UK Parliament / Open data

Energy and Climate Change and Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Front-Bench spokesman for the Liberals consistently tries to take every opportunity to thrust his party's policy down our throat, but I have a better alternative, and I will tell him what it is in a minute. We have made a commitment to increase our renewables share massively, with the consequence that, with the exception of Malta and Luxembourg, we are faced with the toughest target in the whole EU. One wonders what Malta and Luxembourg have done to deserve that. It gets worse: Britain is likely to carry a disproportionate cost of meeting the EU's 2020 renewables target. Indeed, Pöyry Energy Consulting has estimated that the UK will carry between 20 and 25 per cent. of the total EU cost of meeting a Europe-wide renewables target. That works out at between £150 and £200 per household per year. To sum up, we probably will not be able to build the target number of wind turbines; in any case, they would not produce the energy required, and even without the much-needed back-up capacity, they would cost us all a great deal of money. No wonder industry and commerce are concerned. The lights could go out, and Britain's energy prices will be higher and less competitive. Industry and commerce will find it harder to sell their goods and services abroad. What should we do? First, we must not shy away from fossil fuels, but should concentrate on making them carbon-free. Secondly, we must invest in the long-term development of nuclear fusion. I am delighted that the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change has found such enthusiasm for clean coal, because I genuinely think that it is a real alternative. My concern, however, is that we are not moving quickly enough. That is the general thrust of my argument. I plead with him to find ways of moving on the whole clean coal agenda more quickly. He has a problem with wind turbines—there is no doubt about that—and we need to find a sensible replacement, which is sitting underneath our feet, and will fulfil 300 years of energy need, provided that we can create the technology in time to make it viable. That is where I want to end. I have a great deal of respect for the way in which the Secretary of State has changed the whole focus of our energy policy, and I believe that he is committed, as I said earlier, to the concept of clean coal. I simply urge him to put more effort, energy and resources—perhaps by shifting some of the resource that has gone into fashionable wind turbines—into developing clean coal more quickly. The payback for Britain will be considerably greater, and it is one way—just one way—in which we might escape the lights going out.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
501 c489-90 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top