---

Energy Bill

I am grateful to noble Lords for contributing and I shall be even more grateful when I have an answer to the bumblebee or whatever analogy made by the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin. First, I shall address the amendment. As the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, appreciates, inspectors will perform very important functions in relation to carbon dioxide storage sites, ensuring compliance with the relevant licence conditions and adherence to high standards of environmental protection. I therefore agree with him that the regime set up for inspectors in this chapter deserves our close attention. I shall briefly outline the provisions of Clause 31. One of the key areas covered by the regulatory framework in the Bill concerns the closure of carbon dioxide storage facilities. The purpose of the framework is to ensure that carbon dioxide is stored permanently in geological formations. We have already discussed some of the existing constraints on this matter. However, operators as commercial entities cannot be responsible for carbon dioxide storage facilities indefinitely due to the geological timescales involved, a factor that I am sure is recognised by all Members of the Committee. We are talking about very long time periods indeed. Clause 31 therefore provides the Secretary of State and, in relation to licences granted by them, Scottish Ministers, with the powers to make regulations specifying requirements for the termination of licences and the arrangements for the long-term stewardship of closed carbon dioxide stores. We expect licences to include provisions requiring the carbon dioxide stores to be monitored for a period of time after closure to ensure the safety and security of the relevant stores. During this time, the responsibility and liability for the store will remain with the licensee for a reasonable time after closure. Only when there is sufficient evidence to confirm that the stores are safe and secure would we expect to consider terminating a licence. If I understand the amendment correctly, it would include an express provision in this clause allowing inspectors to examine carbon dioxide stores following their closure. I do not believe that the amendment is necessary because there are already powers elsewhere in the Bill that would allow us to deliver the same objective. The noble Lord is concerned about the long-term security of the environment, and rightly so. First, requirements for inspection of carbon dioxide stores, both during the operational phase, when carbon dioxide is being injected, and during the monitoring phase, when the carbon dioxide store has been closed but the licence has not yet been terminated, could be included in the specific licence terms and conditions of any carbon dioxide storage facility. The power for the licensing authority to prescribe such, and other, conditions is already in Clause 20, which governs the terms and conditions of licences. Secondly, such a provision would duplicate powers in Clause 27, which would give the Secretary of State and Scottish Ministers the power to appoint inspectors and make regulations prescribing their powers and duties. That would allow the regulators to specify the inspectors' responsibilities in relation to both operational and closed carbon dioxide stores and in relation to any inspections that may need to be carried out prior to the termination of a licence. The noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, has clearly identified an area of concern. What is the nature of the powers of inspection? How do they relate to when carbon dioxide is being injected, and when the site has been closed but has not been rendered sufficiently safe and secure for the licence to be terminated? What happens after that? I assure the noble Lord that there are powers in the Bill that meet the anxieties reflected in the amendment. Let me deal with the question about the criteria for closure of a store, which was asked by the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley. We need to consult on those issues, and we intend to do so shortly. The criteria will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis. We do not have any experience in regulating the closure of such stores, for obvious reasons. Therefore, international experience and evidence will have to be relied on, at least in the first cases. However, the guiding principles will be clear, well known and, I hope, acceptable to the Committee; namely the polluter pays principle, the essential protection of the environment and the necessary protection of the interest of the taxpayer regarding these issues. We must consult on this. Noble Lords have raised anxieties about the issues, and we recognise that we are breaking new ground on them and that they are of profound importance. They relate to other issues regarding closure and safe storage, which we will debate later in the Bill. They are profoundly significant. In asking the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment, I also express gratitude that he has given us the opportunity to clarify that we have addressed the issues that he identified and that we will be consulting in due course on the crucial issue of the criteria.