Horwood on the Green Energy (Definition and Promotion) Bill (Twickenham & Richmond Liberal Democrats)

Horwood on the Green Energy (Definition and Promotion) Bill

June 27, 2009 10:33 AM

horwood • [Jun 25] Martin Horwood (Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat): IT is a pleasure to serve on the Committee with you in the Chair, Miss Begg, especially as you have recognised the progress of global warming in this building and allowed us to remove our jackets.

I congratulate the hon. Member for East Surrey on having got the Bill this far and for pragmatically not opposing the complete deletion of all the clauses in it. I am not sure what that does to increase openness and transparency to the public in our processes, but it is certainly a pragmatic and sensible move.

I will comment in due course on some of the losses that I think we may suffer as a result of changes to the Bill, but in the case of clause 1 we are not losing a great deal. The clause says that "small-scale low-carbon local sources" means "renewable sources of a capacity not exceeding 10 megawatts, the energy from which is consumed within a 30 mile radius of the source of generation".

That definition of green energy is being lost in the process that we are now being asked to accept. The shift from 10 MW down to 5 will perhaps make the Bill consistent with other legislation and is, in any case, possibly a sensible measure, as 10 MW is a pretty big figure when it comes to wind turbines.

We have suggested a different definition. Amendment 2 contains the phrase: "the generation of electricity or heat from renewable or low-carbon sources by the use of any equipment, the capacity of which to generate electricity or heat does not exceed the capacity specified in subsection (2A)".

That definition is quite loose. There is a risk in redefining green energy as anything that might be low-carbon. For example, on a larger scale it opens the door to nuclear being defined as "green", which we Liberal Democrats would obviously dispute. It is useful to have these tighter definitions, including the definition of green energy as "small-scale" and "low-carbon".

Peter Ainsworth (East Surrey, Conservative): The hon. Gentleman has made the point before himself, but I must remind him that, as yet, no form of nuclear energy is "small-scale".

• Martin Horwood: The record will show that I was careful to say that, on a larger scale, such a definition could lead to greenwashing, but who knows? There may be other forms of smaller-scale generation that, on closer examination, turn out not to be quite as green as they first seem, and which may create pollutants. However, we are happy to proceed on a pragmatic basis and to accept the Government's amendment.

. . Charles Hendry (Wealden, Conservative) : My hon. Friend has never been a kamikaze; he has been a leader of men. I agree with the Minister that her phrasing is a better definition, and we are happy to support her on that basis.

Question put and negatived. Clause 1 accordingly disagreed to.

Richmond upon Thames Liberal Democrats: