The official site of the Prime Minister's Office

19 November 2007

Environment Secretary Hilary Benn answered questions on climate change, coal, nuclear, Kyoto and biofuels in today’s webchat.

He also tackled flood defences and aviation in the hour-long session.

• Prime Minister calls for global action on climate change
• Webchat archive

Read the full transcript

Moderator says: Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, will be here to answer your questions on climate change and floods on 19 November at 17:00 GMT.

Moderator says: The Minister is a few minutes late. We’ll be starting shortly.

Hilary says: Hello. Sorry to be a bit late but I have been listening to the PM make his speech and then went to the Oval for a conference on the future of farming. Right, who’s first ?

Mrs Karen Hurley: If the Government is committed to tackling climate change and moving to renewable energy. Why have the grants for renewable energy alternatives reduced so significantly?
Will there be more help or people available who want to use greener alternatives?

Hilary replies: Actually there is a lot of help for householders through the Energy Efficiency Commitment; eg assistance with low energy lightbulbs, loft and cavity wall insulation, etc. Today we have been talking about the new Green Homes Service which will be available from April. Run by the Energy Savings Trust it will offer advice to householders.  On renewable energy sources, perhaps we’ll come to that with another question.

anthony watts: Why does the Government not kick start a real renewable energy revolution by seriously subsidising solar, wind and ground source heat pumps for both private homes and business. Surely such a move would set the example for the rest of Europe and clearly show the Governments committment to this most important of causes.

Hilary replies: We have a long way to go but a recent survey by Ernst and Young said that the UK was actually the second best country after the USA when it comes to being an attrative location for investing in renewables. I have a refurbishment of an old building in my constituency where they are using water from an underground acquifer to heat the homes they will be providing. It shows what is possible. And the new obligation on energy companies that we have announced today will provide incentives for some domestic microgeneration.

• Read the Ernst and Young survey (pdf, 444kbs)

Charlie.Winder: If this government is committed to climate change issues why has the roll out of hips not been completed as yet so that we are doing more Energy Performance Certificates on the whole of the housing market so that we reduce carbon inefficiencies in homes

Hilary replies: Because we are phasing them in, Charlie. And the new Green Homes Service I was talking about a moment ago will contact people selling homes that get low ratings on their EPCs to offer advice on how it can be improved.

Beth Hewis: How is the government encouraging the production of renewable energy? We have had 2 out of 3 wind farm applications rejected here in Nottingham.

Hilary replies: Overall, the picture is better than in the case you obviously know about !  For big infrastructure projects we are proposing to change the planning system. But ultimately, I think it comes down to two things. One is recognising that all forms of energy generation involve some ‘cost’. The other is how can we find a way of giving local communities more of a stake in wind power - eg its capacity to generate revenue.

Matt Phillips: Hello Hilary. Burning coal is the single biggest reason for climate change historically with all the consequences we know about for the world’s poorest. The resurgence in coal in the UK (and other countries) is also the reason why the UK is struggling on climate change targets. Don’t you think the government should halt the planned 10.6GW of new coal plants in the UK and instead adopt an emissions standard for power plants such as that adopted in California - this would stimulate the market to build renewables instead?

Hilary replies: What we urgently need to do - not just for the UK but for the rest of the world - is to develop carbon capture and storage technology. The Prime Minister talked today about a time when it should be made mandatory in some form for all new British fossil fuel plants.

BRYAN NORRIS: With 7 out of 16 nuclear reactors in this country offline for the foreseable future,why does our government see nuclear power as a reliable source of power?.

Hilary replies: We are currently consulting on whether nuclear should be part of our energy supply for the future. What we need is a balanced energy supply and a secure one; anyone fancy being dependent on someone else who has their hand on the gas supply tap? The other point I would make is that climate change is forcing us to think about a lot of things afresh, and we need all the sources of no-carbon and low-carbon energy supply we can get. 

• More on nuclear power

Diane Porter: How will the government tackle the cost, including the cost to future generations, of nuclear waste if it goes ahead with building nuclear power stations as part of its strategy to reduce carbon emissions?

Hilary replies: It would be for the proposers of any nuclear power stations to cover this cost primarily. And as the price of carbon rises - and we need there to be a strong carbon market - then the economics of a number of things is going to change.

Louise: I welcome the climate change bill, but think it doesn’t go far enough. When the science already tells us the UK must reduce carbon emissions by about 90% by 2050 to play its fair share in averting global warming of 2 degrees or more, why does the climate change bill not set more ambitious long-term targets? And why, given that we know this already and many government reports have already shown this, do we need to wait til 2009 for the Committee on Climate Change to revise the 60% target set out in the current bill?

Hilary replies: Louise, have you seen what the Prime Minister said today about the UK’s 2050 target ?

Beth Hewis: Environmental groups have been talking about climate change for years. Why is it now that we are setting targets? What happened to our Kyoto targets?

Hilary replies: We are meeting them Beth. Indeed, we will do nearly twice what we signed up to do under Kyoto. The problem with Kyoto is that it only covered some countries and the reductions on CO2 and GHGs it will deliver is way too small for the scale of the problem we face. That’s why we need a new international agreement!

Guido: What progress will be made at the forthcoming Bali Conference for rewarding ‘avoided deforestation’?

Hilary replies: I can’t say yet, Guido. But it’s on the list of things we want the negotiations to cover. The most important thing is to change the incentives. At the moment developing countries may feel that their best option is to cut down their forests and raise finance from doing so. If we get the right deal, then perhaps countries will gain money from not cutting down these precious sinks. Part of the UK’s Environmental Transformation Fund is going to be used to help avoid deforestation.  

Alex Jones: What will the UK government do if the commitment of the US to reducing CO2 emissions in Bali is weak? Time is clearly running out for us to take action. Will the UK government put strong and significant pressure on the US?

Hilary replies: Every country has to play its part, and climate change has been an issue on which the UK Government has taken a very different view from the administration in the USA. But things are beginning to change in the States. Look at California and the East Coast states. And look at the Major Emitters Conference that the administration called. The science is now very clear!

Laura Trevelyan: Will the UK government follow up on their commitment to alleviating poverty by ensuring that the agreement that comes out of the UN’s climate change conference in Bali must include a provision for providing assistance for poor countries to develop in ways that will limit carbon emissions?

Hilary replies: Yes, Laura. First by increasing our overseas aid budget - which will rise still further over the next few years on the way to achieving the UN 0.7% target by 2013. Secondly, through the Environmental Transformation Fund I mentioned earlier. Third through the World Bank and things like the Clean Energy Investment Framework - a bit of a mouthful but all about helping developing countries to invest in a low carbon future. 

Sarah Spinney: The poorest are suffering the affects of climate change first and worst. When you go to the UN’s climate change conference in Bali, will you call for much needed compensation for poor countries for the damage already caused by climate change?

Hilary replies: Sarah, if you have a look at the answer I just gave to Laura’s question, then you can see some of what we are doing. But a lot of money could potentially come from carbon markets - that’s why we are so strongly in favour of binding emissions reduction commitments. Without that you don’t get a carbon market….

B Eggertson: What do you say to countries that prefer intensity targets over hard caps?

Hilary replies: They are worth doing, but they do not on their own deal with the problem because you can use your energy more efficiently and still end up increasing emissions.

Sam Mackay: Can you tell us a little about your views on the role of biofuels in reducing the UK’s carbon emissions? I was pleased to hear the Prime Minister say that his government will not support an increase in biofuels before an effective sustainability standard is in place, but it is not clear what this means.

Hilary replies: Thanks, Sam. We have to develop the standard and the issue is this. Biofuels that are worse than what they replace, or which lead to massive deforestation are not much good - to put it mildly! So we need facts and information to enable us all to judge their overall environmental benefit. We will be pressing hard in Europe for these to be drawn up as soon as possible.

mary locke: I wish that more councils would encourage recycling. Can the Government make it more of an incentive for companies to recycle. There are so many products that can be recycled glass, boxes, clothes batteries even I hear cooking oil. How about community compost heaps for alotments that would also reduce landfill useage.

Hilary replies: Me too, Mary.  We will be giving more support to councils to develop their recycling facilities and we have set them some tough targets. Although we have quadrupled domestic recycling in the last decade, we have a long way to go. Community compost heaps sounds good, but those of us with gardens can compost too. I empty mine once a year - smelly but very good for the garden…

Nikki Packham: Why is the Government insisting on increasing air passenger numbers by more than 200%and still claiming to be doing everything it can to tackle global warming? The two cannot be compatible.

Hilary replies: The Government isn’t insisting on anything. When did you last have someone from the Government knocking on your door to tell you to get on a plane? It’s people who choose to get on planes. The right thing to do is to include aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme so that it plays its part in reducing emissions.

Angela Kidner: How does the government reconcile the acknowledged need to make drastic cuts in carbon emissions with the go-ahead for further expansion of Heathrow Airport?

Hilary replies: By making sure that aviation contributes to reducing emissions across the economy as a whole - see my answer to Nikki. The UK is at the forefront of countries pressing for aviation to be included in the ETS - then any increase in emissions will involve the industry having to pay for corresponding reductions elsewhere. What matters is reaching the target overall.

Andrew Kelly: Why is it that during the recent tidal surge, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft were said to be particularly at risk of flooding, notwithstanding their flood defences?
Given that these occurrences can be expected more frequently, what is being done to eliminate the exposure of these communities to future such flood risk?

Hilary replies: Because it was the highest tide - a combination of the surge and high tides - at Great Yarmouth since the great flood of 1953. However, a lot has been invested in flood defence since that disaster, which claimed over 300 lives in the UK and 2000 in Holland, and the defences held. But it was a close run thing.

What are we doing ? We are investing a lot more in flood defence, Andrew. Where do you live by the way ?

Nick Lester: What assurances can you give that flooding cash in Gloucestershire will not be affected by proposed moves to cut Defra spending?

How do you respond to the call by the LGA to bring forward extra funding to tackle flooding or risk a repeat of the devastation seen over the summer?

Hilary replies: A categorical assurance! Flood defence spending will rise from £600m this year to £650m next year, £750m the year after and £800m in 2010/11. A lot more money to spend - and timed to allow the Environment Agency to work up schemes. 

David Lidiard: What defences will there be built againt flooding. Why are homes being built in flood areas.

Hilary replies: See my previous answer David. On building on flood plains - and I am answering these questions from a flood plain (Downing Street) - we have tightened the planning guidance, given the Environment Agency the right to be consulted and ministers have the right to call in applications. But councils have to take the decisions and be responsible.

Nige34: Why won’t you, as a government accept that global warming is a natural occurence that happens every few thousand years and has NOTHING to do with the actions of man, instead of peddling what we all see as tax-raising propoganda?

Hilary replies: We have better things to do with our time Nige34. I am not a scientist but I listen to what they are saying. If you think you know better, so be it. But when we are warned about a risk then government has a duty to take it seriously.

• Read about the challenge of climate change

Allan McCall: Carbon Trading causes large amounts of money to be transferred between different sectors of the economy, causing some big winners (power companies) and big losers (customers). Would not a carbon tax be more equitable?

Hilary replies: Not really, as presumably business would pass on the cost to customers.

Stephen Pennells: Why is HMG still dragging its feet over raising the target for “Carbon cutting” to 80% from the proposal 60% in the draft bill. Since that the IPCC has reported again in dire terms that 80% or more is NECESSARY- so why continue with an inadequate level? Deferring raising it to 80% until advised at some dim and distant time in the future is wasting time which we don’t have. How will you explain this to your grandchildren?

Hilary replies: Have a look at what the PM said today. The Climate Change Committee will be asked to look at whether our domestic target should be tightened up to 80% and it will do that next year and not some dim and distant time in the future, Stephen.

Michael Kenward: Way back when your dad was responsible for energy, the UK funded a lot of energy R&D. No longer. How will we fund demonstration projects of, for example, carbon capture?

• Read about the challenge of climate change

Hilary replies: Not so, Michael. We are funding a pilot project on Carbon capture and storage!

Mary Talbot-Rosevear: Does the Government acknowledge that farmers have a significant contribution to make to controlling climate change?

Hilary replies: Yes, Mary, I do. Agriculture accounts for 7% of our emissions in the UK - about the same as aviation. As it so happens, I spent part of today at a conference talking about this with representatives of the industry. There are things that can be done.

Mary Ransome: In your opinion, what is the biggest block to achieving significant action on climate change in the UK?

Hilary replies: I think, Mary, whether we can find the will to do today what we know needs to be done for a better tomorrow. I am an optimist, though. Human beings have a great instinct for survival and an ability to change and adapt to the natural environment. We need both these qualities in abundance now more than ever.

Since this is my last reply, thanks everyone for taking part. And keep it up!

Moderator says: That’s all we have time for today - thanks for all your questions.

David Miliband will be here on Friday 30th November from 1345 GMT in our next webchat.

Â

Tags: Hilary Benn, webchat

Share this:

delicious

digg

facebook