Author: Dafydd Elis

Steven Chu in Copenhagen (Image by: Andy Revkin)

The US’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced a new stream of funding for low-energy technologies here in Copenhagen yesterday.

The money is being offered as the result of discussions at the Major Economies Forum (MEF) at L’Aquila, Italy, earlier this year.

The money is for five years, and will be distributed over four different programmes. One will focus on solar-powered lighting using LEDs; another will provide practical and economic support to low-income countries to deploy renewable energy technologies. The other two programmes focus on improving energy efficiency in developed countries’ products and on providing information about clean technology potential globally.

Of these, the bulk of the funding will go to the renewable energy funding - $250m of the $350m announced. In fact, much of this money is not new. $200m of it had already been pledged by the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland.

While this funding might go a little way to filling a near-term gap in financing for technology transfer and development, the short five-year duration of the programme announced and the relatively small sums involved ($70m a year between more than seven major economies) is small fry even compared to the $10billion per year committed by the EU to adaptation funding last week.

More fundamentally, a long-term and economically sizable mechanism for supporting technology transfer will need to be developed as part of a post-Kyoto agreement. This has been under discussion over the last two years as part of the Bali agreement, and featured in the draft negotiation text issued last week.

Exactly how this will look once this week’s negotiations are done remains to be seen.

The announcement, made by the World Bank on the sidelines of the UN climate meeting taking place in Barcelona, will bring music to the ears of the millions of Africans suffering from climatic changes.  The decision made by the trustees of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF), will commit $1.1 billion dollars to six African nations.  The choice of benefiting countries illustrates both Africa’s opportunity and potential international competitiveness within the emerging low-carbon economy but also its extreme vulnerability and limited adaptive capacity to the implications of climate change. 

The six nations will receive the money in a combination of grants or low-interest loans from the CIF which was launched in 2008, and has pledges of over $6 billion dollars to date. The CIF is a collaboration of public development financiers and is run jointly by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the International Finance Corporation and World Bank.

Leading Africa’s position in renewable energy and energy efficiency investments, South Africa will receive US$500 million which will be channelled into helping the country achieve its ambitious target of 4% renewable energy generation by 2013.   The money will be instrumental if South Africa is to achieve the target of a 12% increase in energy efficiency by 2015, a difficult task considering its dependence on coal.  Another large benefactor, Egypt, which is set to get $300 million dollars will also utilise the money to improve its power sector and the urban transport system in Cairo which is grossly under prepared to serve one of the world’s largest cities of over 17 million people.

A promising development for climate investment and possible innovation in low carbon growth is the pledge of US$150 million to Morocco for a fund dedicated to low carbon growth.  The fund will also boost energy security, a development which is likely to be viewed with keen interest from investors in the DesertTec Foundation. 

The climate finance will not all be focused on large scale infrastructure, with some of the money for South Africa dedicated to the distribution of solar water heating to millions of households, especially those with no access to electricity and in remote rural locations.

The CIF also earmarked between US$60 million and US$70 million for individual grants to Mozambique, Niger and Zambia which the World Bank felt all ‘shared dramatic risks in potential loss of land, life and livelihoods as a result of climate change’. These countries will utilise the money to pilot an initiative aimed at creating ‘resilience strategies’ against the impacts of climate change. 

Mont-Saint-Michel, on the Normandy coast of France, is the sight of new conflict.  The most recent battle is not in a medieval setting, but a modern struggle against two good, but opposed environmental causes.  On one side are those who want to reduce carbon emissions by installing windmills.  On the other side stand ecologists who suggest that windmills churning above the tidal flats of Mont-Saint-Michel would distract from the natural beauty of the medieval monument and potentially destroy the landscape in the future.

France is on an ambitious route to expand its use of windmills in renewable energy.  Currently there are 2500 windmills producing 4500 megawatts per year; the goal is to have 8500 windmills producing 25000 megawatts by 2020.  Windmills are becoming increasingly sought after by EU goals to limit greenhouse gases.  Last week, the EU recommended that it invest $ 70 million in clean energy over the coming decade, tripling windmill construction to produce 20 % of Europe’s electricity.

Those against the windmills near Mont-Saint-Michel have nothing against the quest for clean energy but rather argue that windmills above the ridgeline are not the way to achieve this goal.  Allies have formed across France, and an ambitious campaign to prove the windmills would desecrate the vista has begun.

The mayor of Mont-Saint-Michel, Eric Vannier, has stayed out of the debate for the most part, but 600 locals have pooled finances to hire lawyers to sue local government.  They expect a court ruling in Spring 2010.  If the group wins the lawsuit, “they’ll have to put everything back beyond 30 km (~18.5 miles),” said Corinne Gressier, who runs the group “Windmills: Turbulences.”  But she also realizes, “if we lose, it’s over.”

French law bans windmills closer than 1500 feet from historical monuments.  The current court case in will be on trial in Nantes.  It concerns plans to build 300 foot high windmills on farmland in Argouges, on a plateau a bit more than 10 miles southeast of Mont-Saint-Michel.  The monument attracts about 3 million visitors each year to admire the rock-top monastery.  Andre Antolini, president of renewable Energies Syndicate, told reporters last month that, “at the proposed distance, tourists to the monument would only see tiny blades peeking over the horizon.”

But for protesters like Gressier and the national alliance of environmental groups, the three windmills at Argouges would just be the tip of the iceberg if building is permitted.  There are current plans for an additional 80 towers in farming communities across the entire ridgeline above Mont-Saint-Michel.

The complicating issue is that farmers and village counters tend to embrace proposals to install windmills in their fields because of the payments they receive.  They get stipends for use of the land and villages are provided tax revenue on income from electricity, which is sold to the national grid.  “It’s a flourishing business,” said Jean-Louis Butre, president of the Durable Environmental Federation, based in Paris.

At present France gets about 80 percent of its energy from nuclear reactors and an additional 12 percent from hydraulic generators.  That leaves a balance of 8 percent that must be filled by oil, coal, natural gas, solar, or wind.  Butre explains that if government decided to fill that gap with windmills, it would have so many that they would be part of the scenery in more than a third of the country.

In fact last year, Butre challenged president Sarkozy’s strong push for wind energy in the book “Fraud: why windmills are a danger for France.”  The former President Velery Giscard d’Estaing, a supporter for nuclear power, wrote the preface to the book.  He denounced windmills as an “unacceptable use of public funds, a deceptive public discourse, and often questionable business.”

Now the delegation from Argouges, with support from groups around France, waits to see if they will win the court battle and put atop to the windmill construction near Mont-Saint-Michel.  It remains to be seen how this part of Mont-Saint-Michel’s represents 13 centuries of history will play out.

© Laura Padgett

Following two days of high-level discussions held in Washington at the beginning of last week, the U.S. and China signed an agreement to increase cooperation on climate change and energy.

These discussions were the first meeting in the China-U.S. Economic and Strategic Dialogue which was launched by Hu Jintao and Barak Obama at the G20 meeting in London in April, and are set to continue later this year. They consisted of two parallel tracks – an economic track, co-chaired by US Treasury Secretary Geithner and Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan; and a policy one, co-chaired by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Chinese State Councilor Dai Bingguo

In the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which was signed at the end of the meeting the two nations agree to “strengthen and coordinate our respective efforts to combat global climate change, promote clean and efficient energy, protect the environment and natural resources, and support environmentally sustainable and low-carbon economic growth”. The countries agree that cooperation between them is crucial to reaching these goals, and that they both have an important role in global negotiations. The document also states that this future cooperation will also strengthen and improve the relationship between China and the US, something that will benefit both countries in areas other than climate change as well.

As far as practicalities, the MoU doesn’t contain a whole lot of those. There are no exact targets and no detailed plans for cooperation other than stating that the two countries will “establish Climate Change Policy Dialogue and Cooperation as a platform for the United States and China to address global climate change and to identify and resolve areas of concern.”

So this agreement is no more than a general outline for future cooperation, which while it is definitely a step in the right direction, as US Senator John Kerry pointed out “the fully defined mutuality of effort between our two countries—did not materialize.”

This does not mean though that the improved relationship between the US and China since Obama took office has not yielded more concrete developments. These came two weeks previously when - during secretaries Steven Chu (energy) and Gary Locke (commerce) visit to China - the two countries agreed on several joint projects including an agreement between the U.S. DoE and the Chinese Ministry of Urban-Rural Development to foster collaboration in the development of more efficient building designs and sustainable communities; and an announcement of a joint Clean Energy Center to which the two countries pledged $15 million in support of initial activities.

These increasingly closer ties with China also provide opportunities to expose the US public and members of Congress to the progress made within China in fields such energy efficiency, renewable energy and clean energy technologies. This is important as the perceived lack of progress in other major emitters, especially China, is often used as an excuse to oppose and water down the US climate bill.

Environmental issues are central to the new government’s plan. Refusing to sign up to “any legal commitments or binding, mandatory targets on climate change”, Jairam Ramesh, the new Environment and Forests Minister reiterated that India will stick to its own climate change initiative: the eight national missions announced in the NAPCC last year. Perhaps reacting to the much repeated criticism of the climate change action plan, the government has stressed the need for more “action” and less “talk” this time around.

To start, the self certification clause that would have allowed industries to simply “self certify “ the environmental impact of any expansion will be dropped. BT Brinjal will not be hitting the supermarket shelves anytime soon either as the government has indicated that a comprehensive study on genetically modified foods is needed before clearance for any new foods will be given.

While the finance ministry may be keen on doing away with these “anti-market” environmental obstacles, Jairam Ramesh has declared that he will focus his energies on strengthening the regulatory system and ensuring stricter environmental norms. Environmental laws have long been seen in India as obstacles to development and growth. Arguing that a more accountable and transparent system will integrate environmentalism into the country’s economic model creating a more sustainable growth plan, Jairam Ramesh hopes to set up new overseeing authorities as well. The new government has announced that the current Central Pollution Control Board will be converted into a new environmental protection authority. Biodiversty and wildlife protection authorities and a new public environmental research institute will also be set up.

This new pro environment stance taken by the government is a good start. Till now, the environmental ministry has generally maintained a low profile and a strong environmental ministry that is ready to a take a stand is a welcome change.  India really needs to start putting in place the promised missions and enforcing environmental standards. But there also is pressure on the government to maintain economic growth rates during the economic slowdown and in order to do so it appears they have realised that India will have to match economic growth with environmental protection and adaptation.

According to a UNEP report, investment towards renewable energy in India increased by 12 percent this past year, with a 17 percent rise in investment in the wind energy sector and India has been lobbying at the international level for more technology transfer. At the domestic level, the new Minister has set the right tone. But for India to come out on top, the government has to follow through these next five years.

Seven years ago, Hamburg sold its municipal energy provider to the Swedish utility Vattenfall. Yesterday, in a telling example of changed thinking on energy policy, Hamburg’s Green environment minister announced the start of construction for the first (admittedly tiny) windpark operated by the city’s newly created municipal energy provider. The re-claiming of political control over energy production and supply by municipal providers, in line with developments elsewhere in Germany, highlights three issues. First, that for environmental and economic reasons political control over energy production and supply might be desirable. Second, that Green and Conservative politicians can make pragmatic policy. And third, that ‘greening’ energy supply might be a paying proposition for a city like Hamburg.

To provide more competition and therefore choice for citizens; to have an energy provider taking responsibility for fighting climate change; and to have an energy provider that operates in Hamburg, re-invests profits and represents the city’s interests; these are are the goals Anja Hajduk, Hamburg’s Green environment minister names for the creation of the new state-owned energy utility. They are to be achieved, in the medium-term, by Hamburg Energy, the new company by not only producing its own renewable energy, but also re-taking control over the heat- and gas-grids currently operated by Vattenfall and providing its customers with exclusively non-coal-non-nuclear electricity.

Hamburg Energie’s creation was first announced last autumn, at the same time as the government - legally obliged - granted Vattenfall the right to operate a coal-fired power station in the city. And while the Left party in the city characterizes the move as a cynical political ploy, it is more likely the expression of a spectacularly unspectacular Conservative-Green coalition’s pragmatic approach. Apart from announcing the creation of a municipal rival to Vattenfall, Hajduk - faced with her party’s discontent but legally obliged to grant the plant’s construction - also placed stringent regulatory limits on its size and the amount of cooling water from the river Elbe it is allowed to withdraw. And while traditionally seen as big-business friendly, Hamburg’s CDU members of government have so far gone along which a majority of the Green’s environmental policy - in striking contrast to the constant quarreling observers are used to from Red-Green coalition days.

And there is evidence that the optimism placed in renewable energy has sound economic footing. For example, in an unrelated - but not accidental move - Siemens announced the creation of a European sales and project execution headquarter in Hamburg. For northern German manufacturing, mostly rural and hurt by the demise of the ship-building industry from the 70s onwards, wind turbines have long provided a dynamic and fast-growing engine of job creation and economic growth. Siemens’ announcement, part of a wider trend of growth in renewable-energy related services in northern Germany and Denmark, show that this industry can create white-collar jobs in the city as well. The creation of Hamburg Energie is a sign that this message has been understood.

On 30 April, the Ministry of the Environment (MoE) announced the final data regarding the amount of emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the 2007 fiscal year. According to MoE, the amount of GHG emissions in the 2007 fiscal year was approximately 1.37 billion tons (CO2 equivalent), exceeding the amount of GHG emissions in the 1990 base year by 9.0 percent and exceeding the amount of those in the 2006 fiscal year by 2.4 percent. This was the worst result for Japan in terms of GHG emissions.

It was reported that such a surprisingly high increase in GHG emissions was significantly affected by the suspension of operation of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) in the Niigata prefecture as most of CO2 emissions in Japan are energy-origin CO2 emissions.

The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant has seven units, generating a total electrical output of  8,212 MW, making it the largest nuclear plant in the world by net electrical power rating. Though Japan heavily depended on the nuclear plant, it had to stop the operation because of the Niigata Chuetsu earthquake in July 2007  because the Kashiwazaki municipal government ordered TEPCO not to start the operation of the plan until its safety was confirmed and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) gave TEPCO a similarly order. Consequently, thermal power stations, emitting more GHG, had to operate more, resulting in increase in CO2 emissions.

Thus, in order to reduce CO2 emissions and avoid electricity shortage in the summer season, the Japanese Government and TEPCO have strongly wanted to restart the operation of the plant. Then, on 7 May, Hirohiko Izumida, the Governor of the Niigata prefecture, announced that he acknowledged a request from TEPCO to restart its operation. Though TEPCO consequently started the trial operation of Unit 7 of the plant on 9 May, problems were found in its reactor core isolation cooling system in its trial operation. As a result, though it was expected that the plant was going to start its operation in the end of June, it became unclear whether the plant was able to do so.

If the operation is delayed, Japan again would need to heavily depend on thermal power stations in this summer and CO2 emissions would increase compared to the condition in which the nuclear plan could operate. However, it may be apparent that the safety of the nuclear plant has not been confirmed. As well as problems of the plant found in the trial operation, it has been still questionable whether the plant is really earthquake resistant. Indeed, constructing nuclear plants in Japan, where a huge number of earthquakes happen, seems really scary. As Japan seems most unsuitable for constructing nuclear plants considering earthquakes, Japan may be one of the countries that should immediately increase renewable energy production in order to reduce CO2 emissions and simultaneously avoid electricity shortage.

Wind turbines beside a road in northern France.

France is known for nuclear energy, but it seems that the winds of change are gathering momentum.  The vast majority of the electricity generated in France comes from its 59 nuclear reactors.   The country has not historically been considered a global leader in renewable energy, but France has taken some bold steps recently to support growth in this industry.
By 2020, the French government plans to generate 23 % of its electricity from renewable energy sources.  France now exceeds Denmark in aggregate wind energy capacity after adding 950 MW in 2008.  France currently has 3400 MW of wind power generation and plans to increase this to 25000 MW by 2020.

The above table gives the total installed wind energy capacity for France according to the Global Wind Energy Council.  With the annual growth rate around 38 % and new wind capacity represents 60 % of all new generation installed in the country last year.  France is now the fourth largest market in Europe after Germany, Spain, and Italy.
The policy framework to encourage wind energy growth has been in place since 2002.  Initially, a tariff of 8.2 euro cents per kWh of wind generated energy was offered to producers for a period of ten years.  Yet, in July 2005, the law was amended to stipulate that in order to be eligible, wind farms have to be built in special Wind Power Development Zones (ZDE).  The ZDEs are defined at the regional level based on electrical production potential, grid connection capacity, and landscape protection.

The concept of ZDEs may be a good one, but it has slowed up legislation and development in the past few years.  The feed-in tariff in the ZDE was reaffirmed in a decree signed on 17th November 2008, after the previous decree was cancelled by the Conseil d’Etat, the highest administrative court, in August 2008.  The French Syndicat des énergies renouvelables (SER) suggested a wind power generation target of 25 GW by 2020, including 6 GW offshore wind power.  This has been adopted by the National Assembly and should be adopted by the Senate in the coming months and passed into functional law by the end of 2009.
As the wind power sector grows, France is taking a close look at protecting the environment, but also at the workforce.  According to the French Agency for Environment and Energy Management, the wind industry in France currently employs 7000 people.  The SER goes on to claim that by 2020, at projected growth rates, the wind energy sector could represent 60000 direct jobs in France.

Wind energy companies are taking note and seizing opportunities.  For example, Vestas just announced an opening of a new office in Paris, La Défense.  Nicolas Wolf, General Manager of Vestas France, explains, “In 2008 alone, we have almost doubled the wind capacity delivered in France compared to the year before, and in the past three years we have doubled the number of employees in our country. It is extremely important for Vestas to be established in Paris in order to continue supporting the growth and the development that we have experienced in the past years.”

There are still several barriers that remain and hinder development of wind energy throughout France.  Some examples include: slow authorization; inadequate grid connection capacity; and zones in which installations are forbidden.  A 2007 study issued by the Ministry of Industry and Economy indicates that 9 weeks are necessary to notify applicants that the application process has been launched and a farther 22 for the process to be completed.   Preparation for the first offshore wind farm in France began with government financing in 2005, but long authorization has delayed construction until the end of 2009 or 2010.

Overcoming existing obstacles to wind energy development is certainly the key to France realizing its wind energy potential.  According to a report authored by A.R. Laali and M. Benard for l’Electricité de France, France appears to have the second largest wind energy potential in Europe, after the United Kingdom.  The biggest potential for growth in the coming years is in the north and northeast of the country.  The winds may be blowing slowly, but they are blowing surely for increased wind power throughout France.

During the past week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on the draft legislation of ‘American Clean Energy and Security Act 2009′. Over 60 witnesses testified, including Energy Secretary Steven Chu, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Nobel laureate Al Gore, as well as representatives of environmental groups, electricity producers, auto manufacturers and renewable energy companies.

Prior to the hearings, Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the Committee and co-sponsor of the bill, promised that he will stick to his proposed 20% reduction in GHGs emissions in the next decade and that it was Congress, rather than the EPA who should determine how to regulate these emissions (referring to the EPA’s endangerment finding released on the previous Friday).

Here is a brief description of the proceedings and some of the highlights.

Tuesday:

The first day consisted of opening statements only, but the action surrounding the hearings kick-started with a letter from the 23 Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee to the Committee’s Democratic leaders saying that the draft bill is not ready to be discussed, as a major element - how the permits will be distributed - is missing. They also called for a hearing dedicated to the EPA’s recent endangerment finding.

This was seen more as a delaying tactic, as Edward Markey, the other co-sponsor of the bill, said in the opening session - “The time for delay, denial and inaction has come to an end”.

Wednesday:

In the second day the committee heard from representatives of the administration (Secretary Chu, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood), the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) and others, such as the CEO of American Wind Energy Association, President of the Union of Concerned Scientists and a Senior Economist from the Stockholm Environment Institute.

The administration’s representatives responded to the concerns of Republicans as well as some Democrats and explained that the benefits of a cap-and-trade system will outweigh the costs, stressing that such a bill will create jobs and a stable investment environment, as well as ultimately reducing costs to consumers. Both Chu and Jackson though said they are still studying the details of the draft bill and that the administration had not given its blessings to it.

Secretary LaHood, in response to a question from Democrat John Dingell, assured the committee that the administration is committed to helping the automobile industry.

Companies belonging to USCAP generally stated their support of a cap-and-trade system. For example the representative from Alcoa, an aluminium producer, mentioned that increasing energy efficiency has already helped them reduce costs, and that aluminium is expected to be used in future energy efficient vehicles and buildings. However, both she and others (Duke Energy and NRG Energy, to name two) said they will drop their support for the bill if they did get free permits.

Thursday:

Day three saw testimonies from utility companies, think tanks and research institutions, consumer organisations, renewable energy companies and more. The panels dealt with issues of allocation policies, ensuring US competitiveness and the more technical issues of low-carbon electricity, CCS, renewables and grid-modernization. 

The utility companies stressed that they will need time to adapt and urged a gradual transition to a full auction system, also requesting allocation of free permits at first. It is encouraging to note though, that the American Public Power Association, which represents more than 2,000 community-owned electric utilities, supports auctioning no more than 5 percent of total allowances from the onset of the programme.

In response to that and to opposition from Republican members of the committee, as well as concerns raised by Democrats, Markey told reporters that “There are going to be some free allocations of allowances.”

Advocates of renewable energy called on Congress to set a renewable-energy standard requiring all states to get part of their energy from renewable sources.

Friday:

The main focus of the day was on the “star” witnesses - former vice-president Al Gore, former Republican Senator John Warner, and Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, which was apparently added by the Republicans as a last minute addition to balance out Gore and Warner’s favourable testimonies.

Former Sen. Warner was one of the few Republicans in the last Congress who supported strong action on climate change (and joined with Dem. Joe Leiberman in a bipartisan attempt to pass a climate change bill). He attacked the “clean coal” mantra, saying that “we know clean coal is not around the corner” and argued that climate change is a national security issue which must be addressed.

There were no surprises in Al Gore’s testimony, who equated the bill under discussion to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s and the Marshal Plan of the 1940s. He urged the House panel to make sure the bill includes provisions to protect people who would face hardships as a result of the expected changes. In response to Rep. Dingell’s concern that US jobs will suffer after all, as countries such as China won’t face the same burdens, Gore drew on his experience with the international negotiations when he said that “If the United States leads, China will follow”.

What Next?

The bill will have to go through other House panels, but Waxman planned a tight schedule and hopes to have it ready for discussion in front of the full House by Memorial Day (May 25).

In the meantime, there are apparently negotiations going on behind the scenes to find a compromise that will build a winning coalition in favour of the bill.

Scottish ministers are aiming for 50% of electricity demand to be met by renewable energy by the year 2020, with an interim target of 31% by 2011, and recent reports suggests that they are running ahead of schedule.

Minister Alex Salmond said:

“…we are well ahead of schedule in meeting our renewables energy targets. The consented projects, as well as those already operating, represent some 35% of Scotland’s electricity needs.”

The UK is one of the windiest locations, and attracts significant investment for onshore and offshore wind energy projects. Vestas wind turbine manufacturers recently announced a new manufacturing plant near Campbeltown, Scotland, is being taken over by the subsidiary of another Danish firm, Skykon, which plans to expand the plant three-fold. Mr Salmond expects the deal will safeguard the current 85 jobs, create 250 more, as well as 150 indirect spin-off jobs.

Meanwhile, UK ministers were last night considering fresh incentives designed to spur investment in renewable energy amid evidence that the credit crunch is threatening government energy targets, made legally binding by the Climate Change Act 2008.

The Energy Minister hit back at claims that the Government was failing to deliver on an ambitious plan to foster a green energy revolution by building thousands of onshore and offshore wind turbines. Mike O’Brien told a meeting of renewable-energy chiefs that he was determined that Britain would meet its goal of generating as much as 35% of all UK electricity from wind, wave and solar power by 2020, up from less than 5% at present.

This was welcome news for the UK renewables industry in light of current job losses announced across the economy, and speculations over frozen investments drawing to a halt despite Gordon Brown’s rhetoric about the “Green New Deal” to help the UK out of recession.

Spanish firm Iberdrola Renovables confirmed they would be standing by all its planned wind power projects in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK.

A spokeswoman for Iberdrola confirmed the company received consent for its first UK offshore wind farm in the Irish Sea, which will have 500 MW of capacity. Iberdrola’s five-year strategic plan to invest 18.8bn by the end of 2012 remained on track, she said.

He confirmed that the Government was examining new ideas to increase investment, which has been hit by the recession as banks rein in lending and the price of conventional fuels plunges.

Mr O’Brien said: “We are fully aware of the investment challenges facing some parts of the industry. We are examining how we can help ensure there is sufficient finance and other support available for viable projects which are short of the investment they need.”

The Observer recently reported that a £1bn public-private funding body, the Energy Technologies Institute (ETI), is allowing several multinationals to secure exclusive licences to British renewable developers’ innovations in return for providing funding. The firms in question include BP, Shell, E.ON and French government-controlled EDF.

Scotland’s confidence in meeting their challenging renewable electricity targets reflects the ambition from the country’s private industry, despite the lack of funding and investment from governments and banks; acting to only further highlight the supportive action needed across a united and great, Britain.