One of the things I find pleasantly surprising in the UK is how open government is when it develops policy. There are always green papers, consultation documents, select committee meetings and other chances to have your say. I haven’t yet figured out how much they change their plans in response to this feedback but it’s nice that they at least go through the motions.
This past year has been a particularly busy for energy consultations, mainly because the 2004 Energy Act required the publication of a microgeneration strategy within 18 months of the Act’s confirmation (i.e. now-ish). But there have also been invitations to comment on the Renewables Obligation and some regulatory issues. Here’s a list of the major recent consultations:
- Ofgem’s consultation on the regulatory implications of domestic-scale microgeneration (issued April 2005, responses by July 2005, and decision document by December 2005 to coincide with…)
- DTI’s Microgeneration Strategy and Low Carbon Buildings Programme consultation (issued June 2005, responses by September 2005, and final strategy by December 2005)
- DTI’s Renewables Obligation Review (preliminary consultation closed in June 2005 with the statutory consultation closing in December 2005)
The ECI‘s recently done quite a bit of work on these issues and so we were keen to share the results of our research. In particular, the 40% House report revealed that to achieve a 60% cut in CO2 by 2050, two-thirds of the reduction would have to come from reduced demand and one-third from low and zero carbon (LZC) technologies (i.e. microgeneration). Accordingly our responses stressed that any new policies or changes to regulation must set the stage for long-term support of LZC technologies. This doesn’t mean providing subsidies for 50 years but if, for example, the regulations lead to the installation of meters which can only measure electricity flows into the house, it will be extremely difficult to offer microgenerators a fair price for the electricity they will generate and export to the grid.
These consultations are particularly useful to clarify the sometimes vague goals expressed in strategy documents. For example, the microgeneration sector is still quite new in this country and requires clear government support, both in the form of subsidies (e.g. installation grants) and supportive institutions (e.g. making it easier to connect to the grid, claim renewable obligation certificates and so on). Early feedback suggests that the microgen strategy and LCB programme are too vague to provide the necessary confidence for investors to support and help build this industry. Without this short-term support, the industry will find it difficult getting up to speed and hence being ready to support the government’s desired long-term growth in microgen.
We’ve now submitted our contributions to these consultations and it’s just a matter of waiting to see what happens. Fingers crossed!
