The highlights include grid connection reforms which will allow more renewable energy projects to be connected to the grid, no mentions of tidal or onshore wind and a continuation of the Energy Profits Levy until 2028.

The key announcements:

1. Powering Up Britain

   1. Plan for 8 priority areas to deliver energy security, including targets such as 95% clean electricity by 2030.

   2. Aims to mobilise up to £100 billion of private investment over the decade in sectors like offshore wind, hydrogen, solar and nuclear - notice how there was no similar support announced for tidal or onshore wind.

   3. Sector-specific plans to support industries like manufacturing, fossil fuels, construction etc. to decarbonize operations over the next 15 years. Details here.

2. Reduce UK Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) permits available by 45% between 2023 and 2027 and extend the scheme to cover emissions from domestic maritime and energy from waste.

   1. P.S. This is a controversial scheme that allows companies to trade their available emissions budget to companies needing more emissions allowance. Supporters say that this encourages staying within a collective emissions budget. However, this makes it easier to evade individual responsibility and commercialising emissions is ethically questionable.

   2. So all in all - reduction of ETS permits is welcome.

3. There will be an exemption for the Electricity Generator Levy for new renewable energy projects.

4. Grid Connection Reforms: Reforms to drastically reduce grid connection waiting times for viable renewable energy projects.

   1. This should free up over 100GW of connection capacity so projects can connect sooner without delays.

   2. This could cut the overall connection delays from 5 years currently to no more than 6 months.

5. There are new measures to halve the time it will take to build new electricity grid infrastructure - to 7 years.

6. Oil and Gas Fiscal Regime Package

   1. A package covering short, medium and long term for the oil and gas sector, including ending the Energy Profits Levy and details on the Energy Security Investment Mechanism.

   2. This provides relief to companies if oil/gas prices are exceptionally high to promote investment.

   3. The age-old argument cited for this is “energy security” - but of course, we know that oil and gas are not necessary for this to be guaranteed.

7. Green Industries Growth Accelerator

   1. £960 million in funding has been announced to support clean energy manufacturing capacity.

8. Basically nothing in the way of energy support (in the forms outlined in yesterday’s EcoTwig ;) for households this winter.

9. Expanding Energy-Saving Materials VAT Relief to more technologies like heat pumps.

10. Only residual funds of £295 million in 2023-24, and 2024-25 budgets to support energy bills under the Energy Bills Support Scheme.

    

So there it is — the 2023 Autumn budget. I’m eager to see how the plans for the national grid map out, as it is sure to add plenty of capacity for renewables. But the continuation of the Energy Profits Levy shows that the Treasury is still clinging on to the dark and dirty profits of oil and gas. Long-term funding for wind and solar is also a step in the right direction, but how far forward can we get if we are leaving tidal and onshore behind? Not very, I bet.

Onwards and upwards - twig’ you later.

Share

The ESNZ Committee report notes that while unprecedented financial support was provided last winter at the height of the energy price crisis, no exact measures have been announced for the coming cold season - even though bills are predicted to remain 69% higher than they were in 2021.

With an estimated 6.6 million UK households in fuel poverty, the committee urges the government to take immediate action. Recommendations include:

• Extending existing assistance programs like the Warm Home Discount and Cold Weather Payments

  • The report suggests prioritising low-income and fuel-poor households, and those with disabilities and medical conditions. Discounts should not be based on a first-come, first-served basis.

  • Cold weather Payments

    • If the average temperature falls below 0°C for seven consecutive days in a region, eligible households are given £25 - retrospectively.

    • The report hails this as an “outdated, old-fashioned scheme,” and suggests that it be based on the daily minimum temperature, not an average; and to be provided in advance of forecast cold events.

  • Warm Homes Discount

    • Energy suppliers provide rebates to low-income and vulnerable households in, or at risk of, fuel poverty; It is a one-off payment of £150.

    • N.B. not all suppliers are required to offer the rebate.

• Implementing an energy social tariff to subsidise bills for low-income families

  • Energy social tariffs

    • In the case of energy, the price of gas and electricity would be set below the cap on energy prices for those with low incomes.

• Requiring energy companies to provide better customer service and priority support lines for charities assisting vulnerable groups

• Revising the standing charge component of bills so costs better correlate with household usage

  • The standing charge is a daily amount that you must pay for energy - regardless of how much your household uses.

  • The report highlights that the standing charge has increased by over 65% in less than five years.

  • The ESNZ Committee deems the charge as “unfair and regressive” and recommends replacing it with a per-unit cost.

• Accelerating the rollout of smart meters to help consumers manage consumption.

  

The report also slams the voucher redemption system used last winter for the Energy Bill Support Scheme, with 25% of vouchers unclaimed due to administrative failures.

All in all, the committee raises socially just recommendations for the government to act on over the coming winter.

Ofgem has since announced its intention to launch a review into standing charges, but government action in response to the committee has been lacking.

With the Autumn Budget coming tomorrow we may see more support made available, and if there is, you can find out more about it here on EcoTwig.

“Legislation will be introduced to strengthen the United Kingdom’s energy security and reduce reliance on volatile international energy markets and hostile foreign regimes. This Bill will support the future licencing of new oil and gas fields, helping the country transition to net zero by 2050 without adding undue burdens on households.”

The Substance:

The government have published a 76-page document explaining the contents of the King’s speech. When it comes to climate, we all know that King Charles holds the matter close to his heart. But as the government wrote the speech, poor Charlie had to grit his teeth and formally announce a bill to support the future licencing of new oil and gas fields.

So, what does this new document tell us?

• The Offshore Petroleum Licensing Bill will be proposed in this parliament and allow for regular oil and gas licensing.

  • The Bill will require emissions tests to “ensure that future licensing supports the transition to net zero.” It's a counterintuitive approach, for sure, and one that also doesn’t get any substantive attention in the new doc.

  • The Bill will apply to the whole of the UK.

  • It will supposedly be “vital to the UK’s energy security”, but if history teaches us anything, we should probably hold our breath and expect most of it to be shipped abroad.

  • Interestingly, we also learn that the scope of the Bill could cover improving the energy efficiency of homes, but information besides its general involvement is scarce.

• Are you hitting your targets?

  • The speech features an interesting line:

    • “While we deliver our net zero targets at home, we're also leading the global effort to tackle climate change — including committing over £1.6 billion for the Green Climate Fund, the biggest single international climate pledge the UK has ever made.”

  • While the pledge is welcome, the notion that the government is delivering net zero targets at home is misguided for reasons outlined in yesterday’s newsletter.

• The government will require annual oil and gas licensing to “boost UK energy security” and reduce dependence on foreign imports.

• Future licensing could secure 200,000 jobs and billions in tax receipts.

• Licensing rounds are supposed to support lower carbon emissions and be contingent on specific tests to transition to net zero.

The Climate Change Committee (CCC) warns the UK is falling off-pace for net zero by 2050. Key targets are being missed on every front, and the government has today announced plan to mandate annual licensing rounds for North Sea oil and gas exploration.

The Conservatives have their eyes fixed on fossil fuel dependence as one last hurrah, despite rapid transition being imperative.

Emissions are set to overshoot mandated levels twofold, and with the government failing to meet four-fifths of recommended near-term actions, we need to see a rapid change of course.

But since 2016, over £10 billion in exploration subsidies have gone to petroleum companies, while proven clean technologies remain under-utilised. Alternative proposals for west coast tidal range, for example, could deliver 10GW of emissions-free energy in five years.

Moreover, most of the potential 500 million barrels at Rosebank are likely to be exported. Pursuing maximum extraction will do little to displace imports, with most so-called "domestic" oil and gas feeding globalised energy markets. Yet new developments will likely prolong extraction for decades.

On that scorching Saturday, over 100 companies urged Sunak to reinstate the net zero policies he abandoned for properties, including EPC minimum requirements for landlords and insulation targets. The companies have been left in the dark regarding their green investments, and the supposed party of business flicked off the light switch.

The Transition Plan Taskforce (TPT), on the other hand, seem to have the right idea. Launched by the Treasury in April 2022, they have today announced a best practice transition plan for businesses, known as the Disclosure Framework.

The TPT focuses on helping companies and financial institutions develop plans to transition their operations to net zero.

The new plan highlights principles of "ambition, action, and accountability", which is reminiscent of what Ford asked the Prime Minister for in his net zero policies after they were drastically rehashed last month: “ambition, commitment and consistency.”

It outlines how companies can include transition plans in their annual reporting and practical ways in which they can respond to new net zero regulations put in place by the Financial Conduct Authority, among others. All in all, this is an important step to greenifying the industry in a way that is organic, informed and tailored to cater for individual businesses.

Talking of greenifying industry, the Department for Business and Trade has announced £89 million of joint funding to develop “cutting edge” electric vehicle tech.

This will help fund 20 projects over four competitions, including developers of offroad vehicles, net-zero tractors and new EV battery systems.

The Department claims that funding from one competition alone could create or safeguard over 4,700 UK jobs, potentially saving 65 million tonnes of CO2 being emitted over the next decade.

Over the way in DESNEZ, however, the Guardian reports that ministers have ‘misrepresented’ the view of the Climate Change Committee (CCC) by claiming that they ‘said we would need a quarter of our energy to come from fossil fuels by 2050.’ The government has supposedly used their own calculations based on a CCC budget to come up with this claim, with professors from UCL and Oxford University, among others calling for an explanation.

Just to put fire in your belly - a BBC analysis has found that on around one in three days of 2023, the average global temperature was at least 1.5C higher than pre-industrial levels. Now is not the time to be complacent, and I’ll be looking eagerly toward Labour conference to see how robust their net-zero proposals are for when they inevitably form the next government.

The government recently failed to water down nutrient neutrality requirements in the Levelling Up Bill after the Lords defeated the move. So they are trying again, but it will come as no surprise if Coffey's Bill faces similar scrutiny in the other place.

This is especially true after the Lords Build Environment Committee reported last week that there is a significant risk that the government will fail to deliver on its housing and environmental ambitions. The inquiry that led to the report heard that 45,000 new homes a year might not be delivered as a result of current pollution rules, and I think that the Conservatives naively see ripping up the rulebook as a quick way out.

Buried in this mess is another admission to a delay to Biodiversity net gain rules for developers - despite the UK being the 7th most nature-depleted nation in the world.

Share EcoTwig.

The news seems at odds with the kind of policies that would be winning blue wall swing voters over. With anti-housebuilding and sewage being high on the list for these typically rural communities, this policy essentially says the opposite of what they want.

Perhaps the Conservatives are trying to get the youth vote on side. Building new houses is a surefire way to do so, and while the group is also favourable to environmental regulations, the desperation many are facing with the housing market may let this one slide.

All in all, though, I think this is more of an ideological endeavour than a vote-winning exercise, as the people they really need to win over likely won't appreciate the change.

Subscribe now

Advocates say it will work wonders for the nation's energy security, but the majority of oil extracted at the site will be sold outside of the UK - on the international market. This means it won't bring down domestic energy bills either. At this point, it is important to note that Norwegian state oil company Equinor is the majority owner of Rosebank.

The BBC reports that in the long term, the site will create 450 jobs. Alternative renewable energy sources, such as tidal stream, however, has the potential to support over 14,000 jobs. Of course - this comparison squares up a single site to a nationwide initiative, but I draw it to show that oil isn't the optimal option for growth. Or climate, obviously.

Both the International Energy Agency and the UN say that the move is incompatible with the UK's Net Zero commitments, and Countryfiler turned eco-campaigner Chris Packham has branded the move as “an act of war against life on earth.”

The decision comes less than a week after Sunak's net zero backtracks and forms the latest in the string of recent climate disappointments.

I will give Sunak some credit, though; his announcement to speed up connections to the grid is light amid the dark. He highlights that untapped energy is abundant, capable of powering half of the UK, waiting to be connected. This has been a significant barrier to community energy projects and rooftop solar. Still, I would have liked to have seen Sunak announce that renewables would get priority access to the grid. Baby steps.

More good news is that boiler upgrade grants are being raised by 50% to £7,500. But, and there is always a but, he also announced there would be a delay on the ban on new fossil fuel boilers and a reduction in the number of homes deemed suitable for heat pumps.

It was then revealed that there are no new fuel efficiency targets for landlords, which is likely to hit renters hardest. Residents of draughty, leaky homes are likely crying out over this announcement, especially with winter fast approaching and energy bills still sky-high. (It’s me; I’m residents).

Some made-up policies that no serious political figure has ever brought to the floor were “scrapped” last night - despite never existing. This includes passenger taxes on flights and a meat tax which popped up in a consultation once and ended up being used for some political points scoring.

The Uxbridge by-election likely brought all of this to the fore; the candidate and now MP, Steve Tuckwell (great drag name), won narrowly on an anti-ULEZ platform - and Sunak ran with it yesterday.

To his dismay, all of this will likely backfire. Contrary to what X trolls want us to think, climate action is generally a non-contentious issue when it comes to policy. We all agree it needs to happen; only the means are disputed. For example, the 2008 Climate Change Act won one of the biggest majorities since the Second World War.

What Sunak may well be banking on, however, is that Labour will now have to ramp up their climate policies after going back on their £28 billion green pledge. Sunak is probably hoping that if the hefty sum is reintroduced to Labour policy, the public will again start seeing the Conservatives as purveyors of fiscal prudence.

While the US has a significant political divide on net-zero, we may face a scenario similar to Australia. In the last election, the right-wing candidate went strongly anti-net zero, leaving the left candidate to oppose. The left candidate won, and here in the UK, a recent poll suggests that 41% of people would be less likely to vote Conservative if the government fails to uphold its climate change commitments.

Another thing Starmer has on his side when going into the offensive is his party's relative unity. Everyone from Zac Goldsmith to Boris Johnson has criticised the PM, and when has a disunited party ever smashed the polls?

Shifting back to the press conference, Sunak branded anti and pro-net zero groups as “ideological zealots,” suggesting a few times that individuals should approach the topic with less emotion. But when children have died and will continue to die in the city he lives in from air pollution, you question his capacity for empathy.

Share EcoTwig.

There could be new energy efficiency rules for landlords or homeowners, though I doubt it will favour a green transition, no new taxes to discourage flying, no policies to encourage carpooling, and no implementation of the long-delayed "seven bin" recycling schemes.

While Downing Street has not denied these changes, they haven’t confirmed them either. The government released a statement late last night that was out of character and left much to be desired. Another statement is expected at 16:30 today (stay tuned).

Zac Goldsmith posted about the debacle on X this afternoon after resigning as an energy minister in June. In the post, he called for a general election. Not now, Zac, not now.

But anything is possible as Boris Johnson has come out of the woodwork to voice his concerns:

Business must have certainty about our net zero commitments.

This country leads on tackling climate change and in creating new green technology. The green industrial revolution is already generating huge numbers of high quality jobs and helping to drive growth and level up our country.

Business and industry – such as motor manufacturing – are rightly making vast investments in these new technologies.

It is those investments that will produce a low carbon future – at lower costs for British families.

It is crucial that we give those businesses confidence that government is still committed to net zero and can see the way ahead.

We cannot afford to falter now or in any way lose our ambition for this country.

More predictably, Lord Deben, ex-chair of the Climate Change committee, has said that Sunak's U-turn has the potential to be challenged in court. And if the past is anything to live by, I don't think the government would fare well.

Big business has also criticised the move. Chris Norbury, the chief executive of E.ON UK, disapproves of the backtrack, and Ford released a statement earlier today explaining that an extension to the ban on new petrol and diesel cars would plunge them into economic disarray.

It is important to note that any policy changes are (technically) speculation - but pretty damning speculation.

More reaction in Westminster:

• Think tank E3G warns that these changes could lead to higher energy bills and catastrophic economic damage.

• The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit believes that the number of U-turns indicates chaos within the government.

• Former BEIS head of energy strategy Adam Bell suggests that these changes could face legal challenges due to the limited room to meet carbon budgets.

• Green MP Caroline Lucas describes these potential changes as economically illiterate and environmental vandalism.

• Liberal Democrat Climate and Energy spokesperson Wera Hobhouse said that Rishi Sunak is an expert at sinking his own ship.

Conservative MPs Selaine Saxby and Peter Aldous kicked off the session by asking the SoS what assessment she has made of the potential of contracts for difference allocation round 5 on floating offshore wind's future development.

Responding, Coutinho said that her department’s contracts for difference scheme is a “UK success story, having contracted more than 30 GW of capacity, including 20 GW of offshore wind, since 2014.”

But when you look at the government’s climate targets, we need to reconsider Coutinho’s response. The UK’s aim to reach 50GW of offshore wind power by 2030 in the UK faces significant challenges as the recent CfD auction left us 5GW behind. In the words of Michael Savage of the Guardian, “Industry figures said there was now a 24GW gap “between what we think we can procure in auctions for offshore v 50GW target for offshore”.

So - the Secretary of State didn’t quite get off to a cracking start. This wasn’t helped by Ed Milliband raising how the auction failure would add £2 billion to bills.

Methane flaring was next on the bill. This comes after a Liberal Democrat amendment to the Energy Bill proposed to ban the practice, which, if included, would clear up 72% of the UK’s methane emissions. The amendment was pushed to a vote but was defeated by the government.

Caroline Lucas pointed this out to energy minister Graham Stuart, but, having not been there, the minister seemed to believe that the house had not debated the amendment.

The session soon turned to the recent Climate Change Committee report. Liz Twist noted the key finding of the report: of 50 key indicators of Government progress on tackling climate change, just nine were on track.

This report is very long, so if you want me to post a summary then feel free to request it.

The defacto ban on onshore wind has become a hot topic during department questions, and many (really cool people) will have been at the edge of their seats waiting to hear Coutinho’s stance on the subject this morning.

Sadly, Graham Stuart took this bundle of questions and didn’t give us much more than we already knew. Praise for his department’s progress (should have gone to Specsavers) was short-lived, however, as he lept into a defence for British oil and gas.

Well there you have it, the big hitters at least. You can find links for the Hansard records for the other questions below.

• Uyghur Region: Solar Industry Sourcing

• National Grid Funding: South-west England

• Area-based Home Retrofit Schemes

• Boiler Replacement Guidance

• Energy-intensive Industries: Decarbonisation

• Heat Networks

• Families in Fuel Poverty

• Renewable Energy Sector: High-skilled Jobs

• Domestic Nuclear Energy

  Share

• Under this initiative, farmers in England will receive compensation for implementing measures that promote food production and enhance farm profitability and resilience, all while attempting to safeguard and improve the environment.

• After consulting with farmers, the government have announced 23 ways for farmers to earn money through SFI - like taking care of hedges, managing nutrients, increasing biodiversity, and improving grasslands.

• Farmers can now choose the initiatives they want to support, unlike before when they had to follow a specific route.

• Farmers with holding an SFI contract before the end of this year will receive 25% of their annual subsidy. Many farmers are interested, and there's no limit on how many can join or how much they can do in this program.

• A National Farmers Union spokesperson has said that the measures “do not go far enough.”

  Subscribe now