Memorandum submitted by the UK Business
Council for Sustainable Energy
1.1 The UKBCSE was formed in 2002 to support
the fastest possible transition to a low carbon economy consistent
with maintaining secure and affordable UK energy supplies. UKBCSE's
members include Centrica, EDF Energy, E.ON UK, National Grid,
RWE NPower, ScottishPower and Scottish and Southern Energy. This
written evidence is submitted on behalf of all our members, each
of whom will also be submitting their own written evidence and
appearing before the Committee.
1.2 During the passage of the Bill through Parliament
and the development of its subsequent regulations and guidance,
UKBCSE has been working closely with the UK's major energy trade
associations—the Association of Electricity Producers, the
British Wind Energy Association, the Energy Networks Association,
the Gas Forum and the Renewable Energy Association—all of
whom support and have contributed to this submission to the Select
Committee.
1.3 UKBCSE welcomes the scrutiny of the Draft
National Policy Statements (NPSs) by this Committee, which, together
with the continuing public consultation, gives greater legitimacy
and status to NPSs, and we are therefore pleased to submit evidence
to this inquiry.
1.4 UKBCSE strongly supports NPSs as fundamental
to the success of the necessary reform of the planning system.
We generally welcome their content, style and the necessary level
of detail, however there are a few areas of specific detail where
we believe further work is required prior to designation of the
NPSs. These areas will be expanded on in our more detailed response
to the Department of Energy and Climate Change consultation.
2. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Key Recommendations
In particular, we would encourage the Committee
to:
— Acknowledge the importance of, and strengthening
the wording on the Statements of Need within the energy NPSs,
as invaluable in clearly stating Government policy on the need
for the range of included technologies, thereby avoiding the need
for lengthy debates on the need at each individual planning inquiry.—
Support the need for NPSs to be robust and sufficiently detailed
to enable assessment of applications for compliance, thereby again
avoiding the need for further debate on national policy-related
issues at planning inquiry.
— Support the need for flexibility concerning
the submission of different elements of a project, with the option
for each in their own right being submitted as a NSIP (nationally
significant infrastructure projects), whilst endorsing the proposed
approach, which requires developers to ensure that an appropriate
level of detail is included to enable the IPC (Infrastructure
Planning Commission) and stakeholders to understand any likely
associated implications.
— Acknowledge that 2020-25 is not the end
of the journey in terms of energy infrastructure investment, with
significant amounts required well beyond, and suggest to DECC
that they include further emphasis of investment requirements
from 2030-50, including reference to the Renewable Energy Strategy
and the Climate Change Committee First Progress Report.
The Scale of the Energy Challenge
2.1 It is widely recognised that the UK is coming
out of a period of "energy plenty", with the decline
of North Sea gas supplies and many existing power stations reaching
the end of their lives. Over a third of the UK's existing generation
needs replacing within the next 15 to 20 years and within a decade
up to 80% of the UK's gas will need to be imported if Government's
objective of maintaining the current high levels of security of
energy supply is to be met.
2.2 The scale of the challenge to meet Government's
energy policy goals of addressing climate change and ensuring
continued security of the UK's energy supplies requires a sustained
multi-billion pound investment programme to build a range of energy
technologies to deliver both a balanced fuel mix and the transition
to a secure low carbon economy.
2.3 In short the UK needs very significant investment
in a range of low carbon energy technologies and in the networks
infrastructure necessary to deliver that energy to consumers—electricity
and gas, big and small, onshore and offshore and across the UK.
The UKBCSE's members, along with those of the UK's major energy
trade associations mentioned above, will be responsible for providing
a very substantial proportion of the nationally significant energy
infrastructure projects necessary to provide secure low carbon
energy supplies. All of this investment must be undertaken in
a way that takes account of the views of communities and respects
precious landscapes and environments.
The Role of National Policy Statements (NPSs)
2.4 In order to deliver the necessary very substantial
investment programme in the UK's energy infrastructure, the UK
needs a broadly consistent long-term policy framework, which clearly
sets out the Government's energy policies and priorities for all.
2.5 In particular, we believe that NPSs are fundamental
to establishing a stable policy framework to enable the very substantial
infrastructure investment programme needed to address climate
change and ensure continued security of supply of the UK's energy
supplies. Without the necessary stability and clearly defined
policy framework, developers may at best continue to experience
uncertainty over timescales and delays through repeated debate
over Government policy at planning inquiries, and at worst may
therefore choose to invest outside the UK.
2.6 Equally, NPSs must clearly spell out the
urgent need case, both overall and for each technology/infrastructure.
The suite of energy NPSs set out in general terms the need case
for the different technologies. This is vital, but UKBCSE/Industry
believes that, given the potential major concerns over security
of supply, the NPSs need to be realistic about the scale of the
need for each technology and the networks necessary to bring energy
to market.
2.7 The need cases should therefore be strengthened
from "significant" to emphasising the critical importance
of delivering investment in each technology, and should provide
clarity over the weight that the IPC should give to the respective
need cases.
2.8 Additionally, NPSs need to be robust, relevant
and clear to provide sufficient detail to communities/stakeholders,
statutory consultees, local authorities and promoters on key issues
that get raised time and time again at planning inquiries. Such
clarity will enable all involved to efficiently assess proposals'
compliance with national policy, and therefore spend more time
on those local issues which could affect the surrounding community
and how best to address them. Conversely, the absence of such
clear guidance in the NPSs could lead to continued debate at each
stage of the consents process, which would negate one of the major
benefits of NPSs.
2.9 Finally, there needs to be recognition of
the need for flexibility in the IPC's ability to consider related
nationally significant infrastructure projects as linked proposals,
via joint applications, or as separate projects in their own right.
2.10 We therefore welcome NPSs as the primary
basis for decisions by the IPC on nationally significant infrastructure
projects (NSIPs). We also support their use as material considerations
for both local planning authorities on smaller-scale energy projects,
and the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) when considering
sub 100MW projects in the marine area—as well as providing
invaluable guidance to all stakeholders and developers.
Reform of the Planning Regime
2.11 Prior to the Planning Act 2008 the consents
regime for nationally significant energy infrastructure projects
was too complex, too lengthy, too uncertain for both developers
and communities and too costly.
2.12 In order to deliver this step-change in investment,
the Council and the wider industry has long supported the reform
of the planning regime, including the majority of the Planning
Act 2008 provisions. These reforms deliver an integrated package
which will enable more timely, transparent, cost-effective, certain
and fairer decision-making on nationally significant infrastructure
projects.
2.13 As well as a stable policy framework delivered
by NPSs, developers need certainty in terms of the time a project
will take to go through the planning system. Therefore, whilst
ensuring full and fair consideration of all the issues, the implementation
of pre-agreed timescales within the nationally significant infrastructure
project regime under the jurisdiction of the IPC, is essential.
2.14 Equally, by placing a statutory requirement
on pre-application consultation, as well as the opportunity to
provide both written and oral representations to the IPC, potentially
affected communities have the chance to engage on individual proposals
earlier and in a more meaningful way than under the existing regime.
2.15 Finally, the establishment of a single
consenting regime with the IPC as a single independent decision
making body, will streamline the planning system to provide greater
certainty, efficiency and consistency for all, whilst ensuring
the quality of decision making, including community and stakeholder
involvement, is improved.
Conclusion
2.16 UKBCSE welcomes NPSs as the fundamental
plank which underpins the integrated package of planning reforms
so necessary to enable the UK to meet its twin goals of secure
and affordable energy supplies whilst addressing the challenge
of climate change.
2.17 We support the integrated nature, style, level
of detail and content of the energy NPSs and believe the layout
is easy to follow. This, along with clearly setting out the UK's
overarching energy needs, also provides a generally good level
of information on types of technologies, their likely impacts
and how these can be mitigated. This level of detail is not only
very helpful but necessary, as it will set out clearly what the
IPC, local authorities, statutory consultees and potentially affected
communities can expect from a proposed development and its impact,
and from its developer in terms of mitigation. We do however,
note a number of areas where we believe small modifications are
needed to remove any ambiguities and prevent delays in the future.
2.18 In order to be effective the NPSs must
give clear, specific and unambiguous direction to the IPC, industry
and stakeholders. The suite of energy NPSs, as currently drafted,
generally provide both the stable policy framework that energy
developers require in order to invest, and, on the whole, the
right level of detail to enable effective assessment of compliance
with national policy. This detail will be necessary in order to
enable the IPC and all other relevant parties to satisfactorily
consider the relevant issues that could affect a local community.
However, whilst generally satisfactory for this purpose, in some
cases we would welcome an even greater level of detail.
3. THE SCALE
OF THE
CHALLENGE
3.1 Radical reform of the planning regime remains
essential to delivering the very substantial amount of energy
infrastructure necessary to make the transition to a low-carbon
economy, to ensure continued security of the UK's energy supplies
and attract inward investment into the UK. The Government's Renewable
Energy Strategy and Low Carbon Transition Plan clearly recognise
these imperatives.
3.2 The Climate Change Act 2008 sets a statutory
target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050. The
EU Renewable Energy Directive has set the UK a legally binding
target of achieving 15% of all energy from renewable sources by
2020. This will require a step-change in renewables development
to move the UK from 5.5% of electricity generated by renewables
currently, to around 30% by 2020.
3.3 However, 2020 is not the end of the
journey and continued investment is needed well beyond, as confirmed
in the Climate Change Committee's First Progress Report, which
recommends that the electricity industry should be significantly
decarbonised by 2030 to enable low carbon power to form the basis
for decarbonising the rest of the economy and delivery of the
2050 target.
3.4 Also, within a decade the UK will be
importing up to 80% of its gas, which will require new gas import,
reception and storage facilities as well as significant investment
in the integrated gas transmission and distribution networks to
enable gas to reach the market.
3.5 In short, the UK needs a diverse portfolio
with extensive investment in all types of energy technologies
and infrastructure—electricity and gas, big and small, onshore
and offshore and across the UK and including significant investment
in the energy networks that enable energy to reach the market.
As recognised by the Government when launching the draft NPSs,
the transition to a low carbon economy will require a phased transfer
from carbon-intensive energy technologies. Therefore this will
continue to necessitate investment in the nation's gas infrastructure
(both reception facilities and the national gas transmission network/gas
distribution networks), as well as the development of carbon capture,
transportation and storage (CCS) technology to potentially enable
existing coal-fired power stations to continue generating, and
the construction of new coal-fired generation (providing CCS can
be proven to work at a commercial scale and the costs of retrofitting
do not preclude such an option).
3.6 In addition to the existing need cases
in the draft NPSs, we believe there should also be an explicit
reference to the need for carbon dioxide transportation and storage
infrastructure and as well as appropriate information on assessment
of impacts, mitigation measures and a statement on IPC decision
making for these infrastructures included within EN-1 and EN-2.
New carbon dioxide transport and storage infrastructure will be
needed to support the Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) chain,
taking captured carbon away from power stations and industrial
emitters and transporting it for permanent storage underground.
3.7 Alongside these technologies, companies
believe nuclear power is a proven largescale technology which
has the potential to continue to make a major contribution to
the UK's electricity generation through investment in safe and
efficient modern designs of nuclear reactors.
3.8 All energy developers need a broadly
consistent long-term policy framework and a planning regime that
is effective and fair, but most importantly gives them, affected
communities and their representatives certainty. The Planning
Act reforms are an integrated package, which together deliver
a more timely, certain, unified and effective planning regime
to enable decisive investment whilst ensuring enhanced community
engagement.
3.9 Appropriate incentives are required
to stimulate investment in low carbon technologies. A long-term
carbon price, reflecting the cost of emitting carbon dioxide from
fossil fuel generation is essential to underpin investment in
low carbon generation of all types, including renewables, nuclear
and CCS.
4. THE ROLE
OF NATIONAL
POLICY STATEMENTS
(NPSS)
4.1 The NPSs are critical to the success
of both planning reform and delivering the UK's energy policy.
They need to provide, and as currently drafted do broadly set
out, a stable long-term policy framework.
4.2 Equally, it is vital that they give clarity
on issues, which are raised time and time again at planning inquiries.
Therefore, they need to be robust and sufficiently detailed to
enable efficient and effective assessment of applications for
compliance, thereby negating the need for further debate on national
policy-related issues at inquiry level. This will enable greater
opportunity to review and address the impact on the local community
and environment.
4.3 The Overarching NPS for Energy (EN-1)
sets out the Government's energy policy priorities; the need case
for each electricity and gas technology and the equal need for
investment in the electricity and gas networks. It also helpfully
confirms that in order to address climate change and ensure continued
secure and affordable energy supplies, a wide range of energy
technologies will be necessary for the foreseeable future.
4.4 Therefore, when considering a prospective
energy project, either the IPC, or in the case of smaller-scale
energy proposals, the relevant local planning authority or other
relevant decision maker, can begin assessing proposals on the
basis that the national need has been established, and not waste
lengthy periods of time debating the national need. This will
provide much greater time to assess the local impacts of a proposal
and whether they can be satisfactorily resolved/mitigated.
4.5 However, whilst welcoming this recognition,
the Council believes that the need case for all the various energy
technologies/infrastructures should be strengthened still further
from the need being "significant" to emphasising the
critical importance of delivering investment in all technologies
to maintain security of supply and address climate change. Specifically
the need case for gas infrastructure should be strengthened within
EN-1 and EN-2. Equally, EN-1 should spell out that the IPC should
give substantial or considerable weight to the need case for each
technology.
4.6 Equally, the value of setting out national
policy in a single place is that by including Government's policy
on particular issues within the relevant NPS, this will provide
clarity for developers, the IPC, statutory consultees, local planning
authorities and potentially affected communities, and hence again
negate the need for lengthy and needless debate. A good example
of this is electric and magnetic fields (EMFs), where planning
inquiries considering electricity overhead line projects often
spend much time debating the science surrounding EMFs. By setting
out Government policy on EMFs and the compliance standards network
operators will have to meet, everyone will know exactly what is
required to make a prospective project compliant, and can therefore
concentrate on the local issues such as the proposed route, the
impacts, amenity issues and how to satisfactorily address them.
4.7 We also support NPSs' use as material considerations
for both local planning authorities on smaller-scale energy projects,
and the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) when considering
sub 100MW projects in the marine area—as well as providing
invaluable guidance to all stakeholders and developers.
4.8 Of course many renewable projects, whilst
not nationally significant infrastructure projects, share the
same characteristics and impacts of development covered in EN-3.
As currently drafted, Paragraph 1.2.4 states that an NPS "may"
be a material consideration in decision making on an application
under the Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA). UKBCSE strongly
believes that this wording should be strengthened and that all
NPSs including in particular the Renewables NPS should be afforded
equivalent status within the TCPA regime.
4.9 Lastly, the suite of energy NPSs do not
appear to consider period post 2020 for renewables and gas, and
post 2025 for nuclear and coal. Given the nature, scale and timescales
of investments required, the NPSs need to recognise that this
investment will be required beyond these timescales (as confirmed
by the Climate Change Committee First Progress Report which considers
potential investment in the period 2030 to 2050.
5. NPSS—STYLE,
CONTENT AND
APPROACH
Format and Style
5.1 The Council and the wider industry welcome
the format and style of the NPSs, and in particular the cross-referencing
between NPSs and with the Planning Act 2008, which ensure consistency
and provide information on:
— What the IPC should expect from applicants
and with whom it should consult.
5.2 The provision of information on impacts
and mitigation will enable all stakeholders to know upfront what
they can expect in terms of likely impacts arising from a project,
including guidance to developers regarding the actions they will
be expected to take in order to minimise that impact. This level
of detail is therefore helpful, and providing that the IPC deems
that the proposed development meets with the requirements of the
relevant NPSs, it will allow greater time and focus to be given
to project-specific impacts on the local community/environment.
Non-Spatial Approach
5.3 We welcome the spatial approach taken within
the Nuclear NPS (EN-6) and ask that the spatial nature of the
Crown Estate leasing process also be referred to within the Renewable
NPS (EN-3). However, we agree that a non-spatial approach for
the remaining technologies is the most sensible approach and important
for a number of reasons including:
— The importance of market influences in
determining where and when to develop nationally significant energy
infrastructure projects.
— The range of technical, operational, commercial,
ecological and other environmental considerations that determine
where a developer might consider proposing a project eg the geological
constraints affecting underground gas storage or the proximity
of the grid network for all forms of generation.
— The evolution of energy technologies
and mitigation measures which could quickly affect the legitimacy
of any assumptions leading to spatial "mapping" for
differing technologies, thereby quickly rendering the NPSs out
of date.
— The resource intensive nature of undertaking
detailed spatial planning (be it centrally, regionally or locally)
which would inevitably delay the introduction of NPSs.
— Even more importantly, the planning regime
is based on a plan-led system based on Local Development Frameworks
and Regional Spatial Strategies, which look holistically at the
needs of communities. With the exception of nuclear, which is
largely based on existing nuclear sites and therefore warrants
a different approach, any national spatial approach for other
individual technologies would cut across the fundamental principles
of a plan-led system which encapsulates local democracy, enshrined
within the planning system for decades.
Flexibility
5.4 Whilst the new regime very much improves
the ability for the authorising authority and all stakeholders
to consider the holistic implications of any nationally significant
infrastructure project, it is important that it also retains flexibility
around submission of different elements of a project, with the
option for each in their own right being submitted as a NSIP eg
a proposed electricity generation project and any connection or
indeed deeper reinforcement of the electricity network system.
In such cases, these different aspects may be undertaken by different
legal entities with different regulatory and commercial backgrounds.
5.5 For a range of technical, commercial or environmental
reasons it may not be appropriate for a generator or gas reception
facilities developer to include within their consent application
the connecting assets or any necessary network reinforcement works.
However, we support the requirement in those circumstances for
an applicant to have to demonstrate that there are appropriate
alternatives for connection to the gas or electricity grids.
5.6 The proposed approach strikes the right
balance enabling the IPC and other stakeholders to understand
the likely full implications of a proposed development, whilst
enabling the developers of the respective elements of an energy
project, the opportunity for one party to apply on behalf of all
involved; to jointly apply or to apply separately.
Alternative Sites
5.7 Industry welcomes the wording laid out in
Section 4.4 (Alternatives) of EN—1 the Overarching NPS for
Energy, which confirms that when there is a policy or legal requirement
to consider alternatives (such as under the Habitats or Water
Framework Directives) the IPC should frame any consideration of
alternatives in the context of the scale and urgency of the UK's
need for energy infrastructure.
5.8 The section also allows the IPC to potentially
exclude vague or inchoate alternatives or to potentially place
the onus on third parties proposing an alternative to provide
any necessary evidence.
5.9 Whilst energy developers will themselves
normally consider all reasonable expedient alternatives, and/or
take into account suggestions from stakeholders, a range of technical,
operational, commercial, geological, ecological and other environmental
factors often render alternatives unsuitable.
5.10 The proposed approach will ensure that
all genuinely viable alternatives are considered whilst making
sure that the proposing of alternatives is not used to unnecessarily
frustrate or delay valid applications who have consulted fully
with the affected community, the local planning authority and
statutory consultees to develop the best all-round proposal.
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 In order to be effective the NPSs must
give clear, specific, unambiguous direction to the IPC, and inform
the work of both industry and stakeholders. The suite of energy
NPSs, as currently drafted, generally provide both the stable
policy framework energy developers need to invest, and, on the
whole, the right level of detail to enable effective assessment
of compliance with national policy. This provides more opportunity
for the IPC and all stakeholders during IPC consideration or planning
inquiries to consider and satisfactorily deal with the relevant
issues that could affect a local community. The level of detail
is generally satisfactory for this purpose but in some cases we
would welcome additional detail as an aid to clarity.
6.2 In particular, we urge the Committee to:
— Acknowledge the importance of, and recommend
the strengthening of the wording on the Statements of Need within
the energy NPSs, as invaluable in clearly stating Government policy
on the need for the range of included technologies, thereby avoiding
the need for lengthy debates on the need at each individual planning
inquiry.
— Support the need for NPSs to be robust
and sufficiently detailed to enable assessment of applications
for compliance, thereby again avoiding the need for further debate
on national policy-related issues at planning inquiry.
— Support the importance of flexibility
concerning submission of different elements of a project, with
the option for each in their own right being submitted as a NSIP,
whilst endorsing the proposed approach, which requires developers
to ensure that an appropriate level of detail is included to enable
the IPC and stakeholders to understand any likely associated implications.
— Acknowledge that 2020-25 is not the end
of the journey in terms of energy infrastructure investment, with
significant amounts required well beyond, and suggest to DECC
that they include further emphasis of investment requirements
from 2030 to 2050, including reference to the Renewable Energy
Strategy and the Climate Change Committee First Progress Report.
January 2010
| 
