The document discusses the findings and recommendations of the UK Research Councils UK (RCUK) Energy Strategy Fellowship. It recommends that UK public spending on energy research and development be better aligned with the country's climate change and energy policy goals. It also calls for a more joined-up approach across the UK's energy innovation landscape, including between research councils, innovation agencies, and government departments. Specific recommendations include establishing strategic roadmaps to guide research, improving data sharing policies, and providing longer-term funding for infrastructure and field trials.

1. CCS and the wider energy innovation picture
UKCCSRC Biannual Meeting:
CCS in the bigger picture
Queens College Cambridge
2-3 April 2014
Jim Skea
Research Councils UK Energy Strategy Fellow

2. Outline
• The RCUK Energy Strategy Fellowship
• UK public support for energy R&D
• Findings and recommendations

3. 3
Launch Event
Kohn Centre
The Royal Society
London
12 November 2013
Research Councils UK
Energy Strategy Fellowship

4. International Panel for the RCUK Review of Energy
Is the energy research funded
by the UK government through
the RCUK energy programme
delivering impact in the UK and
worldwide?
“Across almost all areas
reviewed by us we found
interesting, leading edge and
world class research. The
excellent international reputation
of UK research is deservedly
earned”.

5. The buts…..
• Impact
On the whole, the academic community is very well regarded on the
international scene….. in terms of impact on economic benefit,
industry development and quality of life, we have concerns that
much more can be done.
• Skills base
There is a good pipeline of doctoral students and post doctoral
research associates……the availability of long-term career paths is
less than clear.
• Targeted programmes/transparency
These have produced impressive results…..….. the communication
and lack of transparency of process regarding the balance between
open ended discovery and targeted strategic programmes.

6. Tasks of the Energy Strategy Fellow
• Develop a “roadmap” of research, skills and training needs across
the energy landscape to meet the UK 2050 targets
• Identify gaps and misalignments of activities with UK goals
• Work closely with the Research Councils and DECC
• Organise meetings and workshops
• Act impartially and independently
• Act as advocate for the Energy Programme

7. Energy research and training – workshops
Fossil Fuels and
CCS
8-9 January 2013
with UK CCS
Consortium
Energy in the Home
and Workplace
5-6 February 2013
with DECC (EEDO)
Bioenergy
14-15 May 2013
with BSBEC and
Bioenergy SUPERGEN
Electrochemical
Energy Technologies
25-26 June 2013
with RSC
Energy
Infrastructure
17-18 April 2013
With Ofgem, Smart Grid
Forum
Transport Energy
11-12 June 2013
with Low Carbon Vehicle
Partnership, DfT
“Light-touch review”
Nuclear fission
Wind/Wave/Tide
Industrial processes
“Strategic”
Energy strategies and research needs
Environmental science, social science and economics
Research Councils and the funding landscape

8. What the Fellowship could and couldn’t do
Could do
• Long bullet point lists of research problems
• Insights into the overall balance of the RCUK portfolio
• Insights into better ways of working
Couldn’t do
• Clear research priorities within specific research domains

9. Outputs
• Synthesis report
• Nine topic-specific supporting
documents (including Fossil fuels and
CCS)
• Twelve workshop reports
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/rcukenergystrategy/prospectus

10. Outline
• The RCUK Energy Strategy Fellowship
• UK public support for energy R&D
• Findings and recommendations

11. Energy RD&D spend in the UK

12. % of GDP spent on energy RD&D
Source: IEA

13. The UK energy innovation landscape
Source: Unpublished DECC energy innovation map 2013

14. Energy innovation spend by body
Source: National Audit Office

15. Outline
• The RCUK Energy Strategy Fellowship
• UK public support for energy R&D
• Findings and recommendations

16. Findings and recommendations
• Resources and portfolios
• Joining up the innovation landscape
• Infrastructure and data
• Champions
• CCS-specific recommendations

17. Resources
“Like inverted Micawbers waiting for something to turn down”
Winston Churchill on the Treasury
“…the research councils and other research and
innovation bodies should press for public
expenditure settlements that are better aligned
with the UK’s wider climate change and energy
policy ambitions.”

18. Hedging your bets: energy projections to 2040 compared

19. Policy clarity?
• The energy research community does not believe that a clear
and convincing vision of the UK’s future energy system has been
established.
• Such a vision could inform the development of strategic
roadmaps that point clearly towards research challenges.
• Clarity about the direction of energy policy and a consistent
vision of the future coupled with a sustained long-term funding
structure would also encourage younger researchers into the
field……
• ……but the research community’s expectation about policy clarity
is almost certainly unrealistic. This underlines the need for a
portfolio approach to investments in energy research whose pay-
off will be in the longer term.

20. Joining up: links along the innovation chain
• There needs to be a more joined up approach across the innovation
landscape with the Research Councils, TSB, ETI, industry, DECC and
other government departments acting in concert.
• The establishment of the Low Carbon Innovation Coordination Group
(LCICG) is welcome but high expectations need to be managed
• TSB catalyst centres support projects in priority areas where the UK
research base has a leading position and where there is clear
commercial potential.

21. Joining up: transparency and basic/applied research
• More clarity about the applied/basic orientation of Research Council
support. There are differences in the nature of the science supported
within and across the domains of different Research Councils –
NERC/EPSRC/BBSRC?
• “There is an-going need to communicate the relationship between the
research councils’ Royal Charter objectives, their Strategic and Delivery
Plans, and the specific choices that are made in supporting research
and training activities. The logic behind the research councils’ decision-
making is not always understood by the research community”.

22. • The International Review Panel recommended a single Energy
Programme budget…unlikely to happen but examples of shared
initiatives (UKERC, Energy Use Energy Demand )
• Interdisciplinarity is acknowledged and supported by the Research
Councils…but potential gaps
• CCS: strong NERC/EPSRC interests, + relevance of ESRC
Joining up: cross-council working

23. Data: a patchy record
• There should be open access to the results of publicly funded research
(OECD)….all research councils insist on data management policies
• ESRC, NERC and STFC place strong data requirements and support data
providers and/or management centres
• BBSRC and EPSRC devolve responsibility to they should establish stronger
data sharing policies and establish suitable repositories for manifestly
‘common good’ data
• EPSRC should identify priorities for curation and sharing; BBSRC already
does this

24. Infrastructure: trials and facilities
• Field trials
• geological storage of carbon dioxide
• unconventional fossil fuel extraction
• marine renewable technology trials
• bioenergy crop production
• energy efficiency interventions
• Computational facilities
• Experimental facilities
• STFC facilities (Diamond, ISIS) under-used
• Capital and operating budgets determined separately
• ‘capital beneficence’ and ‘operating austerity’

25. Infrastructure: funding cycles
The needs of science not the wants of scientists…
• Research Council Strategic Plans should extend beyond budgetary
cycles to enable long-term investments in infrastructure, surveys, trials
and experiments to be exploited fully. However:
• flexibility
• should not be seen as establishing firm budgetary commitments
• should be reviewed at regular intervals.
• Research councils should be prepared to make selective longer-term
research investments of 10 years or longer, subject to rigorous stage-
gating procedures, where there is clear evidence that scientific benefits
cannot be realised on a shorter timescale:
• CO2 storage trials
• cohort studies in the social sciences
• the evaluation of the impacts of policy interventions.

26. Champions and centres of excellence
Strengths
• UK Nuclear Universities consortium
• UK CCS Research Centre
• Bioenergy – BSBEC and Supergen Bioenergy Hub (but “schizophrenic”)
• Networks
• Marine renewables
Emerging
• End use energy demand
Weaker
• PV
• Fuels cells and hydrogen

27. CCS: specific recommendations
Near-term challenges
• capture retrofit on gas-fired generation
• reliability, availability, maintainability and operability (RAMO)
• monitoring and control
Basic research challenges
• small-scale carbon capture
• negative emissions technologies (biomass energy with CCS)
• membranes, adsorbents and capture looping
• air capture
• biomimetic CO2 capture

28. Fossil fuels and CCS are linked
• need to re-consider declining support for fossil fuel research, especially
in relation to NERC/geological sciences
• understanding fluid-rock interactions
• characterising complex subsurface systems at large spatial and
temporal scales
• the impacts of engineered activity on the deep sub-surface

29. Thank you!
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/rcukenergystrategy