The UK is facing a 1970s-style “oil price shock” that could wipe ￡45 billion (US$72.9 billion) from the UK economy, British Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Chris Huhne said in his first intervention on the issue since the start of the Middle East political crisis.
Rising oil prices pushed gasoline to a record ￡1.30 per liter at British pumps this week and turmoil in the Middle East is leading to intense pressure on British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne to ease the pressure on motorists, probably by dropping previously announced plans to increase fuel duty in the budget on March 23.
However, in a speech on the impact of the oil crisis on Thursday, Huhne said that a price of US$100 a barrel for oil transforms the economics of climate change in Britain.
He disclosed that the British Department of Energy and Climate Change’s economists have said that if the oil price rise turns into a 1970s-style crisis, the cumulative loss to the UK economy would be ￡45 billion over two years.
Oil is at a two-and-a-half-year high and there have been predictions that if the political turmoil spreads around the Persian Gulf, the price would rise further. The Libyan rebellion has shut down oil production in many parts of the country and while Libya’s oil fields produce only about 2 percent of global demand, experts say the disruption is putting pressure on world supplies.
“If the oil price doubled, as from US$80 last year to US$160 this year, it could lead to a cumulative loss of GDP of around ￡45 billion over two years. This is not just far-off speculation: it is a threat here and now,” Huhne said.
The speech was in part an attempt to galvanize public support for tough measures to create a green economy after recent setbacks, including attacks on the science of climate change and stalled international negotiations.
The speech could also be seen as an attempt to burnish the coalition’s green credentials after months in which the British Department for Transport has declared an end to the “war on the motorist.”
Drawing on research conducted for the Labour government by Lord Stern, Huhne said US$100 a barrel is seen as the point at which the economics of climate change pivots so that it becomes cheaper for British consumers and businesses to invest in green technology than remain with the status quo.
He said that if oil only reached US$108 a barrel by 2020, as predicted by the US Department of Energy, then the UK consumer would “win hands down” by paying less through low-carbon policies than for fossil fuel policies.
This is the moment to invest in green infrastructure, homes and transport, according to Huhne.
Fossil fuels are now the costly, high-risk option for energy: It is “crazy” not to -prepare for a low-carbon future.
He said the government had made it possible for consumers and businesses to switch to green energy, through the green deal for homes, feed-in tariffs and new technologies, such as electric cars, which are predicted to have a breakthrough year this year.
In the low-carbon economy, Huhne said, “we will turn to electricity to heat our homes and charge our cars, leading to a doubling in demand for electricity by 2050.”
Steve Holliday, chief executive of the National Grid, predicted this week that the UK would need to increase its installed capacity of electricity generation from 75 gigawatts to 100 gigawatts by 2030.
This in turn would require a rapid transformation of the UK energy market with long lead-in times and high capital costs.
If the country is to avoid an energy crunch by the end of this decade, Huhne added, “the UK must cut our carbon emissions by 34 percent on 1990 levels. We must generate 15 percent of our energy from renewables by 2020, up from 6.7 percent in 2009.”
He said Britain had chosen a portfolio approach to energy supply, relying on a mix of renewables, nuclear and carbon capture and storage for coal and gas.
It was impossible to overstate the scale of the investment challenge facing the country, with Ofgem estimating that ￡200 billion of new investment is needed during the next decade to secure supply as aging nuclear and coal power plants close.
“Energy companies are not the Salvation Army and will need to convince big investors, like pension funds, that the UK energy market is not just stable, but also offers a good return,” Huhne said.
As a result the consumer would face a cost, but it would be lower than not making the investment, according to Huhne.
“We have delay and lack of detail on the green investment bank and the green deal, the fiasco over the botched feed-in tariff review, which has shaken confidence in the smaller-scale renewables sector, and the endless wait for the renewable heat incentive. The government has dithered long enough,” Shadow Energy Minister Meg Hillier said.
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday was handcuffed and escorted by police to the Taipei Detention Center, after the Taipei District Court ordered that he be detained and held incommunicado for suspected corruption during his tenure as Taipei mayor. The ruling reversed an earlier decision by the same court on Monday last week that ordered Ko’s release without bail. That decision was appealed by prosecutors on Wednesday, leading the High Court to conclude that Ko had been “actively involved” in the alleged corruption and it ordered the district court to hold a second detention hearing. Video clips
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that
RSS