Bristol Airport switches to 100 per cent renewable electricity


Advertisement


Bristol Airport switches to 100 per cent renewable electricity
14520

In a significant step towards reducing its carbon footprint, Bristol Airport has switched to a 100 per cent renewable electricity supply. The announcement follows the recent publication of a carbon roadmap setting out how the Airport will become carbon neutral by 2025 for emissions within its direct control.

The new three-year agreement with global renewable energy supplier, Ørsted, will see the Airport’s annual electricity use of 17 million kWh powered entirely by renewable sources. Electricity is the largest contributor to carbon emissions from on-site airport operations. In addition to the electricity used in the terminal and other buildings, a growing number of aircraft stands are equipped with Fixed Electrical Ground Power (FEGP), reducing the need to use diesel powered engines for essential pre-flight services. Over the duration of the contract an estimated 14,000 tonnes of carbon will be saved across the Airport site as a result of the move to renewables – equivalent to the emissions from driving 34 million miles in an average car.

Simon Earles, Planning and Sustainability Director at Bristol Airport, said:

“From next month our terminal and other facilities will be powered by renewable energy – a significant step on our journey to carbon neutrality. There is more to do, but this is a clear statement of our intent to reduce our direct emissions.”

Ashley Phillips, Managing Director at Ørsted Sales (UK) Ltd said:

“It’s exciting that an international airport like Bristol is placing such strong emphasis on sustainability. At Ørsted, we want to drive the transition to low-carbon energy systems in the UK, and support organisations like Bristol Airport that share this ambition of creating a greener energy future.”

As well as addressing direct emissions, Bristol Airport’s carbon roadmap includes a commitment to offset road journeys by passengers and explains how flights will tackled through the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) – an international agreement aimed at stabilising emissions at 2020 levels.
 
When that's coupled with their plan to build thousands of new car parking spaces it's hard to take it seriously as anything other than a cynical attempt to help their expansion plans go through the planning committee. If they weren't trying to expand I would put money on them not even considering these measures.
 
When that's coupled with their plan to build thousands of new car parking spaces it's hard to take it seriously as anything other than a cynical attempt to help their expansion plans go through the planning committee. If they weren't trying to expand I would put money on them not even considering these measures.
In general terms I can see the point you are making, but this sort of thing is nothing new with BRS. They've been expanding both in passenger numbers and in infrastructure for many years in the face of a significant local and national and even international opposition.

They've ploughed millions of pounds into local communty projects with the current and previous expansion planning consents generating millions of pounds in section 106 payments which went into such things as improving road structure in the unitary authority of North Somerset, in whose area the airport sits. The airport also subsidises some local bus services.

Whether they would sit back and do nothing if they didn't want to 'keep in' with local residents, and at the same time try to show the planning authorities that they are a responsible airport owner, is arguable and people wil lhave their own opinion on that.

BRS has been fortunate in having impressive senior management and supportive private sector owners since the city council relinquished any connection nearly 20 years ago. They've been imaginative and innovative with an airfield that is tiny in size, with physical limitations such as a short runway, difficult weather on occasions and poor surface connectivity, so they've had to be. Imagine how much busier BRS might be had the city council had instead of Lulsgate settled on Filton with its longer runway (2,600 metres), better weather, with a major motorway junction on its doorstep and main line rail connectivity within a mile or so and a branch line (Filton-Avonmouth) running through the site.

Below are links to a couple of other recent airport press releases along similar lines to the subject matter of this thread.

I'm not a football supporter-type follower of an airport. To me an airport is a facility for a city, town or region in the same was as railway stations and bus stations provide such a service. BRS happens to be my local airport and I use it when I want to fly which these days is becoming increasingly less frequent. I'm far more interested in the economics of aviation than watching aircraft, although I do still look up when one is passing overhead, and although at times I've criticised BRS I do respect the way the owners and management down the years have made such a success out of such unpromising material.


 
I totally get what you mean. Any push towards reducing C02 has to be commended.
The fact they have a Sustainability manager is a really good sign of the commitment.
The huge increases in car parking spaces would probably even out any benefits though. I've used it a couple of times and the airport flyer is an amazing service, clean and efficient. It would be really nice to see use of trains to the site, I can imagine a lot of people would use them, but as with the buses, the airport will make a lot more money from parking than subsidising public transport
You are right on your final paragraph too, I certainly find myself a little (very) biased, so probably not as rational as I could be!
 
I totally get what you mean. Any push towards reducing C02 has to be commended.
The fact they have a Sustainability manager is a really good sign of the commitment.
The huge increases in car parking spaces would probably even out any benefits though. I've used it a couple of times and the airport flyer is an amazing service, clean and efficient. It would be really nice to see use of trains to the site, I can imagine a lot of people would use them, but as with the buses, the airport will make a lot more money from parking than subsidising public transport
You are right on your final paragraph too, I certainly find myself a little (very) biased, so probably not as rational as I could be!
I wasn't suggesting that you are a football supporter-type follower of an airport - in fact, your posts suggest a rounded approach. There are some who seem to regard their local airport as they would their favourite football team. I see nothing wrong in that - they are usually very enthusiastic.

I just stated my own position to make it clearer where I stand.
 
Is this not just a change of electricity provider. We all do it. Bulb energy and other such companies claim that their supply is from renewable sources. They supply the domestic market But dig deeper down and things get a bit murkier. They buy electricity from third parties who make no such claims that all their power comes from wind and solar. Dig into the stats from Orsted own site and they say only 64% of their power is sustainable. They hope to become 100% by 2023. So yes a big gimmick. For BRS to say they are now 100% green is a bare faced lie when their own supplier does not make that claim.
 
Last edited:
Is this not just a change of electricity provider. We all do it. Bulb energy and other such companies claim that their supply is from renewable sources. They supply the domestic market But dig deeper down and things get a bit murkier. They buy electricity from third parties who make no such claims that all their power comes from wind and solar. So yes a big gimmick.
I never understand how customers can be sure their electricity comes from renewable sources. The National Grid recieves its electricity from all kinds of sources and it's then sent through high voltage systems before being pared down to a level suitable for transfer into users' premises whether a private house or an airport.

It's not as if there are separate wiring systems for each electricity provider. Electricity comes into my house through wires and when I change provider no-one comes along to change the wires. So how do I know if my bit of electricity is from renewable sources - how does anyone know?

All I can see that happens is that a provider buys its power from a company specialising in renwable energy. I fail to see how my bit of electricity can be guaranteed to be from renewable sources if the Grid takes its power from various sources, not all of which are renewable.
 
Orsted the supplier was a huge fossil fuel company. Its hived off most of it into other entities and has jumped on the renewable bandwagon. It does own huge off shore windfarms but given that it is such a major player in many European countries it cannot be all 100 percent renewable. In fact they say that their total renewable power is now 65 percent. So how much of that 65 percent enters our national grid is questionable.
 
Top Bottom