Climate dept invent new energy toy

Mike Childs

30 November 2011

The Dept of Energy and Climate Change has unveiled a new toy. Well it's not actually a new toy, it's a computer model. But it's fun to play with!

The toy (sorry model) is the updated Energy Pathway model and it enables users to construct their own energy pathway to 2050 and look at the cost implications.  A pathway is simply the energy generating kit you want to build together with energy efficiency choices you want to make.

Along with a number of others I was allowed to trial the model and submit a pathway ahead of the public launch today. Below is a brief description of three of the pathways but first a bit of background.

UK energy policy has for a number of years had the three equal policy objectives of delivering energy security, keeping prices low and delivering reductions in carbon pollution. All really important things to do (I suspect even Lord Lawson would agree with at least two of them).  DECCs new model enables you to assess your pathway against all three policy objectives.

Here's a flavour of a couple of pathways that DECC did and one I constructed (together with my highly subjective scores on how well the pathways perform against the three policy objectives):

• Ignore climate change - you'd think this would be as cheap as chips but actually it is no cheaper than pathways designed to meet the Climate Change Act reduction targets.  It sucks on energy security with 90 per cent of energy needing to be imported. Carbon emissions climb which, as Lord Stern could tell you, means that in 2050 people will be picking-up a hefty tab for climate impacts.  Score 0 out 3.
• Deliver climate reductions as cheap as possible - this pathway has 4 or 5 new nuclear plants delivering 13 GW of energy (this will please Mark Lynas and George Monbiot). It has lots of fossil fuel power stations fitted with carbon capture and storage. It is also very low on wind and solar. It uses lots of biomass produced both domestically and imported (this will not please those people who are going hungry as biomass and biofuels production takes over agricultural land drives up food prices). Two-thirds of energy would need to be imported by 2050. Score 1.5 out of 3
• Friends of the Earth pathway - this has lots of energy efficiency and renewable power. It also quickly eliminates fossil fuel use for electricity production (except for when gas is used as a back-up for renewables).   It delivers great energy security with only 15 per cent of energy imported by 2050 (which surely must please right-wing bloggers).  The cost is in the same ball-part as other pathways and could under some conditions even be cheaper. A score of 3 out of 3.

Hurrah, Friends of the Earth wins!

Actually it is important to take all these results with a pinch of salt.

Making cost estimates for technologies and fuels over the next ten years is difficult, doing so over 40 years is little more than informed guesswork. Also the cost estimates don't take into account benifits, for example, reduced costs to the NHS from a greater focus on energy efficiency or jobs in off-shore wind.

But the DECC model is a great initiative because it nails the lie that action to reduce carbon emissions will cost a bomb. It's not perfect but then in my experience no model is.