Media bullsh**t on green energy deal
The Telegraph today boldly proclaims:
"WIND FARMS TO INCREASE ENERGY BILLS BY £178 A YEAR"
Err, hang on a minute....
The Government has agreed to invest £7.6 billion pounds a year towards meeting our 2020 targets.. by investing in new nuclear, renewables and carbon capture and storage. The Telegraph article goes on to say:
"Bills will go up over the next two decades by an estimated £178 a year under all the Government’s green and fuel poverty policies, with the contribution to nuclear and renewables making up £95 by 2020."
So of the £178 headline figure claimed to be solely because of wind farms...actually only £95 is from renewables at all - and even that figure includes expensive new nuclear power stations.
Many followers of the nuclear debate will already know that much of the UK's ageing nuclear infrastructure is at or beyond its life expectancy and companies such as EDF have been asking for huge subsidies to roll out new stations.
In fact DECC (the Department of Energy & Climate Change) say that 20% of the UKs entire current generation capacity of 82 gigawatts requires replacement this decade. DECC also point out that 250,000 new jobs will be created and that an over-dependence on gas would lead to higher annual energy bills - perhaps as much as £250.
So really, just how much of the £95 figure will go to nuclear verses all other forms of renewables, of which wind is just a single component? In September the Telegraph reported that new nuclear would add £70 to annual energy bills.
Even a dumbed-down 16 year old with GCSE maths can calculate that 95 - 70 = 25.
So the likely increase in annual bills (by 2020) resulting from all forms of non-nuclear renewable energy is £25.
Daft energy bill? (UPDATED)
UPDATE (01/06/2012)
George Monbiot is the latest commentator to spell out the inconsistencies in the draft daft energy bill. In his recent Guardian article Monbiot goes as far as to accuse the energy minister, Ed Davey, of deceitfulness. While the bill talks the talk over reducing CO2 emissions by placing caps on the amount of CO2 allowed per unit of electricity and requiring new coal powered plant to use CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) the actual small-print, says Monbiot, has been cleverly worded with get out clauses that will result in business-as-normal.
For example, to gain permission for a new coal fire powered station, the developer merely has to declare that CCS technology "is or is to be, or has been, used in commercial electricity generation for the purposes of or in connection with a CCS demonstration project". Key is the phrase "is to be" - meaning nothing more than an intention.
The bill also allows gas power stations to emit MORE (not less!) CO2 than they do today until the year 2045.
It is worth pointing out that 2050 is the year by which global temperature rises must have been pegged at 2 degrees Celsius if we are to avoid runaway climate change. Only last week the International Energy Agency's chief economist released 2011 data showing a 3.2% rise in CO2 emissions to 31.6 Gigatonnes.
"When I look at this data, the trend is perfectly in line with a temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius (by 2050), which would have devastating consequences for the planet" Fatih Birol, IEA Chief Economist
UPDATE (23/05/2012)
For a detailed blow-by-blow analysis of the draft Energy Bill read here. Our favourite response has to be from Nick Molho (head of energy policy at WWF) who said:
Given the increasing concerns around the economic viability of new nuclear and the repeated delays to the CCS [carbon capture and storage] demonstration programme, renewable energy and energy efficiency are our best bets to deliver a secure, cost-effective and low-carbon power sector by 2030.
But renewable energy investors need clear, unequivocal, long-term support from ministers, who must face down sniping from the backbenches and certain sections of the media. The government must also recognise that a one-size-fits-all approach just doesn't work in the energy sector and that we need targeted financial support mechanisms for renewables.
Original Post
The Guardian today reports that the anticipated Draft Energy Bill will backtrack on previous Government commitments to be the "greenest ever" and promote new gas and nuclear generation at the expense of renewables.
The new "dash for gas" could all but destroy any hope of meeting CO2 emissions targets but worse still, could totally undermine the fragile solar, wind and tidal industries. Thousands of jobs have already been lost in the solar pv industry following a 50% cut in subsidy earlier this year with another cut planned in the Autumn.
Retaining the dependency on imported foreign gas will saddle future generations with the cost of finding alternative fuel sources and the UK will have failed to take advantage of the "Green Revolution".
New nuclear power stations are likely to add £200 a year to household energy bills according to a report on BBC Radio 4 this morning. This makes the current £5 for renewables look cheap.
If the new energy bill does call for a new dash-for-gas-and-nuclear it will be a sad day indeed for the UK.