Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Teverson (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Energy Bill [HL].


Energy Bill [HL]

I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate. I should like to follow through on a couple of questions. The noble Lord, Lord Oxburgh, was talking about generation that was purely electricity or purely heat. If there is a demand for hot water, whether it be for market gardening or district heating, the most energy-efficient thing to do would be to use as much of it as you could for that purpose. This is primarily for electricity generation although you could theoretically have one or the other. In terms of depletion, as I understand it—the noble Lord, Lord Oxburgh, knows about it far better than I do—that is a conservative estimate. It could be argued that there should be no depletion over time on very deep exploration; there is a chance for rejuvenation. The industry is rightly conservative regarding those estimates because ultimately the earth is being heated from the core upwards. Cornwall and Devon are particularly good in this respect because there is a layer of limestone over granite, which makes it a particularly good cocktail. I have probably got that slightly wrong. I see from the noble Lord, Lord Oxburgh, that I have. That is what someone from the industry told me, but there we are. It is not just Devon and Cornwall—this relates to other areas as well. On remuneration, the two ROCs regime is already in place, as the Minister said. The industry would like to look at the renewable heat initiative in terms of the hot water that comes out. That is probably an area of future discussion. I am very encouraged by the Minister. I know that these things are not necessarily easy to achieve. Other countries, particularly in Europe, have these systems in place and they are the sine qua non. Without them, you will not get development of this technology. That is why it is important to get on with it. I would have thought that setting up a licensing regime from fresh would be a civil servant’s heaven—that there would probably be people queueing up in DECC to invent the British geothermal licensing system. That clearly has a cost in people power, but there is no ongoing cost to the department afterwards. Indeed, I hope that in due course revenues will come in from this technology, as in oil or whatever. I am encouraged by the Minister’s remarks. I am sure that this will be a point of discussion between now and Report, and on that basis I am pleased to withdraw my amendment. Amendment 35 withdrawn. Clause 98 agreed. Amendment 36 Moved by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c43GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Conservation Housing Licensing Energy Heating Exploration Prices Offshore industry National park authorities Renewable energy Taxation Wind power Broads Authority Coal Authority Geothermal power
Legislation
Energy Bill (HL) 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk