Reacting to Labour’s announcement on Great British Energy, Green Party co-leader Adrian Ramsay said:
“We need real change if we are to meet the demands of the climate crisis. These Labour plans do not deliver it.
“Compared to Labour’s original commitment to spend £28bn a year on green investment, this announcement of just £8.3bn over the course of the parliament looks tiny and is nowhere near enough to deliver Labour’s promise of ‘clean electricity.’
“Labour’s targets focus on the electricity supply. However, to achieve net zero we need to see the electrification of home heating. This aim was ditched when Labour cancelled its £28 billion investment pledge.
“Domestic energy security is vital, but that must begin with energy efficiency. That means providing the national programme of home insulation delivered by local authorities that will ensure warm homes and cut bills. This was another victim of Labour’s ditching of its original £28 billion investment pledge.
“We want to see community owned assets and schemes that genuinely benefit people, not the private companies seeking to use public funds channeled through Great British Energy to continue profiteering while the planet burns and people’s bills remain too high.
“Where is the support for local area heat networks which would make a real change and offer great long-term investments ideal for community ownership?
“Labour has spent too long listening to the pleadings of energy companies for public investment in unproven technological solutions like carbon capture that simply won’t deliver the immediate real change we need.
“The Green Party is committed to democratically controlled community ownership for a greater share of the energy market and a faster transition to Net Zero over the next ten years.
“We would invest the money so that communities could take ownership and see less income in the hands of companies that have made excessive profits from fossil fuels or run our water companies into the ground.”
NOTES TO EDITORS
- An Initial Green analysis of Labour’s plans shows:
‘An initial capitalisation of £8.3 billion over a Parliament, paid for by a proper windfall tax on oil and gas giants.’
- UK’s energy supply needs over £900 billion investment to reach net zero by 2050 according to a new report published by NatWest and Boston Consulting Group (BCG)
- It is a tiny proportion of what is needed in terms of investment. Even Labour’s £28bn offered lacked the necessary ambition.
‘The £3 billion GB Energy local power plan alone will generate 8GW of clean power within five years, the equivalent to…’
- If Labour want to meet their target for decarbonising the grid they will need to deliver far more by 2030
- ‘Connecting a large volume of renewable generation and storage projects is critical to decarbonising the power system by 2035. Between 180 and 220 GW of grid-connected power generation capacity will be needed to achieve this.
- The lack of mention of local area heat networks is a worrying sign. They are a good long term investment ideal for community ownership. The arrays for communal ground sourced heat pumps will be in the ground for hundreds of years.
- Given the low level of funding to Community Energy in a huge market it is hard not to think that Labour is committed to corporate ownership OR a very slow pace of decarbonisation.
The Green Party is committed to a greater shared for democratically controlled community ownership and a faster transition to Net Zero over the next ten-years.
We would invest the money so that communities could take ownership and see less income in the hands of companies that have made excessive profits from fossil fuels or run our water companies into the ground.
Derisking and Corporate Partnership
Carbon capture and storage CCS has been subject to a high level of corporate lobbying. It has been primarily driven by the fossil fuel companies
Government’s have globally invested billions in CCS project’s that have underdelivered.
Hydrogen has also been subject to high levels of corporate lobbying It might have a role to play in energy storage and some industrial processes, but it is not going to have wide application in the energy market.
The are doubts about both technologies. They might both be needed but it is not clear how much and the other clear opportunities for this country.
Derisking the investments of unproven technology might not be in the interests of a government trying to defend the NHS.
Labour’s engagement with this technology is worrying, who are they listening too?
The recent excellent report from IPPR Manufacturing matters: The cornerstone of a competitive green economy makes it clear we should be focusing on the proven technologies of heat pumps and wind power.
