Kulaprabha again: So this is the third and last post about our sustainable energy project… well, last one for the moment.
If you’ve read the first post, you’ll know that we’re in the middle of a project to move to wood pellet boiler and solar thermal heating for our space heating and hot water. I submitted two grants / loans proposals today. So either cross your fingers or chant mantras on our behalf – or both!
If you’ve read the second post, you’ll know that even with our current very old and inefficient oil-fired boilers, our carbon footprint in the community is half the UK average. Which is great to know and what I was hoping would emerge from the carbon calculations I’ve been doing. Definitely a benefit from nine of us sharing our living space in a community together.
What you don’t know yet is how much better our carbon footprint will be if we can get the funding to help cover a proportion of the wood pellet boiler and solar thermal system installation costs. So now I’ve used the footprint software to calculate what our footprint would have been in 2008 if we’d had had the renewable sources in place. Here are the results:

.
The difference is in our energy use. Other sources of CO2 remain the same.
.
Here are the details:
2008: CO2 TONNES
|
ACTUAL |
PROJECTED |
| Energy |
87.2 |
17.0 |
| Business Travel |
2.6 |
2.6 |
| Personal Travel |
7.5 |
7.5 |
| Waste |
0.7 |
0.7 |
| Water |
0.6 |
0.6 |
| |
|
|
| Total |
98.7 |
28.4 |
.
If had we had the biomass boiler and solar panels in place last year, then we would have reduced our CO2 from 98 tonnes to 28 tonnes. A reduction of 72%!! And our energy consumption would have dropped from 88% to 60% of the our CO2 production. Here’s another graph to show you what I mean:
.

.
The tonnes per person is an average taken over the year for all retreatants plus community members. Perhaps a more useful figure is for the community only, where the amount of CO2 would have decreased from 6.7 tonnes per person to 2.2 tonnes over the year.
You know those Energy Performance Ratings? If you have an old fridge it’s likely to be Rating C or worse? Whereas new fridges will be A or A+? Well we’ve had an energy assessment done for Taraloka. At present we are Rating ‘E’ for the community and ‘D’ for the retreat centre. If we make the change away from oil, upgrade our attic insulation and install wood burning stoves which means we don’t have open chimneys any longer, then both the community and the retreat centre will be Rating ‘A’! The high efficiency wood-burning stoves should be installed by the end of next week. The attic insulation has been costed but we’re going to wait until after the solar thermal work is done before going ahead with it – it saves on mess in the attics!
So far I’ve been looking at changing the technologies and machinery we use. We’re fortunate here at Taraloka in that we can explore these possibilities and allocate funds to them. We couldn’t do that if we didn’t own the property. If you’re someone who is renting property, whether for a charity, a business or a home, you don’t have that freedom. Not unless you have a very environmentally concerned landlord and even then they might not have the cash to invest. I’m grateful for the level of funding that there is but I think there is a lot more that could be in place.
I was at a seminar last month called “Renewable Energy – It Doesn’t Have to Cost the Earth” hosted by Marches Energy re:Think. One of the speakers – a West Midlands business man – was asked what change he’d most like to see happen in the UK: he said he’d like the UK Treasury come on board and be much more serious about supporting the shift away from fossil fuels. I thought his was one of the best presentations at the seminar. It has a dramatic title : “Armageddon or Opportunity Paradise.” You can download it and the other presentations and workshops on the seminar by following this link.
There is another aspect to all this. At present our business and personal travel at Taraloka contributes 10% of our carbon footprint. If we manage to get this project sufficiently funded then that changes to contributing 35%. We could make changes there and produce a further reduction in CO2. That’s definitely doable. But it would take us into a different arena altogether : not just changing machinery and technology, it would mean changing our behaviour. And that’s difficult!
This afternoon I was talking to the energy assessor who compiled our energy performance ratings. He told me he was drawing up guidelines for housing association tenants about what they can do to change their behaviour and diminish their energy usage. I might ask him for a copy for us! Another speaker at the seminar, the head of the Sustainable Energy Division of E-on UK Ltd, was talking about building low carbon communities. One of his remarks has really stuck with me. He said – with regard to changing our behaviour in the UK :
“If everyone does a little …….
And then he paused. You’ve probably finished the sentence. But maybe not the way he finished it ….
“If everyone does a little, we’ll only achieve a little.
To minimise the impact of climate change, we need to reduce UK carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. And that means 80% from every one of us.”
Think about it. And if you want to read more, try UK Met Office / Climate Change. (Clicking this will open a new window in your web browser.)