Yesterday it was claimed in both the Mail and the Telegraph that energy prices were likely to increase by almost a third to £1,900 by the end of the decade.
Yesterday it was claimed in both the Mail and the Telegraph that energy prices were likely to increase by almost a third to £1,900 by the end of the decade.
The claim was based on a report by the Taxpayers’ Alliance and was really intended to show how energy bills were being driven up by green taxes.
The TPA report claimed that electricity bills would increase by 29 per cent between now and 2020 due to green measures, and 100 per cent by 2030 – based on a report by Liberum Capital.
However as Damian Kahya puts it at the Greenpeace Energydesk blog:
“Energydesk contacted the TPA to ask how they’d worked this out. Their response is somewhat confusing…What they are saying here is that the government wants gas bills to be high because otherwise people will revolt against rising electricity bills to pay for clean energy. If this were true, it would be the story of the century and act of political self-destruction on an epic scale. But it’s not….
“Most people, including The Committee on Climate Change and The government and The CBI say gas prices have risen (driving up bills) and will probably rise more. But they do not predict they’ll rise because of a conspiracy to ensure they keep pace with green energy.
“They predict they’ll rise because gas is getting more expensive. In fact, that tends to be cited as a reason to use green energy – so as to protect consumers from rising gas prices.
“If, as some others predict, gas prices do not rise, then the pressure on consumers paying a gas and electricity bill will be reduced. In other words, they will be more able to afford any increases in their electricity bills.
“In short, the claim made by the TaxPayers’ Alliance – which underlay two national stories and a parliamentary campaign – has no evidence to support it at all.”
Definitely worth a read.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
14 Responses to “Misleading Taxpayers’ Alliance claims about green energy costs”
Jimmy
The TPA?
blarg1987
And what is the alternative? Rape North Sea, Oil and Gas, and shale gas, large amount sof pollution and then when we have used up all those finite resources then what? A mad rush for nuclear and renewables which will mean fare greater hikes in concumer bills and a proportion of income then we currently face.
In the short term your ideas are good if we are selfish, however long term they are very bad for consumers in the longer term.
SadButMadLad
Well yes, Labour and Tory governments did rape the north sea oil. They taxed it (which is right and proper) but they didn’t use that money to save for a rainy day. They spent it. And now that we are having that rainy day, there are no saving to spend on the nice projects that would keep people employed. Keynes himself said that its right for the state to spend to get out of a doldrum, but only if it had saved up during the good years.
With shale gas, which will flood the market with cheap fuel, prices will come down. Shale gas should be taxed. But after being used to help cut the debt (not just the deficit) it should be put aside like the Norwegians do into a sovereign fund. It is finite, but only after a very long time. Long enough to build up a good fund. But then many politicians are only interested in the next election and don’t think long term.
But don’t worry, technology will have advanced in the future to mean that we can get more of the last bits of oil and gas out of the ground. Fracking has been used in normal oil drilling since the 1950s but the technologies related to it have advanced that it can now be used to recover shale gas.
Do we give up now and say that we have reached peak oil or do we carry on knowing that technology will have advanced as it inevitably does to make it cheaper in the future to get more fuel. Generally the later case is true. Just look at computers. Initially very expensive and only used by scientists, now so cheap that even greater processing power is thrown about into toys. Same will happen with getting gas or oil.
As for nuclear, that already works, but the government (Labour & Tory) didn’t plan ahead and allow new ones to be built to replace the current ones that are at the end of the life. If we had new nuclear stations built, we wouldn’t have this stupid arrangement of wind turbines being built at a cost per GW that is greater than nuclear. Yes, turbines are cheap, but they don’t produce much power.
blarg1987
Whis is all down to lack of investment in the first instance, the policies that the TPA advocate will mean we will be in the same situation now in 20 – 30 years time as shale gas reaches its peak.
Most of the innovation is down to prices being so expensive that it is now economical to reach those resources. The computer example you set is right, however it was the push of the state (contracts requiring smaller lighter computers) that created the momentum that has benefited everyone.
I do partially agree with your points except that the shale gas we should use to invest in the next generation of energy and so become an export nation creatingg far more jobs and long term economic growth.
SadButMadLad
Sorry, the state said that smaller lighter computers were required? Seriously? Are you trying to troll me? That is just wrong. It was innovation within the computer industry that did it. The state didn’t tell the semiconductor manufacturers to keep pushing Moore’s law. It was them trying to squeeze more power out of out their chips to beat their competitors.