The government’s energy security strategy looks doomed to fail on its own terms
Analysis: The Tories are doing the least possible to help people and the planet and the most to help polluting industries, writes Harry Cockburn
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.As evidence of devastating war crimes in Ukraine by Russian forces grows, and soaring fuel prices mean people in the UK are being engulfed by a tidal wave of unaffordable bills, the UK government is unveiling its long awaited energy security strategy.
This hugely important policy package will outline how the government will move to cut imports of Russian fossil fuels, make the UK energy supply secure and efficient, and set out how new energy projects help the country hit its legally binding net zero targets.
The strategy comes the same week the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned global emissions must peak within the next three years and then rapidly come down to prevent global devastation that will leave cities underwater and push a million species into extinction. The UN’s secretary-general, Antonio Guterres, said: “Investing in new fossil fuel infrastructure is moral and economic madness.”
It is against this backdrop the government is already preparing the ground for an energy strategy that will do little to protect people from surging bills in the short term, and will continue to support the wildly dangerous fossil fuel industries pumping climate-altering emissions into the atmosphere.
In a speech this week by the energy secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, he cleared the way for an expected announcement on new drilling licences for oil and gas in the North Sea, while he has also ordered a review into the moratorium on fracking.
A chief means of ridding us of Russian gas – government support for heat pumps and insulation – was missing from his speech. Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, has actively opposed such support, according to reports.
Energy experts have repeatedly told The Independent the fastest way to make energy cheaper in the UK is also the greenest, and is also the best way to get us off Russian fossil fuels. That is a greater level of government support for insulation and help to make the move to heat pumps, combined with investment in renewable energy.
While much of the UK remains dependent on gas for cooking and home heating, greater energy efficiency through improving insulation will slash enough energy to remove the requirement for Russian gas – which contributes between 2 to 5 per cent of our annual consumption.
Choosing to instead invest in new fossil fuel programmes is a wild decision for several reasons:
- as Kwarteng himself admits, they will not drive down energy prices, as oil and gas are sold on the global market, and UK reserves – including shale gas – are comparatively tiny
- the decades-long lead times – averaging 28 years in the North Sea – mean such investments can’t help in the short term, and also mean new fossil fuel pollution will be coming online just ahead of the 2050 net zero target
- 80 per cent of UK oil has to be exported as we don’t have the refining facilities at home.
The government is also understood to have shot down proposals to make planning for onshore wind farms easier, despite widespread support for them, citing concerns about the impact on British landscapes.
But the same concern is not stopping the government from setting out plans to support “hundreds” of new nuclear power stations across the country.
While onshore wind is among the very cheapest energy generation methods after solar, nuclear is the most expensive, with government spending on nuclear set to lock in an extra £80 a year on top of already soaring bills for consumers.
According to Greenpeace, investing in nuclear “is quite literally gambling away taxpayers’ money on projects that are generally late and represent poor value for money”, the organisation said in a briefing ahead of the government’s new energy security strategy.
While there are legitimate concerns about not having sufficient renewable capacity when the wind doesn’t blow, updating the energy grid, making homes and businesses more efficient, and installing power-sharing facilities with other European countries will have an enormous impact.
While the UK is undoubtedly ahead when it comes to wind power, European countries will catch up, with the European Commission saying around 68 per cent of Europe’s electricity mix must be renewable by 2030.
Will the government’s energy strategy rapidly slash the need for Russian gas and oil in the short term? No it won’t. Will it help those facing unpayable bills? No it won’t. Will it help reduce the UK’s burning of fossil fuels? No it won’t.
Who is really benefiting here?
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments