黑洞社区

There can be no doubting the ambition of the plan. The 2008 Climate Change Act put the UK鈥檚 aims for reducing carbon emissions on a statutory footing and made it mandatory for the country to cut emissions by 80% by 2050 (based on 1990 levels) and, on the way, by 26%-32% by 2020. According to the government at the time, passing this act made the UK the first country in the world to set such long-term and ambitious carbon reduction targets, and the first to create a legally binding framework for this.

Meeting those targets, however, requires a revolution in the way the UK generates its energy: by 2025 almost all energy will have to come from renewable sources, including nuclear. That is a huge challenge.

Putting nuclear to one side, the latest Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) figures show that in 2011 just 9.4% of UK electricity came from renewable sources, although that was already up on 2009, when just 6.7% of electricity was renewable. 鈥淔undamentally changing the way energy is used in this country is a massive task,鈥� says Adam Mactavish, sustainability director at Sweett Group. 鈥淎lthough it鈥檚 a long way off, 2050 will come around very quickly when you think about the scale of change that is needed.鈥�

Steps have been taken in the right direction, and the government has put in place a series of measures aimed at increasing green energy production. Perhaps best known is the Green Investment Bank, which launched last year with an initial capitalisation of 拢3bn. It has been charged with investing in green projects, either those concerned with green energy production or with energy saving measures. The UK Guarantees scheme, which provides a government guarantee for private sector loans to qualifying projects, is also open to bids from green energy infrastructure projects.

And perhaps most significantly, at the end of November last year DECC published its long-awaited Energy Bill, which is designed to create a market where low-carbon energy can compete with fossil fuel derived electricity. In order to do this, the bill introduces the principle of long-term, fixed-price contracts for low-carbon energy production, with a so-called 鈥渟trike price鈥�: the market price at which low-carbon energy producers would receive a subsidy from the taxpayer. This, the thinking goes, will create an irresistible investment opportunity. Construction risk aside, minimum returns on investment in energy generation will be in effect guaranteed by the government.

However, while there is great support in industry for government policy, many are frustrated that it has not yet prompted into the huge uplift in low-carbon energy infrastructure projects that is needed.

鈥淚 would say that the UK has the most comprehensive energy policy of any government in the world at the moment,鈥� says Bill Hocking, executive vice president of contractor Skanska UK. 鈥淚 believe that. What it鈥檚 less good at doing is translating it into action.鈥�

What we want

With this in mind, 黑洞社区 included several aims for energy infrastructure when we launched our Green for Growth campaign at the beginning of the year.

Specifically, the campaign is calling on the government to: provide greater clarity on the detail of its intentions, including strike prices for the various forms of renewable energy production; consider preferential treatment for green energy projects under its UK Guarantees scheme; and drop its requirement for public debt to be falling before the Green Investment Bank can borrow money.

The UK has the most comprehensive energy policy of any government in the world at the moment. What it鈥檚 less good at is translating that into action

Bill Hocking, Skanska UK

As the response to our campaign illustrates, there is a great deal of support for these proposals. From internationally renowned architecture practices such as Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners to the UK鈥檚 leading business lobby group the Confederation for British Industry, companies, organisations and individuals from across the construction industry and beyond have backed our campaign鈥檚 aims.

Indeed, some would like the campaign to be bolder still. For instance, Mark Stewart, head of UK energy at consultancy EC Harris, proposes that the UK Guarantees scheme should be reconfigured to support primarily green infrastructure projects. 鈥淭he word 鈥榩referential鈥� isn鈥檛 enough,鈥� he says. 鈥淭here should be priority treatment for green infrastructure schemes.鈥�

黑洞社区鈥檚 proposal that the Green Investment Bank be able to leverage its funds has also received a great deal of backing from the sector. However, some also believe that the bank needs to use its initial 拢3bn to invest as a matter of urgency. Since the bank became fully operational in October 2012 - when it was granted State Aid approval by the European Commission to make investments on commercial terms - it has invested in just two projects: the construction of an anaerobic digestion plant in Teesside and the retrofit of manufacturer Kingspan鈥檚 industrial facilities.

鈥淭he Green Investment Bank is the biggest bottleneck in the financial world,鈥� says Stewart. 鈥淭here is a crying need for that money to be unlocked. We鈥檙e working on 10 schemes at the moment that are viable and just need a kickstart. We鈥檙e talking about tens of millions, not hundreds.鈥�

However, perhaps the most urgent action that the industry needs from the government is for it to set a strike price for renewable energy developments. Presuming that the price is set at a level that is sufficiently attractive to investors, the move could unlock huge numbers of projects that at present are unable to attract sufficient finance. 鈥淚t鈥檚 no secret that we鈥檝e all been waiting for the strike prices to be released, because it releases a huge tranche of investment and not much is going to happen until then,鈥� says Skanska鈥檚 Hocking. 鈥淚t鈥檚 quite frustrating in that there is a huge pipeline of opportunity, but it鈥檚 all sat waiting for a go/no-go predicated on an investment case driven by the strike price.鈥�

In addition to setting a strike price that will provide value to the taxpayer and be tempting to investors, some in the industry believe the coalition has a job to do in convincing the market it is truly committed to renewable energy in the long term.

Recent changes to government policy haven鈥檛 helped. For instance, the move announced in October 2011 to halve the feed-in tariff for solar power is widely quoted as having damaged investor confidence. 鈥淭he government has a track record with launching initiatives and then changing them halfway through,鈥� says Sweett sustainability project director Richard Quartermaine. 鈥淭ariff levels got set incredibly high and then got slashed. So, any investment the solar industry made, they鈥檝e had their fingers burned. I think it鈥檚 had a widespread impact, from investors to manufacturers.鈥�

The government鈥檚 public statements on the issue have also done a great deal of damage. Osborne鈥檚 2011 Tory party conference speech is a case in point. In it, the chancellor said that the UK is not 鈥済oing to save the planet by putting our country out of business鈥�, adding: 鈥淲e鈥檙e going to cut our carbon emissions no slower but also no faster than our fellow countries in Europe.鈥� The comments were widely seen as undermining confidence that the coalition means business on the green agenda.

鈥淭he big issue for infrastructure investment is confidence,鈥� says EC Harris鈥� Stewart. 鈥淭he key statement from government that kicked confidence was when George Osborne said that we will go no slower but no quicker than our European neighbours. What the government is doing with its lack [of vocal support for the green agenda] is eroding confidence day by day.鈥�

Tariff levels get set incredibly high and then get slashed. So, any investment the solar industry made they鈥檝e had their finger burnt

Richard Quartermaine, Sweett Group

However, despite his strong criticism for the government鈥檚 apparent lack of urgency on renewable energy, Stewart says that the situation could be rectified relatively simply. 鈥淭he position is recoverable. The industry is ready and geared up,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he government should come out with a revised, exciting timeline, then the confidence will come back from all parties.鈥�

Indeed, some parts of the industry at least are chomping at the bit. 鈥淚 think that the will is there and that the industry will respond magnificently to what is an opportunity, at the end of the day. It鈥檚 a business opportunity and an opportunity to do the right thing,鈥� says Skanska鈥檚 Hocking. 鈥淲e鈥檝e spent a lot of time and a lot of money preparing for these big, long-term infrastructure opportunities. Now we want to get on and build some of them.鈥�