Utility Week

12 | 19TH - 25TH JULY 2019 | UTILITY WEEK Utility of the Future: climate change Towards net zero carbon The Treasury mulls over its options The chancellor has announced a review of paying for net zero carbon – what thinking might he draw on? David Blackman reports. T his week's 50th anniversary of the first Moon landings has sparked an outpouring of memories about the US space programme's mightiest single achievement. Extraterrestrial travel isn't exactly the most sustainable activity, given the huge amounts of rocket fuel required to li• a handful of people beyond the grip of the Earth's gravity. Nevertheless, environmental- ists have drawn lessons from how US presi- dent JF Kennedy launched the 1960s space race for how contemporary societies should tackle the transition to a carbon-free future. They include economist and Third World debt campaigner Ann Pettifor, who argued at a Labour party debate last week in London that the US's collective will overrode conven- tional financial concerns. "Nobody raised the question of how we were going to finance that choice to go to the Moon," she said. But there is no question that getting on to a carbon neutral track will be expensive. Reaching net zero emissions by 2050, which was enshrined into law earlier last month, will cost the equivalent to 1 to 2 per cent of UK GDP, the Committee on Climate Change has calculated. How it will be paid for and how the costs are distributed across society is becoming a central question. The concept of the "just transition", mar- rying environmental and social justice, is increasingly a buzzword, particularly on the le• of politics. Sharing the burden The Treasury announced last month that it is launching a review to explore how the costs of delivering a net zero emissions goal should be shared across the economy. And beyond Whitehall, the IPPR thinktank has established a commis- sion under the chair- manship of ex-Labour leader Ed Miliband to map out how the tran- sition to decarbonisa- tion can be achieved without sacrificing social equity. The same question will be put under the microscope at the Citizens Assembly, which is being assem- bled this autumn by six select committees to thrash out a route map to net zero. A quick glance across the English Chan- nel, where the "gilets jaunes" protests have become a regular and sometimes violent feature of the Parisian weekend since the autumn, shows why the UK's politicians are right to worry about the risks of not bringing people on board. The high-vis jacketed pro- testors' movement was sparked by French president Philip Macron's decision to hike fuel taxes, which prompted the rallying cry: "They worry about the end of the world, we worry about the end of the week." In the UK, environment-related civil dis- ruption has so far been the preserve of the climate change campaigners at Extinction Rebellion. But a potential backlash was on the mind of Polly Billington, Miliband's adviser on environmental issues when he was Labour leader, who also spoke at the London debate. "Climate change is a class issue. I'm fed up with it being something that people care about who don't have anything else to care about. The working class is going to be screwed over if climate change is not tackled. "Building public consent is not going to be easy. If we don't get this right, the divides will be as profound as over Brexit." She was backed up by shadow Treasury spokesman Clive Lewis, who is lead- ing efforts to hard- wire environmental sustainability into the opposition's eco- nomic thinking. "If you don't have economic and social justice at the heart of your transition to a more sustainable society, you won't bring people with you," he said. "The fight for sustainability is also a fight against inequality; the poor cannot consume what they don't consume, but the rich can," he added, pointing out that the richest tenth of society are responsible for a dispropor- tionate slice of overall emissions. Luke Murphy, who is running the IPPR commission, says: "Issues of economic jus- tice are central to solving the climate emer- gency. If done in the wrong way, it could exacerbate economic and social injustice." "If you do it in the wrong way, you are going to lose public support. The speed and scale we need to go at means ensuring it's a fair and just transition," he says, recall- ing how previous industrial shi•s have been mishandled. Breaking with the past The dramatic plunge in coal use for power generation has been widely celebrated over the past year for its contribution to plunging carbon emissions. However, memories are still raw in many communities of the social havoc that the clo- sure of the UK's deep mines caused for the communities involved. The worry is that the transition from a fossil fuel economy will have a similarly disruptive impact in terms of jobs and livelihoods. Meanwhile, the government's reliance on using electricity and gas customers to sub- sidise the costs of decarbonisation through their bills is coming under strain. The GMB union published figures last week from a poll showing that only 20 per cent of people think the cost of decarbonising electricity should be funded primarily through customer bills. More broadly, such subsidies are viewed, including within utilities, as regressive because they bear down proportionately on the poor. Murphy says: "The best way of pay- ing is through general taxation rather than through energy bills." The GMB's solution is that the cost of decarbonisation should be funded via increased corporation tax. A more direct option is to target the emissions problem directly by increasing the price of carbon. Professor Dieter Helm of Oxford University proposed in his cost of energy review for the "Issues of economic justice are central to solving the climate emergency. If done in the wrong way, it could exacerbate eco- nomic and social injustice." LUKE MURPHY, IPPR COMMISSION

• Cover