Conclusions and recommendations
Lack of 'joined-up Government'
1. We acknowledge that the Government has undertaken
a number of important initiatives at both a domestic and international
level to respond to climate change, but we are frustrated by the
absence of a clear central direction to the Government's work
on climate change. Given the strength of scientific evidence which
suggests that the situation is even more urgent than anticipated,
we recommend that a Minister for Climate Change or a Cabinet Committee
on Climate Change chaired by the Secretary of State for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs be appointed, with sole responsibility
for focusing and coordinating the actions of Government Departments
to ensure that the UK's domestic and international targets are
met. It is imperative that tackling climate change be put at the
very heart of Government. (Paragraph 34)
2. In our report on Defra's 2004 Departmental
Annual Report, we recorded our concern that Defra does not yet
have sufficient 'clout' to be taken seriously by other Government
Departments in framing their key policy decisions. The findings
of this report do not persuade us otherwise. (Paragraph 35)
3. We are encouraged that the Public Service
Agreement target on greenhouse gas emission reductions is now
shared by the Department for Transport as well as Defra and the
Department of Trade and Industry. However, we strongly recommend
that the review of the UK Climate Change Programme does not lead
to a reduction in the target for greenhouse gas emission reduction
in Defra's existing PSA target. (Paragraph 37)
Road transport
4. Road transport has a significant impact on
climate change. Emissions from road transport must be made a priority
in the UK's climate change mitigation strategy. We recommend that
the Government re-examine the effect of its current fiscal measures,
such as differentials in Vehicle Excise Duty, with a view to making
them more effective in promoting the purchasing of low-carbon
cars. We regard the recent announcement in the Budget of a £5
increase in Vehicle Excise Duty for the two most polluting bands
as no more than a token gesture. At a European level we also recommend
that discussions are held to examine what economic measures might
be developed to require vehicle manufacturers to speed up the
development of low carbon vehicles. (Paragraph 41)
5. We welcome the Government's decision to focus
its new vehicle technology programmes more on climate change.
We do not believe, however, that it was helpful to cancel existing
programmes rather than add to them, and urge that the Government
publish details of any successor schemes urgently. We also recommend
that the Government ensure that any hiatus between abolition of
the Powershift programme and other low-carbon vehicle programmes
and the implementation of their replacements is avoided. (Paragraph
43)
Biofuels
We believe that biofuels can be a useful a tool in
the mitigation of increasing greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
Accordingly, we welcome Defra's decision to rectify the omission
of biofuels from the Climate Change Programme as part of the climate
change review, and recommend that the Government take this opportunity
to adopt policy measures to increase biofuel production and use
within the UK. However, we regret that so far, in spite of a 20
pence per litre duty derogation first announced in the 2002 Budget,
there has been very little UK biodiesel produced and no home-based
bioethanol plant established. We note the apparent difference
between Defra's enthusiasm for biofuel crops and the Treasury's
reluctance to fully engage in this issue, and call upon the Government
to re-examine its approach to its use of fiscal incentives in
this area in order properly to kick-start the development of a
UK biofuels industry. (Paragraph 47)
Aviation
7. Aviation has a significant impact on climate
change, which is likely to increase with the projected growth
in the industry unless alleviation measures are implemented. It
is therefore vital that aviation be included in climate change
mitigation strategies at both a national and international level.
Depressing demand for air travel is possible in the short-term,
but may prove difficult to maintain over time. We applaud the
proposal to include aviation within the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
(ETS), but we are concerned by the length of time seemingly required
to achieve implementation. We recommend the Government use whatever
means necessary to ensure inclusion within the scheme by the start
of the second phase of the ETS in 2008. We welcome the commitment
in the new Sustainable Development White Paper Securing the Future
on this. (Paragraph 57)
8. We also recognise, however, that there is
a limit to what can be achieved in the short to medium term by
the inclusion of aviation within the emissions trading scheme,
due to the long asset lifetime of aircraft. We therefore additionally
recommend that the Government work with the EU and other partners
to encourage the uptake of new technologies and 'fast-tracking'
their development, in addition to adopting fiscal measures to
reduce demand. We also recommend that discussions are held at
an EU level with the aircraft and aero-engine manufacturers and
the airlines to examine ways in which the development and introduction
of more fuel efficient aircraft can be accelerated. (Paragraph
58)
9. In addition to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
and the fast-tracking of technological development, referred to
in paragraphs 57 and 58, we also recommend that the Government
evaluate the effects of an aviation fuel tax and a system of capping
the overall carbon emissions associated with aviation and airport-related
activity as part of determining what would be the most effective
package of fiscal measures to contribute to an overall reduction
in emissions from aviation. (Paragraph 59)
Renewables and the Renewables Obligation
10. We are concerned that alternative renewable
technologies such as wave, tidal and solar power are currently
believed to be commercially non-viable for many years. In order
to achieve its targets on renewable power generation, it is imperative
that the Government urges the development of a suite of technologies
rather then relying solely on onshore windfarms, although these
have a valuable role to play as part of a suite of renewable energy
sources. Accordingly, we recommend that the Government comes forward
with programmes to promote the rapid mainstream development and
use of new renewable energy technologies, particularly biofuels,
biomass and solar, wave and tidal power. (Paragraph 75)
11. We are concerned that any gains made in the
proportion of the energy supply generated by renewable technologies
may be cancelled out by the declining proportion of energy production
from nuclear sources. Renewables are predicted to supply some
9.9% of the UK's energy by 2010, but the proportion of electricity
from nuclear sources is predicted to fall from 24% in 2004 to
7% over the next fifteen years. We are concerned that the current
rate of increase in renewable energy may not be sufficient to
compensate for decline in electricity from nuclear sources, resulting
in an increased dependence on fossil fuels. Therefore it is essential
to accelerate the increase in sustainable energy and energy efficiency
measures. (Paragraph 76)
12. The contradiction between the new business
rates introduced by HM Treasury and the Renewables Obligation,
the aim of which is to mitigate climate change, is a clear example
of the lack of 'joined-up' Government. Given the urgency for action
underlined by the climate change conference in Exeter, it is essential
that all relevant departments reaffirm the Governments commitment
to the Renewables Obligation and renewables targets to inspire
investor confidence. (Paragraph 78)
Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
13. We are concerned that the Government is not
doing enough to enable Combined Heat and Power (CHP) to achieve
its national uptake targets, particularly given the gains in carbon
reductions that can be achieved through this—already commercially
available—technology. We commend the announcement in the
Budget of a reduced rate for the installation of micro-CHP. We
recommend that the Government, in its response to our report,
detail the actions which it will now be pursuing to address the
current deficit in CHP generation. (Paragraph 85)
Nuclear power
14. It is clear that there are concerns regarding
the economic viability and environmental impact of nuclear energy
generation. The Government must make clear the role it believes
nuclear power could or should play in achieving the carbon reduction
targets set out in the UK Climate Change Programme. The Government
should at the same time publish a candid assessment of the prospects
for nuclear fusion technology contributing to the generation of
domestic electricity within the next twenty years. Details of
the level of investment thus far made in the development of this
technology should also be made available. (Paragraph 92)
Carbon capture and storage
15. We acknowledge that carbon capture and storage
could be an extremely valuable technology. But we are aware of
the concerns regarding its economic viability and the potential
long-term environmental and potential safety impacts. We also
note the disparity in timescales between the 2006-08 date suggested
by the Energy White Paper needed to maximise the technology and
the 2020 target set by Defra. We look forward to the findings
of the Carbon Abatement Technology Strategy due to be made public
later this year. Irrespective of these findings, we recommend
that the Government should not spend too much time and resources
on what is ultimately a useful tool for 'buying time'. Pursuing
this route should not detract from more 'mainstream' adaptation
and mitigation strategies. (Paragraph 96)
Energy efficiency
16 Increasing uptake of easily implemented measures
with small financial outlay and comparatively rapid payback periods,
such as encouraging use of energy saving light-bulbs, is a prime
example of 'low-hanging fruit' which we recommend to the Government
as a simple yet effective means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions
whilst increasing consumer awareness of the issue and how minor
changes in lifestyle can have a significant beneficial impact.
The Government needs to work with energy providers to overcome
the apparent inertia in adoption of these straight-forward energy
efficiency measures. (Paragraph 101)
17. We welcome the inclusion of energy efficiency
measures in the Building Regulations. This will help lessen the
climate change impact of new housing. But we are concerned that
the Energy Efficiency Commitment is not having sufficient impact
on existing housing stock. The large initial cost combined with
the length of the payback period for domestic installation of
renewable energy sources urgently needs to be addressed. We recommend
an urgent expansion of programmes leading to domestic energy efficiency
in existing housing stock, including energy generating measures.
We also urge a review of energy market rules in order to promote
this. We note the value of simple measures such as installation
of cavity wall insulation and the rental of solar panels, and
recommend the Government lead the rollout of such schemes at a
national level. (Paragraph 103)
Stamp duty
18 A reduction in stamp duty as a 'reward' for
installing energy efficient systems within the home fails to address
the majority of the housing stock. However, even with the recent
announcement in the Budget to raise the stamp duty threshold to
£120,000, such a move would still affect some 900,000 homes
sold every year. Incentives to improve energy efficiency of such
houses could contribute significantly to the Government's domestic
carbon reduction targets. Despite the fact that such a move will
not affect all existing housing stock, the Government should seriously
consider making such a change. The Government should also examine
what fiscal measures it has at its disposal, such as a council
tax discount, that could accelerate the adoption of more energy
efficient systems by owners of existing building stock. (Paragraph
105)
Planning and building regulations
19. We welcome the inclusion of energy efficiency
measures in the Building Regulations. This will help lessen the
climate impact of new housing. However, we are concerned that
the inclusion of energy efficiency measures may be undermined
by the target set out in the ODPM Five Year Plan to build homes
for £60,000 each. While we support the Government's desire
to increase the volume of affordable new housing, such a policy
should not be pursued without incorporating best practice with
regard to energy efficiency. In its response to our report Defra
should set out how houses built at this price can still be as
energy neutral as possible, and the steps Defra has taken with
ODPM to ensure this is the case. (Paragraph 110)
The commercial sector
20. We commend the work of the Carbon Trust in
helping business and the public sector adopt energy efficient
practices and reduce carbon emissions, and we support their awareness
raising campaign. It is evident from case studies that considerable
financial savings can be made through implementation of energy
efficiency measures. We recommend that the Building Regulations
for new commercial buildings are made more stringent so as to
demand improved energy efficiency from this sector and include
design requirements for such buildings to generate a proportion
of their own energy consumption. (Paragraph 116)
Communication and education
21. Raising awareness amongst consumers of the
impact of climate change, and ways in which they can help combat
it, is of great importance. We welcome the recent commitment by
Defra to provide £12 million over three years to support
a climate change communications initiative. However, we are concerned
that the current 'head of steam' resulting from the recent flurry
of media coverage of the G8 climate conference in Exeter may be
dissipated. We recommend that some of the resource set aside for
climate change communications should be used to identify what
the barriers to the public changing their attitudes and consequently
behaviour are, thus ensuring that future policy is aimed at removing
these barriers. It is also imperative that any communication initiatives—such
as television advertising—are fully supported by provision
of websites, telephone hotline facilities and literature to assist
consumers. In this context, we welcome the work of the Energy
Saving Trust in developing the Sustainable Energy Network based
on the network of Energy Efficiency Advice Centres. We recommend
that Defra consider increasing funding to the Energy Saving Trust
to support this work. (Paragraph 123)
The EU Emissions Trading Scheme
22. We note that the current situation of uncertainty
surrounding the UK's National Allocation Plan (NAP) can only have
a negative impact on the UK's credibility and leadership position
with respect to climate change. We urge the Government to consider
reviewing its current position on the NAP. We are concerned that,
once again on a key development of EU environmental policy, the
UK finds itself at odds with the Commission on the detail of how
the new rules on emissions trading will work. Given that 22 Member
States have now got approved NAPs in place, we call upon the Government
to rapidly resolve its difference of opinion with the Commission
on this matter without resorting to time-wasting and lengthy proceedings
via the European Court. (Paragraph 133)
23. We are concerned that, while the EU Emissions
Trading Scheme (ETS) focuses attention on relative positions,
it has the potential to 'lock-in' current energy use, with heavier
emitters merely purchasing carbon allocations from the new accession
States which themselves, in absolute terms, may have energy inefficient
systems compared to those used by allocation purchasers. We recommend
that the ETS be monitored carefully to ensure that it increases
the use of more CO2 efficient technologies and that total emissions
are capped at increasingly restrictive levels to achieve an EU-wide
reduction in emissions. (Paragraph 134)
The EU's Kyoto targets
24. It is important in itself for the EU to meet
its Kyoto targets, but it also adds weight to attempts to persuade
the rest of the world to change. It is imperative that the EU
sets an example to developed and developing nations, by achieving
its target and thus showing, through its own practice, that implementation
of energy efficiency measures is not detrimental to economic growth,
or indeed individual businesses. (Paragraph 137)
Agricultural policy
25. We recommend that the Government investigate
using CAP reform and the redirection of agricultural subsidies
to encourage biofuel/biomass production, and to encourage agricultural
best practice with regard to climate change during its Presidency
of the EU. (Paragraph 146)
International relations and the G8
26. We commend the Government for hosting the
Exeter scientific symposium 'Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change'
in February this year as one of the first major events of the
UK's Presidency of the G8, reinforcing the Prime Minister's commitment
to bringing the issue of climate change to the fore in the international
arena. We hope the Government will take full advantage of the
momentum generated by this event by taking forward climate change
policies during its Presidency. We also applaud the work of the
International Climate Change Taskforce, and recommend that the
Government supports the Taskforce's activities in working towards
international engagement on climate change issues. All political
leaders must show in their actions a consistent commitment to
tackling climate change. (Paragraph 155)
27. We understand that the use of existing coal
stocks in developing countries is inevitable. However we recommend
that the UK Government encourages international technological
development of more efficient fossil-fuelled power generation
to minimise emissions per tonne of coal during its Presidency
of the G8. We recommend that the UK take full advantage of the
current global prominence of the issue of climate change to take
forward the proposed G8+ Climate Group and pursue international
agreement on concrete carbon reduction measures to run alongside—and
not instead of—the Kyoto Protocol. (Paragraph 161)
| 
