---

Draft National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (EN-2)

I agree with the Minister that most of us will not know what to do with ourselves next week since we have been closeted on these statements for an extensive period of time. Indeed, the technology-specific NPSs we are considering today are a bit skeletal and, for the most part, comparatively unobjectionable because most of the issues of principle that we are concerned about are set out in the overarching NPS, EN-1. I do not propose to go through all the arguments I raised when we debated that policy statement, but many of them become relevant as we consider each of these NPSs in turn, not the least how low carbon generation fuel mix will be achieved and how greater energy efficiency will be dealt with in practice, and whether each of these statements should be putting greater weight on steering major development away from designated areas. Many of these issues were raised in the debate on the overarching NPS. I turn to the technology-specific NPSs and shall deal first with the one covering fossil fuel electricity generation. It expounds the view that carbon capture readiness and carbon capture and storage are the answer to a maiden’s prayer as far as fossil fuel generation is concerned. It is interesting to note that carbon capture and storage is a bit like a religion rather than a technology. It is something we all want to believe in, but in our heart of hearts we are not convinced that it exists. The big question is, will it work on the large scale that will be required? We have to believe in it in the short term because there is very little else that would mitigate that element of carbon, and hope that, since the current price of carbon does nothing to promote a commercial approach to carbon capture and storage, the Government will continue to press for public investment in the pilots. That is the only way in which we can test whether it will work on a large scale. I commend the fact that the electricity networks infrastructure NPS recognises the need to adapt to the impacts of climate change. We all remember how close to the edge we got when the major switching station in Gloucestershire was threatened by flooding in 2007, but a little known "factette" is the high proportion of electricity substations that are sited in the flood plain. Therefore, we need to ensure that those climate change threats are taken account of when creating new electricity networks infrastructure. I urge the Minister to go a step further than the planning statement. We need strategic planning for electricity networks to ensure that they avoid designated areas and minimise environmental impacts. There is a particular need for careful planning and clear guidance for the landfill of offshore cabling. Perhaps we should ask the Minister to rename this NPS as it does not cover renewable energy infrastructure, but rather biomass and wind only. A number of renewable technologies fall into the category mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, of a black hole. But on the "renewables" NPS, I welcome the fact that there is a commitment—particularly as regards wind power—to take the marine policy statement into account. Noble Lords who recall the debates that we had on the Marine Bill will know that that has to be taken very seriously. The NPS should require the IPC, when looking at proposals, to consider the sustainability of biomass feedstocks. I am not confident that the sustainability standards in the renewables obligation certificate process that the NPS suggests are robust enough. I apologise to the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, if I whetted his appetite prematurely as regards the Severn barrage, but I want to touch briefly on the elephant in the room as far as the renewables statement is concerned; that is, tidal and wave power. I was interested to hear the Minister say that they were not included because they are not yet commercially viable. That is interesting since carbon capture and storage is included though it is not yet commercially viable. There seems to be a small frisson of difference there.