All eyes on Ed for how Labour would respond to IRA. He's bullish: 'we should match US ambition on climate action and stop moaning' #GAevent
Ed: the winners of the green global race will not be decided in a decade. They're being decided now. IRA supercharges the race to decide who wins.
Ed: being on the boat to the Beatrice wind farm in Scotland last week was a view of the future, not least because many of the workers used to work in the oil and gas industry. But we're behind on clean steel, jobs in the wind sector.
Ed: Some say IRA will end up with a race toward unproductive subsidies. This is overblown: we need $5tn per year in investment globally, renewables are local (unlike oil or gas which are widely traded), and we can focus on our strengths.
Ed: the geology of the North Sea give the UK an advantage in offshore wind, green H2, and CCS. Our policy (CCAct, 2030 fossil car ban, etc) also gives us an advantage. But we need a British Inflation Reduction Act. Here's what Labour would do:
1. Eliminate inconsistency: back onshore wind/solar, don't give the £11bn from the oil/gas windfall tax back to oil/gas as HMG has done. 2. We'll speed up the planning process and every regulator will have a net zero duty. 3. Real commitment from Rachel Reeves to a...
National Wealth Fund. Part financing gigafactories, 4 CCS clusters, the world's largest electrolyser factory, etc 4. GB energy that, like Orsted in Denmark, will be a national champion for clean tech. 45% of UK offshore wind is owned by foreign govts- Labour will change that
That's the 4 part response to IRA: "not protectionism but patriotism"
Q&A: Would Labour mirror the US's subsidy for domestically produced EV batteries? Ed says this is an area he'd engage with the US on as he thinks it's not quite working. But his overriding priority is to get gigafactories built.
Q&A: Will it be too late by the time Labour gets into power? Ed: I want to get into govt as soon as possible and we're doing the work now to be ready to implement from day 1.
Q&A: are you worried about European companies going to the US? Ed: I'm more interested in making the UK a great place to build clean energy companies.
Q&A: should we blend H2 into the gas grid? Ed: I think most heating will be done by electricity but we should keep exploring the role for H2 here.
Q&A: aren't some new green techs just not viable here, and therefore we risk wasting subsidy on these (like H2)? Ed: we don't want govt to crowd out private investment but govt can make derisking investment and should. Green H2 is incredibly important.
Q&A: How long can steel industry survive without subsidy? Ed: govt has been doing tiny handouts to tick things along. Labour would spend enough (£3bn) to transform the industry to zero carbon, not just emergency bailouts. It's a strong industry if it transforms.
Q&A: is 2030 zero carbon possible? Ed: it's hard but the benefits are huge. Unless you set a stretching target you have no hope. Govt is asleep at the wheel on 2035 power.
Q&A: would labour ban new oil/gas production? Ed: I don't believe in new licenses for oil/gas. Govt has to throw £ at oil/gas companies to get them to drill- govt is providing 90% of cost of Rosebank and 80% of the oil is exported. Why is that good value for UK taxpayer money?
Q&A: on EV tax credit, what does Labour want? Ed: US says that it's flexible on other countries being eligible. It's the one area where Labour would seek some change.
Q&A: will taxes rise to fund all this? Ed: we're talking about prudent investment not tax rises. OBR says if we delay climate action by a decade, we double the costs to the UK. It's prudent to invest now.
Q&A: is there a tension between £28bn from central govt and localising decisions? Ed: I think a lot of GB Energy's work will be locally led. Housing retrofits must be led locally. We will make every local authority a partner in this.
(now into a panel discussion) Ed, on unions: 70% of workers at the Beatrice wind farm used to work in oil and gas. But there aren't enough jobs! IRA puts high skills and unions at its centre and it's incumbent on govt to make more clean jobs for the transition to work.
Future UK/EU relations on climate? Ed: UK should be working with the EU on this. In the North Sea, glad HMG joined the North Seas Cooperation group as we should collaborate on energy infrastructure.
How do you make the case for nature? Ed: we face a biodiversity and climate crisis. Nature completely speaks to people's lived experience - GW and GtCO2 are abstract. I am in the green prosperity business and nature is key to this.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
we made offshore wind cheap. Today, I can barely see the case for one CCS power plant - much better to build cheaper wind and (probably) use hydrogen or long duration batteries to fill the gaps when the wind doesn’t blow.
Same story for steel. My colleague @VernerViisas showed…
how, in the UK at least, CCS on coal fired steel works probably is more expensive and likely slower than switching to electric arc furnace steel and using hydrogen to reduce iron. green-alliance.org.uk/publication/bu…
CCS keeps being outcompeted by cheaper cleaner tech before it gets built.
You've probably heard a lot about the US Inflation Reduction Act. You're gonna hear a lot more over the next 18 months. Read these essays to get our take on what IRA means, and how the UK can respond.
For unions, the crisis was of offshoring.
For climate activists, the crisis was failure of any prospect of 'well below 2c'
For Democrats, the crisis was Trump beating Clinton.
IRA is an emergency response for all three groups. Emergency means 2 things:
1) Making IRA a work (in reality and politically) is a huge deal for all three parties. It sorta has to succeed.
2) Emergencies let you do extraordinary things: IRA's value is probably not ~$370bn. It's probably $800bn+
There is just one rub in making IRA a success: permitting.
Big announcement from @DefraGovUK today on ELM. Perhaps the first significant one in years and on balance a small step in the right direction. What can we take from it? 🧵
First, the good news! the highest value-for-money bit has survived: Landscape Recovery is expanding, if slowly. The first round was FAR more popular than expected, and supporting farmers on 10% of land to do LR-type activity could halve the land system's carbon emissions by 2035.
But the lowest value-for-money bit, SFI, has been made even lower VfM - great thread here on this:
. The strategic risk is lobbyists think the £ for nothing bits of CAP can continue in ELM. We can't afford that if we want to restore nature and hit net zero.
Its focus is on growth and business and yet it lacks any squeamishness about regulation (of buildings, boilers, cars) and state facilitation (deployment roadmaps for renewables, H2; and directing regulators to hit net zero).
It's honest that HMG has been resting on its laurels (ie mainly power decarbonisation) and that heretofore downplayed ideas like circular economy, nature-based carbon removals, and a big rethink on how we use land (via a land use framework) MUST be part of UK net zero progress.
I shouldn't have to do this but let me explain why the future won't, in fact, be cold and dark if we power it from renewables. thetimes.co.uk/article/the-fu… THREAD
This article (paywalled, likely a good thing in this case) draws heavily on a concept called 'Energy return on investment' or EROI.
It was popular in the peak oil days of 2007/8.
Basically, it said modern civilsation would end if we used energy resources that had low return.
The idea is that eventually everyone in society would have to work to harvest energy, leaving no slack for people to do other valuable things, like tweeting on an idle August afternoon.
Of course it got weaponised against renewables, like so:
1. I think Guy underplays paying landowners (and tenants!). Why? Nearly 4 in 10 farms are unprofitable without basic payments; rising to 7/10 without agri-environment payments.
Paying the least profitable farmers to restore nature could be a way of levelling up rural Britain.
As Guy rightly points out, Defra's ambitions are an order of magnitude lower than what's needed for nature, and I fear, what would best support rural communities.