Utility Week - authoritative, impartial and essential reading for senior people within utilities, regulators and government
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/255052
10 | 7th - 13th February 2014 | utILIty WeeK Interview despite the changes to the Energy Company Obligation (Eco), which many believe is a cut or significant scaling back of the scheme. She says the impact of the Eco has been "smoothed out" and it now targets the poor- est households and those with the highest energy bills. But Sandys does believe more can and should be done under Eco. "I do wish local authorities would absolutely get on board with the project and really start embracing the opportunities that Eco offers there," she says. "From my point of view, I had a very difficult time get- ting my local authority on board. It just doesn't seem to be a priority. "For me, it was the biggest priority that families this winter would not have to suffer in the cold, or that they were being charged much more than they needed to be [for their energy]. "I was absolutely furious and I feel that local authori- ties needed to really get on to the fuel poverty project and look at this Eco issue as an opportunity to renew their housing stock." With Sandys' concern about how much people are paying for their energy, the discussion quickly turns to Labour's plans for the energy market – the proposed price freeze. Not only does Sandys oppose the plans, she strongly rejects them, claiming they are "totally pointless". "First, it is going to kill the competitors – the new, young companies coming in with innovative pack- ages that are really offering a consumer-facing product. Kill them. "Second, it's not going to happen because the bill will not be affected – the energy companies will put their bills up before or aer [the freeze]. "Third, it destabilises the whole sector. What we want to do is reduce the overall bill by getting people to be more energy efficient, being really engaged with prod- ucts that actually mean something." For Sandys, this does not mean a 1970s-style energy market where the same product is continually offered to consumers in the same way as it always has been. She says dumb meters and estimated bills are the key culprits when customers become disengaged from their energy suppliers. She tells me it is not the consumer that must be edu- cated about the energy sector, but the other way around. "Consumers are absolutely smart – they are really smart – it is just that the sector needs to smarten up to match the consumers." Smart meters can be a big step in the right direction, Sandys adds, as long as suppliers use the technology in the right way to make life easier and better for the customer. "We need to ensure they are very smart and not reli- ant on consumers becoming electrical engineers. "Sometimes you hear from people in the smart meter sector that what we need is a huge awareness campaign about what a smart meter is. I think it is incumbent on the smart meter that the consumer doesn't need to spend any time learning what it is," she says. This could be achieved by, for example, letting the meter tell householders how warm their rooms should be (18-20°C) and that the heating controls should be adjusted when the clocks change. It is this innovation and introduction of "simplistic things" that Sandys believes can help. One thing she believes has not been help- ful in the cost of living debate has been the talk of the cost of energy. "I sort of regret that people have been talking about the price of energy over the past few months; I wish we had spent as much time explaining to the public about energy efficiency as we did about the cost of a unit of energy. "The cost of a unit of energy is not really the point. The point is what the bill is at the end of a quarter, and that is what is frightening people." In the past 16 months in the job, Sandys believes she has helped the government to make a difference, even though she admits there are still quite a few things on her to-do list. "I want consumers to be the drivers of markets – I feel very strongly about that," she says. "Without that, we're going to find ourselves very much captured by large corporates – and that is not the place to help develop markets." "I wish we had spent as much time explaining to the public about energy efficiency as we did about the cost of a unit of energy." Carbon Capture and utilisation (CCu) As part of her work with the 2020 group, Sandys has been examining the pos- sibilities presented by carbon capture and utilisation (CCU). Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is seen as a vital part of ensuring that the UK's future electricity generation mix meets the government's low-carbon tar- gets. However, Sandys and the 2020 group believe carbon dioxide should not be treated as a waste product that must be disposed of – as it is in CCS systems – but rather as a useful resource. Sandys says: "Everything is focused on CCS, and CCS in my view is a very, very over-engineered idea. "You're taking our carbon, then piping out into the middle of the sea, then you're drilling down and embedding it – it's fantastic. CCS is an engineer's dream. "It is quite a feat to rid us of a waste that in some minds should not have been emitted in the first place." Despite her scepticism of CCS, Sandys is convinced that CCU can take at least some of the pressure off the engineers struggling to get CCS up and running. "We're not sure CCU will absolutely and comprehensively cover the whole issue of carbon," she says, "but we're currently not thinking broadly enough." Carbon that is captured, rather than being piped out into subsea storage areas, could be used in the manufacture of construction materials, polymers and even some fuels. The combination of CCU technology and renewable energy in the production of fuels could also help the development of energy storage, with energy being stored in "manageable forms" such as liquids or gases. Sandys says: "Carbon has suffered from a bad image, in particular among the greenies. Carbon itself, however, is not bad; what is bad is its atmospheric build-up – the emission of carbon dioxide. "Carbon can be recycled, utilising rather than storing this so-called waste, not only reducing the cost of landfill – or seafill – but ensuring that new prod- ucts do not need to use new carbon." CCU has been highlighted by Sir David King, the foreign secretary's special adviser on climate change, as one of the top ten emerging technologies for 2013/14. The US is investing $1 billion in CCU research; Germany is investing £118 million and the Chinese have made it a key component of their carbon management programme. This action and investment across the globe has convinced Sandys that, rather than treating CCU as "an aerthought", the UK government should start investing more time and money in it. "It is early days for utilisation of carbon, but as we are still a while away from fully functioning CCS, utilisation technologies have time to catch up," she says. "With a bit of government help and encouragement, that could be achieved for all our benefit, both here and globally."