Conserving the Future - and Exploding the Myths

Written by Andrew Stunnell MP, Shadow Energy Spokesman and published in Power UK on Wed 6th Oct 2004

The Liberal Democrats' new energy policy document 'Conserving the Future', passed at this year's Party Conference sets out not only the objectives of a sound energy policy, but also the timescales and the mechanisms for delivering it.

At its heart is our belief that Britain must play its full part in slowing down climate change by a very substantial long-term reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. We have therefore accepted fully the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution that there needs to be a 60% reduction of CO2 emissions by 2050. 'Conserving the Future' sets out rigorous proposals to do so whilst maintaining a prosperous and competitive economy, and protecting the most vulnerable in society.

I cannot claim that our conference debate on energy was as newsworthy as our by-election victory over Labour in Brent the week before, nor as entertaining for observers as the IDS meltdown in Blackpool two weeks later. But in one respect at least the policy is unique - it sets out a 50 year plan of action, when 50 months is the more usual policy time frame!

To get both a sustainable economy and a sustainable environment, you have to have a sustainable energy policy. How we supply and use energy is crucial to delivering economic growth, and to keeping the planet habitable. It is therefore odd that little political effort goes into working out what to do, and how to balance the many conflicting objectives. It is also strange that some of the biggest players in the energy industry seem happy to peddle self-serving myths that are very far from the truth, and which make the policy-makers' task even harder.

When you look at the facts about energy in the UK, rather than the glib assertions of sloppy pundits you get some big surprises. Try these four:-

Myth 1: If you want more prosperity there will be massive growth in the use of energy. The only way to cut back on energy is to go back to hair shirts and woad.

Fact: In the 10 years from 1992 to 2002 the UK's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose by 32.5%, and real earnings rose by 21%. However, gross energy use rose by only 2.7%. That is including growth in transport, and, yes, that is 2.7% in 10 years, and not a misprint! Just for the record, energy use in Germany actually went down during the same decade, though they also enjoyed massive growth in GDP.

Britain has already gone a long way in de-coupling prosperity from energy growth. And notice that the figures refer to energy use, not CO2 emissions. That is a strong hint that efficiency and conservation are going to be at least as important as fuel substitution if we are to meet the RCEP targets. A 30% reduction in electricity use in the next 50 years is achievable, without loss of quality of life.

Myth 2: The real problem is curbing energy use in the transport sector - and you'll never get people to give up their cars.

Fact: Your home puts more CO2 into the atmosphere each year than your car. And the fastest growth in energy consumption is not the transport sector, but in office and commercial premises, where lighting, air conditioning, and office machinery demands are shooting up. Sadly, whilst you probably do know how many miles to the gallon your car does, you won't have the slightest idea how much CO2 your house emits each week.

At the moment a huge amount of political effort goes into tackling the transport question, but none into the office machinery issue, and not very much into the scandal of bad housing. That is despite the fact that up to 35,000 people die each winter from the medical consequences of living in poorly heated and insulated homes. You won't be surprised to know that the Liberal Democrat policy aims to change that.