Government energy announcements - Greenpeace response

Overview

Responding to today's government energy announcements, John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace, said:

"If this plan becomes a reality, it will create hundreds of thousands of green jobs and make Britain a safer and more prosperous country. This will be good for the British economy and, in the long-run, save householders money as we reduce our dependence on foreign oil and gas.

"Ed Miliband appears to be winning important battles in Whitehall. But it's crucial that these plans now get full cross-party support and more backing from the Chancellor. The renewable energy industry is too important to become a political football and this strategy for green jobs deserves more than the current paltry sums being offered by the Treasury."

Renewable energy

Jim Footner, senior energy campaigner for Greenpeace, said:

"Britain's renewable industry needs to form the cornerstone of our response to the climate crisis. So Ed Miliband should be congratulated for standing up to giant utilities like Eon and EdF and providing this boost to the British renewable sector.

"Now we need cross-party consensus, because this isn't just about hitting vital climate targets. It's also about securing our energy supply, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and generating a much needed boost for the British economy."

• The UK has one of the best renewable energy resources in Europe. Yet we languish near the bottom of the European league table in terms of our ability to exploit it. The UK currently generates just 5% of our electricity from renewable sources, compared to 12% in Germany, and 27% in Spain.
• It is good news that the Climate Change Secretary has chosen to implement powers introduced last year to set the grid access regime and speed up access to the grid for renewable energy capacity. Renewable energy must get priority access to the grid.
• Ed Miliband has also heeded that calls from across the energy debate to amend the remit of the regulator OFGEM, which has for too long represented a barrier to the development of renewables. OFGEM will now have to include decarbonisation in the face of climate change within its primary duties - an important change.
• The UK's status as a world leader in marine energy technologies is recognised with the allocation of money for further research and development as well as the identification of a ‘Low Carbon Economic Area' in the South West of England, announced in the Low Carbon Industrial Strategy. The budget of just £60 million fails to give this emerging industry the full support it deserves.
• On planning, the strategy proposes measures enable renewable energy applications that currently face years of delay in the planning system to gain quicker approval. It is crucial for the successful implementation of the strategy that these planning reforms (particularly for onshore wind farms) are taken seriously by local authorities considering applications. It is therefore necessary that strategy as a whole, but particularly the strategy on planning gains cross party support.

Low Carbon Industrial Strategy

Robin Oakley, head of Greenpeace's climate and energy team, said:

"If Miliband's vision was to become a reality it would create hundreds of thousands of green jobs and make Britain a safer and more prosperous country. But that won't happen with the paltry budgets being offered by the Treasury. It is scandalous that Miliband's low carbon ambitions, which have potential to create whole new green industries, are met with a budget that is only about half the amount the Chancellor allocated for bonuses for a bunch of failed RBS bankers.

"For years the UK has lagged behind the rest of Europe on renewables. If Britain is to catch up, and to benefit from the economic boost, job creation and security of energy supply that our clean energy resources offer, it will require the Chancellor to get behind Ed Miliband's efforts."

• The Carbon Trust estimates that up to a quarter of a million jobs could be created in the UK through the delivery of the efficiency and renewable energy targets.
• The focus on offshore wind, wave and tidal is right and the recognition that regional development for new clean technologies, with research and supply chain to support then, is sound.
• Britain leads the world in the research on wave and tidal power with some of the pioneering companies sited here. But the only wave project in operation in a commercial environment - designed in the UK - is located in Portugal, because UK support was lacking. Government should follow up this welcome expression of support for marine renewables in the Southwest with more development clusters for renewables and more money to help accelerate the commercialization of the leading designs in these technologies here in the UK.
• More could be done to support the training and development of the construction industry to help deliver a national refit improving British homes, making them warmer, cheaper to run and low carbon. Energy efficiency measures offer nationwide job creation opportunities and long term skilled jobs, especially in the construction sector which has been badly effected by the recession.
• According to reports in February 2009 bonuses at RBS reached £775 million http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/feb/18/rbs-bonuses this highlights the paucity of the total budget of £405 for low carbon industrial development and the spending announced today from that budget that includes only £180 million of direct funding for renewable energy development.

Carbon Budgets

Robin Oakley, head of Greenpeace's climate and energy campaign, said:

"It's a step towards a much more coherent climate policy that each government department will now have its own carbon budget. And it's also good news that Miliband reaffirmed the government's commitment to a 34% cut in emissions by 2020. However, the latest climate science suggests he needs to be much more ambitious in this area and it's vital that the reductions are all genuinely made here in the UK and not replaced with offsets in other countries."

• Following new legislation last year (the Climate Change Act), the Government will have to operate within a ‘carbon budget' in the same way it has to operate in a financial budget. If they go over the carbon budget, they'll have to do something about it.
• There is a new adviser to Government on what these carbon budgets should be - the Climate Change Committee (CCC).
• The UK has to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050.
• The CCC recommended, and the government agreed, to reduce UK greenhouse gas emissions by 34% by 2020. Although if there is a decent agreement in Copenhagen later this year, this will be increased to around a 42% cut, which is more in line with what we need to avoid dangerous climate change.

Transport

Anita Goldsmith, head of Greenpeace's transport campaign, said:

"After Ed Miliband made such positive statements on renewable energy today, it is a shame to see that the Department for Transport has let the side down yet again.

"It is hard to see how such weak policies will deliver the kinds of emissions cuts we need, and any real progress will be wiped out by the department's ongoing obsession with unrestrained aviation growth."

"It is important not to let the DfT fool anyone into believing that they are driving forward increased vehicle efficiency when in fact they lobbied against this in the EU, leading to weaker targets and slower progress.

"Overall this package tinkers at the edges, whilst letting the real problems embedded within road and air transport go unchallenged. We're hoping that Adonis will soon get his department under control and align it with the wider priorities of the government."

• If plans to expand Heathrow go ahead, it will become the biggest single source of carbon dioxide in the UK and will wreck the Government's chances of meeting climate change targets.
• The Government's own figures show that aviation currently accounts for 13% of Britain's total climate change impact and threatens to undermine all other efforts to cut emissions in other sectors.
• The global warming impact of emissions from aviation are predicted to double from 2006 to 2030.
• By 2050, on this trajectory, the aviation sector alone could use up the UK's entire carbon budget, making it almost impossible for the UK to meet its targets and damaging other parts of the economy forced to make up the difference.
• Small increases in the efficiency of planes will be overwhelmed by an unrestrained growth in flights and including aviation in the ETS will not solve the problem.
• According to a report from Ernst and Young, even in the toughest Emissions Trading Scheme scenario, emissions from the aviation sector would grow by 83% by 2020. T&E background briefing (2007) Including Aviation in the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) page 6.
• Electrifying our road transport network could be a vital step in the fight against climate change. But this must be done alongside radical improvements in vehicle efficiency standards and be accompanied by investment in additional renewable sources of energy generation.
• The DfT lobbied on the recently agreed EU regulations to reduce emissions from new cars to an of average 130gCO₂/km by 2012. The proposed target was originally for 120gCO2/km. There are already cars on the market that can deliver 99gCO2/km or less, such as the VW Polo Blue Motion, as well as petrol-hybrid vehicles that are even lower.
• The electrification of rail and move towards low emissions buses are good initiatives but remain a small part of the overall transport problem. According to the DfT's own figures, rail accounts for 1.7% of total UK domestic transport emissions with buses accounting for 2.3%. http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/energyenvironment/climatechangefactsheets.pdf
• Road transport and aviation remain the biggest problems, with road transport accounting for 92.3% of domestic transport emissions.
• The focus on greener driving techniques also puts the onus on individuals rather than the delivery of the big infrastructure changes that urgently need to take place in the transport sector. Essentially, this is a transparent attempt to pass the buck on to drivers - the very opposite of the sort of leadership we need.

Biofuels

Reacting to new figures on the source of the UK's biofuels, Greenpeace chief scientist Dr. Doug Parr said:

"It is a scandal that 27 million litres of Indonesian palm oil were pumped into our tanks last year, of which not a single drop met the Government's own environmental standard. Companies like Tesco are selling their customers biofuel from unknown sources which could be wrecking the climate and destroying rainforests. It's time for Lord Adonis to abandon this misguided policy and start again".

Key findings of the Renewable fuel agency fourth quarter report, 2008/9:http://www.renewablefuelsagency.org/_db/_documents/RFA_quarterly_report_Apr_2008_Apr_2009.pdf.

• A tenth of the UK's biofuel - 123 million litres - was produced from palm oil over the past year.
• 27 million litres of Indonesian palm oil were pumped into our tanks this year, of which not a single drop met the Government's own environmental standard (the RTFO meta standard). This is a scandal, because palm oil is one of the main causes of rainforest destruction and its production is actually speeding up climate change. A tenth of all the biofuel we used was palm oil
• Several companies (Chevron, Murco, and Topaz) have not reported any biofuels meeting the qualifying environmental standard, and Esso have reported less than 2% of their biofuels meeting a qualifying environmental standard.
• Less than a quarter of the biofuel (24%) we're using has met the Government's own sustainability standard.
  

CBI energy report - Greenpeace response

In a report released yesterday the CBI has called call for the contribution from wind power to be reduced in favour of nuclear energy as means of decarbonising the electricity sector.

Commenting on the CBI report, Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:

"The CBI claims to represent the interests of British industry, but by calling for wind power's contribution to our renewable energy targets to be reduced it's actually doing its members a great disservice."

He continued:

"Nuclear power is less effective than wind power at tackling climate change, while investment in renewables would create much needed British jobs in one of the few growth sectors in the global economy. Here in the UK we have one of the best renewable energy resources anywhere in the world and a manufacturing sector champing at the bit to capture the lead in marine technologies like offshore wind and tidal power."

The government's business advisory group - set up to accelerate the transition to a low carbon economy - concluded in a report last week that by meeting its renewable energy targets the UK would create 250,000 jobs and generate revenue of £70bn from wind and wave technology by 2050. The report also added that by 2020 the UK could become a world leader in offshore wind, capturing 45 per cent of the global offshore wind power industry.

Instead of working to realise this much needed boost to the UK economy, Greenpeace believes the CBI has prioritised representing members like EDF which are interested only in pushing a new generation of nuclear reactors in the UK, which will do little to deliver a secure, indigenous, globally replicable solution to the problems of climate change and energy security while creating jobs. The record of the nuclear industry in delivering cheap, reliable energy is poor (construction of a new Finnish reactor - touted as a example of how nuclear can deliver - is now three years behind schedule after three years of construction, and substantially over budget).

Sauven added:

"The existing bill for nuclear waste already stretches beyond £100bn, but that hasn't stopped EDF already calling for renewable energy to be constrained because it has the potential to render new nuclear stations even more uneconomic. The company can't even deliver its only new reactor construction, at Flammenville in northern France, on time or on budget. It's a shame that the Confederation of British Industry is lobbying furiously for a French state-owned energy giant instead of UK-based renewables companies."

Miliband coal consultation - Greenpeace response

Commenting on the launch today of a new government consultation on the future of coal in Britain, Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:

"The fact that there is even a consultation on coal is welcome, given that this time last year policy was being decided by myopic ministers in thrall to regressive civil servants, but Ed Miliband needs to go further. His proposed policy leaves us with the threat of a massive new coal plant at Kingsnorth that would only capture and bury a quarter of its emissions and pump out six million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, making it the dirtiest new power station built in Britain for decades."

He continued:

"Britain could and should be a global leader on climate change and Ed Miliband has the power to make that happen, but first he has to rule out emissions from new coal-fired power stations, like Kingsnorth, and set a deadline for closing the existing coal plants like Drax."

He added:

"If Ed Miliband rules out emissions from new coal plants he'll be able to go to the vital Copenhagen climate conference with the credibility to demand a strong global deal to succeed Kyoto."

Geoff Hoon resignation - Greenpeace response

Commenting on Geoff Hoon's resignation, Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:

"Geoff Hoon's resignation is an ideal opportunity for Labour to ditch its disastrous Heathrow policy and make a clean break from the past. In recent years the fortunes of the third runway have become a metaphor for the Labour Party itself - increasingly unpopular, with most people now wondering what on earth it's for. In one single step Labour could signal that it takes the voting public seriously and is committed to stopping climate change, and it wouldn't cost a penny. In fact as the aviation industry continues to decline a new £13bn runway would be economic folly."

Greenpeace hails 'signs of climate leadership' at last

Following Thursday's announcement by Ed Miliband of new regulations for coal plants and the launch of a consultation on coal policy, Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:

"At last Ed Miliband is demonstrating welcome signs of climate leadership in the face of resistance from Whitehall officials and cabinet colleagues. He is the first minister in twelve years to throw down the gauntlet to the energy companies and demand they start taking climate change seriously."

Greenpeace believes the key part of today's announcement is the requirement by power companies to capture and bury all the CO2 emissions from new coal plants by 2025 at the latest, if the Environment Agency states that CCS works a radical departure from the policies of previous energy secretaries. This time last year energy issues were being decided by tired ministers in thrall to regressive civil servants. Now we see hints of real climate leadership.

John Sauven continued:

"Finally a cabinet minister has faced up to the massive threat coal poses to the climate, but we're not there yet. Very significant questions remain unanswered, with environmentalists concerned that emissions from coal could still be undermining Britain's climate efforts for years to come. For every tonne of carbon captured and buried from new coal plants before the 2020s, the Government seems happy to see three tonnes released into the atmosphere. Until there is a cast iron guarantee that new coal plants won't be allowed to pump out massive amounts of CO2 from day one, our campaign continues."

Questions that the consultation must answer are:

• Will new coal plants be permitted to operate for a decade while still pumping three-quarters of their emissions into the atmosphere?
• How will the Government ensure that, if CCS technology doesn't work, the UK won't be left with a legacy of new coal plants emitting huge amounts of CO2 at a time when we must be slashing emissions?
• Will existing coal plants like Drax, which are slated to continue operation into the 2020s, be allowed to continue operating unabated despite their massive emissions?

Four CCS coal demonstration projects operating for 15 years before becoming fully CCS could still emit up to 275 million tonnes of CO2, according to the Greenpeace energy team (calculation available on demand). Greenpeace believes today's announcement will only be effective in ruling out climate-damaging emissions from coal if it is backed up with tough regulations that prevent the prospect of the energy companies building new highly-polluting coal plants with the odd small CCS experiment bolted onto the side. A new Kingsnorth that emits marginally less than it otherwise would have is still utterly inconsistent with claims that Britain leads the world on climate change.

Research by Poyry, Europe's leading independent energy experts found that if Britain meets its renewables and energy efficiency targets, we won't need any coal or nuclear.

In December last year Lord Turner's Committee on Climate Change in its advice to the Prime Minister said no coal station (existing or newly built) should still be operating without full CCS beyond the early 2020s. Professor James Hansen, the NASA director widely recognised as the world's leading climate scientist, has said no coal station should be allowed to be built unless it has full CCS from day one.

Greenpeace supports the approach pioneered by Governor Schwarzenegger in California - an Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) applied to power stations that would limit the amount of CO2 produced per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated. Greenpeace advocates an initial EPS of 350g/Kwh which would rule out new unabated coal. The EPS would tighten over time to reflect developing technologies and demands by scientists that emissions peak in 2015 then reduce dramatically.

Sauven said:

"The Government should implement an Emissions Performance Standard so if CCS doesn't work, whatever takes its place is in line with the climate science."

Environmentalists have run a two year campaign against new highly-polluting coal plants, with attention focusing on E.ON's plans to build a new plant at Kingsnorth in Kent. The German utility submitted plans for a normal unabated' plant, and came close to achieving consent from then-energy secretary John Hutton. Now those plans are regarded by government as untenable.

Six Greenpeace activists who shut down the existing plant at Kingsnorth and painted the Prime Minister's name on the chimney faced trial late last year but were acquitted after convincing a jury that the damage they did to the power station was justified in the face of the harm done to the planet by coal plants.

In Thursday's Financial Times Scottish Power urged the Government to support a plan to 'retro-fit' CCS at the company's existing Longannet power station on the east coast of Scotland. Fitting CCS to such existing plants would negate the need to build new coal plants in order to demonstrate the potential viability of the technology. Nick Horler, the chief executive of Scottish Power, said: "There are over 50,000 fossil fuel plants worldwide, and if we can't do anything about retro-fitting them with carbon capture, then whatever we do with new build is largely irrelevant."

A full Greenpeace briefing on coal can be downloaded at: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/files/pdfs/climate/caseagainstcoal200812.pdf

A timeline of recent developments in the coal debate can be found at: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/coaltimeline

Green groups launch legal battle against Heathrow expansion

Leading green groups, together with local councils and residents' groups, today launched a legal challenge against the government's controversial decision to expand Heathrow airport.

The thirteen organisations backing the challenge - representing millions of people - will argue that the consultation process was flawed and that the decision was irrational.

Lawyers representing the coalition argue that a third runway means that the UK risks breaching legal limits on noise and air pollution, that it will seriously undermine our climate change targets and that the costs of the project have not been properly assessed and will not benefit the economy.

Greenpeace, WWF-UK, RSPB and CPRE will claim that expanding Heathrow will massively increase carbon emissions and that this is completely incompatible with the urgent need to tackle climate change.

Lodging the documents at the High Court is the first step in a process which is expected to lead to a Judicial Review of the government's decision on Heathrow.

If the challenge is successful, the decision would be quashed and the government would have to re-run the consultation. If the Court agrees that the decision was irrational then the government may also be forced to review its entire aviation policy, which supports expanding nearly thirty airports across the country.

Greenpeace Executive Director, John Sauven said:

"The government's decision to expand Heathrow is completely at odds with the urgent need to slash emissions and stop runaway climate change. This is why we are launching a legal challenge.

"Brown and Hoon know that the sums on Heathrow don't add up. That's why, at the last minute, they knocked together a handful of half-baked proposals in an attempt to 'green' the runway.

"But however much the government try to dress this decision up, the simple fact is that this runway can not be built if it is serious about tackling climate change."

David Norman, Director of Campaigns at WWF-UK said:

"The decision to allow a third runway at Heathrow blows the chances of setting the UK onto a low carbon pathway completely out of the water. If the targets set in the Climate Change Act are to be meaningful, the government must stop adopting policies that undermine them.

"Nor does it make sense financially - why expand a carbon intensive industry such as aviation, which will make it incredibly difficult and expensive for the UK to meet the government's carbon targets - when there are green alternatives such as video conferencing and high speed rail available instead? Every other part of the economy will have to cover the carbon costs created by a third runway."

Dr Mark Avery, the RSPB's Director of Conservation, said:

"The RSPB believes climate change to be the biggest threat to life on Earth. We are already starting to see its impacts on wildlife here in the UK, including catastrophic declines among seabirds in parts of the North Sea.

"Against this backdrop, the decision to build a third runway at Heathrow is perverse. We are not opposed to flying, and indeed recognise that for many people international travel is a vital part of their life and work. But encouraging a massive increase in flights, just at the time when we need to reduce our emissions dramatically, shows a reckless disregard for the well-being of our planet, and our future."

Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England said:

"Britain's aviation policy is badly out of date and lacks democratic legitimacy. It takes very little account of the urgency of climate change or the impact on people's quality of life of ever more noisy flights and car journeys to airports.

"The decision on the third runway was stitched up behind closed doors, and the Government seems less and less prepared to subject its decisions on aviation to proper public scrutiny. Aviation policy has become so democratically challenged that a legal challenge is the only way for groups like us to influence it."

EDF staff charged with spying on French government office

Top staff at nuclear energy giant Electricite de France (EDF) have been charged on suspicion of spying on Greenpeace.

Two security chiefs at the French government-owned company are accused of conspiring to hack into Greenpeace computer systems in France. Three others have also been charged, including a computer expert and the head of a private investigation firm. The computer expert has already admitted the charge.

The head of Greenpeace UK is today seeking assurances that EDF, who are the front-runners to build new nuclear reactors in Britain, have not been spying on staff at Greenpeace's London offices.

EDF confirmed yesterday that authorities had searched their premises and an investigation had been opened for "fraudulent intrusion into computer systems".

EDF have recently bought British Energy, owners of almost all of the UK's nuclear power sites, and have an intense interest in shifting the nuclear debate in Britain.

John Sauven, head of Greenpeace UK, said: "We want to know if EDF have been spying on us.

"Their staff are already facing spying charges in France, and they've got a very obvious stake in the future of nuclear power in the UK.

"We back cutting-edge renewable energy projects, while EDF openly admit that such schemes would scupper their nuclear plans.

"So it's now very much up to EDF to say if they've been using underhand tactics in this country."

The spying revelations have already caused a furore in France, with national media covering the story widely. In 1985 the French government accepted responsibility for the bombing of the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior, in which one crew member died.

Gordon Brown's brother, Andrew, is head of media relations at EdF.