SC(3) CR-E11

Sustainability Committee

Inquiry into Carbon Reduction in Wales: Electricity Generation (including renewable energy)

Response from WWF Cymru

WWF response to National Assembly for Wales Sustainability Committee Inquiry into Carbon Reduction in Wales: Carbon Reduction Energy Production

WWF Recommend the Sustainability Committee and WAG:

• Recognise that Climate Change is symptomatic of a larger problem that is our ongoing unsustainable development. If everyone lived as we do in Wales we would need three planets to support us. We must realise we need to change the way we live not only to beat climate change, but to tackle others problems such forest destruction and the threat to our oceans. WWF’s One Planet Wales vision not only shows how this can be done but also how each of us fit in. http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/25700_wwf_report_e.pdf
• Support an 80% carbon emissions reduction target and ensure that an emissions reduction trajectory is agreed upon that will ensure an 80% cut in carbon emissions in Wales by 2050.  
• Reject in principle the building of any new coal fired power stations without proven carbon capture and storage technology fitted. New coal stations shouldn't be built unless the carbon emissions can be captured and buried from day one.
• Ensure that Wales’ energy needs are met from sustainable renewable technologies without a Severn Barrage.

A demand reduction strategy with forecast trajectory of reducing energy consumption is required.

The current political and business enthusiasm for renewable biofuels is understandable. This emerging industry could play an important role in tackling climate change. However, without appropriate safeguards, this flagship policy could have disastrous unintended consequences - actually increasing carbon emissions, intensifying deforestation and causing extensive negative social impacts. WAG and NAW must ensure that biofuels:

• Meet strict externally audited, widely accepted and mandatory sustainability and greenhouse gas balance standards, including at least a 50% saving on greenhouse gases compared to fossil fuels, taking a whole life-cycle approach.
• Take account of the greenhouse gases caused by land-use change and forest clearance to grow biofuels so that where high carbon land-uses are lost, no saving is claimed. Although additional measures may become necessary, with these safeguards in place, biofuels are much more likely to contribute to a reduction in emissions from the transport sector without damaging the environment.

Introduction

Climate change the most serious environmental challenge ever to face our planet. Energy production and use is by far the biggest contributor to the problem, mainly through carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuel combustion. CO2 emission reductions from the energy sector thus have to be a key priority in climate change strategies. Energy production also has a variety of other environmental impacts, ranging from habitat destruction from exploration and mining to air pollution from coal burning. We recognise that energy production is required to provide the following energy services: electricity, transport and heat. For the purposes of this response WWF has focussed attention on decarbonisation of the electricity sector in the main but recognises that the previous consultation into reducing emissions from transport will have considered further contributions to this agenda.

The UK Government is proposing that the UK’s CO2 emissions fall by at least 60% from 1990 levels by 2050. However, it is now clear that developed countries, including the UK, will need to reduce emissions by at least 80% for us to have a good chance of avoiding the most damaging impacts of climate change. Moreover, the UK’s share of emissions from international aviation and shipping, which are currently excluded from the target in the UK Climate Change Bill, will need to be fully taken into account. If such dramatic reductions are to be achieved in the future, action must be taken now in the energy sector to improve energy efficiency and move to lower or zero carbon electricity generation technologies.

WWF believes that Wales, like the UK as a whole, has excellent potential for achieving emission reductions through energy efficiency and a move to renewable energy sources. It is crucial that both the demand and the supply side are addressed by energy policy in an integrated fashion. All energy sources have some environmental impact. It is thus necessary to both opt for the best environmental option and to minimise the overall demand for energy.

Much can be achieved through energy efficiency. UK households waste £6.5 million a year by being energy inefficient, yet the technologies exist to drastically reduce domestic energy consumption, both through more efficient buildings and through more efficient appliances. In terms of long-term emission reductions, housing is particularly important and WWF is calling for the adoption of the Code for Sustainable Homes with immediate effect in Wales. In addition WWF is calling for a well resourced comprehensive strategy for tackling emissions from existing homes from which emissions cuts are possible and easy - they are the low hanging fruit of emissions reductions and we should be prepared to use the 80% plus cuts that can be generated from the existing stock to compensate for other areas where carbon emissions cuts may be more difficult to achieve.

Renewable energy sources are either emission free or carbon 'neutral' but can only be considered sustainable if they don’t compete with any other essential land-uses (as do some bio energy crops), if they don’t produce toxic wastes (as does nuclear energy) and if they don’t eliminate ecosystem functions (as does a barrage). In WWF’s view, the most benign renewable energy sources include onshore wind, offshore wind, sustainable biomass (including energy crops, forestry and agriculture residues, wood waste), solar (photovoltaics and thermal), small hydro, wave and tidal (excluding barrages), landfill and sewage gas (based on anaerobic digestion). WWF does not consider energy from the incineration of municipal waste as a renewable resource, as most of the waste is made up of non-renewable materials.

In the short to medium term, fossil fuels will continue to play a major role in the UK's energy mix. WWF supports the development of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) which dramatically increases the combined efficiency of electricity and heat production. CHP, in power stations, industry and the domestic sector, can thus make an important contribution to emission reductions. For further information that might be of interest on CHP please see the WWF / Greenpeace report "Powering Edinburgh into the 21^st Century” November 2006. http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/pb_power_.pdf

WWF sees gas as an important interim fuel but does not support the development of so-called 'clean coal' technologies. These technologies offer little benefit for CO2 reductions. WWF is also cautiously supportive about proposals for carbon removal and disposal from power plants due to the high risks, costs and uncertainties involved. WWF does not support the building of any new coal fired power stations without proven carbon capture and storage technology fitted. CCS 'ready’ power stations for the technology (if proven) to be fitted at a later date offers little incentive for the technology to be brought forward with any pace while coal is then burned unabated.

WWF believes that nuclear energy cannot be viewed as a sustainable technology due to the high risks to the environment and human health associated with its operation and associated waste disposal.

In WWF's view, it is possible to cover the electricity gap created by the closure of the UK’s nuclear capacity by energy efficiency, renewables and CHP.

The Challenge in Wales

Political Will

The greatest barrier that any Government faces in the battle to tackle climate change effectively, is the political determination. The recognition that dealing with Climate Change will necessitate moving beyond 'politics as usual’. The recent Friends of the Earth Australia report present an interesting solution.  Climate Code Red advocates declaring a state of national emergency. The report can be read at http://www.climatecodered.net

'Climate Code Red’ identifies Governments are operating in a manner of "failure-inducing compromise…..we now need to think the unthinkable…if we are to return to a climate safe planet”(1). The science is moving so quickly that the policy responses are consistently inadequate to meet the scale of the challenge. The report explains that the only way to tackle this inadequate, conservative, political inertia is to declare a national state of emergency.”(2)

The adoption of the 3% per annum reduction target in Wales demonstrates strong ambition to lead; but the cost of failure to reach these targets in Wales will be significant. Early adopting Governments cannot be seen to fail at this task. Forecasts need to be transparent as to exactly how the 3% emission reduction WILL lead to an 80% cut (or indeed more should that be required) as Wales’ contribution to keeping global emissions at a level that will provide a better chance at stabilising the world’s temperature at no higher than 2 degree rise in global average temperatures.

Institutional Powers

Exceptions within the Government of Wales Act listed having relevance to this consultation on carbon emissions include:

• Generation, transmission and supply of electricity, apart from pollution.
• Energy conservation, apart from the encouragement of energy efficiency otherwise than by prohibition or regulation.
• Oil and gas, apart from pollution.
• Road freight transport services…
• Regulation of use of motor vehicles and trailers on roads…
• Provision and regulation of railway services, apart from financial assistance, which (a) does not relate to the carriage of goods…
• Aviation, air transport, airports and aerodromes, apart from (a) financial assistance to providers or proposed providers of air transport services or airport facilities or services, (b) strategies by the Welsh Ministers or local or other public authorities about provision of air services…

According to Schedule 7, therefore, significant public policy areas relating to carbon emission reduction are outwith even the potential 'devolved competence’ of the Assembly Government; (although there is no similar restriction in the provisions of Schedule 5).  Moreover, of course, much private sector activity in general, including industry and the household sector, lies beyond the Assembly Government’s legislative or regulatory remit.

However, a lack of powers must not become an excuse for Wales not to reduce carbon emissions from the energy supply system and the renewable energy route map is evidence of the positive ambition required. Joint working with the UK Government in non-devolved areas will be critical to the over all success of a strategy to reduce emissions from the production of energy.(3)

Public attitudes to Wind

Previous independent survey projects to understand public attitudes to wind power projects in the UK have shown that a "substantial majority of the residents who lived in areas containing the wind farms were in favour of wind power, both intellectually by supporting the idea of developing renewable energy sources, but also directly by supporting the construction of wind farms in their locality. 80% of those surveyed supported their local wind farm; those that lived near an operating wind farm were more positive than those who did not.  The BWEA has also summarised the conclusions of 42 surveys carried out between 1990 and 2002” These indicate an average 9% against (BWEA)(4). Yet alarmingly well organised minorities to wind in Wales are slowing down, what should be a very urgent process.

The Financial Times wrote recently in February 2008, "If Britain is to meet ambitious EU targets to supply 15 per cent of its total energy demand with renewables by 2020, it cannot ignore wind power. The UK's geography means it commands about 40 per cent of Europe's wind resource, making it an ideal site for turbines”(5) yet the UK generates around 2.4 gigawatts (GW) of power from wind only a tenth of what Germany has achieved. If it wasn’t for the planning system this figure might be a lot higher as there is a further 9 gigawatts caught up in the planning process and progressing at a painfully slow rate of just a few hundred MW a year. While legislation is passing through Parliament to speed up the planning process for larger scale farms the concern in Wales should be the many smaller wind farms in the planning system currently and the new applications that are likely to come through. According to the BWEA "many of the best sites for large farms are already taken up by projects in planning. Proposals for small wind farms are handled by local authorities; however, meaning the government's proposed new planning commission is unlikely to speed up the planning process.”(6)

Wales must consider how this challenge can be over come with serious urgency. Blocking the very best solutions to a problem, that if not tackled, leaves future generations the legacy of an uninhabitable planet on the basis of a temporary visual impact, is at best recklessly irresponsible. The Welsh Assembly Government might consider supporting wind power via a communications campaign that might form part of the Climate Change communications strategy. Reading about wind farms in local newspapers will not be anywhere near as effective as a visual representation of these farms.

In 2003 a television advertisement was screened in various parts of regional Australia on behalf of the AusWEA. The two stated objectives were to demonstrate why renewable energy is needed and to show people what wind farms look like in moving images. The ad resulted in greater support for the MRET campaign through the internet, while the television station that aired the ad received calls from the public expressing positive feedback(7).

Case Study: Spain 26 March 2008(8)

Madrid (AFP) - Wind power is breaking new records in Spain, accounting for just over 40 percent of all electricity consumed during a brief period last weekend, the country's wind power association said Tuesday. As heavy winds lashed Spain on Saturday evening wind parks generated 9,862 megawatts of power which translated to 40.8 percent of total consumption due to low demand during the Easter holiday weekend, AEE said. Between Friday and Sunday wind power accounted for an average of 28 percent of all electricity demand in Spain, which is a leading world producer of such energy, a statement from the association said. The record for power generated by Spain's wind parks was set on March 4 at 10,032 megawatts, but as it was a regular working day this accounted for less percentage demand. Spain's wind power generation equalled that of hydropower for the first time in 2007. In July the government approved legislation that will allow offshore wind parks to be set up along the nation's vast coastline in an effort to boost the use of renewable energy sources. While more expensive than land-based wind farms, offshore wind parks can take advantage of stronger, steadier coastal breezes. Spain, which along with Germany and Denmark, is among the three biggest producers of wind power in the 27-nation European Union, is aiming to triple the amount of energy it derives from renewable sources by 2020.

Case Study: Denmark

In Denmark 80% of erected turbines are owned by individuals or cooperatives. More than 150,000 families have shares in wind energy schemes….The highest concentration of wind turbines in the world occurs in a place called Sydthy, Denmark. Sydthy has 12,000 inhabitants and 98% equivalent of its power comes from wind power. The reason that the community accepts and allows so much wind development may be explained by a poll by Anderson et al (1997), that reveals that 58% of the households in the municipality of Sydthy have one or more shares in cooperatively owned wind turbines….People who own shares in a turbines are significantly more positive about wind power than people having no economic interest in the subject” As wind farms begin to scale up in size and larger single institutional investors come forward to support them consideration will need to be given as to how   communities can continue to share stakes in wind farms in their back yard. Examples of this do exists "One is the Middlegrun offshore wind project near Copenhagen, a development that is 50% utility owned and 50% shareholder owned(9).

WWF, RSPB, IPPR’s: '80% Report Delivering a Low Carbon UK’

Prior to the WWF, RSPB ippr 80% report there was no rigorous assessment of the feasibility and costs of reaching an 80% carbon emissions reduction in the UK

In this work, the Institute of Public Policy Research (ippr), WWF and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) set out to investigate whether a target of 80% can be achieved in the UK by domestic efforts alone and what the costs of doing so would be.

We employed two approaches - the MARKAL-MACRO model, used by the government for the 2007 Energy White Paper, and a model developed by Professor Dennis Anderson at Imperial College, employed for the Stern Review on the economics of climate change.

We followed the same assumptions and approaches used by government, but added some constraints that we consider environmentally essential. Unlike the government, we included emissions from international aviation, with a multiplier to allow for non-carbon dioxide effects, in our targets and models. This clearly made our approach much more challenging - however, we believe it is indefensible to exclude this large and rapidly growing source of emissions from UK targets.

We examined the implications of excluding new nuclear electricity generation and placed limits both on the use of biofuels and wind.

The key conclusion is that it is feasible to reduce the UK’s emissions by 80% by 2050, and at costs that are not prohibitive.

Both models identified pathways towards an 80% reduction that involved rapid decarbonisation of the electricity sector, achieved by major investments in wind power and other renewables, and a significant role for carbon capture and storage. Emissions from the production of heat would be reduced through a major programme of energy efficiency and potentially a move to the use of low carbon electricity for heating. Surface transport emissions would be dealt with by major improvements in vehicle efficiency and, for cars, a move towards use of advanced biofuels derived from sustainable sources.

We must stress that the results presented here do not necessarily represent our preferred pathway to decarbonisation.

This report represents only a few of many possible scenarios - including those that could include more rapid uptake of marine renewables, far  higher levels of distributed energy and energy efficiency, and the achievement of energy security goals. Indeed, cost minimisation models of the kind used here inevitably exclude some solutions that might be preferable on environmental or social grounds.

Despite these caveats, it is clear from the modelling results that it would be feasible to adopt and achieve a UK emissions reduction target of at least 80% by 2050 from 1990 levels, and to do so without new nuclear power. There are also some clear general recommendations for policies to help achieve this goal:

• A much more aggressive focus on energy efficiency should be pursued across all sectors of the economy.

• An ambitious implementation programme for renewable energy must be pursued. The UK government should focus on delivering, rather than weakening, the EU target for renewable energy to meet 20% of primary energy by 2020.

• The UK Government should review current policy planning tools and the current framework for energy regulation to ensure that the benefits of decentralized power generation are recognized and achieved.

• Carbon capture and storage (CCS) could play an important role. There is an urgent need to demonstrate the viability of this technology in large scale electricity generation, and to develop a clear framework for regulation and treatment of liabilities. Certainly we cannot afford to build and run new unabated coal-fired power stations without some form of guarantee that CCS works effectively.

Urgent action is needed to constrain significantly the forecast growth in aviation. Without such action, it will be difficult or impossible for the UK to achieve reductions in emissions consistent with avoiding a dangerous level of climate change.

The government should apply its own sustainable development principles to the selection of climate mitigation measures in the future. This will ensure that these measures deliver best value in economic, social and environmental terms. Such an approach would, for example, ensure that biofuels were only deployed at volumes that did not pose a significant risk to the environment or food production. The estimated cost of meeting the 80% target, including our share of international aviation emissions, ranges between approximately 2% and 3% of GDP in 2050; though energy efficiency could markedly reduce these costs, to approximately 1.5% to 2 % of GDP.

These estimates represent an upper limit on costs; and while the sums involved are large, the impact on growth of the whole economy over time is relatively minor. The economy would almost triple in size by 2050, even with an 80% cut in emissions. GDP would reach the same level as it does in 2050 under business-as-usual one and a half years later, in the spring of 2052. Costs would be significantly lower if barriers to energy efficiency are addressed successfully. The costs of achieving the 80% target are also dwarfed by the costs of unmitigated climate change.

Decarbonising the UK economy by 80% would cost between one half and one tenth as much as doing nothing, based

on Stern’s estimate that climate change damage costs would reduce global GDP by between 5% and 20%.

Further useful exerts from a more comprehensive presentation of this study are found below and taken from the ippr’s companion report '2050 Vision.'

What needs to happen - A Vision for 2050(10)

"It is important to emphasize that the approaches used here are not forecasting models. They are not used to try to predict the future energy system of the UK in 50 years’ time. Instead they offer ways of exploring the trade offs and tipping points between different combinations of fuels and energy technologies over time, and the cost and emissions implications of these different options.

Some assumptions about technologies and energy demand were applied to both modeling exercises. Due to concerns about the potentially negative social and environmental impacts of excessive biomass production, a WWF international study of sustainable biomass potential was used as a basis for placing a limit on bio-energy imports. Because of questions about waste management and the costs of insurance, as well as public acceptability, the study also looks at the option of excluding new nuclear build.

Finally, the future growth of aviation demand in the baseline is assumed to be no higher than efficiency gains, effectively keeping emissions from (and energy use in) aviation constant from 2010 onwards.

The Anderson model has a probabilistic treatment of costs and other variables. For many emerging technologies, such as coal with carbon capture and storage or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, we do not know for certain what costs will be, so the model assumes a range of possible costs, with each cost within that range assigned a probability. The results, in terms of future portfolios of technologies, and costs, are then produced through multiple runs of the model, and are expressed in terms of a probability distribution.

The MARKAL MACRO model has a different approach. Rather than a range of possible costs for each technology, the model works with a single estimate. Uncertainties about the future are explored through sensitivity analyses, for example with different assumptions about oil prices, or learning rates for new technologies. With the exception of the assumptions mentioned above about biomass, nuclear and aviation emissions, the analysis here employs the same assumptions as used by the Government in calibrating the model for the 2007 Energy White Paper. However, for technical reasons, we imposed additional storage costs on intermittent renewables above 25 per cent of the total electricity generation threshold.

Technology scenarios

Both models imply that an 80 per cent reduction in carbon emissions would be feasible with technologies known about today, but would be very challenging to achieve, and would require urgent and radical changes in policy.

In both models, to meet the rapid emissions reduction requirements in the period to 2030, the electricity sector decarbonizes first and to the greatest extent. Wind (especially offshore wind) and carbon capture and storage (CCS) play a major role in both models, because they are the cheapest ways of reducing emissions in the short to medium term.

At the moment, wind generates around 3 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity a year, less than 1 per cent of UK supply. According to the MARKAL-MACRO model, that would have to increase to 20 TWh by 2020, requiring 6 gigawatts (GW) of installed capacity (for comparison, the planned London Array in the Thames Estuary has a capacity of 1 GW). This is within the range of Round 2 of offshore wind-farm development (5.4-7.2 GW). However, by 2030 capacity would have to rise to 33 GW, and to some 48 GW by 2050.

In the Anderson model, where electricity takes up most of the decarbonisation strain until 2025, the rate of investment would have to be even faster. According to our calculations based on the Anderson model, up to 20 GW of wind power may be needed by as soon as 2015. However, this is of the same order as estimates of what can be achieved from the wind power industry.

The models also call for a very rapid deployment of CCS technologies by as early as 2020, to cover around 5.5 GW of fossil-fuel capacity, equivalent to 11 medium-sized power stations. By 2050, between 50 and 110 power stations of this size would need to have CCS. Currently there are plans for just one demonstration plant by the middle of the next decade.

The MARKAL-MACRO model seeks out the lowest cost solutions, and may well underestimate the contribution of decentralized renewables such as solar power. These play a greater role in the Anderson model, where the average portfolio also includes some of what is known as 'domestic combined heat and power’ (the simultaneous generation of heat and electricity from a single unit in the home).

Road transport also sees a major restructuring, first with a move to much greater efficiency in car engines, and by the widespread introduction of electric hybrid drives in vans and buses. Biodiesel use (especially second-generation biodiesel) begins to take off from 2010 across all vehicle classes, and by 2030 conventional diesel has been largely phased out.

However, there are limits to the use of first-generation biofuels, especially in cars. In the MARKAL-MACRO model only around 1 million tones of oil equivalent (Mtoe) (around 4 per cent of current use) of biofuel is used in the car fleet, rising to 4 Mtoe in 2050. The most important fuel source for cars by 2050 (providing about 70 per cent of energy) is so-called second-generation Fischer-Tropsch diesel, produced from biomass. It should be noted that despite the tight carbon constraint, the model does allow for an increase in mileage, with the distance covered by vehicles some 50 per cent more in 2050 than in 2005. The fleet of heavy-goods vehicles converts to hydrogen (mainly from electrolysis using zero-carbon electricity) by 2030. Rail switches over entirely from diesel (which currently accounts for 60 per cent of energy use in rail) to electricity.

The sector that decarbonizes least is aviation. Despite this, in the MARKAL-MACRO model the number of air passenger kilometers traveled still increases by around 30 per cent between 2000 and 2050.

See Appendix 1 for Policy recommendations at a UK level taken from the ippr’s companion report 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change?

Policy Recommendations for Wales

Low-carbon electricity

Both models suggest that the electricity sector should decarbonise first and most extensively in the medium term (while also indicating the importance of making a start on transport). The extent will depend on how much effort is taken up by the transport sector, but getting onto the path towards an 80 per cent reduction will almost certainly require major investments in low-and zero-carbon power(11).Moratorium in principle to the granting consent for a coal-fired plant without a fully working CCS system

Strategic programme: set up a strategic programme for national energy transformation, complete with monitoring and an evidence base.(12)

Decarbonised electricity supply system that can meet the consumption needs of the people of Wales and beyond (with consideration for the ambitious renewable energy targets the UK is committed to at a European level), without support for a Severn Barrage.

Innovation in low-carbon technologies

Small-scale electricity generating technologies, including roof top wind turbines, solar photovoltaics, and micro-CHP could make a significant contribution to our energy demands. Micro-generation is very different to the usual way of supplying electricity from large centralised power generators in that individuals can meet their own needs. Any excess power can in principle also be linked back to the electricity grid. Although carbon abatement cost curves show some micro renewable technology to be an expensive option, it is a well established fact that economies of scale, once wider uptake is catalysed, will have a significant impact in lowering cost. The capacity for micro-renewables is potentially very significant, with mainstream estimates of up to 25% of UK electricity demand being met by 2050. A greater more ambitious role for micro generation should be considered within the energy route map.

As this year’s budget saw an increase in funds to support the deployment of low carbon technologies, WAG must ensure that this increase in budget at UK level is reflected in the budget allocation within Wales. WWF Cymru expects therefore to an increase in resource this year to support the mass uptake and deployment of low-carbon technologies in Wales.

Micro-generation: accelerate take-up through pilot technology programme and utility rebates.(13)

Speeding up progress towards energy efficiency

There is also a need to keep energy efficiency a priority in the minds of the public. There is a tendency to talk about energy efficiency, but rapidly move on to solutions that focus on supply, including nuclear power. For electricity in particular, the more that demand-side efficiency and management solutions are brought into use, the less the gap in generation on the supply-side. In terms of short-term strategy, government should ensure that energy efficiency and conservation is the priority for energy policy.(14)

The energy route map suggests a stabilisation of demand; this is supported by WWF however we would urge the Welsh Assembly Government to consider being ambitious in setting a trajectory for demand reduction with associated targets.

To help achieve demand management WAG could set up internal carbon trading market and extend this to an energy partnership investment programme.(15)

Policies to help the vulnerable

Low-income households will face difficulties in meeting the higher costs associated with cutting carbon envisaged in the models. 'Carbon poverty’ will replace fuel poverty as a major social policy problem and political issue. Tackling carbon poverty will require the same range of policies as those dedicated to addressing fuel poverty. There will need to be a mix of well-targeted programmes to improve the energy performance of the housing of low-income households, direct payments for winter fuel (and possibly in future, fuel payments in summer, for cooling).(16)

Policies for energy-intensive industries.

In the absence of successful global sector-specific agreements, WAG should ensure it is working effectively with companies with energy-inefficient plants to reduce their carbon footprint by reaching industry best-practice levels.(17)

Conclusions

While an 80% target is technologically feasible and affordable, achieving it would require an immediate and radical shift in the pace and scale of investments in low carbon technologies - probably initially in the electricity sector. The models point to the need for a rapid increase in the deployment of renewable energy technologies, and also for urgent action to demonstrate the effectiveness of carbon capture and storage as an economically and environmentally acceptable abatement option. It is also clear from the modeling that in the absence of new technological solutions, emissions reductions compatible with the government’s international climate change goals cannot be achieved without significant constraints on the growth in aviation.

All models have their limitations, and we would emphasize that these modeling results do not represent a blueprint for a low-carbon economy - other technologies and societal choices may be equally, or more, valid. Better energy futures might well include far higher levels of distributed energy and energy efficiency, which our work shows has significant cost benefits.

But these results show that, according to the best models we have available to us, the UK could in principle attain a target of 80% by 2050 through domestic action alone - and that it can do so without damaging the wider environment, and at costs that are significantly lower than the costs of doing nothing.

Appendix 1

Policy recommendations (UK level) Taken from the ippr companion report to the IPPR, RSPB, and WWF 80% Challeneg Report.(18)

Low-carbon electricity

Both models suggest that the electricity sector should decarbonise first and most extensively in the medium term (while also indicating the importance of making a start on transport). The extent will depend on how much effort is taken up by the transport sector, but getting onto the path towards an 80 per cent reduction will almost certainly require major investments in low-and zero-carbon power.

Given the longevity of power plant, and the time scales for decarbonising electricity, this is a short-term policy issue. To help the UK avoid building new power stations that generate high-carbon, coal-fired electricity, the UK Government should immediately start to develop a framework for investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS), anticipating the successful demonstration of the technology early in the next decade and setting a target for CCS compliance.

Innovation in low-carbon technologies

The role of low-carbon technologies is crucial. If technologies such as offshore wind, hydrogen storage and carbon capture and storage are not developed and commercialized, then the only way to radically reduce emissions would be through a much reduced use of energy and by having a smaller economy. Such a vision is likely to be politically unattainable.

More resources should be given to support research on low-carbon technologies. Government should increase annual revenue from energy companies purchasing certificates to meet their targets for renewable electricity under the Renewables Obligation. The new Energy Technologies Institute should focus principally on research, rather than development, with an appropriately open intellectual property regime.

Government should continue to press for long-term targets for emissions from new cars across the EU, with a goal of vehicles having zero emissions by 2030. This approach should be extended to aviation. Government should propose a long-term mandatory carbon emissions standard for aircraft that land at EU airports, and consider adopting a standard for UK airports.

Systems of certification for product standards should be amended to provide a low-cost rapid 'innovation assessment’ for new low-carbon technologies, especially for business-to-business markets. The Government should work at the EU level to provide a framework for investment in road transport refuelling stations, to help avoid incompatibility between countries or even regions within countries.

Speeding up progress towards energy efficiency

In both models presented in this study, speeding up the rate of change at which we move towards more efficient use of energy will lower the costs of reducing emissions. The cost reductions would be substantial, of the order of one-third. These effects are far larger than the differences that would be made by ruling out a new generation of nuclear power stations.

Government should place a greater focus on approaches informed by behavioural psychology in designing interventions to speed up the introduction of energy efficient behaviour and new products in the household sector. In the commercial and retail sector interventions should focus more on regulation and corporate social responsibility as the key drivers of behaviour.

There is also a need to keep energy efficiency a priority in the minds of the public. There is a tendency to talk about energy efficiency, but rapidly move on to solutions that focus on supply, including nuclear power. For electricity in particular, the more that demand-side efficiency and management solutions are brought into use, the less the gap in generation on the supply-side. In terms of short-term strategy, government should ensure that energy efficiency and conservation is the priority for energy policy.

The pace and ambition of change should also be stepped up. Policies to speed up energy efficiency, especially an obligation on energy suppliers, should be brought forward and adopted more quickly than is currently planned.

The earlier measures are introduced, the more effective they will be in lowering costs.

Policies to help the vulnerable

Low-income households will face difficulties in meeting the higher costs associated with cutting carbon envisaged in the models. 'Carbon poverty’ will replace fuel poverty as a major social policy problem and political issue.

Tackling carbon poverty will require the same range of policies as those dedicated to addressing fuel poverty. There will need to be a mix of well-targeted programmes to improve the energy performance of the housing of low-income households, direct payments for winter fuel (and possibly in future, fuel payments in summer, for cooling).

Most important of all will be to raise the incomes of the most vulnerable households through targeted benefit and tax credit measures.

In addition, new approaches, such as requiring energy suppliers to adopt social tariffs or step-up tariffs, or bulk-buying of energy at a discount for low-income households by government, should also be considered.

Policies for energy-intensive industries.

Some energy-intensive industries (especially those open to international competition) will also have concerns about the impacts of tighter carbon constraints and higher pricing, with the fear that production and jobs will move to other countries.

In fact, relatively few industries in the UK are both energy-intensive and exposed to a high degree of international competition. Aluminium, iron and steel are likely to be the most affected.

Global sectoral agreements are often seen as the best way of reducing emissions in energy-intensive industries open to high levels of international competition. However, sectoral agreements will be easier to negotiate in some sectors than others.

In the absence of successful global sector-specific agreements, government should work with companies with energy-inefficient plant to reduce their carbon footprint by reaching industry best-practice levels. Taxes on imports could also be considered.

WWF Cymru
Tŷ Baltig, Sgwâr Mount Stuart
Caerdydd, Cymru CF10 5FH
Baltic House, Mount Stuart Square
Cardiff, Wales CF10 5FH
ffôn/phone: 029 2045 4970
ffacs/fax: 029 2045 1306
cymru@wwf.org.uk
wwf.org.uk/cymru

(1) Page v  D. Spratt, P.Sutton. Climate Code Red, 2008, Friends of the Earth.
(2) Page 63 D. Spratt, P.Sutton. Climate Code Red, 2008, Friends of the Earth.
(3) See Wales Environment Link submission to National Assembly for Wales Sustainability Committee Inquiry into Carbon Reduction in Wales: Carbon Reduction Energy Production
(4) G. Boyle,2004, Renewable Energy, Oxford University Press.
(5) http://www.ft.com/cms/s/b738388a-d38c-11dc-b861-0000779fd2ac,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2Fb738388a-d38c-11dc-b861-0000779fd2ac.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.greenpeace.org.uk%2Fblog%2Fclimate%2Fft-no-longer-on-the-qt-about-wind-power-20080206
(6) http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/59b59464-d38c-11dc-b861-0000779fd2ac.html
(7) K.Mallon,2006, Renewable energy policy and politics , Earthscan
(8) http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=51767
(9) K.Mallon,2006, Renewable energy policy and politics , Earthscan
(10) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez
(11) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez
(12) WWF One Planet Wales Report http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/opw_report_final.pdf
(13) WWF One Planet Wales Report http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/opw_report_final.pdf
(14) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez
(15) WWF One Planet Wales Report http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/opw_report_final.pdf
(16) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez
(17) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez
(18) 2050 Vision: How can the UK play its part in avoiding dangerous climate change? Author: Matthew Lockwood and Jenny Bird with Raquel Alvarez