CR-LU9
Sustainability Committee
Inquiry into Carbon Reduction in Wales: Rural Land Use Management and Carbon Reduction
Response from: County Land and Business Association (CLA)
The CLA is a membership association representing the interests of private property owners and land managers covering a wide range of interests from agriculture, forestry and riparian interests to diversified rural businesses throughout England and Wales, involving all aspects of the rural economy. We are members of the Welsh Assembly Government’s (WAG) Climate Change Commissions’ (CCC) sub groups looking at Adaptation and Emissions Reduction.
The CLA has done it’s share of policy work on Climate Change going back to 2001, with the publication of our policy document 'Climate Change and the Rural Economy’, which made 102 recommended policy responses to meet our analysis of the potential climate change impact on land management and the corresponding mitigation and adaptation strategies for the eight themes we identified and considered. More recently (2006) we conducted a study with the University of East Anglia and others, entitled 'Climate Impacts and Options’ (CLIO) project looking at the affects of climate change across a wide bio-geographical range of 21 estates in Europe. Earlier in 2008 we launched our freely available web based tool- 'Carbon Accounting for Land Managers’ (CALM) which enables land managers to measure their green-house gas emissions and carbon sequestration 'profit and loss’ account for their own farm businesses, how they arise and how changes to their enterprise mix can affect the outcome. In December 2007 a joint report by the industry high-level task force of CLA, NFU and AIC entitled 'Part of the Solution', demonstrates how the sector offers part of the solution to this public problem. All these reports can be accessed through the link below:-http://www.cla.org.uk/Policy_Work/Climate_Change/
Written questions for carbon reduction inquiry
General questions
1. Is the proposed 3 per cent annual reduction target by 2011 'in areas of devolved competence'1 sufficient to enable Wales to make its full contribution to meeting UK-wide targets? If not, what targets should be put in place?
It is not clear how the 3% target has been arrived at, nor if what is proposed is a 3% per annum cumulative change. What is the starting date? The language needs better explanation.
Without baseline data it is difficult to accurately assess what targets are achievable. UK agriculture and land use has already cut carbon emissions by 24 percent (1990-2005), through better use of resources, increased efficiency of production and efficiency gains.
The CLA has accepted the need to reduce carbon emissions to address climate change.
However we have cautioned that imposing carbon reductions on home production without ensuring imported food is equally efficient, risks exporting employment and rural business to no net overall gain in the climate. Greenhouse gases know no borders, and Welsh producers are already some of the most efficient in emissions terms in the world - certainly they have lower emissions per tonne of output than, for example, livestock producers who gain their pasture by cutting it out of virgin rainforest.
Welsh farmers are as capable as any other business of improving their energy efficiency (lights, heat, insulation, vehicle choice and operation etc) within the context of affordability and good business sense. There are also currently very strong economic incentives to optimise the use of N fertilisers, and there is more that can be done here. However, in overall GHG emissions enteric fermentation in livestock production accounts for almost 40% of the problem. Work is already under way to reduce methane from livestock through research into better feeding stuffs.
For an assessment of the likely overall potential for carbon saving in farming, and policy recommendations we refer the WAG to the joint CLA/NFU/AIC publication "Part of the solution” which may be downloaded at http://www.cla.org.uk/pdf/ClimateChangeAgricultureAndLandManagement.pdf
2. Should the emission reduction target be based on Welsh consumption, or production, or both (ie should it take into consideration the carbon dioxide generated in Wales (production), or the carbon dioxide emissions that Wales' residents are responsible for, regardless of their source (consumption))?
The CLA argues that only by addressing the embodied consumption of carbon equivalent can the net UK emissions be controlled. It has been estimated that UK consumption accounts for three times the UK’s GHG calculated by the IPCC methodology, largely owing to the export of much of our heavy industry and the import of manufactured goods.
If Welsh farming is to continue to deliver the food that is required by the population, and the wider environmental delivery which supports rural communities and rural enterprise including tourism, then they cannot be made solely responsible for GHG saving in the food sector.
However, the control of GHG emissions on imported food lies outside WAG competence, and while it is logical to look at consumption figures, an achievable target for Welsh agriculture will be more readily assessed and managed. When considering this, CLA urges WAG to study the "Part of the solution” paper referenced above.
Questions specific to carbon dioxide reduction and rural land use management:
3. What particular challenges do rural land managers in Wales face in reducing carbon dioxide emissions from their activities, and how can these challenges be overcome?
These are described in the reports referred to. From the CLA’s standpoint, as mentioned above, it appears the land management sector has done rather more than most to identify relevant issues through our published policy documents which are all in the public domain. In reality and practical terms there are currently plenty of economic incentives for private enterprise and land managers to improve energy and emission efficiencies in the light of today’s surging input prices.
However, scientific advances will be required before much more can be done to address the GHG outputs from livestock systems.
4. To what extent has the Welsh Assembly Government been successful in utilizing the powers available to it in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from rural land use?
There is little evidence that it has. In particular, we note that the Rural Development Plan for England is now offering the land management sector grant aid for biomass and anaerobic digestion installations, which support is not matched in Wales since the closure of the Wood Energy Business Scheme.
5. What opportunities does the Welsh Assembly Government have to help rural land managers:
a. reduce their carbon dioxide emissions, and
By using a tool such as CALM, land manangers can readily measure the emissions characteristics of their landholding and how they arise. With this knowledge it should be possible to evaluate the consequences of certain actions and make informed decisions. From members’ anecdotal examples where they have evaluated their own farms, it is apparent, for example, that upland welsh LFA farms, well wooded and with extensive enterprises are capable of emitting less GHG and carbon by comparison to an intensive dairy and arable business in the Midlands. The former are potential carbon sinks and the latter net emitters of C02 per hectare. With the potential for developing a market for trading carbon (environmental credits) as a public good (as in the USA) the Welsh uplands could develop an important and viable market for environmental goods, traded through open market mechanisms and free of public funding. Using CALM it might be possible to establish a CO2 baseline from which to estimate the required actions to achieve a 3% reduction by 2011 or whatever is desired, as without such data targets appear meaningless.
There needs to be a wider recognition of the contribution trees can make and how much forestry in Wales could be transformed if carbon had a more significant tradable value ( e.g as building materials etc). Government needs to decide how to incentivise it so that private land owners take up the challenge. WAG can help by backing the industry’s attempts to persuade government (DEFRA) and the Commission to press for inclusion of domestic forestry in the next Climate Change agreement.
WAG can use EU funding through the Rural Development Regulation and New Challenge Agenda to more widely to support displacing the use of fossil fuels in the land based sector, such as through biomass boilers and biogas (anaerobic digestion), small scale hydro etc.
b. better manage the storage of carbon within the land?
As with trees the capture of carbon in soils is a long term objective, both from the additional benefits to productivity and sequestration. In this regard there appears great potential for carbon storage in the upland peat bogs of Wales. Learning and finding out how to manage these to reduce emissions and increase carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an essential for WAG to research. Durham University has recognized expertise in their Departments of Geography and Earth Sciences( Dr Fred Worral and Dr Tim Burt) and currently there is an on going project at Lake Vyrnwy involving the blocking of 'grips’ and re-wetting of bogs, undertaken by UK Popular Biology Network (UK PopNet). The project is not yet fully evaluated as bogs both emit gases as well as sequester carbon during their formation process. Once it can be established what management system will do this with any certainty then government has to find out how to incentivise it and how to get the necessary rewards to land managers to ensure that they engage in the CCS process. The current Axis 2 review consultation includes this concept as a possible option.
6. Could alternative targeting of Welsh Assembly Government financial resources lead to greater carbon dioxide emissions reductions within the context of rural land use than are currently being achieved? If so, where could additional resources lead to greatest impact? (Please provide detail to support your evidence).
Proposals for the Axis 2 Review with options for carbon storage and Better Woodlands for Wales are moving in the right direction. More encouragement through the planning system for CHP/ Anaerobic Digestion and other local green energy schemes as being commissioned elsewhere should be pursued.
7. What examples from other administrations (devolved, UK, and overseas), where other means have been used to achieve reductions in carbon dioxide emissions from rural land use, could be adopted in Wales under current powers?
See Annex 1 below.
There are also established and emerging practices and management systems to sequester carbon and mitigate GHG’s already in use, especially on the Continent and increasingly in England. Entrepreneurial individuals are increasingly 'doing their own thing’. Rather than trying to reinvent wheels what WAG has to do is decide which of the systems in use are best to achieve the desired target with a degree of certainty and then decide how to incentivise them and what merits further research. If they don’t know, should they have set Welsh targets in isolation in the first place? It should not be that difficult as much information is already in the public domain and available to evaluate, and against which to make some practical decisions.
8. In the context of the Government of Wales Act 2006, which further means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions from rural land use could only be achieved with the introduction of further legislative competence for the National Assembly for Wales?
As far as land management contributions are concerned, much could be done through existing regulatory frameworks such as the planning system, incentivising farm, forestry , and hydro schemes. At a UK level the tax system is outside WAG’s competence, but as suggested above, it is for WAG to collate and evaluate the information and evidence from schemes out there and suggest appropriate and realistic policies and actions to achieve its targets.
9. How can land managers in rural areas contribute towards the Welsh Assembly Government’s 3% reduction targets and how much reduction in CO2 in Wales could realistically be achieved through improved land management?
The policy papers referred to already illustrate the important contributions land managers can make through adaptation and mitigation. Undoubtedly targets of 3%, or perhaps 6% and above, could be met through current price driven energy savings and efficiencies, together with incentives for developing a mix of currently available technologies for countering carbon and GHG emissions, such as AD, biomass, afforestation and hydro.
FJES/24/10/08
Hoddell Farm, Kinnerton, Presteigne, Powys LD8 2PD
TEL: 01547 560484. FAX: 01547 560493
E.MAIL: julian.salmon@cla.org.uk
Annex 1.
Some examples of what is achieved elsewhere.
Austria
The region of upper Austria has maintained a biomass boiler grant for many years. This is automatically available on demand to any citizen who installs a woodfired boiler, in both domestic and business sectors. It has lead to the creation of a large scale industry in the supply and processing of woodfuel, including pellets, and supported the development of some of the leading biomass boiler manufacturers in the world. Upper Austria now gets some 16 per cent of its total energy supply from biomass, whereas in England this is less than 1 per cent.
These large scale businesses include the following boiler manufacturers who are large enough to have international representation:
Biotech Energietechnik GmbH (Austrian)
http://www.pelletsworld.com/
UK representative
Biofutures Ltd
CDN Office, 77 Herbert Street, Pontardawe Swansea SA8 4ED
Tel: 01792 830238 Fax: 01792 863895
Email: biofutures@cdnplanning.com
Website: http://www.pelletsworld.com
Binder (Austrian)
www.binder-gmbh.at
UK representative
Wood Energy Ltd
Pinkworthy Barn
Tiverton
Devon EX16 9EU
0845 070 7338
info@woodenergyltd.co.uk
www.woodenergyltd.co.uk
Froling (Austrian)
www.froeling.com
and
KWB (Austrian)
www.kwb.at
UK representative for both Froling and KWB:
Econergy Limited
Unit 8/9, St. Georges Tower
GB - SG19 3SH Bedfordshire
0870 054 5554
admin@econergy.ltd.uk
Case studies and information at http://www.econergy.ltd.uk/index.html
Gilles (Austrian)
www.gilles.at
(Has case studies in England as well as elsewhere)
UK representative
Energy Innovations
5 & 6 Richmond Old Dairy
Gedgrave
Woodbridge
Suffolk IP12 2BU
01394 459 110
England has offered a range of national grant aid supports including:
1. Bio-energy Capital Grants Scheme
Funding for a new five year biomass heat capital grant scheme was announced in 2006 in the Government response to the Biomass Task Force report. The aim of the scheme is to support the installation of biomass-fuelled heat and combined heat and power projects in the industrial, commercial and community sectors in England.
Government has so far run three rounds of the Scheme funded by DTI (now BERR) and the Big Lottery Fund.
Round four of the Bio-energy Capital Grants Scheme closed in May 2008.
Defra intends to run further rounds of the scheme. The details are likely to be broadly similar to round four (subject to a cap on grant of £100,000). Further information will be released by Defra in due course. If you are interested in applying to the scheme, you should register your contact details as soon as possible by email to industrialcrops@defra.gsi.gov.uk
The old scheme (which is now closed for applications) had the following key characteristics:
The round was open to applications from the industrial, commercial and community sectors. "Community" included local authorities, schools, etc. There was no targeting of any particular technology or sector. Applications were accepted from installers as well as the end-user/ultimate beneficiary.
There was a very short "application window”: in order to be successful, applicants had to have a project worked up and ready to submit in a very short space of time.
Grant rate - Capital grants were available towards the cost of the heat or combined heat and power equipment. There was a variable rate of up to 40 per cent of the difference in cost compared to installing a fossil fuel alternative (25 per cent of eligible expenditure for heat only projects).
Eligible costs include capital expenditure directly associated with the installation, including the fuel storage and feeding equipment, subject to various limitations set out in the DTI guidance notes.
2. The Bio-energy Infrastructure Scheme open to Farmers, foresters and biomass producers up to £200,000 each under a new round of grants from 5 Aug 2008 supports the biomass industry in England by helping those supplying biomass fuel for use in heat and electricity generation.
All projects must be based in England and must supply the biomass to end-users in Great Britain. Grants are available for up to a maximum of £200,000 per producer group or business.
The deadline for applications is 5 August 2008 for applications from businesses and 5 September 2008 from producer groups.
3. The Low Carbon Buildings Programme (LCBP)
The LCBP has been subject to severe criticism from the renewables industry, but nonetheless, provided an application is successful, it can offer modest support for biomass renewables as well as other energy projects.
It comprises three grant streams, Domestic, Commercial, and Not for Profit. The scheme is not well funded, and has suffered from problems in this respect. Grant applications are cash limited, and many have been unsuccessful as the scheme periodically runs out of money.
Grant may be obtained for any renewable technology, but is subject to conditions including that the applicant has undertaken a range of energy efficiency measures (such as loft insulation, low energy lightbulbs etc).
The LCBP business stream of grant funding ended in April 2008 but the much reduced grants continue to be available to domestic and charitable renewable investments. It is not at all clear how (indeed if) the proposed replacement (the Energy Efficiency Commitment) will support domestic renewable installations.
Full details are available at http://www.lowcarbonbuildings.org.uk/home/
OH/24/10/08
