search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
| Small hydro


decarbonised through big nuclear and new offshore wind, however, this won’t solve the problem of the increased demand (from electrification of heat and transport) on the grid,” Gilmartin continues. “With electricity demand more than doubling, the required reinforcements will be very costly and take a long time – therefore stalling progress to Net Zero. Local generation is a viable solution to this issue.” So, does Gilmartin think more local generation is feasible?


“Communities are very motivated and gaining momentum. The ability to run webinars and hold meetings online has vastly improved the sharing of knowledge, ideas and the ability to support new community energy groups. Communities also have savings to invest in community schemes – they get a return on their investment of about 4%, but their money is supporting a community-based, not-for- profit community scheme. Any profits are returned to community benefit funds, and they are also supporting low carbon energy. We never really have an issue raising capital finance to build these schemes,” she says. Motivation from communities is a real advantage in setting up these schemes and groups working together propel themselves forward. “The ability to raise the capital means that they are


more likely to progress a scheme than a landowner who may prioritise their capital for other things,” Gilmartin explains. “Communities who are on oil are really keen to come off it, but they are limited in what they can do – community hydro is a really great way for them to address the climate emergency and start the transition to Net Zero in their communities. Raising awareness is valuable too. Success breeds success. Most groups will continue with other projects once their scheme is developed.” To encourage the development of these schemes Gilmartin says that seed funding such as the Rural Community Energy Fund grant has been invaluable. Groups need grants to get moving, pay for consultant hydrologists etc but they also need support. With a background in renewable energy consultancy Gilmartin says she can give a lot of advice and assist in streamlining how projects come forward.


Buttermere Hydro Buttermere Hydro is a 45kW high head scheme on the


Mill Beck at Buttermere in Cumbria. The Local Energy North West Hub has granted Melbreak Renewable Energy Community Interest Company a grant to undertake a feasibility study for the scheme. It will


Right: Kate Gilmartin is the Community Energy Investment Lead at the Local Energy North West Hub. With a background in renewable energy consultancy she supports the scoping, seeding and development of renewable energy projects across northwest England, including six community hydro projects. www.localenergynw.org


generate ~225,000kW/yr, is low impact with a small impoundment for the intake. It has a buried pipeline and a discreet turbine house, which will be situated behind the existing substation from where all the water will be returned to the beck. A local hotel has agreed to be the main consumer of the electricity. To ensure the project is financially viable and to maximise hydro generation consumed by the hotel the hub suggests the installation of three EV charge points, as well as evaluating the costs for switching away from the hotel’s oil heating to a heat pump.


Commenting on the Environment Agency’s recently announced new charges for small hydro projects, Gilmartin says that a community scheme such as Buttermere will pay £1500 before the 1 April 2022 but will pay £11,383 for the application for abstraction after the 1 April. This is on top of all the other costs associated with the application, such as fisheries studies, geomorphology, hydrology and so on. “The EAs ‘cost recovery’ is a massive blocker and


counter to their narrative of being active on climate change mitigation,” Gilmartin says.” They’re charging themselves out at £100/hour (equivalent to a chartered engineer), yet the officers assigned to the project may have little or no experience in hydro – hence the amount of time required to review an abstraction licence. A qualified hydro engineer would be able to review and comment on an application with one day of work. I have suggested the EA outsource to people who are qualified and can do this review within a day.”


Net Zero Moving to Net Zero offers a significant challenge to the


distribution network operators. Gilmartin says that case studies such as Buttermere Hydro highlight the issues of grid capacity that rural communities will face as they start to think about and move towards actioning their Net Zero ambitions. The solution is localised energy generation (often in the form of small hydro), flexibility, and local balancing. ●


Below: The potential Buttermere hydro project could meet the heating needs of about 27 homes. The CO2 savings, powering heat pumps and displacing oil heating is equivalent to an 840kW grid connected solar scheme, which would use ~1.5 hectares of land


Bottom: A local survey showed that 88% of respondents were keen to see a community-owned hydro project developed at Buttermere


Pros and cons of community owned schemes


What are the advantages of such community- owned power schemes? ● Low carbon energy. ● A community-owned asset bringing in revenue to the community for 60+ years.


● Ripple effect.


And the disadvantages? ● They are complex projects that need support and a good, committed team.


● There can be complexities around land ownership/common land etc – all need unpicking and a budget to do that (the Rural Community Energy Fund has really helped, but we are unlikely to receive more funding).


● The community has to run a hydro scheme and any technical issues that arise.


● Succession – who will run the scheme in 30+ years?


www.waterpowermagazine.com | April 2022 | 23


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37