Ed Davey’s contribution (on the next steps to decarbonize the UK) to a new collection of essays from the Social Liberal Forum is a tour de force in strategic thinking.
One of the great strengths of Liberal thought through the ages has been an ability to find practical, scientifically and economically-sound solutions to pressing social challenges. For an excellent example of this, from someone who has held high office, look no further than Sir Ed Davey’s essay in Four Go In Search of Big Ideas, which not only provides a wide-ranging discussion of the challenges of decarbonising the UK’s economy in line with the aims of the Paris Agreement but also presents up-to-date policy suggestions to support the deployment of cutting-edge green tech.
For the power sector, Davey suggests that “any new nuclear should be suspended until it can prove substantial cost reduction”. He is also clear both for the need to improve the incentives to supply-side innovations like renewable power with storage (the practice of equipping intermittent power sources like wind and solar PV with battery storage) and to rapidly speed up the ability of “demand-response” technologies and smart grids to respond to changes in supply and to cut overall energy demand.
In a section that reminds clean energy advocates like me of how useful it would be to have Davey back in the Council of the EU, he urges much more use to be made of interconnectors between neighbouring nations, as well as fast-tracking reforms to electricity markets to ensure, for example, that network costs are fairly shared among market participants and that barriers to new entrants like community energy groups are broken down.
One of the many interesting proposals in the chapter is Davey’s suggestion for encouraging more consumers to get involved with the energy market via a competition called “Your Home, Your Power Station”. Distributed energy couldn’t be a more liberal vision but more needs to be done to bring people onboard and this could help.
Fully decarbonising heat is still a challenge to which there is not sufficient agreement and Davey acknowledges this. The core of the debate turns on whether to go for “renewable gas” or whether to push for full electrification of heat via things like electric heat pumps. Both require significant further work and Davey suggests a £1 billion Innovation Fund for zero carbon gas to be coupled with a kickstarted programme for Carbon Capture and Storage. The UK should also aim to set up two new Hydrogen Heating Projects at village scale, so we can better understand the nature (and cost) of the retrofits needed to make current gas networks suitable for Hydrogen. When we look at how successful the Lib Dem pioneered Offshore Wind Industrial Strategy has been in attracting investment and cutting costs in the sector, this sounds wise.
Finally, there is transport and industry. Both require big investment in clean infrastructure. Electric Vehicle growth in the UK will be stunted if decisions are not made soon on how to roll-out a full EV charging network across the country. If this is done well, EVs could even be used to balance power grids. Davey suggests a new Commission on Transport Fuel Infrastructure Switch (COFIS). As noted, a comprehensive carbon capture and storage programme and a huge ramp up of energy efficiency investment are also urgently needed as a part of a Green Power Industrial Strategy and, no doubt, Davey would see a much bigger role for this than the government does in its recently published Clean Growth Strategy.
Four Go In Search of Big Ideas is available from the SLF website for £9-50 including postage and packing. Find us at www.socialliberal.net.
* Edward Robinson is a member of the Liberal Democrats in Europe.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
US outperformance isn't *all* about Tech
The Joy of Six 1298
Last West End Christmas Fortnight events today! #dundeewestend
How national insurance increase will undermine homeless services
North London's expanse
Jonathan Brown
Joseph Bourke
Nonconformistradical
theakes
15 Comments
“any new nuclear should be suspended until it can prove substantial cost reduction”
Then that’s a green light! The price agreed for the Hinkley Point new build is cheaper than currently being paid for wind-generated electricity – once you include the cost of subsidies.
renewable power with storage
Do the math’s, you soon realise whilst this has its uses, it isn’t a mass market solution. Plus we still have to address the problem: total theoretical electricity from renewables is significantly less than total energy currently consumed, and that is before we include the energy overheads of batteries.
Electric Vehicle growth in the UK will be stunted if decisions are not made soon on how to roll-out a full EV charging network across the country.
Don’t see anything wrong in this!
Also do the math, there is a reason why the mineral extraction companies are so upbeat about EV’s – market prices of key metals are already rising as demand is highly likely to outstrip supply.
I think the fundamental flaw in much of the ‘green’ thinking is the assumption that we can decarbonise our energy supply etc. etc. and still maintain our current energy-dependent lifestyle.
Interestingly, Brexit provides (another) opportunity to make major structural changes in our economy and society. However, like previous opportunities, I fully expect the politicians to give it a miss and desperately try and prove the science and math’s wrong.
According to Ed Davey “any new nuclear should be suspended until it can prove substantial cost reduction”. Is this the same Ed Davey who negotiated and signed the Hinckley Point contract ?
According to the Public Accounts Committee, ‘The UK government should rethink the economic case for new nuclear power stations after making “grave strategic errors” in the Hinkley Point project.
In a report published on Wednesday, the Commons public accounts committee accused the government of neglecting consumer interests and failing to push for a better deal with the French and Chinese investors who are building the £20bn nuclear plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset.
The committee said consumers had been “dealt a bad hand” by the government’s agreement to lock UK households into buying expensive electricity from Hinkley for 35 years. “Its blinkered determination to agree the Hinkley deal, regardless of changing circumstances, means that for years to come energy consumers will face costs running to many times the original estimate,” Financial Times, 17 November, 2017.
What is “zero carbon gas”? Do you mean hydrogen? Methane (the sort of gas we all use for heat atm) is CH4, so it can’t be that. Hydrogen is problematic as it’s difficult to store and transport; is currently made either from coal & steam (C + 2H2O -> CO2 + 2H2) which obv has a CO2 output, or via electrolysis, which loses a lot of the energy used.
Electric heat pumps can work, but air source has a low coefficient of performance when the air is really cold (like in the winter ) so you might as well use the electricity as heat directly, ground source relies on enough heat going back into the ground in the summer to avoid permafrost conditions, and water source is only available where there is flowing water. Could be useful to suck some heat out of power station cooling water, I suppose.
As for CCS – I prefer PPD for practicality… Powered by Pixie Dust. The underground wells have to stay secure for 1000 years plus for it to make a serious difference because of the speed of natural CO2 removal. Wells fail quite often, but such a failure would make the whole thing pointless. AND you lose a third of your power (if we’re talking electricity), or use that much on top of whatever else you’re doing (iron smelting) to cool the enormous quantities of hot gas being output. Renewables look like a lot better option.
Roland makes the excellent point “the fundamental flaw .. is the assumption that we can decarbonise our energy supply etc. etc. and still maintain our current energy-dependent lifestyle.”
For example in transport – cycling is very much less energy intensive than hauling a couple of tonnes of car around with you, even if it is battery powered. Public transport – buses and trains are also more efficient – and use road space more efficiently. And what about HGVs? Battery power for them is much harder, because hauliers expect to run them for 100k miles a year, not the 5 to 12 of a private car. So even if they can haul their batteries around – when do they charge them?
Aviation ? How much kerosene can we get out of plants without affecting the food supply? It’s really not enough to
…have a deposit on plastic bottles while flying to Australia to see the Barrier Reef before it’s completely gone, for example.
At an LD conference some 10 years ago, delegates were asked to raise their hands to commit to a personal10% reduction in GHG emissions. Sounds easy, doesn’t it? I didn’t, because I know how hard it is. And I wonder if anyone on this site remembers making such a commitment, and whether they achieved it, and if so, how?
PS Wandsworth claims to be going for EV infrastructure see https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2018/04/jonathan-cook-improving-air-quality-for-londoners-must-be-a-top-conservative-priority.html
10% reduction in personal GHG emissions? Become a vegan.
One interesting thing re solar power, which is technically possible as it is done in parts of USA and Canada, is to fit Smart Meters, in conjunction with solar panels, that run backwards so that the grid acts as a “battery” for the consumer. So power generated in the day is credited directly to the consumer for use in the night, ditto excess power generated in the summer can be used in the winter. With falling solar panel prices and this simplification of the process no other incentives should be needed. Low energy users could probably avoid any electric bills if they use a provider like Ebico who do not have standing charges.
I am willing to take bets, though, that the current Smart Meters being fitted in the UK will not run backwards, given the usual larceny involved in the energy industry.
@ William Fowler. No, they don’t. The old style rotating ones used to go backwards…a case of old tech being better than new!
Where does energy saving come in? Where for example are the suggestions for zero energy houses? How about looking at transport. No matter what fuel we use is there any possibility of it being sustainable? Simple ideas like abandoning London as a capital need exploring, and in fact abandoning the idea of a capital city. We are all poisoning each other. How long do we have?
@William – Firstly, the grid doesn’t act like a battery, even though some may perceive it in that way.
The key difference between the UK system and the US system is the way things do and don’t get accounted for.
In the US system there is no need for the Utility to maintain any billing records, they simply read the meter, if you’ve used more than the last reading, you owe them, if you’ve used less then you get a credit. All that needs to be recorded is the standard periodic bills, thus as far as the Utility is concerned, during certain periods it’s operating costs are higher so a reduced tax bill.
In the UK system, all energy consumed and generated is recorded and payments are made (money moves between bank accounts) which require additional accounting records, which don’t change a Utility’s cost base in the same – off-book, cost hiding, tax-saving – way.
As for the current Smart Meters, the expectation is growing that all those installed and being fitted today, will need to be replaced due to a number of technical limitations that will prevent them from delivering the supposed benefits and that is before we start on the growing number of security vulnerabilities…
I installed solar panels recently, with an elderly meter. It went backwards for less than one revolution before stopping. They have to be really old to run backwards. The amount generated is metered separately and that’s what the FIT is based on. Other than that, I would love to install a battery to store the excess before it goes back to the grid, so I can use it each evening. This doesn’t require expensive modern tech, since lead acid battery technology is capable of doing the trick. There’s no real concern about energy density and power to weight ratios for a home-based battery.
http://www.isoenergy.co.uk/battery-storage-for-solar-panels
Regarding the question about zero carbon gas. Hydrogen is, of course, one aspect of this, and we really should be generating it with surplus wind and solar power for injection into the existing gas grid (which I am informed can take 20% hydrogen with no modifications). There is also the claim that biogas can be considered zero carbon, although as with all biofuels, the devil is in the detail. The zero-carbon gas I wish to see developed to industrial scale is Renewable Methane. This is an emerging science and engineering challenge and various methods are being actively developed.
https://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-news/solar-energy-produces-methane-from-co2-with-new-catalyst-em091/
One important innovation is to provide solar panels on all new builds with built in exporting to the grid as that is cheaper than retrofitting and would allow estate agents to do our work for us by emphasising the cost advantages.
@Peter Hirst
That means that you also have to orient all new houses approximately East-West, so one side of the roof is south-facing.
“@William – Firstly, the grid doesn’t act like a battery, even though some may perceive it in that way.”
That is why I put battery in inverted commas. USA and Canadian consumers definitely do get the benefit I describe from meters running backwards (probably one in a thousand households have the really old meters in the UK that do run backwards, most were mechanically modified to stop that happening due to meter fiddlers) and even in a worst case scenario where the UK industry has fiddled things so it is impossible you can still fit export meters and apply that reading fully against the actual smart meter as everything will be sent to the utility co automatically via SIM/4G, other incentives removed. Just simpler to do it the way I described.
Laurence
only the roofs – the roof ridge can be front to back or side to side or more frequently nowadays aligned with one of the walls. And it doesn’t need to be east-west/north-south. The angle can vary by 15 to 20 degrees without significantly affecting the amount of energy harvested. The amount captured when the sun is low is negligable.