learning the lessons from the revolving green fund, including a case study from lancaster’s wind...
TRANSCRIPT
Learning the lessons from the Revolving Green Fund, including a case study from Lancaster’s wind project
EAUC Conference Workshop – 22nd March 2010
Format for the workshop
• Introductions• Jont Cole, Associate, Inbuilt• Jonathan Mills, Environment and Sustainability Manager, Lancaster
University• You
• Background and progress to date of the RGF• Lessons learnt and recommendations• Lancaster University wind turbine project• Workshop discussion
– How good practice should be generated from projects– How to encourage regional support networks– Delivering sustainability behavioural change within HEIs
What is the Revolving Green Fund?
• The aim of the RGF if to reduce CO2 emissions• £20m from HEFCE and £10m from Salix &
£5m+ funding contribution from HEIs• Recoverable grant – ISP aimed to be recycled
x3• Partnership with Salix (and the Carbon Trust)• 57 English HEIs have received funding (out of
130)
Brief for the evaluation
• Evaluation required to report:– Progress of each strand– Lessons learnt to date– Potential for additional RGF funding– Good practice dissemination
• Met through:– Interviews with stakeholders, successful and
unsuccessful applicants, and non-applicants (25+)– E-survey of practitioners (100+)
Progress to date• Institutional small projects (ISP)
– Nearly 400 projects committed (at 31st October 2009)– 1/3 of £25m committed– To date over 0.2 million tonnes lifetime CO2 saving
committed / implemented (2006 sector emissions were 2.1 million tonnes)
– Recipients report acceleration in CO2 reduction
• 3 transformational projects– Transformational 0.33 million tonnes lifetime CO2 saving
– Expenditure of approx. £20 million– Projects are high profile
6
Lessons learnt
• Available staff resource major barrier to application for both strands
• Capacity particularly in smaller institutions
• The transformational application process was ‘well timed’ for many that applied.
• Projects can be transformational without being ‘innovative’.
7
Lessons Learnt – ISP• Application encouraged by:
– Ability to ID project and supporting data– Production of carbon management plans– Support during application
• Changes to application process recognised• Projects involving insulation show some of the
cheapest lifetime £/tCO2
• Application discouraged by certain:– Project compliance criteria– Financial considerations– Aspects of post award monitoring and reporting
8
Lessons learnt - good practice
• Use of existing networks to share good practice is valued
• Some small institutions don’t have access to networks
• Case studies and regional networks are valued
9
Recommendations – good practice• Need to support the production of both concise
and in-depth case studies• Need to distribute existing ISP material more
widely• Need fund more behavioural change projects• Institution / consortium / sector bodies could
coordinate dissemination through existing routes
• Encourage regional networking• Above to complement work of AMHEC
10
Future funding – requirement
• HEFCE should try and secure additional RGF funding
• Funding should be primarily directed at ISP• Consider how CIF2 can encourage sustainability in
new build and retrofit• HEFE support mechanisms to encourage
applications from smaller institutions– E.g. pump prime funding clusters to recruit shared
energy manager, substantively funded by savings achieved
11
Future funding - enhancements
• HEFCE and Salix to revisit project compliance requirements
• Consider mechanisms to allow application from institutions who don’t have the required 25% contribution
• Consider making the innovation related criteria elective• Increase length of notification of opportunity and
requirements• Pump prime funding and spread funding over annual
rounds
Lancaster University Wind Turbine Project
EAUC Conference April 2010Presented by Jonathan Mills, Environment & Sustainability Manager
Feasibility Assessments since 2007 Funding from HEFCE won in April 2009 Project Team - July Work Starts Aug 2009
Climate change Resource depletion CRC LU needs to cut carbon Emissions Part of LU CMP & SIMP Will Cut LU Carbon Emissions by 5,700t Payback 5-10 years
Best wind resource, best location on campus, least constraints, furthest from residences
Environmental/technical surveys undertaken during autumn – noise, visual, shadow flicker , radar, EM, ecology etc to assess environmental impact.
Turbine locations - Nov 09 Temp met mast erected &
acquiring data. EIA prepared. Engineering assessments
undertaken and design commenced
Community Consultations Dec 09 & /Jan 10
Planning application and EIA submitted 15 Jan
Grid connection agreed Turbine acquisition put out
to tender Landscape/ecology
mitigation proposals being finalised.
Mitigation plans for site users being developed
Planning decision anticipated April 2010
Project a learning experience for all project team
Integrated internal and external project team
External project manager Expertise/experience on type
of project essential Prepare for unusual features –
turbine manufacturers Public procurement rules? Visit other similar projects Prepare for a lot of reasons
why you can’t do it!
Good idea if others are doing it before you!
Best to see/discuss other implemented/ongoing projects
National support networks more relevant at present
Senior level support networks AUDE, VC’s etc important
Turbine acquisition put out to tender.
Major transformational schemes demonstrate commitment of HEE
Highly visible Show commitment of
funding body (HEFCE) Enthuse students, offer
research/project opportunities
Brings efficiency improvements ‘home’ – (its our energy!)
Workshop discussion
• How should the sector address the following three objectives:– Generating more good practice case studies from
RGF-type and other sustainability projects– Encouraging regional support networks
• London Universities Environment Gp; CO2 Sense; Northwest Uni network and East Midlands Uni Ass
– Funding sustainability behavioural change projects within HEIs