Thursday, May 31, 2007

Solar water heating is tops with the Low Carbon Buildings Programme

Solar thermal heating for hot water is clearly by far the most popular form of domestic renewable energy, proving that it works technically and economically.


That is clear from the Low Carbon Buildings Programme (LCBP)'s project successes: since it launched in April 2006 the LCBP has directly funded 2175 installations on homes, including 1467 (over two thirds) solar thermal heating systems, 313 (14%) solar PV projects and 242 (11%) mini-turbines.

In other words solar water heating is six times more popular than micro-wind. Deservedly.

The application process for the grants has been streamlined and it reopened to bids for the remaining £11.9m of grant money two days ago.

There's now no monthly cap, a £2,500 maximum limit on grants per household, a requirement for advance planning permission required and a re-designed form.

No doubt this will run out in a few weeks - then what?

The Low Carbon Kid says: if solar water heating is so popular why has it been left out of the Energy White Paper?

> Apply for a Low Carbon Buildings Programme grant here

Consultation on renewable energy technologies

The Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology - a cross-party bunch containing some usually reasonable MPs - is conducting an inquiry into renewable energy generation technologies.


The Committee invites evidence on the following points:

• The current state of UK research and development in, and the deployment of, renewable energy-generation technologies including: offshore wind; photovoltaics; hydrogen and fuel cell technologies; wave; tidal; bioenergy; ground source heat pumps: and intelligent grid management and energy storage.

• The feasibility, costs, timescales and progress in commercialising renewable technologies as well as their reliability and associated carbon footprints.

• The UK Government’s role in funding research and development for renewable energy-generation technologies and providing incentives for technology transfer and industrial research and development.

• Other possible technologies for renewable energy-generation.

The Low Carbon Kid comments that give the government's record on supporting renewable energy companies at the SME level, his first comment would be to up the subsidies and not create funding breaks that result in companies going to the wall or laying staff off because of the delays in getting funding.

Just such a point has been made by many including Jeremy Leggett of Solar Century, in relation to the Low Carbon Building Programme.

Leggett also said the other day at Hay that senior civil servants - at DTI and Treasury - are the ones who constitute the biggest block in government against renewables, especially at the small end. Hence the lack of a feed-in law, which has given the German renewables industry such a boost. He was told by them when he was on a government renewables advisory committee not even to float the idea of a feed-in law as it would be sunk straight away.

Deadline: Monday 2 July 2007.

Evidence should be submitted in Word format (version no later than word 2002), via e-mail to scitechcom@parliament.uk . The body of the e-mail must include a contact name, telephone number and postal address. The e-mail should also make clear who the submission is from.

Submissions should be as brief as possible, and no more than 3,000 words. Paragraphs should be numbered, and the document should include a brief executive summary. Evidence should be original, not previously published. Further guidance: here

The "most affordable" solution to climate change

The building, transport and power sectors in the G8 countries, together with five leading developing countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa) have the biggest potential for saving energy.

In fact, they could increase energy efficiency by a total of 20% by 2020, according to a report commissioned by WWF.

"There is no one silver bullet to stop dangerous climate change, but energy efficiency is the largest and most affordable solution available to avert the current crisis," says Hans Verolme, Director of WWF's Global Climate Change Programme.

He claims that endorsing these targets is technically and economically feasible for all countries. The report estimates the efficiency potential for each sector by the year 2030 as:
  • the transport sector: 25-50%
  • the building sector: 30-45%
  • the power sector: 4-45%, depending on the country.
Recommended measures include standard setting, labelling for energy efficiency, fiscal instruments such as subsidies or tax credits, and a CO2 or energy tax.

Increased energy conservation would result in cost savings, an increase in energy security, and provide new business opportunities and increased employment.

> Read the report, Making Energy Efficiency happen: From Potential to Reality [PDF link]

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Miliband's complacency

The Planning White Paper has been attacked by many on the grounds that it would increase, not reduce, overall greenhouse emissions

This is because it will permit fast-tracking of motorway widening, new ports, runways, bypasses and so on.

The overall climate impact of all of this has, unbelievably, not been calculated by the government despite "lip service" to the topic in the white paper.

Nevertheless, at Hay-on-Wye Literature Festival, David Miliband asserted that the central philosophy of the government's climate change programme is that "as long as overall emissions from the UK come down it doesn't matter where the cuts are made” and therefore transport emissions could continue to rise without necessarily contradicting policy.

Such complancy is shocking. How can he know that overall emissions will come down if the impact of the planned transport expansions haven't been calculated?

The plans will make it easier for homeowners to install microgeneration, but grants for these are pitifully few and low. You have to be rich to do it like David Cameron.

The Low Carbon Buildings Programme (LCBP) has just received and from yesterday made available an extra £11.9m for housdeholders' solar, wind, groundsource etc.. power. This will last a month and then that's it.

What a way to support the renewables industry and meet the overwhelming public demand.

> Respond to the Planning consultation
The deadline for responses is 17 August.

Decommissioning delays

Decommissioning the nuclear reactors at Harwell in Oxfordshire and Winfrith in Dorset could be delayed by up to five years, the UK Atomic Energy Authority says.

This is down to a budget cut from £101m this year to £60m by 2008-09, caused by the closure of the Thorp reprocessing plant in Sellafield for more than two years following a radioactive fuel leak.

Reprocessing overseas fuel formed much of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA)'s income, as did the sale of electricity from the Magnox power stations at Oldbury, Gloucestershire, which has been temporary shut down.

The best locations for the Energy White Paper's expected new nuclear plants would be the sites of existing ones.

But if Oxfordshire and Winfrith are to remain open for longer, new locations will have to be investigated, such as the sites of existing coal and gas stations in the south-east of England. This could run into plannning permision delays.

Monday, May 28, 2007

Miliband at the Hay Festival

Environment Secretary David Miliband, son and heir of the family of comedians sired by the late Spike Miliband, shared a panel today at the Hay Festival with Solar Century's Jeremy Leggett and climate change author Mark Lynas.

David's brother Ed was also at Hay, together spreading the Brownite smile as wide as they could.

David's body language spoke volumes:
  • he was the only member of the panel to remove his jacket
  • the only one to put his foot on the table
  • the most animated in both attack and defence
  • he peppered his speech and head movements with mannerisms that would have been equally at home on Tony Blair
  • and was the only one to spread his legs alarmingly wide while scratching the inside of his thigh.

What does this reveal about future energy policy? That, I feel, it is to be just as aggressively impotent as before.

That is, a policy of doing as little as possible to support the indigenous renewables industry or to harm road building and our love of cheap air flights, a policy pursued with reckless enthusiasm and empty promises.

Afterwards the Low Carbon Kid buttonholed the man, before he sprang off to join his family, and asked him: wasn't he scared by the fear that if the UK builds more nuclear power stations, then it would give the green light to other nations whose security and safety procedures were not quite as rigourous as ours?

He said: they already are building them.

Er, like Iran?

That's alright then.

The breathless complacency of the energy policy extends, then, to a breathless complacency about safety and peace in a more nuclear world.

Friday, May 25, 2007

The Energy White Paper - a snail responds to an emergency

There's a feeling of deja vu about this.

We've been here before - twice in the last four years.

And still the Government refuses to take the bold decisions it needs to take to embrace the potential of mid and long term future renewable technologies, making the country a dynamic world leader in tidal, marine current, off-shore wind, wave, heatpump, CHP, solar water heating and other generators.

Significant investment (say, the amount spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) now in these would leapfrog us into the claimed twin goals of energy security and climate protection.

The government also refuses to outlaw high-energy-consuming behaviour, instead wanting to tinker round the edges.

Britain will need around 30-35GW of new electricity generating capacity (about one-third of existing capacity) as coal and nuclear plants retire over the next two decades, with around two-thirds of that needed by 2020.

The UK government's new energy strategy, said Alistair Darling, paves the way for a mandatory, auction-based carbon trading scheme for businesses, such as banks, supermarkets and central government departments.

It also promises, again, an end to fuel poverty, more renewable energy, technologies to bury heat-trapping gases and the possible expansion of nuclear power.

"I am quite clear in my mind that it is important that we have a mix of energy supply ... that we don't become overly dependent on imported gas," Alistair Darling told MPs.

Below I summarise some of the many policies signalled in the document, with its many accompanying downloads, that include the various consultations, whose deadlines begin half way through August. I also detail some reactions.

Demand management


Carbon Emission Reduction Target


This scheme will build on the Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC) - a requirement on energy suppliers to bring real savings to their customers by encouraging prudent energy use. EEC2 (2005–2008) deliveed carbon savings of 0.50 MtC/y. The Carbon Emission Reduction Target (CERT) is expected to deliver 1.143 MtC/y and run until 2011. Ofgem and energy suppliers should prepare for its start in April next year. The carbon savings to be attributed to each energy efficiency measure allowed under CERT have already been published.
The government is continuing to investigate the feasibility of personal carbon allowances, and will develop further ways of educating consumers about energy efficiency.

Carbon Reduction Commitment


A UK mandatory cap and trade scheme, the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), will secure savings of 1.2 Mega-Tonnnes of carbon per year by 2020. The Climate Change Bill will be used to introduce this. Under it, as many as 5,000 large firms and public sector organisations could be allowed to buy EU ETS allowances. Last year's energy review broached emission trading for large energy users not included in the EU ETS. Last winter's consultation showed that business supports the idea. CRC allowances will be issued to participants via an auction process. It will only affect organisations whose mandatory half hourly metered electricity consumption is over 6000 MWh per year. CRC will be revenue neutral to the Exchequer. The auction revenue will be recycled to participants by means of annual payments proportional to average annual emissions since the start of the scheme, with a bonus/penalty depending on how successfully they reduce emissions.

Smart meters


The Energy Demand Research Project, co-funded by the Government and industry, will involve several thousand households receiving meters displaying real-time energy use from 2008 to 2010. There is a consultation on the idea that energy suppliers will give all business users advanced and smart metering services within the next 5 years. This will not apply to the smallest business users, nor to larger businesses with half hourly meters. In addition all business premises will be required to have an Energy Performance Certificate when they are built, sold or rented out. This will describe its energy ratings and the steps to be taken to improve its performance.

Consumer electronics


The Market Transformation Programme is consulting on how the performance of energy using products will need to improve between now and 2020, including proposals for product standards and targets to phase out the least efficient products. An online calculator is to be developed which could be used by retailers and manufacturers to test if their products will meet the Government’s standards (e.g. for stand-by power and energy efficiency). It could be used to examine the scope for changing specifications or sales volumes to improve their carbon footprint and help retailers and manufacturers tell Government about their achievements and plans.

Transport


A Low Carbon Transport Innovation Strategy backed by funding of £20m is to be made available for public procurement of low carbon vehicles. A £30m R&D ‘Innovation Platform’ and a further £5m for the Energy Technologies Institute is intended to stimulate the developoment of low carbon transport.

Buildings


The government already has an aim to deliver new zero carbon homes but the real challenge lies in the existing housing stock. For example, seven million solid-walled homes in the UK are technically difficult to insulate. A new 5–7 year research programme - the Technology Strategy Board's Innovation Platform on Low Impact Buildings - will look at cost-effective solutions for both by financing R&D into clear innovation gaps and building on existing work, such as the EST’s Best Practice Programme and microgeneration field trials.

Supply strategies


Nuclear new build


There is a key point in the discussion on nuclear power where it says that the Government has modelled different future scenarios as part of the Energy White Paper. "The modelling indicates that it might be possible under certain assumptions, to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions by 60% by 2050 without new nuclear power stations." However, it says, "if we were to plan on this basis, we would be in danger of not meeting our policy goals" of security of supply and cost-effectively reducing carbon emissions.
The choice is therefore to be made on economic grounds alone. However, the economics of nuclear are calculated as making sense with a price for carbon of at least €36 per tonne. Is this feasible? Perhaps: in May investment bank UBS said it thought the price will reach €30 in 2008.
A number of sites for new power stations are proposed in the south of England including Brighton and Oxford. This was inevitable after the new Scottish Assembly ruled out nuclear power stations in Scotland.
As for the nuclear waste legacy resulting from new build, a report from the NRA published with the White Paper estimates a required increase in the country's nuclear waste storage needs of half as much again.
The go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power plants to replace the 18% of electric power the old ones provide, required by 2023, includes a consultation on how applications should be made. The accompanying proposed planning regime changes announced by Ruth Kelly are intended to speed up the planning permissions process.
None of this guarantees the building of a single new power station however.

Renewables


The Renewables Obliation (RO) system and requirements to be put on energy utilities would triple electricity from renewables such as wind and tidal wave to 15% by 2015. This compares to the European Union target to get 20% of its energy (not just electricity) from renewable sources by 2020.
The RO will be banded to provide differentiated levels of support for different technologies and modified to maintain ROC (certificate) prices if they become oversupplied - but this won't take effect until 1 April 2009 at the earliest. A consultation is now on to determine what technologies (PV, CHP, biomass, etc.) should receive exactly what level of support.
The national grid will continue to be developed to accommodate new renewable and distributed generators.
Tidal power could in theory eventually yield a significant proportion of the UK's electricity needs. The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) is currently investigating this and after it has reported in September the Government will decide on its strategy.

Local energy


To encourage more local or decentralised low-carbon electricity, the DTI and Ofgem will consult later this year on options for more flexible market and licensing arrangements within the licensed framework to be implemented by the end of 2008. The paper says all six major energy suppliers have now committed to publishing easily accessible export tariffs so installers will know how much they will get for the electricity they sell back to the grid. A new Distributed Energy Unit is being set up within the DTI to monitor the development of markets for these technologies.

Heating


There are few measures to support more sustainable heating, other than to publicise more widely the benefits of combined heat and power, and the biomass strategy.

Biomass


The new Biomass Strategy sets out to stablise this emerging new fuel sector, and tease apart the many types of fuel and technologies to determine what level of suport is required for each. It looks at co-firing and the sustainability of biomass, including a requirement on larger generators to report on the source and sustainability of the biomass they incinerate.
Energy-from-waste is the most cost-efficient, but apart from this, the most cost effective options are small to medium commercial/industrial boilers operating throughout the year (80% load) on wood chips or, less cheaply, pellets.
It is currently cheaper to use biomass to heat buildings than convert it into a fuel for transport, so the consultation document looks towards second generation technologies to make biodiesel and bioethanol more competitively priced. At present imported sources for both biofuels are cheaper than those made from UK crops but have a higher carbon footprint.

Carbon capture


Details of a plan to build the world's first end-to-end carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant are also provided. The 300 megawatt plant is expected to be commissioned after 2011. Alistair Darling told MPs that Britain was at the forefront of CCS technology and that he foresees major export potential. After publication of the plan BP withdrew from bidding to build a CCS plant at a North Sea former oil well because the timescale had slipped too far. The grant award competition will start next November, but had previously been scheduled for March.

Reactions


French power giant EDF welcomed the White Paper and said it and the world's largest maker of nuclear reactors, Areva, would ask British authorities to certify the latest "EPR" reactor.

Greenpeace director John Sauven commented: "Reaching for nuclear power to fight climate change is like an obese person taking up smoking to lose weight" and worried that finance for nuclear would distract from R&D for new renewable technologies. He continued: "The government had a good plan in 2003 which they failed to deliver on. Now they want to waste even more time and energy on nuclear power, a wasteful energy system of the past."

Last February the High Court found that the public consultation leading up to this White Paper was flawed. John Sauven said: "It appears the government has not learned from the verbal lashing it got in the High Court. Already Tony Blair has said the policy will not change."
The Energy Institute (EI), the leading professional membership body for energy professionals, welcomed the announcements on new metering, carbon capture and storage and energy efficiency but worrried about whether the UK had sufficient skill levels to meet the challenge.

Fuel poverty charity Energy Action Scotland thought the new meters "will not be sufficient, but that truly ‘smart meters’ are required which can be recalibrated and read remotely, thus avoiding the delays that can lead to debt build-up".

BWEA worried that the Government lacked sufficient conviction to turn its ‘aspiration’ to gain 20% of our power from renewables by 2020 into a firm target. It pointed out that, given the small amounts of heating and transport currently satisfied by renewables, the electricity target will need to go beyond 20%, "the only resource that can take us significantly beyond 20% is... offshore wind".

The Conservative Party said the White Paper "offers nothing definite on nuclear or anything else. It heralds the collapse of carbon capture, while continuing an irrational regime for carbon penalties and incentives. It provides little or no prospect of hitting renewables targets and it does not offer the security that the country so urgently needs."
The response from business however was concern about the 'energy gap' in eight years, between 2015 and 2020 when nuclear power stations start closing. "Time is against us if we are to avoid power shortages," CBI Director General Richard Lambert said.

However, it takes around 13 years to commission a new nuclear power station. "The White Paper suggests the government understands what is needed to avoid this energy crunch. The real test now will be delivering these proposals," Lambert concluded.

There is no clear evidence that private sector finance will be on offer for nuclear industry that needs huge initial investment, even if it can later generate power at relatively low cost. The mid-term energy future is still uncertain.

How to take part


A series of meetings will be held, advertised on the DTI website. The invited public will be demographically representative of the UK population through direct approaches to random homes on selected electoral registers. NGOs, industry, local authorities and many other organisations will be invited to send representatives to meetings to explore their views. The documents are on the following web sites:
> The Energy White Paper
> The nuclear consultation
> Consultation on consumer electronics standards

Responding to the nuclear new build consultation

If you want to object to the support for new nuclear power stations made in the Government's new Energy White Paper, you might wish to do so on the basis of the following assumptions it makes.


There is a key point in the discussion on nuclear power where it says that the Government has modelled different future scenarios as part of the Energy White Paper.

"The modelling indicates that it might be possible under certain assumptions, to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions by 60% by 2050 without new nuclear power stations." However, it says, "if we were to plan on this basis, we would be in danger of not meeting our policy goals" of security of supply and cost-effectively reducing carbon emissions. (See Chapter 5 page 194-5.)

The choice is therefore to be made on economic grounds alone. However, the economics of nuclear are calculated as making sense with a price for carbon of at least €36 per tonne. Is this feasible? In May investment bank UBS said it thought the price will reach €30 in 2008.

If you want to challenge the government you have to come up with persuasive figures.

The models:


> The UK MARKAL model in the 2007 Energy White Paper
> Final Report on DTI-DEFRA Scenarios and Sensitivities using the UK MARKAL and MARKAL-Macro Energy System Models

Siting and waste


A number of sites for new power stations are proposed in the south of England including Brighton and Oxford. This was inevitable after the new Scottish Assembly ruled out nuclear power stations in Scotland. I can't really see Brighton saying yes, can you?

As for the nuclear waste legacy resulting from new build, a report from the NRA published with the White Paper estimates a required increase in the country's nuclear waste storage needs of half as much again. The NRA thinks this is "not much".

The go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power plants to replace the 18% of electric power the old ones provide, required by 2023, includes a consultation on how applications should be made. The accompanying proposed planning regime changes announced by Ruth Kelly are intended to speed up the planning permissions process.

None of this guarantees the building of a single new power station.

How to take part


A series of meetings will be held, advertised on the DTI website. The invited public will be demographically representative of the UK population through direct approaches to random homes on selected electoral registers. NGOs, industry, local authorities and many other organisations will be invited to send representatives to meetings to explore their views. The documents are on the following web sites:
> The Energy White Paper
> The nuclear consultation
> Consultation on consumer electronics standards

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Power companies make a mint from the ETS

Europe’s power companies have made well over €1 billion profits from the EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) to date and the sector will make net profits of €tens of billions during Phase II of the ETS, according to the Carbon Trust.

The EU-ETS needs reforming since it is perversely encouraging some signatories to increase carbon emissions.

Most National Allocation Plans (NAPs) offer free carbon allowances to new entrants. In around half of the NAPs, including the German plan, the new entrant rules actually give higher numbers of free allowances to more carbon intensive fuels, such as coal and lignite, which creates a perverse incentive to build new power facilities that emit high levels of CO2.

Professor Michael Grubb, Chief Economist at the Carbon Trust and Executive Director of Climate Strategies, says:
“Too many countries are using special provisions to try and protect carbon intensive investments. [Instead] policy, on a national and pan-EU level, should be focused on investing in low carbon alternatives.”

The Trust is arguing that Member States adopt a higher level of auctioning in Phase II.

They should also rapidly define a third Phase that addresses the problems surrounding new entrant rules and creates sufficient certainty to encourage long lived investments.

The Carbon Trust also found that:
• the EC last year turned a set of proposed allocation plans that represented a 5 per cent increase on CO2 emissions above verified 2005 levels, into a five per cent decrease below 2005 levels

• Carbon price remains uncertain

• if the carbon price remains positive, this will drive some abatement, particularly in power generation and cement manufacturing

• Power companies will still make big profits

• More auctioning will be important in Phase II and beyond - the current NAPs only propose a small amount of auctioning but governments retain the right to decide to auction more. This could be effective to improve incentives for low carbon investment by using auction revenues to support such investment; by reducing peverse incentives and by enabling a reserve auction price that would help to stabilise price expectations

• Attention to detail will be critical in Phase III – real focus needs to be placed on the details of scheme design that affect individual investment incentives, in particular new entrant and closure rules, in Phase III - going beyond the focus on volumes and prices that has dominated debate on Phase II allocations.

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

The future of farting

It's a fact: farts harm the planet. Everybody talks about carbon dioxide, but no one mentions methane. Methane is a greenhouse gas about 20 times more potent than the carbon dioxide we breathe out through our mouths.

Extreme offenders, in the post-Kyoto world, will be convicted of crimes against humanity.

Therefore I am founding a company called Fart Neutral.

Fart Neutral will neutralise the effect of your farting by investing the money you give us to compensate your farts in schemes to sequester methane under the earth, or burn it to generate heat and power, capturing the carbon dioxide instead.

We will also invest in educational programmes to teach people which foods - beans, lentils - cause the most methane production from rear ends.

Eventually such diets will be taxed out of existence.

We will also manufacture special rubber underwear, sealed tightly round the waist and legs, with a built in inflatable balloon at the rear. When the balloon has fully inflated from your methane production, it will be sealed, detached and replaced.

We will pay you for the return of full balloons and send you an empty one in return. We will then trade the balloons on the open market - methane trading, or, as the trade refers to it, the Fart Mart.

Variations on the underwear will be manufactured for farm animals and pets. Cows are well known as a major producer of this greenhouse gas.

Under post-Kyoto legislation it will be illegal for animals and humans not to wear such methane-capturing apparel. Eventually farm animals will be phased out for a compulsory vegetarian diet, which will, anyway, release more land for food and biofuel production.

This will give rise to a new age of fashion, a revival of the 18th Century style of exaggerated derrières. Men will wear pantaloons with large flaps at the back, and women long skirts with seams to accommodate the balloons at the rear. These will be considered sexy, and the smelling of farts, since they are forbidden, will provide sexual frissons.


Special offer: Send me £5 ($10) now to neutralise your farts for the next year. Hurry! After June 30 the cost will inflate.

Comments from the earlier posting on MySpace:


Lucy:
David, can I assume that a vaginal fart is harmless?

David Thorpe:
Assume nothing. I will have to come round and test this.

Lucy:
Well, I'll put the kettle on but I don't think I can do them to order ..

David Thorpe:
Thank you. I'll be over soon. Do not fret yourself about 'doing them to order'. The important thing is to be relaxed. I have been specially trained with techniques for just such a situation. And besides, in the disinterested pursuit of scientific truth we must above all have patience.

shell:
My boyfriend emits some right humdingers. It lingers for ages too.
Mine smell of roses so there is no way they can harm the environment.

David Thorpe:
I'm afraid that the delightful feminine smell is caused by your sexually aroused pheronomes, and has nothing to do with the methane, which is the carrier gas.
Therefore you both still need to be neutralised.
We do a special discounted deal for couples - £8 for a year.

Mr. Pillowcase:
Wow, you have certainly planned this out very well!

David Thorpe:
Well, thank you, but let's give some tribute to the European Union's Farting Directive (2007).

Poetica™:
You are a visionary! I will start working on my business plan to design the fluffiest Fartaloons and Firts the world has ever seen.

David Thorpe:
I look forward to seeing them. It's important for the designs to be cute and risque, don't you think.
I'm glad to see you are taking the positive attitude, following the Government's decisive leadership on global warming. Rightfully, they say climate change is not a threat, but an opportunity to make loads of money.
This is why we in the business community welcome climate change as a chance to reinvigorate our faded product lines, introduce new styles and fashions, and find new reasons why the public should continue to buy our products, even when they don't need them and can't afford them.
Let us celebrate climate change with a new line of fluffy, methane offsetted underwear!

Lucy:
We're all immature adults here!

David Thorpe:
Speak for yourself. I have the interests of the planet at heart. And making money. You can't get more mature than that.

Adam Horovitz:
Oh god, as a vegetarian I'm in deep trouble...

David Thorpe:
No, Adam, you are half way to salvation, for your meat-free diet is not dependant on the unseen emanations of distant ruminants.
The best way to narrow your methane footprint is to eat less beans and become anorexic.
The most selfless act would, of course, be suicide - that way you have no footprint at all, and we at Fart Neutral can give you a zero methane funeral, by offsetting the methane produced by your decomposing body - for a small fee of course.
However such martyrdom is for the saints amongst us only, and at Fart Neutral we know there are few of those - that is the reason for our existence - to provide guilt free farting for everyone.
Hence our motto: Supporting Farters with a Clear Conscience.

Adam Horovitz:
Beanless anorexia it is, then. No more being mistaken for a passing herd of cattle for me!! Thank you Fart Neutral - I don't know what I would have done without you...