Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/782355
NETWORK / 9 / FEBRUARY 2017 I f the UK is to solve the challenge of meeting its heat needs in a decarbonised, affordable and secure manner it is going to need a multipronged approach. That was the strategy put forward by Imperial College London last year in its Managing Heat System Decarbonisation report. While the proposal is already largely accepted as good sense, last month the results of WWU's Cornwall Energy project demonstrated with hard facts why a single technology strategy is a recipe for failure. Its investigation into possible scenarios to meet the power, heat and light requirements of the Cornwall area through low-carbon sources alone revealed the "totally prohibitive and unacceptable cost" of some of the options. For example, abandoning the gas network and meeting all power needs wholly through electrification would saddle an individual dwelling in Cornwall with storage costs ranging from £32,533 to £141,477 a year. Instead, the WWU project proposes the route put forward by Imperial College London as the only acceptable one: a multivector combination of electrification and repurposing the gas grid with new sources of decarbonised gas. Although decarbonisation will require the help of new technologies for both sectors, no vast shi– from the current state of play is needed for either. The real challenge instead lies first of all with identifying, and then reaching, agreement on the right mix between the two. But Imperial College proposes a three- pronged approach, and the third technology – district heat – represents a far more significant change. There are only about 2,000 district heating networks in the UK, supplying just 2% of the country's heating needs. The Committee on Climate Change's central scenario for the fi–h carbon budget assumes that heat networks will be serving 18% of buildings' heat demand in 2050. The government has thrown its weight behind district heating by pledging £320 million at the end of 2014 to support the growth of the sector. Industry, however, says that growth is being held back by several factors, not least of which is the lack of regulation in the UK. In contrast to the UK situation, district heating is the primary source of heat in Denmark, providing 70% of the country's heat needs. In the capital Copenhagen the technology has a near-monopoly on heat, providing 92% of the city's needs. On the surface, the Danish system is constructed on many of the pillars the industry in the UK is calling for: regulation, a stringent planning system, and better protection for customers. Such a high penetration suggests a success story. It's one the UK should look to emulate if the technology is to make any meaningful contribution. But how feasible would it be for the UK to follow Denmark's example? Network visited the Scandinavian city in the depth of winter to learn more about district heating, hearing from all sections of the supply chain, along with the regulator. What became clear is that the success of the Danish system owes a lot to fundamentally different societal values that conflict with those in the UK. While much of the energy narrative on this side of the North Sea focuses on customers' right to choose, in Denmark the green mission takes precedence, with customers subject to monopolies that charge wildly varying prices. This effectively makes the Danish system difficult to adopt on any real scale in the UK, but there are many valuable lessons our country could learn to boost growth, not least of which is how to integrate household waste into the energy system more effectively. DISTRICT HEATING Compare and Contrast Danish and UK policies on local energy converge Given the energy legacy of the last century, it's a bold claim to say there is a convergence of policies on local energy between Denmark and the UK. However, similar objectives in terms of security of supply, pricing and carbon emissions are driving the two countries together in terms of implementation. Both countries are committed to long-term decarbonisation. The UK Climate Change Act 2008 sets out to cut the UK's net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% (compared with 1990 levels) by 2050. And the Danish government has agreed to be independent of fossil fuels by 2050. This means that heating for buildings has to be zero carbon in both countries. Both countries have national heat planning. Denmark, in reaction to the 1970s oil price shock, started in 1979, while the UK began 35 years later. A similar time lag has followed with local heat planning and zoning. It's compulsory for municipalities in Denmark, but largely voluntary in the UK, although encouraged by central government funding. Many of the UK's larger towns and cities are seeking a central role in growing heat networks, just as their peers in Denmark have done since the 1990s. One major divergence is that in Denmark the supply of heat is state-regulated and effectively not for profit. In the UK it is unregulated, the opt-in Heat Trust emerging from the industry and its stakeholders, with the encouragement of government. However, many in the sector in the UK think that some form of regula- tion is only a matter of time, while the current Danish model is being questioned back home. All these issues and more will be discussed in my presentation at the Future Networks Conference. Visit: events.networks.online/future Ian Manders, adviser on UK energy in buildings policy at the Danish Embassy in London, will be presenting at the Future Networks Conference in March. Turn to page 14 for an event preview.