| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
EU Regional Aid
Mr. Cummings: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what submissions her Department has made to the European Commission concerning the review of funds available under objective 2 of European regional aid. [2167]
Mrs. Roche: The Government and local partners have been negotiating since August 1996 with the Commission on the programmes for grant in 12 European structural funds objective 2 areas in Britain for the period 1997-99. The Commission has now adopted the majority of these programmes and is likely to complete the remainder shortly.
For the period from 2000 onwards, the money available under objective 2 and the other objectives depends on Commission proposals for future financing of the EU and for reform of the structural funds. It is likely to put proposals forward after the completion of the Inter-Governmental conference. The Government have not put forward detailed submissions at this early stage, but we are looking for a package which is affordable, simpler and more efficient, and fair.
Mr. Mitchell:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade if the United Kingdom qualifies for contributions from the EU/EEC cohesion fund on the basis of (i) 1993, (ii) 1994, (iii) 1995 and (iv) 1996 gross domestic product figures. [2381]
Mrs. Roche:
No. Article 2.1 of the Cohesion Fund Regulation restricts eligibility to member states with a per capita gross national product (GNP), measured in purchasing power parities (PPP), of less than 90 per cent. of the Community average and which have a programme leading to the fulfilment of the conditions of economic convergence referred to in Article 104c of the EC Treaty. The United Kingdom does not qualify: its per capita GNP (PPP) has been and is above this level.
Ms Walley:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment she has made of the environmental impact of the Atlantic frontier development; and on what evidence this assessment has been made. [2430]
Mr. Battle:
An assessment of environmental impact and a shoreline sensitivity study were carried out by BP in relation to its applications for consent to develop the Foinaven and Schiehallion discoveries. In addition, the largest offshore environmental study ever undertaken in UK waters was carried out to the west of Shetland on behalf of a group of oil companies by the Southhampton Oceanography Centre. An area the size of Wales was surveyed and much valuable information was acquired. The results of this work provide baseline environmental data as part of the work companies must do to satisfy Government environmental requirements.
Ms Walley:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans she has in respect of further development at the Atlantic frontier; and if she will make a statement. [2431]
Mr. Battle:
Two developments have already been approved in the Atlantic Margin: the Foinaven and Schiehallion fields operated by BP. Other discoveries are identified in the "Energy Report 1997", a copy of which
10 Jun 1997 : Column: 419
is available in the Library. My Department will continue to consider proposals of further development in this oil and gas province which respect the environmental sensitivities of the area and the interests of the other sea users.
Mr Gummer:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what reduction in CO2 emissions is made when so-called clean coal technology is used instead of other existing forms of generation. [2641]
Mr. Battle:
The tables set out the reductions in CO2 emissions from various clean coal power generation technologies currently available or under development compared with a reference conventional pulverised coal plant. The information was provided by IEA Coal Research--The Clean Coal Centre and will appear in a report to be published later this year by the Centre. The table indicates some 20-30 per cent. reduction may be possible if clean coal plant replaces existing conventional coal plant. however all coal fired generation releases significantly more CO2 per unit of electricity than combined cycle gas turbine stations and there would be an increase in emissions if clean coal plant replaced such plant. There would also be an increase in emissions of CO2 if clean coal plant replaced oil fired plant, nuclear or renewables sources of energy.
| Technology | Net plant efficiency, per cent. LHV(18) | CO2 reduction per cent. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional systems | |||
| Pulverised coal | Reference plant | 36 | 0 |
| Subcritical steam | 39 | 8 | |
| Supercritical steam | 42-45 | 14-20 | |
| Ultra-supercritical steam | 47-52 | 23-31 | |
| AFBC(19) | Subcritical steam | 39 | 6 |
| Combined cycles | |||
| IGCC(20) | Demonstrated systems | 38-43 | 8-18 |
| Advanced systems | 45-47 | 22-25 | |
| PFBC(21) | Subcritical steam | 44 | 19 |
| Supercritical steam | 46 | 22 | |
| Hybrid(22) | Subcritical steam | 47-49 | 23-27 |
| Supercritical steam | 52 | 31 |
Notes:
(18) LHV--Low Heating Value.
(19) AFBC--Atmospheric Fluidised Bed Combustion.
(20) IGCC--Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle.
(21) PFBC--Pressurised Fluidised Bed Combustion.
(22) Assumes Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) fitted to conventional systems, PFBC and Hybrid Cycles Gasifier + PFBC technology.
Source:
IEA Coal Research unpublished report ("Greenhouse gas emission factors for coal"--expected to be published in 1997).
Coal Subsidies
Mr. Gummer: To ask the President of the Board of Trade when she plans to meet her German counterpart to explain the environmental advantage of reducing and then eliminating subsidies on coal. [2671]
Mr. Battle:
I have noted with concern a report by the World Bank indicating that subsidies for coal in the OECD area are associated with 1.5 per cent. of the total CO2 emissions. German subsidies account for the bulk of
10 Jun 1997 : Column: 420
this. I mean to press for the elimination of all coal subsidies throughout the European coal and steel community by the time the ECSC is wound up in 2002, and I will support the Commission vigorously in ensuring progressive reduction in state aid paid to the European coal industry over this period.
It is not our policy to subsidise UK coal producers, nor to tolerate subsidised imports into the UK, whether from Germany or elsewhere. UK coal is by far the lowest cost coal produced within the ECSC, and is generally accepted as the only ECSC production with a long-term prospect of viability. I am therefore concerned that UK coal exports should not be disadvantaged over the period to 2002 by subsidies given to other ECSC producers; and we will press the Commission to deny approval to such state aids, unless arrangements have first been put in place for removing any consequential market distortions against UK coal available for sale within the ECSC.
Mr. Gummer:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans she has to extend the non-fossil fuel obligation so that it is available to subsidise fossil fuels.[2672]
Mr. Battle:
I am currently considering the options for the longer term future of the NFFO, and I will make a further announcement in due course. Extending the scope of NFFO to include other forms of energy would need primary legislation and clearance from the European Commission.
Mr. Cotter:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans she has to protect small businesses against the late payment of commercial debt. [2637]
Mrs. Roche:
The Government will introduce a comprehensive range of measures to address the late payment of commercial debt. These will include the introduction of legislation giving businesses a statutory right to claim interest on late payment of commercial debt, a review of the company reporting requirements and a requirement that Government Departments and local authorities pay their bills on time.
Mr. Flynn:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what tonnage of spent nuclear fuel elements has been reprocessed each year at (a) Sellafield and (b) Dounreay, listing the (i) initial uranium enrichment and spent fuel burn up rate composition and (ii) reactor and country origin, in each case since these plants became operational. [1844]
Mr. Battle
[holding answer 2 June 1997]: Reprocessing operations are carried out at Sellafield by British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL) and at Dounreay by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). Since reprocessing operations began at Sellafield nearly 40 years ago, a total of around 40,000 tonnes of spent fuel have been reprocessed. Customers for spent fuel reprocessed at Sellafield are from the UK, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Canada and Italy. Information on the initial uranium enrichment and spent fuel burn up rate composition and reactor origin,
10 Jun 1997 : Column: 421
since these plants became operational, can be obtained only at disproportionate cost. I have asked the Chairman of the UKAEA to provide the corresponding information in respect of Dounreay.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |