This month’s All Party Parliamentary
Climate Change Group (APPCCG) meeting centred on the age old problem of setting
decarbonisation targets; the question being, are they useful milestones, or
millstones around the necks of the energy industry.
 |
| David Kennedy, CCC |
Joining the discussion at the meeting were several senior
figures in the field, including David Kennedy, chief executive of the Committee on Climate Change (CCC),
and until recently a frontrunner for the top civil service job at the
Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).
Mr. Kennedy’s appearance at this meeting comes on the heels of an open letter
presented by his organisation to Ed Davey, the minister at DECC, urging swifter
action on establishing carbon intensity targets.
Mr. Kennedy explained his concern that lingering doubt over whether legislative
targets will be set dissuades investors in renewable energy technologies, and
ultimately hampers efforts to decarbonise the electricity market.
It’s worth noting that the UK already has binding targets
for reducing carbon emissions; indeed, it was the very first country to enact
such legislation.
However, these targets will ultimately be assessed only in 2050, which on the
political timescale is several lifetimes away. Further, the 2008 Energy Act
that carries this legislation allows successive governments to exceed carbon
emission budgets in the short run, so long as they reduce future budgets
accordingly.
Without intervening milestones between now and 2050, one can certainly see an
incentive for incumbent governments to neglect decarbonisation- procrastination
on a national scale.
Opposing this view was David Hone, the climate change
advisor for Shell.
Mr. Hone explained that UK energy policy should not be viewed as a closed
system- indeed, our policy is linked directly to those of our European partners
though EU-ETS, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme.
His view was that by enacting further legislation, the government would be
unfairly constricting energy producers in the UK. Further, any emissions
savings made in the UK could be offset by additional emissions in Europe, as
the EU-ETS would simply sell emissions rights elsewhere.
 |
| Guy Newey, Policy Exchange |
Another significant contribution was made by Guy Newey, Head
of Environment and Energy at the think tank Policy Exchange.
While Mr. Newey agreed in principle with the idea of bringing forward decisions
on decarbonisation targets to 2014, he also made the point that uncertainty on
this topic was a significant disincentive to investors, and that a quick and
firm resolution to this question was essential; to that end, he could live with
an imperfect answer.
This blog is written by Neeraj Oak, University of Bristol
 |
| Neeraj Oak |