Oliver Tickell

Lordy the man\’s an innumerate loon.

Boardman calculates that, for every household, in the UK to qualify as low carbon by 2050, £12.9bn must be spent every year…

OK, we\’ll take that figure as it is.

And it\’s not as if the energy companies can\’t afford to stump up a great deal more. Thanks to energy price increases, windfalls from the deeply flawed Renewables Obligation and the extraordinary give-away of emissions allowances under the EU\’s emissions trading scheme, estimated by Ofgem to be worth £9bn between 2008 and 2012, they are literally awash with cash. In 2007, they paid out dividends of over £1.6bn to shareholders – and that was before the latest round of price increases.

The back of my envelope says that even if we took all of the distributed profits of the energy companies then we\’d still be £11.3 billion short each year.

Even if we nicked all that money, it would still be about £500 per household per year that each household would have to pay. Might pay it directly, might pay it through the tax system….but that\’s where the burden would have to be.

3 thoughts on “Oliver Tickell”

  1. It’s 12.9bn over the years 2008-2016 I think, and that would (she says) release savings by 2050 (not sure what happens in the intervening years) of 11.3bn a year in energy savings.

    Tim adds: That ain’t what Tickell says…he says the spending is per year.
    In the intervening years of course we rack up interest. 42 year paybacks tend not to work very well with positive real interest rates.

  2. This £9b that keeps croping up as a “benefit”? My understanding is that the power generators needed to have carbon credits to continue to operate under the ETS. If they had had to buy them it would have added £9b to their cocts i.e a very large tax increase that they would have them passed on to their very undersatnding customers. In fact they were given the initial carbon credits by the government. Since they need the credits to stay in business how does this become a £9b ‘benefit’.

    The only benefit would acrue if the credits were surplus to requirements because the governemnet got the figures wrong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *