🚫Ban of fossil heating systems to be installed after 2035
This is a huge step. The UK is the first country in the world doing this and it replicates what we have already for petrol and diesel cars. Details to be seen yet but a big step forward.
💷£450m grants for heat pumps
The current funding policy for heat pumps will run out next year and has been generous. £450m over 3 years translates into 30,000 heat pumps per year. That’s not enough to get us on track to 600,000 per year and supports current installation levels.
⚡️Reforming electricity levies
Important step but not clear yet how this will be done. Press release commits to call for evidence and review. It’s critical to get this right.
1) Banning fossil fuel heating by 2035: The document is not entirely clear what is being planned. It talks about setting an 'ambition' but it remains unclear whether this means setting an outright ban of installing new fossil fuel heating systems.
2) The document also talks about the 'aim' to phase out new natural gas boilers by 2035 and highlights the potential for further policy. Further detail needs to be seen before we can be confident that 2035 is a hard regulatory stop.
1) It is widely accepted that heat pumps will play a major role for decarbonising heating. But their running costs are usually higher than gas boilers. This is because we put most of the climate policy costs on electricity and almost none on fossil fuels.
1) Let’s take a step back to understand what’s going on here. The Energy Company Obligation (ECO) is a long-standing energy efficiency programme. The first variation of its kind started in 1994. 10 years ago I wrote my PhD thesis on it @ecioxford. sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
2) ECO (or the Supplier Obligation as it is also known) has always supported installing new fossil fuel boilers. Especially during EEC 1+2 and CERT millions of condensing boilers were installed. This led to very large energy savings. centrica.com/media/1635/bg_…
The UK hydrogen strategy is finally out. My take on it in this thread. gov.uk/government/new…
1) The hydrogen strategy rightly identifies hydrogen as a key ingredient for the energy transition especially in areas such as power, industry and parts of the transport sector.
2) As my quote on @BBCNews says “But, as the strategy admits, there won’t be significant quantities of low carbon hydrogen for some time. We need to use it where there are few alternatives and not as a like-for-like replacement of gas.” bbc.com/news/science-e…
Not only can we afford the costs of net zero but we will have to. The alternative is a disastrous and very costly future. Excellent piece by @jameskirkup@SMFthinktank@spectator.
1) The climate deniers lost the battle around the evidence base and failed with their attempts to discredit the science more than 10 years ago.
2) Unable to challenge climate science the deniers have now turned to the costs of net zero as the new battleground. On a weekly basis they attack policies driving decarbonisation as being unaffordable.
In recent weeks claims have been made that electrification of end uses doesn’t deliver carbon savings because it runs on dirty fossil fuel generation. I argue here that these arguments do not stack up and prolong the combustion of fossil fuels. Thread 1/n energymonitor.ai/tech/electrifi…
2) Estimating carbon savings associated with electrification is complex. A number of analysts have made admirable attempts to appraise emissions savings from a shift to EVs and heat pumps. These studies show electrification leads to significant reductions in carbon emissions.
3) The German media reported widely on research claiming electric cars that run on power generated by coal are no cleaner than petrol and diesel cars. @AukeHoekstra quickly debunked this.