| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Ezra: My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that carbon capture and storage has become a vital element in energy policy in view of the continued growth in fossil fuel consumption, not only in the UK but elsewhere? That is despite the development of other sources of energy and energy saving. Does he further agree that all the component elements in carbon capture and storage have now been proven; that a financial framework from the Government is required to enable a full-scale comprehensive test to take place, not later than 2009, as has been suggested in the Science and Technology Select Committee report from another place; and that, pending those tests, the authorisation for any new power plants should make provision for carbon storage and capture?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I agree with noble Lord that this is an important area that should be explored and is one of the fronts on which we need to proceed. It is not the only one—there are many—but this is an important one, and we are providing a regulatory framework and looking at the appropriate incentives. There is still some way to go on the economics. The main project in the UK is the BP one, which is still at the feasibility stage. There is a long way to go before we will know the economics of this, as opposed to other forms of achieving the same objectives.
Lord Tanlaw: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the United States Department of Transport estimates that 1 per cent of the total energy generated per year with consequent carbon emissions can be saved by switching to daylight saving time? Will he explain why there is not a single paragraph in the Science and Technology Select Committee report on energy saving on the cost-effective energy economies that would be achieved if the United Kingdom switched to single/double summertime? Can the Minister also say whether this well tried method of reducing atmospheric carbon in other countries has been
25 Apr 2006 : Column 69
omitted in the Government's forthcoming energy review and in the Conservative Party's long-awaited green energy document?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, on the technicalities of the matter, it is not at all clear that energy saving will come from the single/double time change in daylight hours. It is highly disputed that it saves any energy at all. In Portugal, which moved to the system, it was reported that there was an increase in the use of energy. Therefore, I do not think that we should see it as a way forward.
Lord Vinson: My Lords, carbon sequestration may be very beneficial, but it is still an unproven technology. We in this country are pioneers of the finest technology for producing CO2-free energy—nuclear. Is it not time that we got down to it?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, that is exactly what we are doing. We are reviewing this as part of the energy review, as I have explained to the House a number of times. We will consider that issue together with the economics and other factors, such as waste, as part of that decision.
Lord Soley: My Lords, are we looking at the work going on in China, which I understand is still opening about one coal-fired power station every week? I know that the Chinese are doing a lot of research on carbon storage, and I wonder whether we are involved in any way. Should we not be looking to work with them on some of those projects?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, we are in contact with the Chinese on the issue, and we have offered £3.5 million for a feasibility study to be carried out in China.
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, does the Minister recognise the urgency of doing an analysis of the economic benefits of developing carbon capture technology to the UK, especially in relation to the increased value of coal on the international market?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, it is clearly central that we have a good understanding of the economics. The main source of that information will be BP and its feasibility study.
Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, given that the Minister has agreed with the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, on the importance of carbon capture, should not the Government first work towards changing the EU regulations to allow the storage of carbon in depleted oil fields? Secondly, can they assure industry that the EU Emissions Trading Scheme will continue beyond 2012, to allow industry to plan long-term capital-intensive investment, such as carbon capture?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, on the first point, the main regulations here relate not to EU regulations so much as to international ones. The
25 Apr 2006 : Column 70
London Convention and the Ospar Convention are the key issues here. The UK has taken a lead in proposing amendments to those two treaties that would legalise carbon dioxide storage beneath the sea bed. That is the major area where we are operating. In the EU, the UK is also leading on the inclusion of carbon capture storage in future emission trading schemes, so that carbon credits can be taken.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, do the Government have it in mind to make carbon capture readiness a requirement in the licensing of all new fossil fuel power stations?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I will need to get further information on that. I do not think that there are any such plans at the moment. The first issue must be to understand the economics of this, before we start taking action to make this in any way compulsory or to introduce incentives for it.
Schools: Academies
2.51 pm
Baroness Walmsley asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): No, my Lords, the criteria remain as set out in last year's academies prospectus and schools White Paper, namely that they,
"will focus on areas of historically weak educational performance, including the establishment of entirely new schools in such areas and the replacement of existing weak and failing schools".
We also said in the White Paper that,
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply but ask about two things. First, does he agree that the public will not accept the Government's spin about academies rescuing failing schools when local people in the Prime Minister's own constituency of Sedgefield are being put under pressure to close a top-performing local school—Hurworth School is by no means a failing school—and turn it into an academy? Secondly, will the Government now have a moratorium on the sponsorship of academies by individuals until any possible link between financial support for the Government's preferred education policies and the granting of any kind of honours has been eliminated?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, no proposal whatever has been put to us for an academy in the Prime Minister's constituency, so that is not an issue for the department to address. On the second point, we see good evidence
25 Apr 2006 : Column 71
of the success of academies so far. We see huge commitment from individuals and organisations to sponsor them, including the Church of England and a good number of organisations well represented in your Lordships' House. These are to give opportunities in communities that have been suffering from low educational standards for too long. We on this side of the House will not see those communities deprived of the prospect of better schools, whatever the Liberal Democrats may favour.
Lord Renton: My Lords, when for hundreds of years in England and Wales we have had schools called "school", why would it be of advantage to any of them to change their name to "academy"?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, I wish that that were the most serious issue we faced in improving the education system. It is up to schools themselves what they call themselves, and if they wish to use different names, they are entirely at liberty to do so. I believe that a good number of our historic public schools have never used the term "school" to describe themselves.
Lord Lucas: My Lords, I know that we are remarkably inwardly turned as a House and that the Department for Education and Skills is well known for thinking that life begins and ends in London, yet not to have heard of the controversy about Hurworth School in the Prime Minister's constituency is surely extraordinary. It caused a great deal of unhappiness in the locality, and many parents have been up in arms about the proposal to abolish a well respected and extremely successful school. Why does the noble Lord not know about it, let alone have an opinion on it?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |