Feed-in tariffs are disappointing for local renewable energy

The government's feed-in tariff plans keep Britain far behind Europe on renewables, and panders to big energy companies

Simon Hughes
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 2 February 2010 11.11 GMT

Today, after many months of delay, the government finally announced its detailed plans for the feed-in tariff. It is a huge disappointment for all of us who want to see communities taking control of their energy production.
The announcement could have heralded a new age in British energy policy, where a large proportion of our energy is produced by individuals and communities through microgeneration, solar panels on the roofs of our schools and homes, small scale hydropower and wind.
It is an approach that has had success in many countries around Europe, where feed-in tariffs have played a fundamental role in promoting renewable energy. In Germany, where feed-in tariffs have been around for years, the total installed solar capacity is around 200 times that of the UK. The Netherlands has 40% of its electricity demand met from decentralised energy.
In every election that Labour has fought since 1997 there has been a renewed commitment to renewable energy, but today renewables still only produce 5% of our power. The European average is 14%. This performance means that the UK comes 25th out of 27 EU countries in the proportion of its energy supplied from renewable sources – behind Malta and Luxembourg.
Given all of this it seems unbelievable that the government did not take the opportunity to announce a more ambitious scheme today. The government's energy cash back scheme aims for only 2% of our energy to be met from microgeneration by 2020. A more generous tariff could have raised this target to 6%. This does not sound much but it is the equivalent of two nuclear power stations of the capacity of Sizewell B.
Raising the target to 6% would cost the consumer just 10 pence more on their monthly energy bills. An YouGov poll conducted just last week showed that it would be overwhelmingly a popular charge.
The increase in cost to the consumer compares well when we consider the £17 each year which each household will pay for the government's CCS levy and the £20-40 per year which EDF has calculated would be required to incentivise the new generation of nuclear reactors.
Today's announcement has made clear that Labour has no room in their plans for small-scale, community-led energy production. This is sure to win them more friends amongst the big six energy companies. Last year it was reported that E.ON and EDF had told the government that they must choose between new nuclear and the large scale development of renewables.
Labour have made their choice. The government's position is that it would rather have a generation of new nuclear power plants, pushed through without any democratic oversight by the new planning commission. These will blight the country for centuries to come and cost future generations billions in clean up.
It is a choice that Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly disagree with, as it removes choice from local communities. For years we have campaigned for more power to be devolved to a local level. In energy policy we want a future where communities and individuals are supported in producing their own clean and green renewable energy and for them to make their own choices about how they do this.
This is why we campaigned for the original amendment to the 2008 Energy Act that introduced the feed-in tariff. It is why I wrote to Ed Miliband just last week asking him to announce a more ambitious scheme today.
It is disappointing that the government has failed to fulfil the opportunity which feed-in tariffs presented. Now all of us who want an energy future that involves a serious commitment to renewables need to speak loudly and seek to persuade others to vote for candidates who share this vision in the coming election.
• Simon Hughes MP is the Liberal Democrats' environment spokesperson.