Like so many important environmental issues, renewable energy has degenerated into a divisive and polarised debate. The wind and solar power lobbies naturally enough highlight claimed benefits – an inexhaustible supply of ‘free’ energy, reduced reliance on imported gas, etc – while critics point out problems such as intermittency and need for backup generating capacity. Taken individually, both positive and negative points are valid, which can make it very difficult for any uninvolved observers to make a rational decision on where they stand. Seeing the whole picture is easier said than done.
Naturally enough, when asked if they support greater use of ‘green’ energy, the majority of people tend to say yes. But if they are faced with the possibility of a wind farm being erected nearby, or are told that renewable energy is, at least for the time being, expensive energy, opinions tend to change. Even vociferous supporters accept that neither wind turbines nor the far more expensive solar panels can be installed or run without public subsidy.
The difference is that they consider this a price worth paying to encourage development of technologies which will, they suggest, be both mainstream and economically viable in the foreseeable future. And behind all this, the primary driver is the attempt to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and mitigate climate change. If this can be achieved, the reasoning goes, then the extra costs of renewable energy would have been a good investment (but see Fuelling Prosperity for more on this issue).
Generally, governments have gone along with this reasoning and have given both verbal and financial support to renewable energy projects. Indeed, they can claim quite legitimately that agreed EU targets oblige them to do so. They also point out, quite correctly, that the major component of rising electricity prices has been the rising cost of fuel, primarily gas, and that the effect of artificially-high feed in tariffs (FITs) for wind and solar power adds a much smaller cost to utility bills.
This is perfectly correct, if rather misleading, since renewable energy makes up just a small fraction of total consumption (at least in the UK). As the use of renewables increases, so does the impact on power bills, as consumers in Germany and Denmark have already discovered.
The best way to come to sound conclusions on the economic impact of renewable energy is to model the entire generating system for a range of different percentages of wind, solar and conventional capacity, a highly complex process which has to take into account additional transmission lines, maintaining backup capacity (so-called spinning reserve) and various engineering changes to allow the grid to cope with large fluctuations of supply over a short period of time. This would also allow a reasonable estimate of actual emissions savings.
In the absence of this, we are left with the competing voices of the renewables lobby and the sceptics, the latter often appearing in the form of local interest groups coming together to fight wind farm planning applications. Recently, the debate in the UK has changed to the extent that newspapers are increasingly carrying stories about the downside of renewables as well as their supposed benefits. But, more importantly and surprisingly, there are signs of the government itself having a change of heart.
The Conservative party, senior partners in the present Coalition government, is well known to be split on the question of renewables. For example, over 100 of their MPs (and a handful from other parties) wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister calling for a rethink on on-shore wind farms (Wind farm subsidy cut urged by MPs). Such a show of backbench opposition was hardly unprecedented, and had not had any effect on policy per se. However, in the recent government reshuffle, one highly significant change was the appointment of Owen Paterson as Secretary of State for the Environment, widely seen as a sceptic on wind farms.
It is normal for new ministers to toe the government line in contradiction to their known beliefs, this being a prerequisite for holding office. However, that does not mean they have to remain silent if policy is being formulated or they believe it is being applied wrongly. In Mr Paterson’s case, only weeks after being appointed, he gave a talk at the recently Tory party conference attacking the current process for subsidising wind farms (see ‘Soviet-style’ wind farm subsidies to face the axe).
This would have been popular with many backbenchers and, to some extent, it is the kind of opinion which is heard at side events during party conferences. It may or may not have had the tacit approval of other senior Conservatives. But we should not forget that it was at last year’s conference that George Osborne appeared to be reining in the green ambitions in a major speech in plenary session. He later supported greater cuts to FITs than the government in fact introduced.
There are further signs that a shake-up of the subsidy regime may be in the offing. Climate change minister Greg Barker has fired warning shots across the bows of the renewable energy lobby with a promise that the government would take a hard look at subsidies in an attempt to bring down energy bills. John Hayes, newly appointed Energy Minister (replacing Charles Hendry) is also no fan of wind farms; he told BBC News in 2009 "Renewable energy needs to pass the twin tests of environmental and economic sustainability and wind power fails on both counts."
But this is not the whole picture; we should remember that both Barker and Hayes are junior ministers under Lib Dem Ed Davey, who continues as Energy Secretary. He will be in direct charge of renewables policy, and we can expect to see continuing tensions within the Department of Energy and Climate Change.
These appointments do not yet mean a real change of government policy, but do signal that critics of renewables are gaining the upper hand in the Tory party. Whether this becomes an issue at the next election remains to be seen, but the prospect of a mainstream European political party campaigning on the issue is a fascinating one. And if it happens in one member state, it could break the current political consensus across the EU. It is quite possible that we are seeing the beginning of the end for the current expansion of wind farms.
The Scientific Alliance
St John’s Innovation Centre
Cowley Road
Cambridge CB4 0WS