EU renewables plan to cost £160 per household

EU plans call for the UK to increase its use of renewables in the energy mix from the current 5% to 15% by 2020.  An independent British government commissioned report for BERR, the Department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, shows that these plans will cost between €5 and 6 billion annually.  On a per household basis, this could increase the average energy bill for every household in Britain by £160 a year — and that’s on top of increases driven by mainstream energy prices.
And in any case, many of the renewables initiatives are set to do more harm than good.
There is increasing evidence that biofuels save little CO2, but they are driving up world food prices, and putting huge new pressure on rainforests and natural habitats, threatening species with extinction.  Wind farms provide limited benefit, especially when placed in peaty heath-land environments.  Many of Britain’s new wind-farm development proposals, especially in Scotland, are on soils of this type, where the disturbance of ancient peat deposits for foundations, roads and other infrastructure can release more CO2 than the turbines would save in their lifetimes.
There is no point in agonising over fuel poverty, then agreeing plans which will hugely add to energy costs — especially when those plans will fail to deliver the CO2 reductions envisaged.  This is a typical example of EU integration allowing bureaucrats to make mistakes on an heroic scale.
  Poyry is a well-reputed energy research and consultancy company, commissioned by the British government (BERR) to do the cost analysis, which despite their insistence on confidentiality has somehow emerged on the BERR website at

This entry was posted in Renewables and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to EU renewables plan to cost £160 per household

  1. Many of those who support the “green agenda”, certainly do seem to want it both ways. Indeed, it is often not just the ridiculously expensive “renewables” which they advocate. In addition, they fail to listen to the voices in defence of alternative options. As this post of Roger’s from April 2008 points out (see above), they have not allowed for the contradictions in their own logic. During such a desperate economic climate and with unemployment damaging lives in our country, could there be a better time for this government to abandon the obsession with wasteful and pointless spending on energy policies which have no long-term future? Only sustainable economic growth can provide more genuine jobs for citizens, and this requires both a “free market” environment and low rate of inflation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s