Why renewable energy is fuelling investor interest

As an asset class, renewable energy has matured dramatically over the past two decades. It has gone from being seen as an alternative culture to having huge investment potential. At the same time, traditional investment norms are changing and not just because of the evolving sustainability mega-trend. In recent years, investment managers have increased their allocations to the broader real assets sector with growing numbers classifying infrastructure and real estate as “real assets”.

Solar power does not pollute the air with greenhouse gases and is noise-free to be used for residential purposes. Solar opportunities are available at various scales, i.e. for households and large business ventures providing power to the grid. Solar panels are the fastest-growing renewable energy option, thanks to falling costs and increasing investment. Their easy installation and “low emissions” are environmentally friendly.

Wind turbine power will be an increasingly compelling longer-term investment due to increasing urbanisation and population growth, leading to higher electricity demand. Technological progress with relative cost advantages for renewable energies and an improved regulatory environment (social and political support) motivates businesses to manufacture wind turbines.

Get in touch with Andrew to discuss


Contact us

Sign up to our insights

Hydrogen for President?

7 Minutes

For hydrogen to truly stake its claim as the future king of fuels it must make an impactful actual contribution to the clean energy transition. Significant adoption is anticipated in sectors where hydrogen is currently almost completely absent, such as transport, buildings and power generation.
  • Hydrogen use today is dominated by industry, namely: oil refining, ammonia production, and methanol production. Virtually all of this hydrogen is supplied using fossil fuels, so there is significant potential for emissions reductions from clean hydrogen production powered by renewable energy.
  • In transport, the competitiveness of hydrogen fuel cell (HFC) cars depends on fuel cell costs and refuelling stations while for trucks the priority is to reduce the delivered price of hydrogen; for the consumer HFC’s offer greater range than electric vehicles with a refilling experience similar to what we are all used to with fossil fuels. Shipping and aviation have limited low-carbon fuel options available and represent an opportunity for hydrogen-based fuels particularly for long-haul.
  • In buildings, hydrogen could be blended into existing natural gas networks for the end-user purposes of generating both power and heat, with the highest potential in multifamily and commercial buildings (particularly in dense cities) while longer-term prospects could include the direct use of hydrogen in boilers or fuel cells.
  • In power generation, hydrogen is one of the leading options for storing renewable energy, and hydrogen and ammonia can be used in gas turbines to increase power system flexibility.

Green supply to meet demand

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) demand for hydrogen, which has grown more than threefold since 1975, continues to rise and is gathering pace – currently it is almost entirely supplied from fossil fuels, with 6% of global natural gas and 2% of global coal going to hydrogen production. As a consequence, current manufacturing production of hydrogen is responsible for CO2 emissions of around 830 Mt CO2 per year, putting this in context it approximates to the CO2 emissions of Germany. Fortunately, technology convergence and production efficiency are driving change. Danish catalyst manufacturer Haldor Topsoe has stated plans to build a large-scale facility to make electrolysers to be used for green hydrogen production. This can potentially reduce the cost of green hydrogen by 20%, achieving a price point at which hydrogen becomes cost-competitive when compared to fossil fuels.
Hydrogen, especially green hydrogen, has become the latest ‘strategic ambition’ among energy companies, including big oil and gas multinationals such as Shell, who see potential in developing and investing in the associated technologies.

Hydrogen refuelling stations and hydrogen pumps at traditional fuel stations are being piloted across the Europe as the transport fuel mix evolves and the downstream business models of these oil and gas multinationals follow suit. There are examples from the energy generation side of things too. Big wind turbine manufacturers such as Siemens Gamesa are trialling floating offshore wind platforms with integrated desalination and hydrogen production capabilities in order to create green hydrogen at source.

Eco-friendly competition with EVs

The evangelists of the early 2000’s thought that hydrogen would come to dominate the clean automobile market but their “hydrogen highway” hasn’t quite materialised as yet. Hydrogen power needed and broadly still needs a new infrastructure, whereas rival electricity battery cars can be charged off the near-ubiquitous electricity grid (with an easy assumption made for charging infrastructure – a particularly vibrant market). Additionally, the concept of high-powered batteries has been well advanced for some time with various uses prior to and in addition to EVs. HFCs do not match battery power as a well understood technology. However and as previously mentioned, this is starting to changing at pace with hydrogen pumps being retrofitted to traditional fuel stations across Europe.

As demand increases and hydrogen becomes more available consumers are more likely to adopt a ‘fast-refuel’ option over the time required by current EVs. Consider this in conjunction with the impending headache of what to do with EV end of life batteries and indeed the CO2 created in the manufacture of the average battery – according to research completed by the Swedish Environment Institute, up to 17.5 t of CO2 is emitted by the making of the average electric car battery.

Hydrogen could be the solution

The UK will need hydrogen to meet its goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. According to the latest National Grid future energy scenarios hydrogen “could be the solution to many of the hardest parts of the transition to net-zero, particularly in long-distance freight, shipping and heavy industry”. Possible futures for the UK’s energy system and routes to net-zero all require large gains in energy efficiency, heavy electrification of transport, a level of societal change and variable reliance on hydrogen.

As we patiently await the UK Government’s Hydrogen Strategy we do so anticipating the rise of green hydrogen providing a super-clean form of energy. The expectation is that this will be driven by convergence between new technology, demand, business collaboration in order to finance increases in production capacity and a supportive regulatory framework. Hydrogen for President…

Sign up to our insights

Contact our Sustainability service line lead,Andrew Wilson, to find out more

Contact us

related articles

Carbon net zero consensus vs the circular economy

16 Minutes

Two core concepts behind carbon net-zero (CN0) are carbon reduction, which focuses on lowering negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and carbon offsetting, where negative emissions are counterbalanced through activity and investments that theoretically net-off their impact.

Policy and public consensus leave the impression that achieving ‘carbon neutrality’ or CN0 through this reduction and offsetting is the one (or two) stop-shop solution to addressing the world’s climate change and sustainability challenges. Perhaps a bit more constructive challenge to this consensus is required.

Up in the trees

The majority of carbon offsetting is conducted through reforestation or afforestation. There are other more esoteric activities such as targeted investments in developing nations that facilitate reduced GHG emissions, e.g. gifting fuel-efficient stoves to specific communities. However, at present there is particularly limited agreement on the timing of offsetting activities; organisations can theoretically report outcomes years ahead of their implementation.

A guessing-game

Whilst meaningful calculations of CO2e emissions are plausible, arguably the calculation of carbon offset is a guessing game. Using reforestation and afforestation as examples: The lack of scientific consensus on the calculation of carbon capture, the finite lifetime of trees, failure to account for existing flora being displaced by trees being planted, the global-warming impact of light absorption by dark forests (especially in previously white, tundra regions) and the insulating impact of organic aerosols released by trees all serve as strong challenges to the generally accepted carbon-capture benefits.

The organisations promoting empirically precise carbon offsetting activities are inevitably motivated to deliver the most significant carbon-capture for a given cost, often driving them to plant fast-growing trees to generate the speediest carbon sinks. Studies, however, have shown that rapid tree growth directly correlates with short life-span, after which the dead tree is either decomposed naturally or burned. This releases the “captured” CO2 and accelerates the point at which carbon capture is permanently reversed. Careless tree-species selection creates further challenges around habitat preservation, for both flora and fauna, with major knock-on consequences for local ecosystems.

Even more fundamentally, the term CO2e may acknowledge the net warming effects of GHGs, but when it comes to carbon capture, it risks oversimplification. Photosynthesis captures CO2, but the remaining GHG groups including nitrous oxides, hydrofluorocarbons and chlorofluorocarbons are not part of the equation; they continue being generated and released unabated and ignored.

It’s all about timing

There are various accounting methods for assessing the impact of timing with respect to money: Discounted Cash Flow, Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return, are calculations that recognise the importance of timing in financial decision-making. No such calculations exist for carbon offset: Organisations can produce GHGs today, and have a ten-year-plus plan for when these will be offset, without addressing the damage or reduced benefit of the delay. The urgency of action on sustainability is unquestionable, acknowledged but still not fully understood.

Regressive macro-behaviours

The prevalence of the CN0, Sustainability and ESG agenda certainly highlights a widely shared intention. However, albeit perhaps being deliberately extreme in reference points, some of the large-scale actions being marketed highlight branding exercises that deflect from the critical need for more fundamental change in our approach.

Take the whole concept of carbon credits as an example? It can be humorously (and dramatically) argued that these are reminiscent of the medieval Catholic practice of selling “indulgences”; a financial penalty to reduce the religious penance required by heaven for forgiveness. The wealthier you were, the lesser the repercussions for sinning!

However, their regressive macro-behaviours are no laughing matter. Reforestation for example typically takes place ‘behind closed-doors’ and this can have disastrous results. Since 2009, the Kenya Forest Service, backed by EU funding for reforestation, has been forcibly removing and dispossessing the Sengwer people of the Embobut Forest, burning more than 1500 homes in the process, and killing one Sengwer man. This humanitarian disaster, highlights just one facet of the overlooked, problematic underbelly of our approach to CN0.

The BBC and Greenpeace have run articles highlighting the level of waste being exported to Turkey, with estimates of 40% of UK plastic ending up there. In theory, this plastic is exported to be recycled, but the reality is that once those responsible have pocketed their payment, it is simply dumped. Simplistic recycling targets, and an acceptance of devolving accountability is at the root cause of these issues: The National Audit Office was damning in its findings stating in July 2018 that “[The UK’s recycling system] appears to have evolved into a comfortable way for government to meet targets without facing up to the underlying recycling issues. The government has no evidence that the system has encouraged companies to minimise packaging or make it easy to recycle. And it relies on exporting materials to other parts of the world without adequate checks to ensure this material is actually recycled, and without consideration of whether other countries will continue to accept it in the long term.”

Carbon offsetting opportunities are a finite resource

There is a limit to how much reforestation and afforestation can be conducted, both in terms of absolute capacity, or more challengingly, due to financial constraints. The largest and longest-lived type of commercially grown fauna is fruit trees (the largest major group being cherry trees) which typically grow no more than 15m tall, whereas as an example, most pine species consistently grow to 50m or more. Broadly speaking, the taller the tree, the denser the carbon capture for a given area. What this means is that optimal carbon-sink solutions have severely limited meaningful commercial benefit so the land must be procured for offsetting projects, and maintained at cost.  At present, there are large swathes of suitable low-price land available, but as these options are exhausted by initial offsetting ventures future projects will have to procure land with commercial uses at much higher costs. Developed nations will likely purchase the majority if not all of the cheap land, leaving developing nations with few or no options available.

Used cooking oil is commonly re-purposed in the UK, burned as biodiesel in lorries, which once again, in isolation is a positive step. However, such is that the appetite for cooking oil derived biodiesel in the UK, that businesses have begun importing it from overseas. Burning marine diesel to transport cooking oil to be burned as biodiesel (which still emits GHGs) all to save on lorry diesel usage? This has a net detrimental environmental effect compared to burning biodiesel at or near its origin and raises obvious questions.

CN0: A single, over-simplified metric

Putting aside carbon off-setting practices, measuring CO2 emissions as the sole metric for success in the sustainability battle means that other negative consequences become fair game. Resource depletion, habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, water pollution, water poverty and human suffering at times go unchecked.  There is particular cause for concern around “green” technologies with a focus on energy generation and energy storage.

  • Dependence on cobalt: At present, the highest energy-density commercially available batteries are lithium-ion (Li+) with cobalt-based cathodes and they form the mainstay of almost all consumer electronics where battery size and weight are critical selling points like phones and laptops. More than 55% of the world’s cobalt is mined in DR Congo, where Amnesty International estimate 40,000 child workers are at risk of contact dermatitis, Hard Metal Lung Disease, lethal mine collapses, atrocious working conditions and modern-day slavery.

  • Lithium remains a problem: Manufacturers of larger applications of Li+ batteries such as battery-electric cars, have more recently been moving away from cobalt cathodes, such as Tesla in September 2020, but the lithium remains problematic. Lithium is found in three forms in the earth’s crust; in solution (brine) and two mineral formats (pegmatite and sedimentary). Lithium brine forms the majority of global reserves, and is predominantly found in low purity form of 4-6% in deep aquifers (subterranean water reserves) often underneath unique salt-flat habitats. Lithium brine is pumped onto vast plastic sheets to evaporate the water and leave behind lithium salt deposits. Extraction of mineral forms means mining, whilst purification requires sulphuric acid, releasing atmospheric CO2. Modelling by LUT and Augsburg universities suggest earth will exhaust its lithium reserves between 2040 and 2100 dependent upon battery technologies, battery electric vehicle (BEV) manufacturing, lithium recycling and global population variables. This modelling assumes the appetite to destroy virtually all of the world’s largest salt-flat ecosystems.

  • Water: Water vapour is part of a positive environmental and atmospheric feedback loop. Unfortunately, due to some of the aforementioned CN0 related activities there are some serious ramifications for water on the horizon. Making full use of global lithium reserves requires (along with rock extraction) removal and evaporation of subterranean lithium brine. Much of this supply is in the form of nonmeteoric aquifers; meaning they are not replenished during the course of the hydrologic (water) cycle, instead consisting purely of water formed by geological events early in the earth’s history, from evaporated seas and volcanic activity. These supplies are not renewable. Further still, this removal and evaporation causes the water tables to drop in the associated surrounding areas which has a resulting detrimental effect on wildlife, farming, etc. Lithium brine is typically found beneath evaporated sea-beds which are almost exclusively located in deserts with no viable alternative water source.

  • Solar power comes at a price: At the core of solar-power (photovoltaic) technologies is high-purity silicon, extracted from quartz (silicon dioxide). Quartz is mined world-wide, with the greatest concentrations in developing nations, where labour conditions are poor and miners are exposed to carcinogenic respirable-sized quartz, responsible for the diseases silicosis and pulmonary fibrosis. Initial quartz purification requires heating with carbon (often using fossil-fuels) to 2000°C to remove the dioxide component, released as atmospheric CO2. Further purification uses hydrochloric acid, by-producing the incredibly toxic compound silicon tetrachloride, responsible for several environmental disasters in China. Construction of a large solar-power installation (200+ Megawatts) requires upwards of a billion litres of water, and can consume more than 20 million litres per year to keep it sufficiently clean.

  • Wind-farms: Wind-farm turbine-blades are typically constructed from varying combinations of glass-fibre, polyester, epoxy and carbon-fibre, the sourcing and processing of which involves significant quantities of volatile organic compounds a class of environmental pollutant compounds hazardous to human health. They have a designed lifespan typically of 25 – 30 years, with first-generation wind-turbines now being decommissioned. In March 2021, New Civil Engineer published an article highlighting the CO2 reduction initiative of re-purposing worn-out wind turbine blades in lieu of steel rebar for construction concrete. Definitely innovative and any diversion from landfill or reduction of carbon is a success. However, as well as being clear on the implication of down-cycling in this manner it is important to seize upon the opportunity to push further and scale such initiatives. For example, contrasting wind-farm turbine blades with other turbine blade types highlights the opportunity for a more holistic approach: Aviation propellers have planned life-cycles, defined by flying hours, and are designed with erosion-shields and sacrificial high-wear parts made of readily-recycled steel and aluminium replaced at scheduled intervals to keep the blades operational, and prolong the lifecycle of the core components.

What to do?

Carbon reducing activities are and must remain a key focus for all. BEVs, sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), biodiesel all make the headlines, and the public are provided with easily accessible solutions like re-usable shopping bags and recycling whilst it seems that the real difficult changes are yet to come.

Perhaps there is a need for a fundamental overhaul of sustainability reporting and metrics to offer real insight. The ‘balanced scorecard’ concept may feel slightly dated or like clichéd management-speak, but a more complete solution to the climate crisis that we face is going to need to be multi-factorial in its application and management, and certainly needs to go beyond the current CN0 status-quo.

Sign up to our insights

Contact our Sustainability service line lead,Andrew Wilson, to find out more

Contact us

related articles

Innovation and sustainability in the UK water industry

1st February 201813 Minutes

Edem Eno-Amooquaye shares his thoughts on why the UK water industry might be missing the point when it comes to innovation and sustainability.

One of the world’s major cities, Cape Town, is expected to run out of water by April…

The usage demands of a growing population, compounded by several years of extremely low rainfall that led to regional drought, have caused this crisis. The local government has responded by determining a daily allocation for water users in order to bring down consumption. In addition, urgent investment is being made in desalination plants, groundwater collection projects, and water recycling programmes.

This is not an isolated incident, and it will not be the last one to affect a major city. We are facing a global water sustainability challenge: 97% of the world’s water is saltwater and understood to be unfit for human consumption, agriculture or industrial use. Of the remaining 3%, only about 1% is readily available for human consumption. This 1% is expected to become increasingly scarce and the global imbalance between supply and demand is forecast to become significantly worse.

This raises an important question about the feasibility of wholesale water being traded as a commodity on a global level. At present, the supply, regulation and ownership of water is understood to be a local issue and many would argue strongly that it should remain as such. CNBC Markets Editor Patti Domm noted in a 2014 article, Why trading water futures could be in our future, that

“history is full of examples where water diversion led to wars or environmental tragedies.”

However, with an abundance of research and commentary being amassed on the subject of water sustainability, there is now wide acknowledgement of the need for innovative solutions to enable the wholesale global management of water. Arguably, this is a focus driven by regions such as the Western United States, India, The Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa that are confronted with water scarcity issues of a severity that the UK is yet to experience. Regardless, this does not mean that the UK can merely pay lip service to the global challenge or that its management of local water shortage challenges will not need to evolve. It was only a few years ago that Eastern Brazil suffered a major drought and in this case it was the slow response of government that was largely blamed for the water supply crisis and resulting social, economic and political disruption. Lessons on the need to proactively address water sustainability are not being learned. The images of mass demonstrations in Sao Paulo have clearly been forgotten. More recently, and closer to home, what should perhaps resonate more strongly is the ongoing drought affecting Portugal and much of Spain, largely due to three years of low rainfall, where the latter half of 2017 saw rivers come close to running dry. The impact on agriculture has been devastating. Reservoir levels are running dangerously low and clean water now has to be delivered by tanker to many rural communities.

We need to question whether the UK has really grasped the concept of global sustainability and its future role within the wider industry

For the UK, achieving sustainability in the water industry means addressing both current and future challenges, which are both broad and varied in their nature; from meeting the clean water needs of new developments, to managing the uncertainty caused by climate change, addressing requirements for the maintenance and renewal of ageing mains infrastructure, achieving targets to reduce energy usage and improving customer satisfaction.

Whilst we can trust that, as an industry, we have not totally overlooked or forgotten the fundamental challenge of sustainability, there does seem to be a significant disconnect at the moment between the global or holistic view and the UK industry’s latest ‘hot topic.’

Why is retail innovation being touted as the answer to all of the UK water industry’s problems?

Changes to the UK water market mean that most organisations can now choose the company that they want to supply their water retail service. This represents what the regulator describes as “the largest competitive water retail market in the world having opened for business”.

In response to this increased competition, and perhaps compelled by the fear of value chain and organisational evolution, the UK water industry appears to have become heavily focused on retail innovation. But is this really the answer to all of its challenges?

Industry forums are directly referring to the adoption of futuristic, leading edge retail models as the solution to the industry’s sustainability challenge. Top online retailers such as Amazon, Apple and easyJet are being referenced as benchmarks for how the water industry needs to develop its customer experience and interaction. Adding confusion to the mix is the rebranding, selling-off and proposed disaggregation of the business retail arms of many water companies as they double-down and nestle in to the comfort blanket of wholesale services in order to reinforce their positions within an industry evolving at an uncomfortably fast pace.

The emerging consensus that retail innovation or mimicking the customer service model of online companies is the Holy Grail or missing piece of the puzzle for the water industry to overcome its sustainability challenge needs to be questioned. Huge changes will be required across all stages of the water value chain to effectively address sustainability. And right now, there’s certainly much less palpable excitement and fanfare around new methods of managing water resources or wholesale business transformation and resilience.

The risk is that the UK is separating itself from the global water resources management challenge, where innovation is focused on water security and the management of water as a scarce global commodity.

Recent reports published by major infrastructure and asset management firms on the development of water utilities promote frameworks for creativity and innovation that, rightly, focus on developing new approaches to serving customers and managing assets. However, they only refer to sustainability as an ‘additional benefit’.

We must challenge the definition of sustainability and the stakeholders who are shaping these discussions in the UK. A choice must be made as to whether we want to seriously contribute to addressing sustainability of water as a global resource, or be limited to viewing sustainability from the medium term perspective of the current players in our local industry.

Arguably, it’s also questionable as to whether these players have really grasped the bigger picture. Maybe the ever-increasing thoroughness of the regulator’s incentivisation and performance management of improvements in customer service and satisfaction metrics have disproportionately skewed the agenda towards retail and customer service.

Or perhaps the UK players deserve more credit. They do have a bit more in their sights than just retail innovation. Ofwat’s PR19 suitably focuses on building resilience and defines the avoidance of dependency on single assets as key to the long-term provision of water services, as well as the ability to adapt and recover from disruptive events. So there are allusions, even if indirect and aided by interpretive leaps, to the need to extend beyond local assets and boundaries in order to sustainably manage demand and supply.

Added to this, some clear steps have been taken. Although research documents and consultations are yet to spawn innovative transformational plans, since its 2011 Water for life white paper the UK government has acknowledged the need for advancements in water abstraction to create a more dynamic system for effective sharing of water resources. In A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment, published at the start of 2018, the government encourages innovation and looks to formalise plans around improving access to water to encourage trading and storage, the growth and implementation of robust long-term plans that develop new water resources where needed, and reforming approaches to water abstraction. Water re-use and alternative water solutions are also being actively promoted and pursued by companies such as Anglian Water, which demonstrates recognition of how exploiting the multiple uses of water is one of the best ways to maximise sustainability.

Most notably, in 2010, Thames Water opened the UK’s first major desalination plant, the Thames Gateway Water Treatment Works, and heralded a step change in technological innovation and drinkable water yield from desalination. However, investment is yet to gather real pace across the rest of the industry. In line with predictions that we will see the number of desalination plants across the world double by 2050, The Institute of Chemical Engineers has set the expectation that the UK will pioneer this revolution in global water management with an additional three major desalination plants and up to 800 smaller units. It will be important for the UK industry to collectively focus on sustainability and water management in order to reassert itself as a world leader in this area.

What's next for the UK water industry?

As is the case for retail innovation, the UK water industry must aim to be at the leading edge of sustainability and implementing water management solutions such as desalination and new technical and commercial solutions for treating and recycling water produced by industrial activity.

The next step must be for the UK water industry to globalise its ambitions, plans and particularly its actions. We need to acknowledge that whilst water sustainability may appear to be just a local challenge, it is a significant issue for which the solutions must extend across local, regional and national boundaries. Perhaps, some of the noise and energy around the UK ‘topic of the moment’, retail innovation, would be better directed towards this cause. The vision and initiatives promoted by organisations such as the World Water Council would be an appropriate reference point.

Contact our Sustainability service line lead,Andrew Wilson, to find out more

Contact us