The Implications Of Climate Change

An opportunity for the minerals industry?

By Stewart Lenton, technical director, SLR Consulting Ltd

Climate change has been debated for some time and while the seriousness of the issue appears to be irrefutable, the sustainability of many activities has yet to be fully considered.

The minerals industry in the UK has already undertaken extensive work on the reduction of energy consumption, both within individual companies and through the Quarry Products Association (QPA), and significant progress has been made with resource efficiency, providing some economic benefits.

Until now climate change within the minerals industry has generally been considered on an overall or group basis. However, recent additions to planning guidance mean that a more site-specific approach to carbon management and climate change may be required in respect of future mineral developments.

The introduction of PPS 1

In December 2007 a supplement to PPS1 Planning and Climate Change was published by the Department of Communities and Local Government. This document states that the planning system needs to support the delivery of the reductions in carbon emissions which will be set out in the Climate Change Bill, which will aim to achieve a 60% cut in the UK’s emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050.

The PPS1 supplement means that planning authorities will have to take full account of climate change, both in terms of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and in terms of the inevitable changes that will occur even if such emissions are reduced. Such account will affect both the development plan system and the determination of individual planning applications.

The effect of the PPS1 supplement on plan development is likely to involve the introduction of a range of policies aimed at making sure that all developments can be shown to have taken proper account of impacts upon, and effects of, climate change.

Consequently, in future, it is possible that site selection will be influenced by climate change issues, including identifying developments which are demonstrated to have the lowest carbon footprint, all other issues being equal.

PPS1 now requires that planning authorities also give proper consideration to the issue of climate change when determining planning applications. This means that all applications, including minerals development, will be required to consider climate change issues at a site-specific level. However, it is not clear – and there is no specific guidance within the PPS – as to how this should actually be undertaken.

From a minerals perspective, this issue could be addressed within the Environmental Statements that support all significant minerals applications. Assessments could range from quantitative carbon footprinting, to demonstrate that development proposals would produce below average emissions, to the more qualitative identification of simple steps to reduce carbon emissions, such as the use of motion-sensor lighting or fuel-efficient mobile plant.

However, planning for climate change also involves adaptation for its inevitable effects and this is an area where mineral developments could be viewed as being more robust than other forms of development. Importantly, the PPS suggests that where proper consideration of such issues is not given, this could be a reason for refusing an application.

Taking account of climate change in minerals projects should not simply be about assessing the amount of carbon that an operation produces, as this may miss the point that aggregates are going to be needed to construct a sustainable low-carbon economy. For example, wind- and tidal-power facilities and zero-carbon houses will have a part to play and will all require aggregates in their construction.

Any attempts, however, to carry out carbon accounting to establish the potential benefits of aggregate use could be meaningless on a project-by-project level, and perhaps it would be better to ensure that all aggregates operations are as carbon efficient as possible.

Minerals industry emissions

In terms of the minerals industry, it is possible to provide some broad indications of the potential emissions and their potential impact.

The principal issues are the consumption of energy, mainly electricity and fuel oil. The emissions from each site will vary considerably depending on the type of plant and machinery, extraction methods, distances travelled to transport material for processing etc.

High-added-value mineral products, such as bricks, lime and cement, are all affected by Climate Change Levy and/or European Union-Emissions Trading Schemes. However, the EU has indicated that it is also looking for UK industries that fall outside these schemes to reduce carbon emissions by 16% over the period 2005 to 2020. This will eventually affect those parts of the minerals sector that currently fall outside the CCL and EU-ETS schemes.

The DETR Energy Efficiency Best Practice Programme with the QPA has already undertaken a considerable amount of work and can provide guidance on industry-standard energy consumption for each type of mineral, and as expected crushed hard rock aggregates are, in general, more carbon intensive than sand and gravel.

Taking the average QPA figure of 10kg of CO₂ per tonne of aggregates, a site producing 300,000 tonnes of aggregates per annum will produce approximately 3,000 tonnes of CO₂ per annum.

To put this into context:

• an average household produces around 6 tonnes of CO₂ per annum
• a family car producing 160g/km travelling 20,000 miles produces around 5 tonnes of CO₂
• an office of 500m² (approximately 40 people) produces around 28 tonnes of CO₂ per annum, or 13 tonnes if best practice is adopted throughout (based on the Energy Efficiency Best Practice Programme data).

Many industries are starting to measure emissions as a function of their unit product and it may become the case that operators eventually have to account for carbon emissions on a product-by-product and site-by-site basis as pressure from customers for clear carbon accounting grows.

Energy management and generation

Managing for climate change involves a number of facets; the principal of these is energy management, in which the industry is already proactive. Some commercial property development is subject to the ‘Merton Principle’, which requires that 10% of the energy requirement for new development is derived from renewable sources. The minerals industry clearly does not wish to see this type of approach, but as new sites come forward and future policies are formulated, the use of renewable energy could be considered both a genuine option and a business opportunity, particularly for larger, energy-intensive operations.

Possible renewable energy options that could be appropriate at minerals operations include wind power, hydro power and the generation of power and heat from either biomass or even waste. As well as generating a low-carbon source of energy, such renewable energy sources generate income in terms of electricity sales and the sale of renewable energy certificates (ROCS), which all major electricity generators have to procure from renewable generators.

As an example, a large wind turbine, rated at 2MW, could generate up to 4,000 MWh/annum, which would be the equivalent electricity consumption of a moderate-sized aggregates operation.

For more intensive energy users in the minerals sector, using waste or biomass as a fuel is a viable option – as demonstrated by the success of the cement industry in developing markets for a wide range of wastes which can be safely combusted in high-temperature cement kilns.

Other intensive energy users could also look to the use of waste as a potential fuel source. For instance, the UK’s Biomass Strategy indicated that over 5 million tonnes of wood is landfilled in the UK every year. Given that a wood-burning generator consuming 30,000 tonnes of wood waste per annum could generate about 40,000 MWh/annum of electricity (about 5MW), the possibility of developing dedicated on-site energy sources using waste materials is a real and potentially attractive prospect.

Adaptation

PPS1’s requirements regarding climate change are not simply about carbon emissions, although the need to reduce emissions of CO₂ and other greenhouse gasses is clearly a key factor. Another key issue is that, in accepting that climate change is happening, measures need to be taken to ensure that its effects are minimized.

A key consequence of climate change is the potential for impact on a range of plants and animals – particularly their habitats.

The way in which climate change will impact plant and animal species and their habitats is unclear, but this is the subject of an increasing number of studies and is likely to form an important part of the climate change debate as action moves beyond simply reducing carbon outputs to planning for the effects of inevitable changes.

Although the case for reducing carbon emissions is wholly supported by the potential economic benefits of reducing energy consumption, the case for developing positive measures which adapt to the impending changes is perhaps less clear. However, as PPS1 becomes established and climate change issues move into the planning system, this will change.

Few developments will be able to offer a positive contribution to adapting for climate change by the provision of additional habitat in the way in which minerals developments can, and this could be an important part of planning for future minerals development.

Many minerals developments already provide significant contributions by the creation of additional habitat and, in meeting the needs of PPS1, this is likely to become an increasingly important element of site restoration, although the potential future need to increase the UK’s self-sufficiency in terms of food may become a counterbalance to this approach, particularly where the best and most versatile land is involved.

Carbon offsetting

Carbon offsetting traditionally involves quantifying carbon emissions and then purchasing ‘credits’ from emission-reduction projects that prevent emissions of an equivalent amount of CO₂ elsewhere. Such projects include renewable energy or schemes to lock up CO₂ in new forests or plantations. SLR have been asked how much carbon can be absorbed by tree-planting schemes associated with minerals development and how many trees would be needed, therefore, to offset emissions from a minerals scheme.

Using the National Forest’s published data, it is suggested that one tree will sequester approximately 290kg of CO₂ during an 80-year lifetime. The operators of a typical quarry would, therefore, need to plant (and maintain for 80 years) around 8,600 trees per year of operation to offset emissions from 250,000 tonnes of aggregates production.

Clearly, this is unlikely to be possible for each year of operation, but the example given above does show how minerals developers could potentially demonstrate some offsetting of carbon emissions through site-specific action.

In addition, such schemes could be designed to have wider landscape and biodiversity benefits. However, offsetting is not seen as a long-term solution to climate change.

Conclusions

The climate change supplement to PPS1 now requires that climate change is considered for all developments and, while the way in which this must be achieved is not specified, the requirement is likely to result in stakeholders seeking to ask: ‘How have you taken account of climate change within the development proposals?’

The minerals industry has, as reported by its various trade organizations, already made significant strides in terms of energy efficiency and sustainability prior to the PPS1 supplement being issued. Nevertheless, there will be pressure on the sector to improve its performance still further.

In particular, the carbon and energy efficiency of individual operations has largely remained a secondary, internal consideration, but there is now the prospect that emissions of carbon from minerals developments will become as important an issue as the potential emissions of noise or dust, which the industry is used to assessing and managing.

But there can be positive aspects for the industry if a proactive approach is taken. Large energy users have an excellent case to make to develop renewable energy sources which can be a source of income as well as power. Minerals operators have, in SLR’s experience, good sites for renewables development, often with good access while being relatively remote from other developments. The quality of restoration at many mineral operations is exceptional and the range of habitat creation is extensive, such that the industry is potentially well placed to provide further habitat to contribute to the necessary adaptation for climate change. Such restoration schemes can, in a modest fashion, act as carbon sinks or, alternatively, sources of biomass, and these aspects should also be considered when designing the whole cycle of mineral extraction.

Applications in the post-PPS1 supplement era will have to confirm that emissions will be minimized by a range of energy-saving measures, careful design and (in some cases) by on-site generation of renewable energy. In addition, such applications will have to demonstrate that the proposed development has taken into account the effect of inevitable climate change and is sufficiently robust to avoid being adversely affected by such change.