select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
Fiona fox's blog
The White Paper detailed plans for future energy policy in the UK, including a go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear reactors.
John Loughhead, executive director, UK Energy Research Centre, said:
“The UK Energy Research Centre welcomes the fact that energy saving has been recognised by the Government as having a crucial and serious role to play in reducing carbon emissions. We would hope that the range of measures outlined in the Energy White Paper will represent a significant boost in the level of energy efficiency in the UK.
“The large business Carbon Reduction Commitment consultation represents a dramatic and positive step for the UK, making us the first country in the world to look at emissions from big businesses, such as banks and supermarkets.
“We also welcome the move to put an intermediate target on renewables with clear cut market measures to support it. It is vitally important that we recognise the need for different levels of investment to support renewable technologies at different levels of maturity.
“We welcome the continued intention to support the carbon capture and storage demonstration, and would urge the Government to initiate this as soon as possible. It would appear that there are no technical reasons to delay selection and trial.
“Simplification of the licensing regime for domestic energy generation, e.g. via solar panels or wind turbines, is a pragmatic step which we would support. However it will be important to ensure reliable guidance and advice is available, given the installation-specific performance of many such devices.
“Finally, we welcome the attempt to have a clear strategy on biomass and transport.”
Dr Seton Bennett, Deputy Director of the National Physical Laboratory, said:
“The Government’s drive for cleaner coal presents several challenges. The challenges are not just financial, as suggested by a recent Centre for Policy Studies report, but scientific and technical. We already know coal burns more cleanly at higher temperature and pressure and how to make this work; that is not in debate. What we are working on is a way to accurately predict the impact new approaches have on the lifespan, cost and safety of power stations – those variables which are making the power industry nervous. Without getting the science right, we can’t reduce the uncertainty which comes with investing in new methods of coal burning.
“NPL is at the heart of several research projects co funded by the DTI and the energy industry, to address these challenges. We are evaluating the impact of clean coal on the lifespan, cost and safety of power stations. The Government is prioritising the right areas but more needs to be done to crack the scientific codes to cleaner energy production if we are to have any chance of delivering against the white paper.”
Professor Stuart Haszeldine from the University of Edinburgh, said:
“The goals of low carbon, secure energy, and affordable energy are right, but enabling commercial companies to deliver at the pace required remains a problem. Twenty percent of UK electricity (13 GigaWatts) is already being commercially offered by new low carbon clean coal and gas proposals. A further 15% is already being offered by renewable proposals. By contrast, zero percent is currently being offered by new nuclear plant. The commercial preferences of industry and investors are clear. To delay still longer on CCS is reckless caution from the Government, faced with the size and severity of the climate challenge. The Government should read the Stern Report.
“New built clean coal and gas, with carbon capture fitted after construction, can guarantee electricity delivery before the UK old coal plants close in 2015. By contrast for the government to rely significantly on newly-built nuclear electricity remains a gamble, which will have to shatter previous UK timescale records on consultation, planning, construction and public acceptance.
“If the UK wishes to lead internationally then the CCS ambition needs to be multiplied more than tenfold.”
Dr Robin Grimes, Reader in Materials, Imperial College London and Principle Investigator of Keeping the Nuclear Option Open, said:
“This is excellent news for the environment. The government have recognised that nuclear power has the potential to deliver substantial generating capacity while contributing little to CO2 emissions. Importantly, modern reactor designs are much more efficient in their use of nuclear fuel (than the existing UK fleet) which means significantly less nuclear waste per unit of electricity. What now needs to happen is for a number of these designs to undergo a strict pre-licensing process and then for the UK to choose the best one, or at most two, and stick to these. Let’s not return to the inefficient patchwork of bespoke designs we built in the past!”
Bernard Bulkin, Commissioner for Climate Change and Energy at the Sustainable Development Commission, the Government’s independent watchdog on sustainable development, said:
“The Government has come a long way on nuclear power. Thanks to the genuinely renewed consultation process, there’s a real opportunity for people to shape the future of nuclear power in the UK.
“We know that the Government is minded towards allowing new nuclear plants, but the question is: what conditions will people place on that decision? We’ll be watching to ensure the consultation process is true and transparent, and that the Government takes on board people’s views.
“The Government has also made serious progress with its plan to introduce carbon trading for supermarkets, hotels and large offices. The next challenge will be to ensure that the scheme is robust enough to deliver real carbon savings. We’d also like energy companies to be obliged to reduce the amount of power they sell to householders. Experience elsewhere has shown that this is one way to really drive energy efficiency.
“There’s still a huge gap between what’s planned now, and what’s needed to tackle climate change and energy security. We’re moving in the right direction – what matters is the speed with which we get there.”
David Kerr, Chairman of the Institution of Civil Engineers’ Energy Panel, said:
“Nuclear is needed as part of the UK’s energy mix. We urge the Government to encourage development of all low and zero carbon technologies such as the construction of third generation nuclear power stations to maintain existing nuclear capacity. The Government should engage in a much wider public consultation on nuclear than has happened in the past.
“It seems unlikely that a new nuclear station could be built and be operational in Britain before 2015. New nuclear build would therefore not contribute significantly to the 2020 emissions targets or cover on its own projected shortfalls in generation capacity.
“ICE supports all forms of renewable heat and electrical energy, in particular, offshore wind power, biomass, tidal barrages and tidal stream technology – each of which could make a significant contribution to energy supply. Construction of energy from waste stations, distributed around the country, to consume waste which cannot sensibly be recycled, should be an important part of the energy mix also.”
Paul Allen, Development Director, Centre for Alternative Technology, said:
“When including the full life cycle costs, nuclear is too expensive. UK nuclear decommissioning liabilities from the past 30 years have been estimated at £56 billion. This and the cost of safe transport and storage of waste must be taken into account in the cost paid for the power.
“It will also be hard to make a case why the UK is allowed nuclear technology, when others are considered too ‘unstable’ to be allowed it, yet must also meet their climate change targets. Renewable technologies can deliver, without an economic legacy or a foreign policy dilemma.”
John Loughhead, chair of the IET Energy Sector Panel, said:
“Decisions made now on energy supply will take 10-15 years to deliver results and a decisive long-term political commitment is needed to ensure this happens. There are three vital issues that need to be addressed urgently by the government. Motivate the public to use technology that is already available to reduce their energy consumption; to create supportive conditions for the development of more advanced technology; and to ensure that there are enough skilled people entering the energy industry at the right time to build new infrastructure and manage future energy sources.”
Philip Diamond, Associate Director, Education and Planning at the Institute of Physics, said:
“The Institute welcomes the government’s conclusion that nuclear energy has a key role to play in the UK’s future energy generating mix. Unless there is new nuclear build, the reliance on fossil fuel energy generation will go unabated. New nuclear plants are urgently required in order to maintain and improve the UK’s current diversity, security and environmental balance of electricity supply.”
Prof Richard Clegg, Director of The Dalton Nuclear Institute, Manchester University, said:
“This is a much awaited White Paper. The UK has been building up to an energy crunch due to the impending closure of nuclear and fossil fuel plants approaching the ends of their natural lives, as well as over-reliance on other countries for our energy imports. Very importantly, the White Paper faces up to some very challenging questions that have been avoided for long enough on where our future energy is going to come from. Its important to see that nuclear is back in the centre of the energy agenda, as the technology is our best option for low-carbon base load electricity generation. We’re also seeing nuclear generation appearing back on the map worldwide. The white paper proposes the best way forward based on a prudent mix of energy technologies covering fossil, nuclear and renewables, as well as re-emphasising the focus on minimizing energy usage. There are challenges ahead but the White Paper puts the UK on the right track. “
Brian Robinson, Head of Energy, Environment and Climate Change at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, said:
“This Government must produce a tangible framework from this document. It is down to them to deliver the results that the 2003 White Paper didn’t. We are very lucky to have the technologies for renewable energy on our doorstep and at the moment we are just scratching the surface, and literally using one to two per cent. Unless something radical comes out of this paper we will not be able to reach the 20% reduction in carbon emissions as enforced by the EU by 2020. It is appalling that we are able to tap into these engineering technologies to combat climate change and we are one of, if not the worst performing country in Europe to do so. Even France, with all its nuclear power stations, has a much higher renewable energy consumption than the UK. The 2003 White Paper (Energy) tried to please everyone but did nothing. We cannot afford for this to happen again and there must be a balanced portfolio of renewable energies in place, right now.”
Dr Susan Ion, Vice President, Royal Academy Of Engineering, said:
“The White Paper finally begins to grasp the importance of taking action to ensure the UK has access to secure energy supplies for the future and to ensure that climate change mitigation remains a priority. However the scale of the engineering challenge to deliver the required infrastructure is unprecedented and must be taken into account for both reliable, secure supply and reduced demand.
“Targets to date have been aspirational and not realistic. We need “MORE TRACTION and LESS SPIN” as the consultation plays out. Otherwise politicians in Westminster will think they can command solutions when we are decades off the pace in terms of engineering reality.”
Dr Anil Kumar, Director Education and Policy, The Engineering and Technology Board (ETB), said:
“We welcome the publication of the white paper; meeting our future energy needs in a sustainable and secure manner requires immediate action. However, we have concerns about the UK’s ability to deliver the range of skills required over the next generation, including the engineering and technology skills needed to decommission and build nuclear plants, often in remote areas of the country. If the UK fails to supply the necessary skills, other countries will – reaping the social and economic rewards. Meeting these skills requirements will take concerted and coordinated effort from Government, employers and education.”
Mr Andrew Furlong Director Of Policy at the Institution of Chemical Engineers, said:
“At present, British Energy operates eight ageing nuclear power stations and one (Sizewell B) fit for the 21st century. Eight new plants would help to maintain the 20% contribution made by British Energy to the National Grid. But it would do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions from their present level, nor would it increase our current 100% power generation capacity which needs an addition of at least 25 GW in less than 10 years. The only viable solution to balance the equation is Clean Coal with Carbon Capture and Storage, but the present lack of incentives could lead us only to an urgent review of the country’s contingency plan for equitable distributed power-cuts.”
Professor Ian Fells, Royal Academy of Engineering, said:
“At last the government is taking the Severn Barrage seriously. It could produce 5% of UK electricity, as much as wind and both reliably and predictably, it will be a vital contribution to our renewable electricity targets. There are 70 years of feasibility data to go on, time for action!
“We have to get under way now with new build nuclear if the lights are to stay on ten years from now and our carbon emissions are to reduce, new coal and gas stations will not do.”
Dr Jeremy Leggett, CEO, Solar Century and Charterhouse Fellow in Solar Energy at Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute, said:
“The conclusion about nuclear would be a bad strategic mistake if there was any danger of it being enacted. But it won’t be enacted, unless Government decides to ride roughshod over democracy and commit taxpayers money to underwrite the risks far into the future. It won’t be enacted, but it will divert much-need resources, and focus, away from the genuine survival technologies identified so clearly in the 2003 energy white paper: renewables and efficiency.”
Martin Pollock, Siemens Energy Services, said:
“Smarter metering is capable of providing a tremendous amount of information about individual household consumption patterns to consumers and to the wider industry. It will be interesting to see which parties have the strongest motivation to use this not only to curb growing national demand and unnecessary emissions but also to actually realise the savings in our energy bills.”
Bill Hamilton. Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, said:
“The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority continues to focus on delivering its core mission of the safe and cost-effective decommissioning and clean-up of the UK’s civil nuclear legacy. In the context of a possible new build programme, clearly we own sites that may be attractive to potential operators because of their locations and the skills that exist within those communities.
“We must wait to see the outcome of the Government’s consultation on new nuclear build before knowing if or how it affects NDA’s strategy going forward.”