3 Inquiries
9. During Session 2004-05, the Committee undertook
an inquiry into Meeting Scotland's Future Energy Needs.
All of the evidence sessions on this inquiry were held at Westminster
during 2005. The inquiry arose from our November 2004 visit to
the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) site at Dounreay,
as one of the series of informal briefing meetings we hold regularly
in Scotland. In this case, we wanted to ascertain how the UKAEA
management and the Doureay workforce were meeting the challenge
of decommissioning the site.
10. At the time we undertook the visit, we did not
intend our on-site discussions to develop into a full-scale inquiry.
However, it became apparent that there were three issues which
had to be addressed formally; (i) the future job prospects for
people currently employed at the Dounreay plant when it was finally
decommissioned; (ii) the long-term strategy for the management
of radioactive waste, in particular, intermediate-level waste;
and (iii) how could the shortfall in energy output be met once
nuclear power no longer provided Scotland's energy needs?
11. Oral evidence was taken from the United Kingdom
Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA), from the Scottish Renewables
Forum (including representatives from Scottish Coal, from Wavegen
and from ScottishPower), from Professor James Lovelock and from
Scottish and Southern Energy.
12. As background for our inquiry, in February we
visited Illinois and California in the United States. In Chicago,
the Committee met or visited representatives from the Economic
Development Department of Zion (a small city to the north of Chicago
which, because of the recent closure of a nuclear power plant
in the city, was experiencing problems similar to those which
could be faced by Thurso), Exelon Nuclear, to discuss spent fuel
and decommissioning strategy, and the Chicago Green Technology
Centre (the Mayor's showcase for sustainable architecture and
alternative energy sources). The Committee also met officials
from the US Department of Energy, the Illinois Department of Commerce
and Economic Opportunity and the City of Chicago Department of
Energy.
13. In Sacramento, the Committee visited the California
Energy Commission, to discuss California State policies and practices
in the decommissioning of facilities and renewable energy programs
and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, including a visit
to the Rancho Seco nuclear facility to discuss experiences in
decommissioning the facility . The Committee also met with representatives
of the Northern California Power Agency, Navigant Consulting,
Theroux Environmental, Beckley Singleton and the Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, organisations specialising in renewable energy
technologies. In San Francisco we met with the San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission.
14. The Committee published its Report on 23 March
2005, with the Government's response being received on 10 October
and published on 24 October. The Committee's conclusions and recommendations
(in bold), together with the Government's comments (in
italics), are summarized below.
| 15. Before any final, irreversible, decisions on what sorts of power generation were the most appropriate for Scotland were taken, the Government should undertake an audit of the energy resources currently available, and to use that audit as a basis to work out the energy requirements that would be needed in the future.
The debate was not about renewables vs. conventional as both would be needed. The energy audit must be on the basis that all current forms of energy would be necessary.
The Government remained committed to the framework for UK energy policy set out in the 2003 Energy White Paper, in which a commitment was made to keep progress towards its energy policy goals under review through, for example, the work of the Joint Energy Security of Supply Working Group and the Climate Change Programme Review.
In delivering carbon reductions, developing energy efficiency and renewable energy were priorities, but the Government agreed that no one single form of generation would be the solution to future energy needs.
16. It was unwise to assume that "emerging technologies" could meet a quarter of the renewable proportion of Scotland's energy needs, and urged further research and development to ascertain their viability.
Scotland had good renewables resources (i.e. biomass, solar, wave and tidal) which were important to achieving the UK 2010 target for 10% of the UK's energy supply to come from renewables. However, it was not yet possible to assume that emerging renewables could meet a quarter of the renewables proportion of Scotland's energy needs.
17. Coal must have a part to play in meeting Scotland's future energy needs; therefore, coal-burning power stations in the UK must be fitted with the equipment necessary to capture carbon dioxide and sulphur. The Government should show its commitment to the UK coal industry by underwriting the cost of providing and installing such equipment at coal-burning power stations.
The Chancellor announced that the Climate Change Programme Review would investigate the potential for incentives to encourage the deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies.
18. Nuclear fusion could be a major source of power in the future, although more research may be required.
Nuclear fusion had the potential to provide a new long-term source of energy and, as there were no greenhouse gas emissions from fusion during its operation, it was an energy source that would not contribute to global warming. Nuclear fusion would also create manageable waste and little risk to public health and safety; however, a commercial power plant was still a long way off, because of the scientific and technological challenges posed by harnessing the energy created from a fusion reaction.
19. The Scottish Executive must clarify its position and state whether the "40 per cent renewables" refers to generation or consumption.
This was a matter for the Scottish Executive.
20. A fundamental, and immediate, review of the transmission charging regime must take place.
Management of the electricity market, including charges to meet the costs of providing the high voltage transmission grid, entailed balancing the interests of different generators and the range of interests of those who distribute and use electricity. Oversight of the electricity market was the responsibility of the independent Regulator, Ofgem.
In preparing to introduce the single GB-wide electricity market under BETTA from April 2005, the National Grid Company, as operator of the transmission grid, and Ofgem consulted widely on the approach to setting charges fair to all concerned.
21. The best way of ensuring the maintenance of Scotland's energy supply was by conserving energy, and the Committee commended the Government's Energy Efficiency campaign.
The Government welcomed the Committee's recognition of its campaign.
22. The Committee commended those companies who, under the Energy Efficiency Commitment, were helping priority households to lower their energy costs by providing free loft and cavity wall insulation, and those builders who were incorporating, solar panels, for example, as standard in or on their new build homes and office blocks.
The Government recognised the significant role of the Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC) in contributing to the Climate Change Programme by cutting greenhouse gas emissions. In providing particular help to low-income consumers, it is expected that the EEC will also assist in the alleviation of fuel poverty.
23. The Government should continue to improve through national regulations, the standard of building construction, both commercial and residential to ensure that maximum energy efficiency was realised, and provide tax incentives, eg reductions in VAT, to encourage a rigorous energy audit before any substantial development, so that the developer worked towards a zero or minimal net energy demand. This should be extended to existing homes.
Under the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, the energy certification of all buildings would become mandatory whenever they are constructed, sold, or rented out. This Directive enters into force in January 2006. In Scotland, implementation would be overseen by the Scottish Building Standards Agency.
24. The Committee agreed with the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee's conclusions on the management of nuclear waste, and stated that neither the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) nor the Government should be allowed to miss the July 2006 target date for a final decision on how such waste should be managed.
Radioactive Waste Policy was devolved, although CoRWM was jointly appointed by Scottish Ministers along with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Environment Ministers for Wales and Northern Ireland. The Government's response to the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee's December 2004 report on Radioactive Waste Management said that the need to have CoRWM's recommendations by July 2006 had been repeatedly stressed to the Committee.
25. The UKAEA was doing all it could to assist its Dounreay workforce who were facing an unsure future, and that the Government should listen to any proposals put forward by UKAEA or the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to ensure that the workforce were given all possible support. Dounreay contributed approximately £80 million into the Highlands through salaries, pensions, contracts and sub-contracts. Caithness and the rest of the Highland Region must be assisted also to overcome the problems which could ensue in a few years' time.
NDA would work closely with local communities around all its sites to alleviate the socio-economic impact of decommissioning and ultimate closure of those sites. The NDA would continue to fund the work that BNFL and UKAEA were formerly doing. The DTI and the Scottish Executive expect NDA to provide advice on how this important work should be taken forward in the longer term.
|
26. The Committee was able to secure a Westminster
Hall Debate on its Report and the Government's response.[6]
This took place on 1 December, and was highly successful,
with approximately two dozen Members attending the debate, and
14 speaking (not including interventions). It is likely that this
success was due, at least partly, to the fortuitous timing of
the debate taking place just two days after the Prime Minister
had announced a major energy review. In his winding-up speech,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland paid the
Committee this tribute:
"…undoubtedly the issues it addressed and
identified with great perspicacity also contributed, in the wider
body politic, to the review's announcement".[7]
27. It is clear that this was an inquiry of major
importance, with implications for the whole of the UK, not just
Scotland. We intend to keep the matter under review, and may well
return to the subject at a later date.
28. The first major inquiry this Parliament has been
into The Potential Benefits for Scotland of the 2012 Olympics.
Oral evidence has been taken from British Olympic Association
and the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, the
Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, sportscotland
and EventScotland, Scottish Enterprise, the Rt Hon Richard Caborn
MP, Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport
and Ms Patricia Ferguson MSP, Minister for Tourism, Culture and
Sport, the Scottish Executive. This inquiry will continue into
2006.
29. Partly in response to a report from Procedures
Committee of the Scottish Parliament on the Sewel Convention,[8]
(ie, the convention that the UK Parliament would not normally
legislate with regard to devolved matters in Scotland without
the consent of the Scottish Parliament), we agreed also to hold
an inquiry, to begin at the start of 2006, into The Sewel Convention:
the Westminster perspective.
30. The inquiry will not consider Sewel Motions per
se, but rather how Members of Parliament can be better made
aware that a particular Bill before the House of Commons has been
subject to a Sewel Motion in the Scottish Parliament - for example,
perhaps by a more formal communication between Holyrood and Westminster
- and how such Motions are scrutinised at Westminster, and to
consider the possible changes to Westminster procedures promulgated
by the Procedures Committee.
6 See Official Report, 1 December 2005, cols.
151WH-200WH. Back
7
Ibid, col 199WH. Back
8
The Sewel Convention, Procedures Committee, 7th
Report, 2005, Scottish Parliament Paper 428, October 2005 Back
|
