Thread by @heatpolicyrich

There is a wealth of expertise and evidence on what is a sensible path for decarbonisation of heat in the UK. Having worked on multiple biogas projects and having worked on this issue for over a decade, this idea that we can use biogas at scale for heat can be dismissed (thread)

https://twitter.com/DaleVince/status/1443560760324546567

1. Availability of bio-resource. Huge amounts of land would be needed. There is recognition of some (most) meat grazing land being re-purposed. But more fundamentally, this would be a restructuring of much of agricultural system.

For context, the @theCCCuk, who have done the most detailed analysis around this issue suggest that the use of bio-energy in heating should DECREASE by 2050 theccc.org.uk/wp-content/upl…

2. Sustainability. Purpose grown energy crops are not (near) zero carbon. Inorganic fertiliser tends to be used but even in organic systems, the energy used in the process and methane leakage can be significant. Current standards are not near zero carbon: ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/han…

Of course wider sustainability concerns over monoculture are important too. I note the farmer interviewed in the original piece is not just farming 'grass', it was maize and cereal too.

3. Costs. Ignoring wider system costs (will come back to this), biogas is expensive. Beyond the capital cost of the digestors, there is the actual cost of the growing of the feedstock, harvesting it, running the digester, and upgrading it to put it in the grid.

Before the non-dom RHI closed, biomethane was being offered support which effectively meant a unit of biomethane cost way more than double wholesale gas. And this was through intense, high output faming methods, not grassland.

As far as I can tell from the web page, these operational and feedstock costs haven't been considered and a £700 a year gas bill is used, basically, a normal bill. This is wrong.

Lots of issues are also ignored. How is this gas stored interseasonally? An issue with biogas projects is that they are normally designed for the minimum summer day, so basically huge amounts of gas storage would be needed.

Biodiversity: ignored
Residual emissions: ignored
The fact that there is a wider energy and agricultural system: ignored
Costs beyond digesters: ignored

Purposefully poor heat pump efficiencies are also used. The lowest daily COP I have had for the past 12 months is 2.7

https://twitter.com/heatpolicyrich/status/1431174541808750599?s=20

My measured COP from October to January 3.74

https://twitter.com/heatpolicyrich/status/1346139995162222592?s=20

Now I've said repeatedly, we need to have a national conversation about heat (among many other things) blogs.exeter.ac.uk/energy/2019/08…. But also, that this needs to be based around evidence and it needs to be independent of interests.

And I fundamentally see this intervention around biogas as an unhelpful distraction which is wasting time, when there is no time to waste.

Whole system analysis is needed which considers developments elsewhere in the energy system, storage and capacity requirements, interaction with transport and generation sectors. And this has already been done, repeatedly. By @UKERCHQ, by @theCCCuk, by @beisgovuk etc

As far as I am concerned, we should be getting on with delivering known low carbon solutions, heat pumps, heat networks and energy efficiency, rapidly and at the scale as pointed out by the CCC. theccc.org.uk/publication/si…

And furthermore, to ignore the potential of offshore wind to provide the bulk of our heating needs, sustainably and cost effectively, would be criminal.
heatgeek.com/the-answer-to-…