UK Parliament / Open data

Energy Security

Proceeding contribution from Brian Binley (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 30 June 2008. It occurred during Opposition day on Energy Security.
You will be delighted to know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I had planned to make the most moving and effective speech on clean coal ever delivered in this Parliament's history, but tragically, in trying to accede to your request and be brief, I have cut it to the point where I cannot do so. We have heard right hon. and hon. Members outline the Government's failure in recent years, especially in terms of renewable energy, microgeneration and the roll-out of smart meters. We have talked about this country's abysmal lack of gas storage—we have 14 days' capacity, Germany has 99 and France has 122. That lack is part of a policy framework that suggests that the Government have abysmally failed the whole population. I want to concentrate on carbon capture and storage, where the Government have acted with great timidity, caused disinvestment and, above all, created great uncertainty in the industry. That is a matter of great sadness. Large investment is required for CCS projects which cannot proceed against a background of uncertainty, but people are having to invest in such a climate. Government policy is unclear: it appears that they support a single demonstration model of perhaps 300 MW and hope that eventually the emissions trading scheme will deliver a carbon price that allows investment to flow thereafter. That policy of wishful thinking has no certainty to underline it. Several large carbon capture projects were under development, but they have been frozen out thanks to the Government's indecision. The opportunity is obvious with between 240 and 250 years of coal beneath our feet and the ability to extend our oil production by up to 25 years. Together, those energy sources could solve our energy security problem, but the Government are not tackling that problem with any courage. As a result of a competition they decided in favour of a post-combustion working model—not a commercial station—to be in place by 2014. That decision shows that they do not see the need for any urgency whatsoever, yet that urgency is staring us in the face. That decision has undermined confidence in pre-combustion, where, conversely, technology is in place and we could create a commercial station by 2014. I need only mention the Centrica progressive energy project at Eston Grange to offer a good example of the impact of the Government's decision: a proposed 850 MW integrated gasification combined cycle coal-fired power station was being worked on, but, although it remains in being, its capability is likely to be scaled down drastically. That presents a massive problem—and so it goes on. We have undermined investment in clean coal to the country's great detriment. What a missed opportunity. On 17 June, Professor Stuart Hazeldine of Edinburgh university said:"““Carbon storage could not only help the world, it could aid Great Britain plc. Develop expertise and hardware and we could sell them to China, India and other developing nations, and so make money while saving the world.””" That was a slightly romantic notion, but none the less it underlines a great truth in this debate.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c642-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top