Driven by the Government policies DECC have released a whole series of policy statements that cut many aspects of support for green – low carbon technologies and programmes. This looks mainly driven by the Treasury’s desire to cut back on public spending and help house builders. This is not the leadership what one would have hoped for in the lead up to the Paris Climate change conference. The complaints have begun and will no doubt escalate.
Their perspective is articulated by Amber Rudd in this interview for the Parliamentary committee on energy and climate change
Heads of ten of the major NGO’s have written to David Cameron expressing their ‘major concern’ over the Government’s cut backs to green policies, and describing them as ‘woeful and shocking’
Since May, the government has ended subsidies for wind and solar power, increased taxes on renewable energy, axed plans for zero carbon homes, and closed its flagship energy efficiency scheme without a replacement. It also made a U-turn on banning fracking in Britain’s most important nature sites, and lifted a ban in some parts of the country on pesticides linked to bee declines.
… and all before the spending review outcomes. DECC in particular has been quick to cut the ‘green crap’ A report from the Green Alliance highlights the challenges for DECC from the planned spending review.
http://www.green-alliance.org.uk/what_new_spending_reductions_could_mean_for_DECC.php
Many commentators have noted the continuing hidden support for oil and gas sectors and no doubt this will become more embarrassing as the Parliament continues.
Subsidising fossil fuels World Bank http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/13/fossil-fuel-subsidies-say-burn-more-carbon-world-bank-president
IMF report May http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2884881/imf_reports_fossil_fuel_subsidies_worth_56_trillion_per_year.html
Energy Crunch – NEF 3rd August – homes in on these themes
Remember Energy Secretary Amber Rudd declaring herself as a “Thatcherite when it comes to climate change”?
Many observers, us included, took this as a positive sign that she was serious about taking action. But recent changes to UK energy and climate policy tell a different story, despite the pre-election pledge all three major parties made to act on climate change.
Leading green groups have already expressed grave concern over recent policy changes.
So what’s happened?
- Subsidies for wind and solar power have been scrapped: according to Amber Rudd, wind and solar can prosper in the UK without subsidy, a claim refuted by campaigners, academics and the industry. Subsidies should of course be removed once industries are profitable, but we simply haven’t reached that point yet. In axing support now, the government risks undoing years of effort and further delaying the prospect of a 100% renewable UK.
- Increased taxes for low carbon energy: to make matters worse, we’re now charging the climate change levy on all energy generation, including renewables – a glaring contradiction in terms. The climate levy was intended to bridge the gap between the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, which undervalues the cost of carbon, and the actual cost. It makes no sense to levy this polluter-pays levy on those who don’t pollute. 3. A U-turn on fracking: fracking has been a contentious issue for some time. While the public’s support has fallen to record lows (read more on this on our blog) the government still seems set on “delivering shale”, even allowing drilling under national parks.
It’s not just the supply of green energy that has been affected. Ambitious flagship policies such as the zero carbon homes policy and the green deal, aimed at lowering demand for energy, have taken a hit too.
Things could be very different. Elsewhere, other countries are starting to reap the benefits of their green policies.
The Netherlands’ commitment to solar has led to a solar panel market boom, while France has announced some ambitious measures as the Paris conference approaches, including the extension of a clean energy tax and a law raising the CO2 tax to €100/t by 2030.
Agree the UK’s headed in the wrong direction? Share this e-mail with your friends.
Don’t miss these:
- The shameful truth about climate change and the UK: we’re the top contributor to historic greenhouse gas levels emissions on a per capita basis. Data comes from this paper.
- How to solve a problem like climate change? MIT has been sourcing bright ideas and now wants your votes! There’s still time to submit some thoughts of your own.
- Want to take action? Demand that the UK rethinks its policy on solar.
Arctic drilling
Amid a worldwide supply glut Shell still has its heart set on drilling in the Arctic, Bloomberg tries to explain why while for now activists hanging from a bridge have stopped vital equipment reaching its operations there. The Guardian made an animation showing why it’s a bad idea anyways – watch it here.
COP21 – commitments & pledges
As COP21 in Paris approaches, vague national plans have been criticised – they are using different base years and accounting methods making direct comparisons difficult. While the limelight is on countries’ emission cutting and most major contributors’ plans are at least in climate finance pledges are still outstanding. Some already worry there’ll be more rhetoric than action, again. Oil majors seem to believe that’s a general theme of Paris anyways – not a single one expecting a 2 degree deal to be reached.
COP21 – getting businesses involved
Calls for businesses to take action are not new and May saw a large summit of businesses discussing Paris in Paris, something we have covered here. Still calls persist for businesses to get more involved albeit some would not like to see them in the Paris negotiations. Instead this comment piece calls for them to stay home and factor a “shadow” carbon price into investment decisions.
The cost of inaction
Is inaction going to cost you the world? Well according to this new study by the Economist Intelligence Unit not quite but part of financial assets would be eroded. Basically, the higher you let temperatures grow, the higher the losses will be. The Guardian covers the study here, reminding us of earlier warnings from the Bank of England and others.
The US Clean Power Plan
US President Obama can’t legislate cap & trade. In a world of second bests what President Obama has come up with looks awfully like cap & trade though, well it has a cap and potentially has some trading. Opinions seem to be divided on whether this is a step forward or, really, not worth the fuss. Others though point out that whether we like it or not has a lot to do with how we define its success.
Energiewende
The poster child of energy transition (or “Energiewende” if you prefer), Germany, has quietly expanded its industry energy subsidy, including new sectors in the exemptions from paying the renewable energy surcharge. This comes not too long after the coal levy was mothballed, in what many see as Merkel backstabbing its coalition partner the SPD who’d been supportive of the plans. It seems the grass is not always greener on the continent.
Putting the cost of renewable subsidies into perspective
Back at home – in the middle of the discussions around renewable subsidy cuts – Businessgreen asked how much is too much? They point out that while we’re willing to invest £42.6bn budget to travel 30 minutes faster between Birmingham and London, the £9.1bn (equivalent to what we spent on the Olympics) is presented – and by many seen – as excessive.
Fracking
New research has shown that contrary to what we have been told for years, fracking did not actually lower US emission – it was the (faltering) economy. More bad news for the technology – if we are to remain within carbon budgets gas is not suitable as a bridging fuel – emissions need to start declining soon if we are to stick with the budget, allowing only half of known reserves to be used.
No Comment