Godfrey Bloom

A new report from the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) finds that

1. Current renewable electricity policies intended to meet the EU Renewables Directive in 2020, will impose extra consumer costs of approximately £15bn per annum, which is roughly equivalent to 1% of current GDP. This annual total is comprised of approximately £8bn in subsidy, £5bn in grid integration, and a further £2bn in VAT charged on these extra costs.[3]
2. Slightly less than one third of this annual cost (£4.5bn) will be recovered from domestic households through their energy bills, at an average cost of about £170 per household.
3. This burden will increase the risk of hardship over the entire population, with very significant increases for those on lower incomes.
4. There is particular concern that the 2.5m households currently using electricity for their primary means of heating will be exposed to a very significant increase in risk of hardship, spending as much as £320 a year extra on space heating alone.
5. About two thirds (£10bn) of the policy cost would be charged to industrial and commercial consumers, with implications for the cost of the goods and services provided by those businesses, and thus with indirect effects on domestic households via cost of living.
6. The policy cost burden will also degrade industrial competitiveness, with negative effects on wages and employment rates, thus having an indirect downward pressure on average household income.

We all knew that the huge subsidies given to renewable energy companies contribute to fuel poverty. Even Chris Huhne and the Dept. of Energy and Climate Change admit that energy prices will rise, thanks to renewable energy between now and 2020, but try to spin their way out of it. The consumer will be paying less in 2020 for energy, they say, because non-renewable energy -- produced from fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas -- will become more expensive.

But this is a massive gamble, and one which flies in the face of the facts. In the USA there has been a huge investment in shale gas exploration. The glut of gas which has been produced has resulted in US gas price stability, rather than the spiralling costs we have seen here in the UK. According to initial geological surveys and exploratory wells here in the UK, we are also sitting on a vast reserve of gas. But if Huhne gets his way, we will be unable to take advantage of it, because we would be committed to so much expensive 'renewable' energy.

A quarter of UK households now struggle to pay their energy bills. This figure is rising. And it will continue to rise until the wholesale price of gas and oil comes right down or the UK scraps its commitment to renewable energy. Huhne's policy of subsidising unviable 'renewable' technologies to make them competitive with conventional energy is a disgusting abrogation of responsibility, which has cost jobs, wealth and lives.

Millions of families are facing hardship in order to service Huhne's grotesque political ambition. It is not unlike a starving household having plenty of food in the cupboard, but Huhne having the key and refusing to let it go. 'It will be worth it in the long run', he claims, 'food prices are rising' . But in fact tomorrow we could have much cheaper energy. Prices are only rising because of political failure. We have the expertise and the resources to begin producing the energy we need from gas and nuclear, and indeed from coal. What the British public does not have is political leaders prepared to represent their interests.