Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Martin Horwood (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Friday, 12 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill.


Climate Change and SustainableEnergy Bill

I am not sure whether it does. The hon. Lady has drawn attention to the very clause that originally contained the renewable heat obligations—a concrete measure that would have provided the market with a specific stimulus. Clause 21 is a limp alternative to that provision, but its inclusion is nevertheless welcome. I was comparing the advantages of microgeneration with the disadvantages of nuclear power, and re-examining the need to subsidise nuclear power. The new Finnish nuclear power station is not an exampleof clean green technology. It may requireenormous guarantees from the Finnish Government on the funding of the power station’s eventual decommissioning and long-term waste disposal. The Energy Policy Act was introduced in the USA last year. It provided some $14 billion of subsidies to the nuclear industry. A microgeneration-led approach would not require such subsidies. One of the welcome aspects of the Bill is that it uses imaginative incentives and the easing of red tape to encourage renewable generation and microgeneration without large-scale public subsidy. That will encourage private sector enterprises such as Solar Smart in my constituency, which offers a pioneering integrated approach to solar-thermal power. The approach involves the integration of solar panels into the supply of not only hot water, but domestic heating, which is an innovation. That is an example of how the microgeneration industry will reveal more potential than we now realise, if it is stimulated, which will enable a safer and more efficient energy supply industry. I recently engaged in a debate with the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) in which he suggested that energy supplies, green issues and tackling climate change were a gentle, quality of life issue. As other hon. Members have pointed out, we must remember that climate change is a real threat to not only our quality of life but to the existence of our economy and, in many cases, to our society as we know it. I have tried to find some sources to persuade even the sceptics on the Conservative Back Benches of the urgency of this matter.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c630-1 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Accountability Costs Combined heat and power Climate change Carbon dioxide Biofuels Housing Environment protection Energy Electricity generation Fuel poverty Insulation Local government Planning permission Pollution Renewable energy Wind power Solar power
Legislation
Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk