By Graham Brown

THE COST of green schemes which could help Angus Council play its small part in saving the planet have been ruled out as too expensive by authority chiefs.

Wind and water turbines, solar heating and photovoltaic electricity systems have been condemned as over-costly and slow in pay back terms in a report which also casts doubt on a wind power proposal for the authority’s new HQ, because the machinery would blight Forfar’s showpiece Angus House building.

For the foreseeable future it seems the council’s hopes of reducing its carbon footprint rest with projects such as the biomass and combined heat power systems installed in only a very few properties.

Generation of renewable energy was the subject of a report from corporate services director Colin McMahon to councillors, but the top official had little good news for environment-conscious elected members over the realistic prospect of green energies being adopted on a wholesale basis across the county.

Instead he said the feasibility of such systems had not gained in viability since 2004, when independent experts put a dampener on the adoption of renewable schemes.

“Angus Council does not have a formal approved policy on the incorporation of renewable energy generation in its non-housing buildings although there are commitments to consider its incorporation in the Sustainable Properties Strategy adopted in February 2005,” he said.

“Property have established, through detailed research, analysis of the value for money and effectiveness of the contributions to good energy management that can be made by such energy generation.

“However, to date only limited opportunities have existed which provide appropriate circumstances to introduce this technology.”

Mr McMahon said a 2004 study “confirmed previous conclusions when it failed to identify any opportunities for the cost-effective adoption of this technology because, in every case, no acceptable pay back period could be obtained, even if the installation cost was offset by a 50% external grant”.

He said the latest report was being presented after property officials undertook a new assessment of the potential beneficial application of renewable energy technology.

The survey has ruled out solar heating, small size wind turbines, water turbines and photovoltaic electricity as viable green alternatives, largely on the grounds of capital cost and the payback times for installing the technologies.

“It is evident from analysis of these findings that the only potentially viable schemes identified are the adoption of biomass and Combined Heat and Power (CHP) systems.

“All other schemes, with the exception of an occasional wind turbine, do not provide value for money due to the lengthy payback periods.”

Mr McMahon said the contractor involved in the multi-million pound Forfar/Carnoustie schools project was asked to look into incorporating renewable energy systems, but none were considered economically viable.

And at Angus House, on the council’s new Orchardbank business park in Forfar, a wind turbine looks an unlikely addition to the landscape.

Mr McMahon added, “The viability of many renewable energy generation technologies will improve as technology develops and demand increases. It is therefore likely that some of the technologies currently considered unviable will become viable and hence can feasibly be adopted as technologies advance.”