Day: October 6, 2024

A New Chapter in Irish Renewables: Ireland’s Green Energy Auction Results


Green energy auction results (RESS 1)

4 August 2020 marked another significant step forward for the new Irish government in implementing policies designed to transform the national power system towards a greener and more sustainable future. On that day, EirGrid (the state-owned company that manages and operates Ireland’s all-island transmission grid) published the eagerly awaited provisional results for the Renewable Electricity Support Scheme 1 (RESS 1) auction process, just two weeks after the scheme was approved by the European Commission under the EU state aid rules.

This government-backed, green power auction is the first of a number that are due to be held over the coming years and forms a central part in achieving Ireland’s national goal of moving away from fossil fuels and reaching a 70% share of renewables in its electricity mix by 2030, as well as its longer-term objective of carbon neutrality by 2050. The background to these targets, and the RESS auctions, can be found in key policy documents such as the Government’s Climate Action Plan (2019) and the recently published Programme for Government (2020).

Wind farms (x19) and solar power projects (x63)

Results for RESS 1 show that solar and onshore wind projects with a combined capacity of 1,275.5 MW were declared provisionally successful in Ireland’s first tender for renewable energy capacity. The projects to be awarded contracts include 19 new wind farms and 63 new solar power projects. RESS takes the form of a two-way contract for difference. Average strike prices set by the auction were €74.08/MWh for all projects, €72.92/MWh for solar projects and €104.15/MWh for community projects. As the auction was run on a pay-as-bid basis, there could be a wide range of prices for successful projects.  

Approved schemes range in capacity from more than 100 MW to less than 1 MW, and size from 20 acres up to nearly 400 acres. They are located predominantly in the south and east of the country. For projects awarded contracts in the RESS 1 auction, the support typically applies for approximately 15 years. At present, these RESS auctions have an estimated total budget of up to €12.5 billion through until 2025.

Uptake in solar

Interestingly, as can be seen in the map below, solar projects accounted for the largest number of applications and awards at RESS 1. Of the 75% of applicants who succeeded in gaining provisional approval at the auction process, 77% of these were solar projects. This is a significant but not surprising development as the previous decade was dominated by development of onshore wind projects in Ireland with little to no investment in solar or any other form of renewables. While there is still room for additional investment in the market for onshore wind in Ireland, we expect applications for solar projects to be a more common feature of RESS auctions going forward.

What next?

The provisional auction results are pending government approval in accordance with the reserved rights of the Minister for Communication, Climate Action and Environment as set out in Section 10 of the RESS 1 Terms and Conditions. Participants had the opportunity to file a Notice of Dissatisfaction by 6 August 2020 and the final results will be announced on 10 September 2020, with the awards to be made on 25 September 2020. All in all, the success of this inaugural green energy auction is a positive sign of what is yet to come for the renewable energy sector in Ireland.

Subscribe and stay updated

Receive our latest blog posts by email.



Source link

WHAT THE UK GOVERNMENT’S TEN POINT PLAN MEANS FOR CCUS


This week, the Prime Minister laid out a Ten Point Plan (TPP) for “Building back better, supporting green jobs, and accelerating our path to net zero”. The policy paper published after the announcement[1] provides more detail than was initially announced. This note briefly considers its implications for the nascent Carbon Capture Usage & Storage (CCUS) industry. In this case, building back better means more public money to do more, more quickly. We have written another post about the rest of the TPP.

Background: The Chancellor’s March 2020 Budget speech committed “at least £800 million” of public funding in a CCS Infrastructure Fund for CCUS. It also set targets of delivering an operational CCUS cluster by the mid-2020s, and a having a second cluster, as well as an electricity consumer-funded CCS power station, operational by 2030[2] (2020 Budget Deliverables). It is important to understand that this £800 million is almost certainly intended as capital funding, i.e. support for the capital cost of developing CCUS facilities. The considerable volume of emerging policy material published by BEIS since 2017 – most recently its business models publication in August 2020 – is clear that the government is also fully expecting to establish revenue funding mechanisms which, ultimately, will inevitably provide industry with many £billions of operational funding.

Some may have speculated that the anticipated squeeze on public spending as a consequence of the huge spending on the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed or hampered its ability to fund CCUS. BEIS’s August 2020 publications – which confirmed the budget funding and deliverables and explained how policy will unfold over the next period – suggested that perhaps such speculation was unfounded. So too did the Prime Minister’s recent speech in which he confirmed his recent conversion to become “a complete evangelist” for the CCUS cause.[3]

However, history in relation to major public spending shows, and in relation to Carbon Capture & Storage in particular, that “it isn’t over until the fat lady – in this case the resident of Number 11 Downing Street – sings”. What can be committed in one Budget speech can be taken away in the next.

The Ten Point Plan: Well, history also shows that “there’s no zealot like a convert”. The Prime Minister’s TPP broadly doubles the 2020 Budget Deliverables, albeit with only a 20% increase in committed public funding. This personal commitment would seem to assure the committed funding and so the early stage development of UK CCUS (at least until the next election). The TPP also promises an energy White Paper in 2020, so detailed policy is to be made rapidly to start implementing the plan.

As with policy, so with the lingua franca. Goodbye CCUS clusters, hello “SuperPlaces” (“hubs where renewable energy, CCUS and hydrogen congregate”).[4]

The new CCUS TPP Deliverables are to meet the stated ambition[5] “to capture 10Mt of CO2 a year by 2030”. They are to:

  • “invest £1 billion[6] to support CCUS in four industrial clusters, creating SuperPlaces in places such as the North East, the Humber, North West, Scotland and Wales”;
  • establish CCUS in two industrial clusters by the mid-2020s;[7] and
  • aim for four of these sites by 2030.[8]

In addition, the TPP:

  • confirms the CCS Infrastructure Fund, now at £1 billion;
  • confirms that there will be a revenue mechanism for industrial carbon capture and hydrogen projects, presumably those foreshadowed in the BEIS 2019 publications and the more recent August 2020 ones;[9]
  • broadly confirms the approximate timetable published by BEIS in its August 2020 publications for policy finalisation on the business models for CCUS (in 2022); and
  • reconfirms the ever-present mantra, “subject to relevant value for money and affordability considerations”.

Commentary: In 2020, we have developed around 100 pages of analysis of the law and policy surrounding CCUS. We have speculated that the 2020 Budget Deliverables were challenging, requiring the government to implement rapid and overlapping processes of policy development, law making, investor-selection and transaction execution. We posed around 60 key questions to be answered by those processes before CCUS would become investable and, where desired by the government, bankable.

The TPP does not answer any of these questions – it is not that sort of document – but they will need answering soon. Even if a doubling of ambition may not double the BEIS workload, it will increase it significantly. Finalising policy, making law to create powers and regulatory frameworks, starting work to establish new, or repurpose existing, institutions, establishing and applying selection/investment criteria, running a process to due diligence and receive proposals from individual projects and negotiation transactions to closing by around end 2023, to allow operation of two clusters in 2027[10] is a big ask. We also speculated that the government might be expected to develop some form of competitive process to select the project(s) to be funded for mid-2020s operation, and would be very likely to do so for the project(s) to be developed by 2030. While, in principle, we would expect the government to be keen to use competitive tension to secure value for money for its investment in the initial projects, it may be that the doubling in the TPP of the 2020 Budget Deliverables will reduce the focus on this aspect of the process for the first two clusters to be funded. First, there may be relatively few projects that are capable of being sufficiently “shovel-ready” within this timescale. Second, a competitive process is likely to be slower, and more labour intensive, than simply negotiating with selected projects.

However, this may not be straightforward for BEIS. If the process will involve choosing winners and losers (i.e. if more project(s) seek funding than are awarded it), BEIS will need to be able to justify objectively how it separates the winners from the losers, or risk its decisions being challenged by the losers. And public policy about how the government commits public funds militates strongly in favour of using competition to assure value for money where possible. One method of mitigating this perceived risk to value for taxpayer money would be to structure the initial projects largely on an emerging costs basis, where most of the cost risk and all of the market risk inherent in developing and operating the projects sits with the government. However, this would also imply a much lower level of return, reflecting that risk allocation, for the investors in those projects than they may expect.

The position is further complicated by Brexit. The “level playing field”, still very much a live issue between the UK and the EU in the trade negotiations, relates in part to what, if anything, will replace the current “state aid” rules. The public funding for CCUS projects will need to go through whatever subsidy control process applies in the UK in place of EU state aid rules and, until a long-term competitive process for allocation of CCUS funding is established, this would be on a per project basis. One of the factors that can smooth the process of securing necessary approvals is to demonstrate that an open competition was used to select the investors/projects to be supported.

Whatever the outcome of the ongoing UK-EU trade negotiations, the CCUS funding arrangements will benefit from EU consent, or at least acquiescence. If there is a deal, it may include the UK at least making some commitments acceptable to the EU about the principles on which its authorities will authorise subsidy schemes, even if they are free from the requirement to seek European Commission approval for such schemes. Even if there is no UK-EU trade deal, under the “WTO terms” which would apply in that situation, the EU and others would be able to challenge certain kinds of subsidy (including those that are contingent on the use of domestic over imported goods), within the framework of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. Subsidy for clean energy technology has been a highly contentious subject in international trade for some time.

If BEIS does deploy a degree of competition in its selection process, the doubling of ambition in the TPP presumably doubles the prospects of success for each project that can meet BEIS’s selection criteria. Whether or not there is competitive process, BEIS will need to implement a highly collaborative process, as one that is not collaborative will not deliver the ambition.

It will also be necessary for the CCUS (and hydrogen) funding arrangements to be harmonised with UK fiscal policy. Very shortly, the UK government has to decide whether to adopt a UK version of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) or a Carbon Emissions Tax to replace the EU ETS as the primary instrument for the pricing of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK after the EU ETS ceases to apply to GB (participation in the EU ETS will continue in Northern Ireland because of the all-Ireland Single Electricity Market).[11] For any business in a SuperPlace, the decision to participate in CCUS will be based on avoidance of greenhouse gas emissions costs as well as any government financial support, and so certainty about the mode and levels of future carbon prices is essential.

Clearly, the TPP is a very positive development for industry. CCUS professionals in both the public sector and industry can expect to be busy for the foreseeable future.



[1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/936567/10_POINT_PLAN_BOOKLET.pdf

[2] Budget 2020, HM Treasury, 11 March 2020.

[3] Prime Minister’s speech to virtual UN climate round table, October 2020.

[4] TPP page 10.

[5] In point 8 of the TPP from page 22.

[6] This is an increase of 20% of the £800 million pledged in the 2020 Budget.

[7] This doubles to mid-2020s commitment in the 2020 Budget Deliverables.

[8] Again, this is double the 2020 Budget Deliverable.

[9] It is not yet clear whether the BEIS August 2020 publications on business models described the revenue mechanisms which will actually be implemented. This may become clearer when the promised 2020 energy White Paper is published, though the TPP suggests this may not become clear until 2021.

[10] This is probably just about “mid-2020s”.

[11] The government has consulted on both options (see https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/the-future-of-uk-carbon-pricing and https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/carbon-emissions-tax.

Subscribe and stay updated

Receive our latest blog posts by email.



Source link

Levelling up to Net Zero: Boris Johnson’s Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution


On 18 November 2020, the UK government set out a “ten point plan” for helping to achieve its goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Prime Minister Boris Johnson gave his own account of this in an article in the Financial Times. There is clearly much more detail to come from the government in the areas covered by the plan, not least in an imminent Energy White Paper, a Net Zero Strategy and a series of sector or issue-specific strategies signposted in the plan, but we set out here some first thoughts on the agenda that is emerging. We start by focusing on the “ten points” themselves.

1. “The Saudi Arabia of wind”

What’s the plan? The aim to have 40GW of UK offshore wind by 2030 goes back at least as far as the Conservative manifesto for last year’s general election. It suggests that the next two to three CfD auctions would need to provide a basis for more than 20GW of new projects between them, which in turn possibly implies that each auction would support about twice as much offshore wind capacity as the 2019 allocation round. Future CfD allocation rounds will feature “more stringent requirements for supply chains” to maximise the UK jobs benefit.

What’s next? The key to achieving these high ambitions will be reducing the costs of existing, fixed-bottom offshore wind technology and rapidly commercialising and scaling up the floating technologies that could expand significantly the range of areas where offshore wind projects can be located: see our new article on this. This will require some changes to the CfD framework (the government’s response to a consultation on these is expected soon). Also important is the BEIS/Ofgem review of offshore transmission: an update on this is promised by the end of the year, and “clarity on an enduring approach in 2021”.

2. “Water into energy”: £500 million for hydrogen

What’s the plan? The UK joins other countries (and the EU) in setting a medium-term target for the production of low carbon hydrogen: in this case, 5GW by 2030, including “a town heated entirely by hydrogen”. So far, low carbon hydrogen has figured in UK government policy mostly as a subset of the proposed development of industrial clusters built around carbon capture and usage/storage (CCUS), with an emphasis on “blue” hydrogen (produced from natural gas, with CCUS), rather than “green” hydrogen (produced by electrolysis of water using renewable electricity). The prominence given to hydrogen in the “ten point plan” and the choice of language are welcome evidence that low carbon hydrogen (of both “colours”) is now being considered as a key area of net zero policy in its own right. The promised £500 million funding appears to be split roughly equally between the supply and demand sides. With a further £4 billion of private investment to 2030, it is anticipated that hydrogen would save almost twice as many greenhouse gas emissions as offshore wind between 2023 and 2032.What’s next? Thegovernment will need to think further about the business models for supporting the first commercial users of low carbon hydrogen and, in the longer term, about how to integrate hydrogen into future green gas support schemes. (The PM envisages a breakfast cooked with hydrogen, but the recent green gas levy consultation made no mention of hydrogen.) Amongst those hoping to fit in on the supply-side of the nascent UK hydrogen economy will, of course, be some of those new offshore wind farms. Green hydrogen

production can help to offset the intermittency of wind power generation and National Grid ESO’s most recent Future Energy Scenarios envisage that, at some point, some offshore wind capacity may not connect to the electricity transmission grid at all, but be focused entirely on hydrogen production. As we have written elsewhere, there are also opportunities for the North Sea oil and gas industries in this area, and some regulatory workstreams that could be started in relation to the blending of hydrogen in the gas grid (it is suggested that blending could reduce the emissions of gas used by up to 7%). Undoubtedly, a comprehensive UK hydrogen strategy (compare the Australian and German ones) would still be desirable, and one is promised for 2021, with business models finalised in 2022. It is hoped that the first GW of production capacity would be commissioned in 2025.

3. New nuclear – all shapes and sizes?

What’s the plan? It is not news that the government is keen to see new nuclear power contribute further to net zero, beyond Hinkley Point C. Another new large nuclear plant (or two), and turning the talk of small and advanced modular reactors into a production line reality, would be welcome from a jobs and a climate policy point of view. £525 million is promised for “large and smaller-scale” plants and for R&D on “new advanced modular reactors”.

What’s next? New technologies will not be ready for deployment for some time. Meanwhile, the government has to decide how to support future nuclear new build: responding to the consultation on a regulated asset base model (from July 2019) would be a good start. In due course, there will be the development consent application for Sizewell C (the “twin” of Hinkley Point C) for ministers to determine. Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see if anything comes of the suggestions that there is renewed interest in taking forward a new project at Wylfa, thought by many to be the best of the sites earmarked for new nuclear a decade ago. The Chinese state-owned nuclear developer also has plans to develop Bradwell, though there has been speculation about the geopolitics surrounding this proposal.

4. Electric vehicles: countdown to 2030

What’s the plan? For some time, it has been clear that the government’s original date of 2040 for an end to the selling of new cars and vans with internal combustion engines was insufficiently ambitious. An earlier date should save money as well as emissions. The date will now be set at 2030 (with a stay of execution for new hybrids until 2035). This is to be facilitated by £1.3 billion to speed up the roll-out of EV charging points; £582 million in grants for buying new EVs; and £500 million for “the development and mass-scale production” of EV batteries.

What’s next? The scaling-up of EVs is a multi-faceted challenge. Vehicle manufacturers and their supply chains will need to make significant investments. Petrol and diesel retailers, and those who finance the purchase of new vehicles, will need to think about developing new products that enable customers to spread the upfront cost of buying an EV over the years of running one with lower fuel costs. The Treasury will need to live with lower tax receipts from fuel duty. Electricity suppliers, local authorities, and car park owners of all sorts, will face new challenges, as well as opportunities to earn new revenues from charging EVs. Ofgem will need to think carefully about how much distribution network operators should be allowed to spend in anticipation of mass EV ownership in setting their price control for 2023-2028. And that all assumes that “EV” in this context means vehicles powered by batteries, not by hydrogen fuel cells: but if low carbon hydrogen production takes off, fuel cells may make a comeback, introducing a further element of choice and complexity. In any event, hydrogen is likely to be part of the solution to low carbon HGVs, on which a consultation is promised.

5. “Cleaner public transport”

What’s the plan? Building on “£4.2 billion in city public transport and £5 billion on buses, cycling and walking, as announced by the Prime Minister in February”, there will be “tens of billions of pounds” invested in “enhancements and renewals of the rail network” – a figure that would be significant if it does not include any of the costs of HS2. Electrification of railway lines is explicitly mentioned: it is interesting that hydrogen (an alternative mode of decarbonisation to electrification of lines) is not mentioned in connection with trains.  

What’s next? It ought to be easier to convert public transport, in the form of buses and trains, to low carbon fuel than it is to change the behaviour of millions of individual car owners. Moreover, this would help with the meeting of air quality standards. In practice, rail industry organisation and funding, in particular, were already challenging areas of policy before COVID-19 cast doubt on so many existing assumptions about their business models. However, there is no shortage of good ideas, and – other things being equal – public transport is one of the cheapest industries to convert to hydrogen use. For 2021, “the first-ever National Bus Strategy” is promised, and there is also a less specific commitment to improved rail links around “regional cities”. When it comes to cycling, at least, changes in behaviour during the time of COVID-19 may help to hit the target of doubling cycling rates from 2013 levels by 2025.

6. “Jet zero and green ships”

What’s the plan? Greenhouse gas emissions from international aviation and shipping involving UK ports and airports are not currently included in the net carbon account, on the basis of which the UK’s progress towards its 2050 target is assessed – although the Committee on Climate Change has recommended that they should be. Nevertheless, they need to be addressed and, if efforts by others, including the IMO in relation to shipping, bear fruit, there will be significant opportunities for those able to supply the new fuels, ships and planes. For now, the public money going into this area seems to be relatively small amounts of research funding, rather than the £hundreds of millions or £billions seen elsewhere.

What’s next? The government set up a Jet Zero Council in July 2020. There are many promising developers of synthetic fuels that offer the prospect of aviation with fewer carbon emissions; and there is increasing interest in various alternatives to existing marine bunkers. Hydrogen and CCUS policy are likely to be key enablers of progress in this area, and it is also anticipated that “high-grade heat” from advanced modular nuclear reactors could “unlock efficient production of synthetic fuels” (and hydrogen). For 2021, consultation on an Aviation Decarbonisation Strategy and a consultation on a sustainable aviation fuels mandate (possibly to commence in 2025) are promised. These are, of course, areas where the nature of the industries mean that there are limits to what any one country can achieve on its own.

7. “Greener buildings” (£1 billion in 2021)

What’s the plan? Making buildings more energy-efficientis not particularly “exciting”, but it is a hugely important part of net zero. In particular, it makes it easier to achieve the decarbonisation of heating (because you will need less heat, low carbon or otherwise) and reduces fuel poverty. Yet it is an area where previous governments have struggled either to find ways of incentivising landlords and homeowners to take retrofitting action, or to set the bar high enough for new buildings. Set alongside a promise of £9.2 billion for energy efficiency in the last Conservative manifesto, £1 billion in 2021 looks useful rather than game-changing. Decarbonising the supply of heat is also complex: a shift from gas to hydrogen would probably involve the least inconvenience for consumers, but is some way from being

practicable. Take-up of the alternative (heat pumps) remains sluggish, but ambition is high, with a target of 600,000 per year by 2028. This is a staggering figure: it is more than 22 times the UK’s 2018 total of 27,000 installations and would be more than double what France, the current leader in European installations with very similar population size, achieved in the same year. There is no mention of additional support for the “low-hanging fruit” of low carbon heat networks, although this is an area where some progress has been made in recent years. Of all the areas on which the “ten point plan” puts a figure in terms of contribution to reducing emissions in 2023-2032, “greener buildings” scores highest (more than three times the impact of offshore wind and almost double that of hydrogen).

What’s next? In terms of “carrots” for homeowners, the government’s latest idea is the green homes grant: it is still too early to tell whether consumers and installing businesses will take full advantage of it, but it is being extended for another year. On the “stick” front, we await the outcomes of consultations on the Future Homes Standard (a consultation on an equivalent for non-domestic buildings is now promised) and a further proposed tightening of the minimum energy efficiency standards (MEES) for private rented accommodation. This is also an area where – particularly in the industrial and commercial sector – there is scope for innovative offerings from landlords and others who are prepared to invest in new technology or enter into new forms of energy efficiency as a service (EEaS) contracts. A Heat and Buildings Strategy is promised for 2021, as well as a “world class energy related products policy framework”. It will be interesting to see whether “[going] with the grain of consumer habits, [to] improve energy efficiency standards of household products” will mean setting standards that are more demanding than those set out under EU product requirements legislation, or just tracking any improvements at EU level that will no longer apply automatically in the UK after Brexit.

8. CCUS for all GB

What’s the plan? CCUS is now widely seen as pivotal to net zero ambitions. The UK has been trying to become a world leader in this area for some time, most recently by planning to support a number of CCUS industrial clusters (see our articles here and here). New elements in the “ten point plan” are a quantitative target (10MT of CO2 stored by 2030 – “equivalent to all emissions of the industrial Humber today”); an additional £200 million of (capital) funding to add to the £800 million committed by the Chancellor in the March 2020 Budget; a doubling in the ambition for the number of clusters to be established by the mid-2020s and 2030; and a new brand name for the clusters, which are now to be designated as “SuperPlaces”. We have written separately on the implications of the “ten point plan” for CCUS here.    

What’s next? Following a series of policy documents issued in August 2020, government decisions are expected on a range of details of the business models proposed for the different “links” in the CCUS value chain over the coming months. It should not be long before the government invites formal bids or expressions of interest from potential clusters. We have been following policy in this area extremely closely and advised the government on a previous attempt to commercialise CCS. Please get in touch if you have any questions.

9. Nature

What’s the plan? The “ten point plan” repeats recent announcements about the UK government’s goal of increasing to 30% the proportion of the UK covered by conservation designations; funding for “landscape recovery” projects; and investing in flood defences. What’s next? There is little in the plan about future policy development in these areas. The implementation of the Agriculture Act 2020 and the Environment Bill will play a key part. An

England Tree Strategy is promised, setting out how the Conservative manifesto commitment to plant 30,000 hectares per year will be met. There will also be a Nature Strategy.

10. Financial infrastructure

What’s the plan? Following on from earlier commitments to increase UK public spending on R&D and the publication of an R&D roadmap in July 2020, and funding for specific projects such as the STEP fusion project, the government will launch a £1 billion Net Zero Innovation Portfolio. This will focus on priority areas corresponding to the “ten point plan”: floating offshore wind; nuclear advanced modular reactors; energy storage and flexibility; bioenergy; hydrogen; homes; direct air capture and CCUS; industrial fuel switching; and “disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence for energy”.

What’s next? The UK plans to issue its first Sovereign Green Bond in 2021, “subject to market conditions”, and to introduce mandatory reporting of climate-related financial information across the economy – starting in 2023 and reaching full coverage in 2025. A “green taxonomy that defines which economic activities tackle climate change and environmental degradation” will “better guide investors”. In the short term, the government must choose between the two versions of carbon pricing that it could deploy to replace the EU Emissions Trading System from 1 January 2021 (a UK ETS or a carbon emissions tax). The outcome of Treasury’s Net Zero Review, considering “the choices across our tax, spend, regulatory and other levers to maximise growth opportunities and ensure an equitable balance of contributions across society” will be important in the longer term.

Create jobs and preserve our lifestyles

Like governments around the world, the UK government is keen to make the most of a “green recovery” from the economic turmoil caused by COVID-19. Since the “ten point plan” is as much a piece of industrial strategy as it is of energy and climate policy, it frequently reinforces the message that embracing the opportunities of net zero policies can, like the Treasury’s Freeports policy, help to “level up” areas of the country which helped the current government to its majority in the 2019 general election. Some early comments have characterised it as “more of a vision than a plan”. If so, it is a vision of a remarkably frictionless transition to net zero where nobody has to pay more for their energy; change their holiday travel habits post-pandemic; consume less red meat and dairy products; or otherwise change their behaviour (apart, perhaps, from a few of the less enthusiastic cyclists and walkers among us). One might almost caricature it as suggesting that, with a small amount of seed funding from the government, amazing new technologies will solve all our problems.

Challenges ahead

The Climate Change Act 2008 established a system of five-yearly carbon budgets to map out the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions reductions to 2050. So far, the UK has beaten the targets set for the first two budget periods and will probably beat the target for the third (2018-2022). Beyond that, it was already not on track for the fourth and fifth budget periods when the 2050 target was only for an 80%, rather than (as now) a 100% reduction from 1990 emissions levels. It is not claimed, nor is it likely to be the case, that the measures outlined in the “ten point plan” will, by themselves, close these gaps. The setting of the sixth carbon budget (for 2033-2037) is another task awaiting ministers in 2021. At a global level, it has been estimated that, on current trends, humanity will burn through the carbon budget that stands between us and dangerous climate change by 2030. There is nothing wrong with painting an attractive picture and leaving the “how” for future publications, as long as the working-out of a roadmap proceeds with a sense of urgency, a commitment to net zero objectives across government, and a willingness to make tough decisions. In the run-up to the UNFCCC CoP26 conference in Glasgow, the eyes of the world will be on UK climate and energy policy. Whilst the political heft behind the “ten point plan” is welcome, it will be the grinding detail of regulatory activity away from the limelight that will determine whether the vision becomes reality.

Subscribe and stay updated

Receive our latest blog posts by email.



Source link