In 2006, Conservative Party leader David Cameron went to Norway to hug a husky and strut his green credentials. By 2013 his policy had changed to “cut the green crap”, a spectacular reversal of commitment. Had the government kept investing in sustainable energy projects, it would have limited the degree of the energy crisis we’re living through.
U-turns on climate commitments
During the recent period of musical prime ministers, the government demonstrated its talent for U-turning and creating policy uncertainty that sabotages the very things it claims to support. Policy seems too often to respond to the personal whims of whoever is in the sitting in the PM’s musical chair at the time.
The U-turns include the decision to override local council approval for a Cumbrian coke gas coal mine before COP 26, only to reverse that decision once COP 27 was over in 2022. This put short term commercial and political advantage over protecting the global climate.
Homes are the second largest sector contributing greenhouse emissions in the UK, yet Liz Truss blocked a plan to give people advice on reducing energy costs because it smacked of “the nanny state”. Grant Shapps in his new role as secretary of state for energy security and net zero announced he was going ahead with a public information campaign.
Then there is fracking: Boris Johnson – no we won’t. Truss – yes we will. Rishi Sunak – no we won’t. Or onshore wind farms? Johnson – no we won’t. Truss – no we won’t. Sunak – yes we will. The majority of voters support onshore wind arrays. Shapps has previously opposed them. We wait to see his future stance.
Achieving net zero
The UK net zero report speaks of being strong on ambition but is undermined by lack of clear priorities, strategies and plans to secure the opportunities of pursuing a green technology transition in the UK. Johnson’s talent for offering seductive visions unsupported by detail still haunts the implementation. There are 129 recommendations to be pursued with zeal by a committed government. Their response will be telling.
The Renewable Heat Incentive scheme to help households install sustainable heat sources was withdrawn on 31/3/21. It was replaced by the Boiler Upgrade Scheme. The funding is restricted to households receiving benefits. Shapps newly in his role as Secretary for Energy Security and Net Zero has announced a new energy saving scheme, ECO+, for households in council tax bands A–D to insulate their homes. These schemes are potentially helpful but the rate at which they change or disappear undermines the confidence of business and consumers to invest in them.
Finally, the Tory government faces an ideological barrier in achieving major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. It must abandon the conviction that markets must be left alone to deliver the desired outcomes. Without regulation and legal enforcement success is unlikely.
Are oil companies’ plans for life under net zero the next elephant in the room?
We all face another problem. Whether we receive our pensions from the state or private sector we all rely on them to keep us tolerably comfortable in old age. Most pension funds hold some shares in ‘big oil’. Like it or not, their dividends have provided a major and, over time, a reliable contribution to the value of pensions. Yet business as usual for big oil has long been untenable for the planet and unethical for pension holders.
Some of the oil companies meanwhile still don’t see it that way because they foresee a demand for oil for decades to come. BP and Shell have recently issued statements of intent to achieve zero carbon across the whole lifecycle of their energy products by 2050. Some oil producers see a future in the growth of demand for petrochemicals. These are different derivatives of oil from the sources of energy we are familiar with now.
We need to understand all the implications of this as a future proposition. It would be disastrous if under cover of the current global environmental crisis the oil industry was laying the foundation for next one. Compounding the already huge threat of waste plastics and micro-plastic particles polluting the environment is not an acceptable replacement for greenhouse gas emissions.
Immediate priorities
The government must inform, energise and incentivise the public to take further action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Changing behaviour can be rewarding financially and make a contribution for the general good. Those best equipped to reduce emissions must take the most responsibility.
The government’s history of changing policies and U-turning on climate policies suggests they will talk a good talk but not necessarily match it with commitment or provide clear plans to make policies succeed. Indecision and uncertainty inhibits an effective engagement by business and financiers.
The government must show how the constituent parts of the plan work to reach a net zero outcome. On fracking, blocking of onshore wind arrays, deficiencies in providing electric battery recharging points, new coal mines being approved in Cumbria, new licences issued for oil and gas exploration, government must be held to account all the way to zero carbon 2050.
