On day three of our series on the low-carbon economy, Zac Goldsmith tells Robin Pagnamenta that private enterprise has a key role to play
Which concrete measures can governments introduce to support the growth of a low-carbon economy in Britain?
Many green choices are still the preserve of the committed or the well-off. With the right incentives and signals, an intelligent government could make pollution and waste a liability and at the same time bring those green choices within reach of us all. Until that happens, green will always be a marginal niche.
Broadly, the Government needs to put a price on pollution, waste and the use of scarce resources, and to invest proceeds into the alternatives. For example, if a new tax is introduced – at the point of purchase – on the “dirtiest” cars, it should be used to bring down the cost of the “cleanest” cars.
That would clean up the car fleet very quickly, and without punishing people for decisions they’ve already taken.
We also need to make better use of subsidies. In my view they should exist to stimulate new technologies and to fund research not yet attractive to the market. The German system of feed-in tariffs is one way we could support green energy technologies, by shortening the payback time.
Funding research into carbon capture and storage is another example. What we shouldn’t be doing is using taxpayer funds to prop up mature technologies and to subsidise fossil fuels, as we currently do.
What solutions can entrepreneurs offer in tackling climate change?
Green entrepreneurs need to be given greater incentives. If that happens, they will find ways to make money by being part of the solution. That can mean any number of things. Some will focus on clean energy, some will develop ever more efficient appliances, others will take part in the global carbon markets. With the right market frameworks in place, the market will respond in endless ways.
Is private enterprise a help or a hindrance to the environmental movement?
The market is by far the most powerful force for change, but it has blindspots. The environment is one. Most environmental problems are, therefore, the result of market failure.
If we can find a way to price the environment into the market, then we can, in my view, trust the market to deliver real solutions. In reality that’s our only hope. I’m convinced that private enterprise will be a fundamental part of the environmental solution.
Should nuclear energy play a role in the low-carbon economy?
If it was up to me, I wouldn’t block nuclear per se, but I would absolutely oppose any use of taxpayer funds to prop it up. That includes dealing with waste, security concerns and so on. I don’t believe it’s right for the Government to use taxpayer funds to support old technologies, no matter how powerful their lobby groups. The job of the Government is to provide energy solutions at the lowest cost and in the cleanest way. That will never, in my view, be nuclear.
Don’t forget there has never been a nuclear power plant that wasn’t constructed and run at the public’s expense. In a free market, nuclear wouldn’t exist. On that basis I would like to see subsidies diverted elsewhere, and, logically, that would mean nuclear has almost certainly had its day.
You have described the supermarket industry as “disastrous” and “soul-destroying”. Is it possible for big corporations to play a positive role in tackling environmental challenges?
Supermarkets dominate the retail sector to such an extent that we don’t really have healthy competition. Tesco’s market share is borderline monopoly. The effect is that neither producers [farmers] nor consumers have real bargaining power.
It’s too easy simply to say that customers can vote with their feet but, the truth is, supermarkets decimate the high street, destroy competition and effectively create dependence. I think that does need to be addressed. But the flip side is that shifts in the buying policies or packaging policies of the giant retailers have big impacts across the board. If Tesco decided to source only sustainably caught fish, for example, that would have a measurable impact on the fishing industry.
What role do you think market-based mechanisms could play in tackling deforestation?
Forests are the totemic environmental issue. I remember as a child worrying about the Amazon. And yet despite the general escalation of concern over environmental issues, the forests are still being decimated. The only answer I can imagine is one that involves making forests worth more alive than dead. And that requires us to harness the formidable power of the markets.
Many people believe that mastering carbon capture and storage technology (CCS) is the only way that the world can realistically cut its emissions of carbon dioxide. Is CCS a practical or important technology to pursue?
We need to bring forward CCS technology. I’m certain it will play a role, but the priority for now is to create the right incentives for clean technology. We should learn from countries like Germany, where a single town, Freiberg, produces more solar energy than the whole of the UK. We should also be focusing on energy efficiency. The best power plant is one that isn’t needed at all because we have cut demand. Today’s technology is already cost-effective, so it’s not even about cost – it’s about investment. That’s the proverbial low-hanging fruit.
— Zac Goldsmith is the editor of The Ecologist and the Conservative Party’s parliamentary candidate for Richmond Park