Share
Jason Ford
A report from the Energy and Climate Change Committee states that low carbon technologies will create jobs and reduce CO2 emissions.
Green shoots
However, the ’Low carbon technologies in a green economy’ report warns that the government must act faster if the UK is to enjoy the economic benefits of the green economy.
The report says that to date there has been slow progress with the move towards a green economy and concludes that whilst development of many such technologies will require significant support from both the public and private sector, they have the potential to create jobs.
The Environmental Industries Commission (EIC) estimates the global environmental marketplace to be worth over £3.2tn.
NESTA believes that by 2013 the green economy is forecast to grow annually by seven per cent, with a UK market of £46bn; creating a million jobs.
By 2015, the ECCC says the sector could grow by 44 per cent to over 1.27 million jobs.
Last week’s announcement from the chancellor of the creation of a Green Investment Bank - mandated to invest approximately £2bn of public and private sector capital in the low-carbon sector - received a cautious welcome.
The EIC stated that by limiting the bank’s mandate to the low carbon sector, the government risks forfeiting investment opportunities that exist across the whole of the environmental sector.
The EIC further warns that unless urgent action is taken to secure other, equally important, environmental and sustainability investment opportunities for British business, it is likely the transition to a low carbon, resource efficient economy will take place with technologies supplied from countries including Germany, the USA, Japan and South Korea.
Figures from NESTA show that the USA is blazing a green-tech trail. Last year’s US stimulus package included $50bn for energy programmes, much of it focused on energy efficiency and renewable energy, and $20bn in tax incentives for renewable energy and efficiency.
According to NESTA, the effects of not investing in green technology will cost the UK £28bn in lost revenue.
The automotive industry is bracing itself for the end of the government’s vehicle scrappage scheme, which is due to end on March 31.
The scheme was announced by chancellor Alistair Darling in his Budget statement in April 2009 and commenced on 18 May to help the UK car industry stimulate demand during the economic downturn.
The funding for the scheme was increased by £100m in September 2009. Last month, the end of the scheme was extended by a month to the end of March from end of February.
The SMMT say the Scrappage Incentive Scheme accounted for a 30 per cent rise in sales against expectations.
The knock-on effects of the end of the scheme are already being felt by Toyota which is today suspending production at its Burnaston plant in Derbyshire for two weeks.
The company employs around 3,500 people at the plant, which makes the Auris and Avensis models. The company has said that the stoppage is to allow supply to align with demand following the end of car scrappage schemes across Europe and to prepare the production line for when the Auris Hybrid goes into production later this year.
Readers' comments (8)
Malcolm Watkinson | 29 Mar 2010 1:13 pm
Certainly there is huge potential in low carbon technology and the UK government has done far too little to encourage it. Sending the wrong signals by allowing the Vestas turbine blade factory on the Isle of Wight to close was not helpful. China has the bulk of solar panel manufacture and as far as I know we have no major wind turbine manufacturer in the UK. How about a car manufacture turning into a turbine manufacturer? That seems a good idea.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alan Fielding | 29 Mar 2010 2:29 pm
I'll tell you what worries me; when we have all gone "green" and are using so little energy to survive, how will the government generate revenue? A tax on electric cars perhaps, or on whose energy saving gadgetry occupies the most room?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris F | 29 Mar 2010 2:55 pm
There is far too much hype and debate about developing Green energy and not nearly enough consideration given to why we need energy and how and when we use it. Our peak demand for energy is when its cold and dark, when solar is no use at all. The wind blows when the wind will which isn't much use either in an industrial economy with customer deadlines. The only natural energy source which is both predictable and reliable in the UK are the tides. Why are we wasting time and effort debating other sources when we are so perfectly placed to exploit the one best suited to our needs. The only real risk to the tidal path is that the moon goes walk about, but then we really do have a problem. As the ad says 'Just do it'.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert C | 29 Mar 2010 3:48 pm
I work in the energy efficiency industry in the US for a large utility who is at the forefront of smart grid development. All I can say is the UK is moving at a glacial pace compared to the US. Here, things just get done. In the UK, there are reports, and consultations and reports on consultations and nothing seems to move forward. Until the UK gets the 'can do' attitude of the US, it will get nowhere
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter Field | 29 Mar 2010 4:47 pm
There is a huge potential for renewable jobs and investments. The risk is that currently favoured renewables are a very low grade source of energy. Accordingly they need huge subsidies (sorry, investments) paid for by the public. Their spending capacity will inevitably reduce year on year. Which will be greater; the conseqent job losses of the general UK public or the jobs gained, many of which will be abroad? Technologies will be stiffled; the worse the technology, the greater the subsidy.
Two other facts remain; billions must still be spent on conventional power stations since renewables are unpredictably intermittent and, no, tidal is NOT reliable; it is predictable however but has a very low load factor of about 20% and as yet no published trial results.
On a dark cold winters night, with peak demand for energy, hydro-electricity is the only reliable renewable technology.
The car scrappage scheme was a huge success and, politically the government stated
it was revenue neutral because of the money gained in VAT. Unfortunately as sales will now slump, jobs will be reduced and also VAT receipts will drop nullifying earlier gains!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
S. Martin | 29 Mar 2010 5:33 pm
The green market is fine for generating jobs, but what about the jobs the country needs at the present time, and not the green jobs sometime in the future.
Environmental, science, and technology jobs are fine and an asset to the UK, but with the loss of so many jobs to our competitors, we need something doing NOW, and we need to rebuild our manufacturing and engineering base to somewhere near a viable option.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
gerard agnew | 29 Mar 2010 6:53 pm
I have to agree with S Martin.
We need to get back to manufacturing and strengthen or engineering base we need good solid foundations from governments to base these on.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris F | 30 Mar 2010 12:46 pm
I agree with much of what Peter Field writes but he seems to have rather missed my point about energy sources. The tide, as a source of energy, is both predictable and reliable. However, the technology to exploit it is virtually non-existant. But surely, solving technological problems is what engineering is all about? The problems could be overcome with a committment to get on and do it. Also, as an aside, I think maybe the SNP might have an objection or two if we flood half of Scotland to provide hydro electricity for the whole of the UK, even if it is green and reliable.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment