Zero Emission Project

From Monday 4th July families in Kingston upon Thames (south west London, UK) will receive the 5ksolar leaflet through their door.

The areas that will be covered during this first leaflet campaign are shown in the maps.

If you live in the following areas:

1. North Kingston
2. Surbiton – Southborough
3. Berrylands
4. Surbiton riverside and Kingston University

you will be probably among those who will receive the 5ksolar leaflet which explains very briefly the benefits of PV solar power and the opportunity to support the campaign and apply for a free solar installation at home through the web site.

The 5ksolar leaflet campaign has been officially launched and from Monday 4th July families in Kingston upon Thames (south west London, UK) will receive the leaflet through their door.

The first phase of the leaflet campaign will cover part of Kingston borough council, mostly the KT1, KT5 and KT6 postcode areas.

The leaflet explains very briefly the benefits of PV solar power and the opportunity to support the campaign and apply for a free solar installation at home through the web site.

The 5ksolar campaign is an environmental campaign for the removal of the barriers that still prevent many people benefiting from solar energy at home.

On 22 June 2011, the British Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) published the Microgeneration Strategy document. Energy and Climate Change Minister, Greg Barker said he want to see a revolution in energy generation at a local level. The coalition government wants to be remembered in history as one of the greenest British governments. But can they really deliver what they promise?

To some extent, the document is good as it tries to set up a policy framework to address certification and technology issues, as well as general public awareness about renewable energy.

However, what is missing is a clear policy framework to facilitate the mass introduction of microgeneration in a cities like London, where a large proportion of people live in rented properties.

Would it be possible to set up a mechanism by which, once we have built a fairly big renewable energy facility, this can inject enough money into a self-feeding development cycle?

In other words, if we had a wind farm, a solar farm or a hydro electricity scheme, could we use the money generated through the British Renewable Obligation scheme to build a network of hundreds of small solar PV installations, which in turn would generate extra money through the Feed-In Tariffs scheme?

Let's make it clearer with an example.

Let's assume we have a community solar farm (or any other large-medium size renewable energy project) that generates each year a certain amount of money. Each year we take aside part of this money to fund 5 PV solar installations (for example, £50k to install 5 solar PV systems). The next year, we do the same but, additionally, we re-invest the money generated through the Feed-In Tariffs scheme by the 5 new solar PV systems. Let's assume the annual FITs revenue of 5 systems can cover the cost of one new solar PV installation.

The issue of being so much dependent on big energy companies is a serious one.

Energy bills are expected to raise well above inflation in the next few years and we will foot the increase.

Even if we don't have to carry PV solar panels on our backs like the sheep in the picture, at least we should find viable solutions for everyone to do their bit. Electricity generation is a social matter and is everyone's business.

It is a responsibility that we all should feel on our shoulders.

Do we really need large solar farms? To answer this question, we should put PV solar power into context.

Solar farms need large flat areas for the installation of the panels, and this development space is often hard to find. Big plots of land are also usually good for other purposes, like agriculture, grazing or maybe residential property development.

The fact that less investment will go towards the development of big solar farms is confirmed by the cuts introduced by the British government in the financial incentives to support solar photovoltaic installations over 50kW in capacity.

This is not good news: the International Energy Agency (IEA) has disclosed figures about unprecedented levels of carbon that have been released into the air over the past 12 months. The IEA found a record 30.6 gigatons (Gt) of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuel – a rise of 1.6Gt from the previous year. The IEA has also calculated that annual emission should not exceed 32Gt by 2020 to avoid the most damaging effects of global warming.

It looks like this is a lost battle already. How can we pretend to cut so much the world's carbon emissions and revert this bleak situation just going on with a business-as-usual mindset? It is clear that something different must be done. Even if a large number of people think that global warming is nonsense, at least they should think about the shortage of energy supply after fossil fuels have run out. Or, even more selfishly, they could realize that relying on big energy companies for our electricity supply is going to squeeze more and more our pockets: the British government predicts a 20% increase in energy costs by 2020.

Is it enough to use PV solar panels to offset our home carbon emissions? In other words, assuming our roof is suitable for a PV solar installation, can we go on straight away and just hope to satisfy our domestic electricity consumption?

The short answer is no. If we are serious about installing PV solar panels, we should first carry out our due diligence and try to answer a few preliminary questions:

• How much electricity do we consume in a year?
• Can we cover this consumption by generating electricity from a solar installation?
• If not, can we reduce our annual household electricity demand?

These questions should come before any renewable energy project is taken on. There is no point in installing solar panels if we consume like a steel mill.

As I pointed out in a previous posting, what really matters in accounting the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions generated by each one of us at home is the amount of carbon produced by burning fossil fuels to run the household, while it doesn't matter what amount of carbon has been generated to manufacture or transport the stuff we have at home.

In particular, it doesn't make sense to take into account the carbon needed to manufacture a boiler, a stove or a solar panel, since another comparable amount has been generated to build and maintain a fossil fuel power station or a nuclear power plant.

Keeping it simple, what really matters is the number you read on your gas and electricity meters. That's a clear and precise indication of how much CO2 from fossil fuels we inject in the atmosphere at an incredible rate.

There is much talk about carbon neutrality and carbon emissions these days and indeed a lot of confusion. Very often these terms tend to be mixed and mistaken or even used for mere publicity and marketing purposes.

But what is really carbon neutrality? And what are carbon emissions? Is it possible to be carbon neutral or construct a carbon neutral building? Can we achieve zero carbon emissions at home?

Let's try to answer these questions without political or ideological bias but just using scientific facts and numbers.