If my electricity supply is 100% renewable, does that mean i'm not producing any carbon dioxide emissions?

Question

Several companies offer 100% renewable energy options. If you choose one, you shouldn't have to pay a carbon tax on your fuel bills. What's the catch?

Answer 1

The climate change levy (carbon tax) is currently only for companies, not individuals. Therefore the effect on you is indirect and difficult to evaluate.

Your electricity is actually coming from a variety of sources because power stations are connected together in a grid. When you buy into a 100% renewable scheme, you're simply paying a "green" premium. You're basically agreeing to pay more for your electricity, in the hope that some of the extra money you've paid is going into development of renewables.

Actually, the same amount of electricity will be generated from renewable sources whether you choose to pay the premium or not - it's simply a way for the suppliers to generate additional revenue.

There's a fixed amount of electricity generated from renewables, which although increasing slowly, is not directly and immediately affected by consumers paying the premium.

What you'll find is that all the electricity from renewables will become accounted for (as more and more people subscribe to your scheme) and eventually the scheme will end. In other words, the scheme is unsustainable. Then what happens is another scheme crops up and you're encouraged to join that one instead. It's a kind of merry-go-round.

Answer 2

If your electricity comes from an electricity company that uses 100% renewable resources to generate the electricity it sells you, then you may well be still emitting (or causing the emission of) carbon dioxide. If the company sources its electricity from wave, tidal or wind power then there will have to have been some carbon dioxide emissions during the construction phase, although once up and running these types of power plant have, in theory, no carbon dioxide emissions.
A biomass plant can be renewable through the logic that when a plant grows, it takes in carbon dioxide from the environment. The amount of carbon dioxide released when said plant is burned is then the same as what the plant initially used to grow, making the process carbon neutral. This type of energy source is only renewable if the crops can be grown and harvested at the same rate as they are burned; there is no net loss or gain of carbon dioxide or biomass.

The argument that, during construction, a renewable energy plant will cause the emission of carbon dioxide can be applied to almost any construction project today, so although true should not be a major concern, so long as the carbon dioxide free energy output from the plant is sufficient to "offset" the initial carbon dioxide outlay during construction.
The issue of running costs in terms of carbon dioxide emissions follows on from the earlier point that a renewable biomass plant may need to burn diesel to run tractors to plow and harvest fields and crops. However, with this line of thought we return to a similar conclusion as with the construction expenses - all power plants might need to burn additional fuel - for example transport of coal or gas - there is limited scope to form a point against renewable energy based on this argument.

Answer 3

Wind and tide power produce no CO2, but burning biomass does. However, one could argue that the Biomass uses up CO2 when it is growing, in which case, I guess the answer is yes! You would have a ZERO Carbon footprint (as they say).
Oh COME ON! GET REAL, Do you really think that you can get out of paying Carbon tax, just because you don't produce any Carbon?
Nice Loophole! I'd bet that the government will rush through a fix to that one any time in the next ... hundred years or so.

Answer 4

No. If your electricity is generated by a renewable fuel containing carbon such as (alcohol, bio-diesel or wood) the generating plant would still be emitting CO2. If the electricity is generated by wind, hydro, or solar (or nuclear which is non-renewable) the actual generation would not emit CO2, but the manufacturing of the generating facilities might.

Answer 5

Burning wood to create electricity produces CO2, but wood is a renewable resource. Hydro is renewable, flooding vast tracts of land produces immense amounts of methans -- worse than CO2!

Answer 6

being renewable has nothing to do with using carbon or not. It has to do with whether you can replenish and refill the source. this could be carbon based or not.

Answer 7

Taxes are forever. If it wasn't a carbon tax it would be some other.

Answer 8

it means having mountains of cow shite in your back garden