Voices

Views from elsewhere

Syndicate contentRSS

Who runs Britain’s energy policy?Supported by

A smaller cut in wind power funding comes at the cost of a commitment to decades more of dirty and expensive gas.

New Statesman
Photograph: Getty Images

Who runs Britain’s energy policy? We have a Department of Energy and Climate Change – you might think from their name that they do. Or perhaps it’s Chancellor George Osborne’s Treasury that calls the shots? Now you’re getting warmer.

This week's announcement by the Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, that he had secured only a 10 per cent cut in wind power funding, was heavily spun as a victory for the Lib Dem-run department. Given that the Treasury had been demanding 25 per cent cuts, this seemed a victory indeed – but one with a huge hidden cost. Because, as payment for this victory, Davey has been forced to quietly concede to another of the Treasury’s demands: a commitment to decades more of dirty and expensive gas.

We know this to be the Chancellor’s wishes, because on Monday someone leaked a letter – effectively a ransom note – that he had sent to Davey outlining his position. In it, Osborne demanded that the Energy Secretary issue “a statement which gives a clear, strong signal that we regard unabated gas as able to play a core part of our electricity generation to at least 2030 – not just providing back-up for wind plant”.

Acceding to this outrageous demand would mean seriously jeopardising the UK’s fight against climate change. As the Government’s independent advisors, the Committee on Climate Change, stated in response: "This would all lead to a second dash for gas. This would be incompatible with the government's climate change goals."

But on Wednesday, DECC dutifully trotted out a press release stating that “the Government… is today confirming that it sees gas continuing to play an important part in the energy mix well into and beyond 2030”. Some victory.

The exchange has also highlighted the hypocrisy of the Treasury in its assessment of what merits public subsidy, and what must go without.

Osborne stated in his letter to Davey: “While your proposals [on renewables funding] achieve some savings we will still be paying more than £500m more to support renewable generation in 2013-14 than we collectively agreed was affordable”. No-one disputes that as technology costs come down, public funding for renewables should decline; the renewables industry itself was offering up 10 per cent cuts.

But wait; what’s this? On Wednesday, as DECC announced its cuts to renewables funding, the Treasury simultaneously unveiled £500m of tax breaks for offshore gas drilling. What’s unaffordable to spend on clean energy suddenly becomes eminently affordable to spend on drilling up the dirty stuff.

Enough is enough. The Chancellor must be prevented from undermining the UK’s green economy – as the CBI recently stated, it’s one of the few parts of the economy still growing. A high-carbon energy system will lock the UK in to a high-cost as well as high-polluting future. So in whose interests is the Chancellor acting?

It’s now up to David Cameron and Nick Clegg to back their Energy Minister over the Chancellor. They should insist that the Energy Bill includes a target to decarbonise the UK’s electricity system by 2030 and unlocks support for clean British energy. The alternative energy strategy that George Osborne would have us follow is a dirty and dangerous dead end.

Guy Shrubsole is an Energy Campaigner at Friends of the Earth. For more information on Friends of the Earth’s Clean British Energy campaign: www.cleanbritishenergy.co.uk

 

14 comments

Michael Simpson's picture

Hello

I think that your blog is quite nice! The content is very Good

Keep up with The outstanding posts.

regards,

Steven Wilder's picture

Good morning

I think that your blog is really nice! The content is really useful

Go on with awesome posts

see you,

Climateworrier's picture

Since intermittent and highly variable wind requires balancing in the grid by highly controllable gas this is actually the most rational policy that DECC have come out with.

There is no way to store meaningful amounts of electricity and so more wind inevitably means more gas.

Anonymouse's picture

It is clearly EdF who runs UK energy policy. New build nuclear is widely considered to cost as much, if not more, than offshore wind. That is why everyone but EdF has pulled the plug (no pun intended) on new nuclear. The net amount of subsidy that will be paid under the proposed CfD will dwarf any amount paid for wind, due to the volumes produced. In case anyone is unsure, a CfD is where the power station/technology gets a contract that agrees to pay it the difference between the market price (average, say £45/MWh) and the price in the CfD contract (nuclear is suggested by some to need an eye watering £165/MWh). This compares to onshore wind at c.£90/MWh and offshore at c.£150/MWh. And people think wind is expensive?!! More gas and wind for me, please!

potkettleblack's picture

Cheaper and less environmentally damaging to just have the gas without the wind - less required then! The more wind the more gas back up we will require. Where is the sense in that, please someone explain to me.

Tricia Jewell's picture

The Chancellor's father in law is a major lobbyist for gas companies, including shale gas. Keep it in the family.

Mosiagi's picture

Indeed, and there we have it.

potkettleblack's picture

Indeed, and there we have it and let's keep in the family....
Exactly, just like the flip side of the coin, Nick Clegg's wife works for a Spanish wind company, David Cameron's father-in-law earns lots of ££££s from wind turbines on his estate and Ed Davey's brother is all wrapped up in renewables + Tim Yeo at DECC likewise.
So, yes let's keep it all in the family.

Leon Wolfeson's picture

Or we could build nuclear, get actually cheaper and clean energy rather than seeing it spiral in price due to the ridiculous RO system (rather than a carbon tax)...

habitat21's picture

Wind turbines should not be regarded as renewable energy because they emit more CO2 emissions though their carbon own footprint and that of their back-up and regulating reserves because of their inefficiency and intermittency when compared to running highly efficient gas-fired power stations at one-third of the cost.

bill23's picture

Who runs Britain’s energy policy?
I was expecting a punch line!!!

potkettleblack's picture

Greenpeace and the wind industry run the UK's energy policy.

potkettleblack's picture

Forgot to say til I noticed who wrote this doubtful article - Friends of the Earth run our energy policy. Living in cloud cuckoo land. We have to power an industrial nation or else return to the Caves.

Mosiagi's picture

"Now then, I'm not saying my father-in-law's a lobbyist for commercial gas and oil, because if I did I'd be rumbled! Ba-bum!"

Latest tweets