Letter To My Labour MP

By Paul Homewood

I have sent this letter to my local Labour MP, regarding Labour’s promise to ensure that 60% of UK energy comes from low carbon/renewable sources by 2030:

The Labour Manifesto last year promised to “ensure that 60% of UK energy comes from low carbon/renewable sources by 2030”

I assume that this is still party policy.

Could you provide detail on how this will be achieved?

FACTS

Currently, as at 2016, only 18% of primary energy consumption comes from low carbon/renewable.

The Committee on Climate Change, hardly backsliders in these matters, have prepared various scenarios, which basically project that around 25% of electricity will come from low carbon/renewable by 2030. But electricity only accounts for about a third of total energy.

About another third comes from direct natural gas consumption, about a half for domestic heating and cooking, and the rest for industrial processes. There appears to be little prospect of switching either of these to low carbon/renewable in the near future in any large scale.

Oil accounts for the other third, mainly for transport, aviation and shipping. Switchover to EVs is still tiny, due to the fact that drivers do not want them, despite massive govt subsidies.

There is certainly no prospect of lorries switching to electric in the next decade or so either, or for that matter aviation and shipping.

COSTS

There is also the crippling cost of decarbonisation.

The OBR already project a cost of £14.4bn in 2022/23, and this will continue to climb rapidly as more renewable capacity comes on stream, and Hinkley Point starts up.

A target of 60% will mean much higher costs still. Has Labour costed this?

BIOMASS

I would be particularly interested in Labour’s policy towards biomass. Many experts now conclude that burning wood pellets at Drax etc will actually have the effect of INCREASING CO2 emissions in comparison with coal and gas.

It is also true that burning wood emits more toxic substances (as opposed to CO2) than coal.

On top of all this, the demand for wood pellets across Europe is causing great devastation across some of the US’ wild forests.

Does Labour favour building more such plants?

JOBS

The closure of coal and gas power stations will involve many job losses.

The move to EVs could also threaten the closure of some of the UK’s oil refineries, and associated chemical plants.

What has the Labour Party got to say to those who lose their jobs?

In particular, the threat to refineries and chemical plants seems to go against your stated aim of rebuilding UK industry.

MANIFESTO

Your manifesto is remarkably short on any detail on how you will meet your target, but does mention:

Insulating 4 million homes

Experience has shown that most people use insulation to make their homes warmer, rather than cutting energy use. So it seems unlikely this will make much of a dent.

Carbon Capture

Currently this still does not exist in any viable, scalable form. Even if it could be made to work, it would make power generation much more expensive than ordinary CCGT, simply because of the process involved. These costs would have to be passed on to energy users.

Nuclear Power

Given the long lead times in planning and building nuclear, it is highly unlikely any new nuclear could be built by 2030, other than Hinkley of course.

There also seems little interest from suppliers, especially with the problems facing Toshiba.

And again there is the issue of cost. Hinkley’s strike price is more than double the market rate. Would Labour sign up to other deals above the market rate?

Given all of the above factors, I would be interested to see how Labour would go about meeting its target