Human society, has never been so energy dependent throughout all of human history as is it is now on energy. Electricity in one from or another helps to make our urban (and not so urban) communities run, think how many labour saving devices we have in our homes, or rather think what we have that's not electrically driven. Electricity helps to make a more equal society a distinct possibility, otherwise we are literally sat in the dark. Once in the dark, there is a risk that notions of fairness and quality go out the window, taking us somewhere quite unpleasant.
Our domestic (and business) energy prices can go up and down in the short-term, yet the long term trend is always (at least for hydro-carbons) going to be upwards, this is something that is unavoidable due to increasing demands for more energy, a growing population and the relative short term limit to the earth's hydro carbon fuel reserves. It's important to recall that in the 1950's people were actually told that in the future by the end of the 20th century energy would be too cheap to meter...oops!
In hindsight perhaps this was before so complicit idiots (in this case a Conservative Government) decided to purse a headlong dash to gas in the 1980’s and to throw our energy resources to this wolves, sorry the free market. In Norway, being no doubt of slightly sounder mind, they chose to sell their gas overseas (to the UK) and to pocket the profits, whilst massively investing in sustainable renewable energy sources (in Norway) which gives the Norwegians control of their own secure energy supplies.
In the UK, upon privatisation, there were 22 electricity companies and 19 gas companies, now we have six. Energy planning has by and large been left in the hands of the private sector, who have been far too focused on squeezing profits out of us to give any thoughts to the future. While other countries attempted to protect themselves against external shocks to their energy needs; the UK’s market driven approach has been proven to be entirely inadequate. France can store 122 days of gas and Germany 99. Yet the UK had as of April 2009 a gas storage capacity which would last only 15 days; the New Labour Government took almost a decade to recognise the need to increase storage capacity.
One direct consequence of this was that the UK has to sell gas during the summer because they could not store it, leaving UK energy suppliers scrambling to purchase gas again when it is needed in the winter. Massive investment in gas storage facilities to hold gas imported from Qatar has taken place, but, with the best will in the world, that gas supply could hardly be described as secure as it sits in one of the more volatile and unstable regions of the planet. David Cameron can sell all the stun guns, cattle prods and baton rounds he likes to some of the most repressive regimes on the planet, but, over longer term he is not backing a winner (as recent events in the Middle East with the Arab spring clearly show).
Anyone with slightly more than half a brain (even the Con Dems) should actually be capable of plot this trend and be able to note the medium and long-term consequences of being dependent upon energy resources that you don't actually control and that are running out. Over reliance on an an increasingly self interested private sector, who's behaviour has been repeatedly flagged up as cartel like, has not helped to safely plan the energy future of these islands.
Self interest has been compounded by a real failure in basic strategic energy planning and made worse by the last New Labour government and the current Con Dem Government's perverse decision to half-heartedly look at developing diverse reliable alternative energy sources, whilst doing its best to try and hide a whopping great subsidy for the much favoured (at least by the UK Government) Nuclear industry.
Being reliant on that nice Mr Putin's for our energy supplies is not the brightest of ideas, especially as having Russia's hand on our gas supplies can be a tad risky - just ask the Ukraine. Over the longer term, Russia will have potentially declining cash reserves and an economy that is heavily reliant on its trade in gas for export, as Europe grows more dependent on Russian gas then the risk of artificial shortages as a consequence of Mr Putin's (our his successors) geopolitical games will be something all of us in Europe can all do without.
In Scotland, the SNP government is actively driving Scottish energy policy, something that will benefit the Scottish people. Energy consultants and developers are busy mapping specific locations where water that flows down steep enough slopes and ravines to allow it to generate an increasingly precious resource: energy.The Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park is actively supporting and encouraging the development of hydro power schemes within the park's boundaries and local communities are also planning to build their own local schemes (something that will deliver sustainable cheap energy and other financial benefits as well).
One of the reasons why the hydro rush will work in Scotland (and could work here in Wales) and should deliver long term sustainable benefits is the new feed-in tariff that came in 2010. The subsidy for producing green energy has been increased and it makes schemes more viable, which when combined with a progressive Government that is actively driving the growth of sustainable non oil and gas and non nuclear dependent energy supplies'- means that plans to develop sustainable renewable energy supplies are proceeding apace.
The question is will Labour in Wales step up to the plate and grasp the opportunity to drive and develop energy policy in Wales?
Showing posts with label Nuclear subsidies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nuclear subsidies. Show all posts
Sunday, 22 May 2011
Monday, 16 May 2011
COME CLEAN ON NUCLEAR COSTS
The Con Dem Government has claimed that our taxes won't be used to subsidise nuclear power. Yet the new Energy Bill that's being debated opens the way for public bailouts if the cost of dealing with nuclear waste spirals. Instead of risking a nuclear bailout, the Government should set this money aside for nationwide energy saving and investment in renewable power.
Now MPs have called for ministers to come clean and admit they are tacitly subsidising nuclear power despite promising that the industry would not receive such support. MP's on the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee have reported that Ministers are attempting to disguise the Nuclear subsidy and are distorting reforms of the energy market. They have also warned that unless the issue was resolved, the UK would fail to get the low-carbon energy system it needs.
The Select Committee's report focuses on the Con Dem government's plans to shake up the energy market.The shake up is needed to ensure the provision of affordable electricity without compromising the UK's climate change targets.
At the present, the current energy market exists to supply plentiful (allegedly) cheap electricity, but makes little provision for ensuring that any energy supplied has lower carbon emissions. MP's and some energy experts have complained that the UK Government is failing to attract enough investment in the infrastructure needed to meet energy needs.
The Con Dem coalition agreement allows the construction of new nuclear power stations "provided that they receive no public subsidy". At the moment the nuclear industry is refusing to build new power stations unless their are further inducements, Con Dem ministers have proposed threat the energy companies that build nuclear power plants get long-term contracts at a guaranteed price for energy produced by their nuclear power.
To make life even more complicated there is the problem of the low price of carbon credits in the EU emissions trading market. UK ministers now plan to introduce a minimum price below which carbon permits will not be allowed to sink with any shortfall will be covered by revenue raised by taxation.
This is intervention in the free market (such as it is) to an amazing degree from a Conservative dominated government. The Con Dems have said that both these policies will benefit renewables too, yet, this ensure that electricity prices remain higher than they would have been without this blatant intervention to favour nuclear industry. This "one size fits all" policy barely disguises what is a subsidy to the nuclear industry, as has rightly been noted by MPs.
For many years, the UK nuclear industry has lived quite happily off massive subsidies from UK taxpayers, at the same time cleaner renewable forms of energy have been starved of cash and investment. Potential sustainable energy suppliers and developers have had to face a less than subtle pro nuclear bias from UK Government departments and agencies, something that has seriously slowed the development of secure and sustainable energy supplies in the UK.
Back in 2002 British Energy (BE) became virtually bankrupt, so the European Commission quietly approved the UK Government's decision to bailout the private nuclear power generator. Under the restructuring plan drawn up to save the company, the UK government agreed to indemnify the company against any shortfall in the nuclear liabilities fund which meets its clean up costs.
BE in return contributes 65% of its net cash flow to the fund, the National Audit Office says this uncertainty "places a significant risk in the hands of the taxpayer", effectively leaving the taxpayer according to NAO facing "a large and uncertain liability". It gets better, BE’s liabilities, all taxpayer subsidised, have risen to £5.1 billion, an increase of more than 30%, since 2003. The amount the taxpayer has to pay will depend on the company's future financial performance.
Now the UK Government plans to build new reactors in the UK (something initiated by Tony Blair and supported by Gordon Brown) and runs the risk of fatally binding the UK to nuclear power for decades, something that will continue to divert vital investment away from clean, renewable energy. It's time for the UK Government to finally come clean about the costs (financial and environmental) of the UK nuclear industry.
Back in 2008, Gordon Brown’s cabinet rubber stamped Tony Blair’s decision to back the nuclear option to solve the UK energy needs was both disappointing and short-sighted, but, was not unexpected. By making nuclear power its priority the failing Brown Government effectively abandoned any serious attempts to conserve energy, and significantly undermined its own commitments to tackling climate change. So far the Con Dems have brought little to the debate...
When it comes to power generation there are real job opportunities that need to be fully grasped; the renewable energy sector can play an immensely important role in creating more green energy jobs. We need to create a decentralised power generation system which can include a community owned and community beneficial sector which will create sustainable long-term jobs for local people, not damage the environment and contribute to providing our local communities with a long-term viable economic energy future.
Now is definitely the time for control of energy policy to be devolved to the National Assembly and time for some original non nuclear thinking and a fundamental sea change in attitude from all levels of government in Wales towards energy policy.
Now MPs have called for ministers to come clean and admit they are tacitly subsidising nuclear power despite promising that the industry would not receive such support. MP's on the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee have reported that Ministers are attempting to disguise the Nuclear subsidy and are distorting reforms of the energy market. They have also warned that unless the issue was resolved, the UK would fail to get the low-carbon energy system it needs.
The Select Committee's report focuses on the Con Dem government's plans to shake up the energy market.The shake up is needed to ensure the provision of affordable electricity without compromising the UK's climate change targets.
At the present, the current energy market exists to supply plentiful (allegedly) cheap electricity, but makes little provision for ensuring that any energy supplied has lower carbon emissions. MP's and some energy experts have complained that the UK Government is failing to attract enough investment in the infrastructure needed to meet energy needs.
The Con Dem coalition agreement allows the construction of new nuclear power stations "provided that they receive no public subsidy". At the moment the nuclear industry is refusing to build new power stations unless their are further inducements, Con Dem ministers have proposed threat the energy companies that build nuclear power plants get long-term contracts at a guaranteed price for energy produced by their nuclear power.
To make life even more complicated there is the problem of the low price of carbon credits in the EU emissions trading market. UK ministers now plan to introduce a minimum price below which carbon permits will not be allowed to sink with any shortfall will be covered by revenue raised by taxation.
This is intervention in the free market (such as it is) to an amazing degree from a Conservative dominated government. The Con Dems have said that both these policies will benefit renewables too, yet, this ensure that electricity prices remain higher than they would have been without this blatant intervention to favour nuclear industry. This "one size fits all" policy barely disguises what is a subsidy to the nuclear industry, as has rightly been noted by MPs.
For many years, the UK nuclear industry has lived quite happily off massive subsidies from UK taxpayers, at the same time cleaner renewable forms of energy have been starved of cash and investment. Potential sustainable energy suppliers and developers have had to face a less than subtle pro nuclear bias from UK Government departments and agencies, something that has seriously slowed the development of secure and sustainable energy supplies in the UK.
Back in 2002 British Energy (BE) became virtually bankrupt, so the European Commission quietly approved the UK Government's decision to bailout the private nuclear power generator. Under the restructuring plan drawn up to save the company, the UK government agreed to indemnify the company against any shortfall in the nuclear liabilities fund which meets its clean up costs.
BE in return contributes 65% of its net cash flow to the fund, the National Audit Office says this uncertainty "places a significant risk in the hands of the taxpayer", effectively leaving the taxpayer according to NAO facing "a large and uncertain liability". It gets better, BE’s liabilities, all taxpayer subsidised, have risen to £5.1 billion, an increase of more than 30%, since 2003. The amount the taxpayer has to pay will depend on the company's future financial performance.
Now the UK Government plans to build new reactors in the UK (something initiated by Tony Blair and supported by Gordon Brown) and runs the risk of fatally binding the UK to nuclear power for decades, something that will continue to divert vital investment away from clean, renewable energy. It's time for the UK Government to finally come clean about the costs (financial and environmental) of the UK nuclear industry.
Back in 2008, Gordon Brown’s cabinet rubber stamped Tony Blair’s decision to back the nuclear option to solve the UK energy needs was both disappointing and short-sighted, but, was not unexpected. By making nuclear power its priority the failing Brown Government effectively abandoned any serious attempts to conserve energy, and significantly undermined its own commitments to tackling climate change. So far the Con Dems have brought little to the debate...
When it comes to power generation there are real job opportunities that need to be fully grasped; the renewable energy sector can play an immensely important role in creating more green energy jobs. We need to create a decentralised power generation system which can include a community owned and community beneficial sector which will create sustainable long-term jobs for local people, not damage the environment and contribute to providing our local communities with a long-term viable economic energy future.
Now is definitely the time for control of energy policy to be devolved to the National Assembly and time for some original non nuclear thinking and a fundamental sea change in attitude from all levels of government in Wales towards energy policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)