What would the Conservatives do for the environment?

The Tories oppose airport expansion and are backing green technology and renewable fuels, but will they be able to honour their energy-efficiency commitments?
David Adam
The Guardian, Thursday 8 October 2009
Despite strong rhetoric from Labour on the environment, its failure to deliver enough meaningful action has left many environmental campaigners disappointed. Some measurements put overall carbon dioxide emissions higher than in 1997 and a pledge to deliver a 20% cut by 2010 is doomed to fail. There has been little progress on renewable energy and Labour has managed to find itself on the wrong side of the debate on the two hot environmental issues of the day – the expansion of Heathrow and the construction of a new coal-power station at Kingsnorth in Kent.
So would a Conservative government offer a greener future? The pre-recession days when the two main parties battled to be the most eco-friendly have long gone, but there are still votes in the environment, and the Conservatives have set out a strong stall. Just this week, they restated their opposition to Heathrow's proposed third runway, and promised to make it a manifesto commitment, along with blocks on further expansion at Gatwick and Stansted. A new high-speed rail network will take up some of the domestic slack between London and northern cities such as Manchester.
The Tories have also talked up the need to modernise Britain's ageing electricity grid, and envisage a new "smart" system with householders able to sell power back to the system and check their fuel use on state-of-the-art meters.
Central to their energy plans would be the adoption of a feed-in tariff, to pay householders a fixed premium for spare electricity they generate. The system is credited with boosting uptake of renewables in countries such as Germany, but has been resisted by Labour. On a larger scale, they believe carbon capture and storage is reliable enough to force every coal power station to reduce its carbon emissions to the level of a modern gas plant.
On housing, they have pledged to find the money for £6,500 of energy-efficiency improvements to every home, and want to generate enough methane from farm and food waste to replace some 50% of natural gas used in central heating.
So far, so good, but environmental promises have a habit of being scrapped, or at least kicked out to endless consultations.
Labour officials question the sums, particularly the energy-efficiency pledge, which they point out will cost £160bn if delivered to every UK house. Conservative MPs voted against green investment in the budget, they say, and Conservative councils have opposed 60% of wind farms since Cameron became leader.
Dave Timms of Friends of the Earth says there are reasons for both encouragement and alarm in the Conservative approach. While green campaigners do not doubt the personal commitment of Cameron and other senior Tories on the issue, there are vocal elements within the party that remain distinctly off-message. "It's not a question of personal commitment, it's whether they can win the battle with the other departments," Timms says.
For all political parties, it remains easier to set environmental targets than to meet them. The first may help get the Tories into government, but only the second will help save the planet.