. Both Siemens and Bosch pulled out of the project, which would see energy produced by solar power in countries such as Tunisia and Morocco relayed to Europe via underwater cables, whilst the Spanish government has backed away from a deal to build the panels. Despite these apparent set-backs, van Son laughed off suggestions the €400 million scheme was in crisis. But does this situation suggest that solar power has still yet to really take off as a form of energy production?

An outline of the Desertsec energy proposal - which may now be in doubt

(Source - The Guardian)

Solar power seems like the ideal form of renewable energy. Even more straightforward than wind power, all you have to do is watch as the sun shines and produces electricity. But despite this seemingly simple process of producing energy, solar has yet to really go mainstream. Whereas wind power is gaining more and more momentum as the answer to the question of how to produce clean, renewable energy, solar power is getting left behind. But why is this? Why haven’t we committed to solar yet?

Cost. Installing solar panels in a home can cost nearly £9000 on average; a price a lot of people aren’t willing to pay, especially as it may also require adjustments or renovations of the roofs of houses, which adds further costs. Many people could have had help covering costs via a grant, but last year the Government cut the Feed-In Tariff (FIT) by over half, meaning people who could have earned money for merely having solar panels (up to £1000 a year in many cases), which would have helped cover the cost of the initial installation, will now earn significantly less. 

Solar power is a great form of renewable energy - but people don't like the cost

(Source - The Guardian)

On top of all this, it has been announced that energy bills will increase to cover the costs of implementing green energy schemes, such as solar power. Any form of price increase is bound to anger consumers and, despite the assurances that using renewable energy will actually decrease prices in the coming years, the new deal has been met with criticism from consumers, MPs and environmental campaigners. 

So with the current negativity surrounding renewable energy in the media – mainly focusing on the cost – it seems that solar power has an even harder task of trying to appeal to people as a realistic alternative to traditional energy production.

Are new coal plants a backwards move?

Plans for new coal-fired power plants raise questions

New research has revealed that over 1000 new coal plants are being planned in 59 countries, with China and India contributing to three-quarters of them. 

This coal expansion is going ahead despite warnings over the large amount of pollution the new plants will create, with scientists, politicians and climate change campaigners all agreeing that the world needs to move away from fossil fuels as the main energy provider. Many argue that fossil fuel assets will become worthless as action on climate change moves forward.

Coal plants are the most polluting of all types of power plants. The capacity of all 1200 proposed plants across the world will be around 1400GW, which is the same as adding another China to the world in terms of the level of greenhouse gas emissions.

A coal-fired power station in Michigan, USA

(Source - Wikipedia)

The report is said to be the most comprehensive made and was compiled by the World Resources Institute, who state that the proposed coal plants are ‘definitely not in line with a safe climate scenario’. Nick Robins, head of HSBC’s Climate Change Centre, believes it would be easier to ignore coal as an energy source, as several factors including tighter air pollution regulations, the increasing investment and commitment to renewable energies and the scarcity of water (as coal plants need massive amounts of water to operate) make coal energy not worth the hassle.

Despite these warnings however, the coal industry has seen economic rejuvenation in recent years, as global coal trade increased 13% in 2010. The UK, Germany and France are still in biggest importers, but countries like South Korea and Japan are fast-increasing their import levels. These countries, along with developing countries such as Senegal and Uzbekistan, have high numbers of coal plants but produce practically no coal of their own. Ailun Yang, of the WRI, believes that there is an issue of a lack of awareness in these countries that their energy needs can be met from sources ‘other than coal’.

Wind farms to give energy bill discounts

'Community tariff' offered to residents living near Good Energy wind farms

A new energy tariff will offer energy discounts to people living near wind farms owned by utilities company Good Energy. 

People who live within two kilometres of a Good Energy wind farm will get a 20% discount on their energy bills, which could save them around £110 a year. The new local electricity tariff will be launched next year and will only apply to the Delabole wind farm in Cornwall to start with (as this is the only farm Good Energy currently owns), but will apply to all new wind farms the company opens in the future. Good Energy expects to develop wind farms that can produce an overall capacity of around 100MW in the UK by 2016. Tariff customers will also receive an annual bonus if the wind turbines overproduce energy.

Turbines at the Delabole wind farm in Cornwall

(Source- This is North Cornwall)

The idea of a local tariff had been talked about for the past two years, according to Good Energy chief executive Juliet Davenport, who sees the idea as part of a bigger plan to ‘bring people closer to their energy source’. Davenport also believes the scheme will help wind farms get backing from people opposed to them because of their visual impact on an area, as they will be getting a ‘share of the benefit’ from the turbines, which would in some way make up for their effect on the landscape.

The new tariff will cover discounts for around 400 homes in Delabole and will cost Good Energy £25,000. Residents in Turriff in Aberdeenshire will also get the benefits of this new tariff as a wind farm is currently being planned there.

Want a good savings investment? Then go green!

Renewable energy investments can offer better returns than banks

In a climate of economic uncertainty across Europe, most people are trying to find the best ways to use their money and are looking for the right places to invest. With stock market returns erratic and inconsistent and savings accounts paying out below-inflation interest rates, there is another way to make money from investments. And it’s green.

Abundance Generation, the FSA-regulated platform for renewable energy investment, are offering people the chance to invest in energy projects that can make returns of up to 8%, whilst supporting local renewable energy schemes at the same time. The first project by Abundance – a community wind turbine in the Forest of Dean – was switched on last week after reaching its minimum funding level recently and is now generating electricity for the community, and generating returns for investors, who include locals as well as others from across the UK. Investors will receive twice-yearly payments from the project, which are their share of the profits made from generating and selling energy created by the turbine.

The turbine at Forest of Dean being constructed

(Source - This is Gloucestershire) 

Bruce Davis, co-founder and joint managing director of Abundance, argues that investing in energy projects is a much better idea than investing money in banks, who have lost a lot of public trust following the banking scandals of recent years, and is available to people of all economic backgrounds. “We are all about democratising finance” said Davis. “Why should the great returns and pleasure of investing in real, worthwhile and ethical assets like renewable energy projects only be available to the very wealthy?” 

People can invest in projects with Abundance for as little as £5 with the average investment being for 20 to 25 years. The risks from investing in Abundance projects are very low, meaning that investing in renewable energy isn't just for rich businessmen; you can do it too. And, unlike a bank, you can actually see what your investment is doing for the renewable energy industry and the local community.

Have energy companies been rigging prices?

PM threatens heavy fines for companies found to be manipulating market

David Cameron has called for heavy fines against all energy companies that are found to have rigged gas prices in the UK. 

The Prime Minister’s view comes after the Financial Services Authority announced an investigation into several major power companies that are accused of manipulating the wholesale gas market in Britain. Nick Clegg, deputy prime minister, backs Cameron’s stance, saying that consumers would be ‘rightly dismayed’ if the allegations of price rigging are found to be true.

Many of the companies accused of price rigging increased their prices last month

(Source - The Telegraph)

The FSA launched their investigation after word of ‘unusual trading patterns’ was revealed by whistle-blower Seth Freedman, who worked as price reporter at ICIS Heren, a company who set benchmark prices that wholesale gas contracts are based on. ICIS Heren reported to energy regulator Ofcom concerns about suspect trading on 28th September, which is the date of the end of the gas financial year and therefore an important influence on future gas prices.

This investigation will do little to improve the strained relationship between the energy companies and their consumers, which was already damaged following last month’s gas price hike.

Have you seen this see-through soil?

Scientists develop transparent soil that lets you watch roots as they grow

The process of how plant roots grow has been revealed in a clearer light thanks to the development of transparent soil.

Researchers from the University of Abertay Dundee and the James Hutton Institute have spent the last two years working on a see-through soil substitute made from Nafion - a synthetic material usually seen in power-generating fuel cells - that allows them to actually watch the roots of a plant as they grow. The compound acts just like regular soil and is the biggest development in the study of the rhizosphere, the world of roots, in recent history, with Lionel Dupuy, a theoretical biologist at the James Hutton Institute, saying ‘This is exciting because there are so many things to discover in soil and we don’t know yet what they are’.

See-through soil lets you watch the roots as they grow and develop

(Source - Daily Mail)

The artificial soil shares key characteristics of actual soil, such as water retention, capability of sustaining plant growth and the ability to hold nutrients. The soil isn’t transparent naturally, and only becomes see-through when treated with a special water-based solution. 

Scientists are confident that the soil can help them get a better understanding of how plants and microbes access nutrients that are present in soil, which can then help them develop and breed crops that have more efficient root systems, meaning less of a reliance on fertilizers. 

Will the President now commit to climate change action?

Expectations rise as newly re-elected Obama talks about ‘destructive power of a warming planet’

With the celebrations of his supporters still in full swing, President Barack Obama has also fueled excitement among environmental campaigners with his victory speech, in which he seemed to accept the risk that climate change poses to the world by mentioning the ‘destructive power of a warming planet’.

Whilst his Republican rival Mitt Romney turned rising sea-levels into a joke during his acceptance speech in August, and despite both candidates completely ignoring climate change during their televised election debates, campaigners feel confident that Obama will start to take action on the issue during his final term as President.

As was the case during his first term, Obama will have a tough task of pushing through any legislation on climate change due to the Republican’s continued control of the House of Representatives. However, with the impact of Hurricane Sandy still fresh in people’s minds, an endorsement from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg because of his position on climate change, and the fact that the majority of Democrats elected to the Senate and the House of Representatives owe many of their victories to the votes of environmental campaigners, Obama does have a better chance of making any climate-change based laws over the next four years than he did during the last four.

The existing Keystone pipeline and the routes of the proposed XL addition

(Source - The Guardian)

Obama has the perfect opportunity to please climate change campaigners, following news that a demonstration will be held outside the White House on 18th November protesting against the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which will carry oil from Canada to be refined in Texas. The pipeline has faced heavy criticism from many people following its announcement, including Kill Bill actress Daryl Hannah, who was arrested for her role in a protest against the pipeline last month.

Does the Government really care about green energy?

Tory MPs call on PM to publicly back renewable energy investments

David Cameron’s position on the green economy has been questioned by his own party after 20 Conservative MPs sent a letter to Downing Street expressing their concern over what they believe to be attacks on renewable energy and an anti-green sentiment from across the Coalition.

The Prime Minister is set to defend the Government’s policy on the green energy economy following criticism that many figures with the Coalition, such as George Osborne, are attacking the value of the sector, despite it being worth over £120bn and supplying a third of the recent economic growth in the UK. 

Many Conservative MPs, including Peter Aldous, MP for Waveney, who organised the letter, feel that Cameron’s silence on the issue may be putting off companies from investing into renewable energy schemes in the UK, and could see them invest overseas instead. Aldous called on the PM to clearly state what the Coalition’s position on the green economy is so that they can work to ‘encourage and incentivise investment from emerging markets…for our country to be a world leader in renewable energy’. 

David Cameron is currently pushing for investment in Britain’s energy production from the Middle East, and will meet with the heads of three of the biggest sovereign wealth funds in the United Arab Emirates to secure more investment in renewables. But in the eyes of many MPs, this isn’t enough. Cameron and the Coalition must come out and publicly back investments in green energy projects and, in the words of Energy Minister Greg Barker, ‘put its money where its mouth is’.

The city of the future

Iskandar Malaysia will be totally green and model for all south-east Asian cities 

An eco-friendly, ultra-modern city the size of Luxembourg, housing 3 million people and powered completely by green energy – that is the vision of Iskandar Malaysia. 

A map of the proposed eco-city of Iskandar Malaysia

(Source - The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/nov/02/iskandar-malaysia-green-megacity?intcmp=122 )

Across the strait of Johor, opposite Singapore, is the site for this ‘smart metropolis’ that developers hope will be template for all new cities across all of Malaysia and south-east Asia. This new city will be home to over 3 million people by 2025 and will be powered by renewable energy, will have publically provided transport and will recycle all of its waste. The city will also have green spaces to encourage social integration and improve resident’s mental well-being. Skyscrapers will share the skyline with low-rise buildings and self-contained ‘neighbourhoods’. 

This vision, described by Malaysia’s Prime Minister Najib Razak as a ‘smart city template’, came about as a solution to the predicted city population growth in the region. In 2007, the world’s urban population overtook the rural population for the first time, and by 2050 the planet’s population will increase from 7bn to around 9bn, with the majority of people in south-east Asia living in major cities.

Eco-city projects have been planned in the past, in countries ranging from China to the US, and have collapsed, but with over $30bn promised to the development of the city (a third of which has come from outside the country), Iskandar Malaysia is hoping to truly become the city of the future.

How safe is nuclear?

With Hitachi investing over $1 billion into two new nuclear power plants in the UK, the issue of nuclear safety is raised once again

This week, Japanese company Hitachi bought the Horizon nuclear power project in the UK for $1.2 billion, which will create two new nuclear power plants in Anglesey, Wales and Oldbury, England, with around 12,000 jobs in constructing the sites and then 2000 permanent jobs once they are completed. Hitachi took over the project from German companies RWE and E.ON after they pulled out following the decision by Angela Merkel to phase out nuclear energy in Germany by 2022. This decision by one of Europe’s leading industrial powers to renounce nuclear energy in favour of renewables was made following the disaster at Fukushima, with fears raised about the safety of nuclear power. Now, with Hitachi opting to invest in this type of energy and start a ‘100 year commitment to the UK’ that question is brought up once again.

A typical nuclear power plant - but is it really that safe?

(Source - http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/NuclearEnergy.php)

Safety is the biggest factor in debates about nuclear power. Anti-nuclear campaigners state that the potential risk of a nuclear disaster (such as a complete nuclear meltdown – a nuclear explosion similar to an atomic bomb is a complete myth, as the uranium isn’t enriched enough in a power plant to explode) outweighs any benefits of nuclear power, as the damage that could be caused by a disaster would be catastrophic. That fear is understandable; a worst-case scenario would be a complete meltdown that contaminates the ground and water supply in the surrounding area, which would cause explosions as a result of radioactive material reacting with water and widespread exposure to radiation that could result in deaths. 

However, in nearly 15,000 cumulative nuclear reactor years, only three major accidents have occurred; Three Mile Island (USA, 1979), Chernobyl (Ukraine, 1986) and Fukushima (Japan, 2011), with only Chernobyl resulting in loss of life. These accidents weren’t caused by the nuclear power process itself, but by a series of specific factors. Three Mile Island was a result of human error, Fukushima was caused by damage from both an earthquake and a tsunami, and Chernobyl was the result of poor reactor design in an environment where safety regulations and security were a low priority. Nuclear energy is so much safer now with security measures and tight safety regulations in place.

The devastating aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster - but events like these are extremely rare

(Source - Liverpool Echo)

In terms of safety, renewable energy is much better than nuclear, as the only risk of damage or death from a wind turbine is if it fell over, which wouldn’t affect as many people as a nuclear meltdown would. With Germany looking to phase out nuclear power by 2022 in favour of renewable energy, they are showing they are willing to commit and support the development of renewable power (as nuclear energy currently provides a quarter of the country’s energy usage), which is a good thing, as it shows the country is prepared to move forward and is thinking about the future. 

However, nuclear power shouldn’t be ignored completely. There is always the worry that something could go terribly wrong with nuclear and, however safe nuclear energy can be made, the actual process of working with radioactive materials and the science behind it will always carry some level of risk. But with safety measures as tight and important as they currently are, the chances of something bad happening are very low. Nuclear power is still important to the world, as it is very efficient in terms of energy production. An average-size nuclear plant would produce the same amount of energy as around 2000 wind turbines. 2000 turbines would take up an area of land around 60,000 acres, whereas a power plant would take up only 1500 acres.

Hopefully in the future there will be a form of renewable energy so efficient and effective, with absolutely no risks, that nuclear power won’t be needed anymore. But until such a time, nuclear energy is still important, and still necessary.