Received the below email on the above topic of the Community Energy bill amendments this morning and thought to share on here as I suspect the majority of us would have some sympathy with it's intentions.
Naturally they are fundraising too although with no obligation to take part. A short video also shows clips from the debate in the Lords.
On the Monday before Christmas, we made another stride forward in our campaign to create dramatic growth in community renewable energy generation.
This time the setting was the House of Lords, where our two amendments to the Government’s Energy Bill were debated. To recap, these amendments are based on our Local Electricity Bill, which would enable community energy schemes to sell their clean power to local people, thus triggering a surge in community renewable energy generation.
I went in person and watched the proceedings, which involved supportive Lords and Baronesses from the Greens, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and Crossbenchers (of which there are over 180), pushing the Energy Minister, Lord Callanan, hard for Government support.
When the Minister failed to state support in his response – as we expected at this stage – he was given a tough time by the Lords and Baronesses present. This rather rattled him and he ended with: “I say without much optimism that I hope noble Lords are reassured that the Government recognise the role that community-owned and locally owned renewable energy schemes can play in supporting the UK’s national net-zero targets.”
These words show we achieved what we intended: the Government see the situation, which is that we likely have enough support in the House of Lords to win a vote on our two amendments at the next stage of the Energy Bill, which will probably be in early February.
If this happens, it would mean that the Energy Bill would come to the House of Commons, probably around March, with our community energy enabling powers contained in it. And with all opposition parties and 125 Conservative MPs lined up in support because of our nationwide public campaign, we are in a strong position to see what we are calling for ultimately pass into law.
Baronesses and Lords came up to me in the corridor after, shaking my hand and expressing congratulations on how much public and Parliamentary support we have built. They offered to keep helping and to give their backing at the next stage.
After a much-needed bit of Christmas rest, we are now working to bring Ministers and Whitehall officials to the negotiating table.
Thank you for your support in getting us this far. A special thank you if you make a regular donation – your contribution is invaluable.
We are urgently in need of more funds. A regular donation will enable us to gain more Parliamentary support, hold public events across the country and put in the time and effort needed to win this campaign in 2023. Any amount you can give will be helpful.
Together we can transform things.
Steve Shaw
Director
Power for People
Re: Lords and Baronesses not backing down
Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2023 8:27 pm
by Swwils
This seems like a really inefficient way to add generation to the grid.
Re: Lords and Baronesses not backing down
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 2:22 am
by Mr Gus
are you referring to hot air from waffle or something else?
Ripple have hooked up a few million quids worth so far, with more to come.
Re: Lords and Baronesses not backing down
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 9:49 am
by Adokforme
Swwils wrote: ↑Tue Jan 10, 2023 8:27 pm
This seems like a really inefficient way to add generation to the grid.
Well, I'm all for it. Having our own energy generation on the roof we know the benefit of it, both environmentally and as it worked out financially also.
So thats energy produced locally and used locally thus saving on transmission costs that I notice you were critical of on another thread. Any energy amount produced via clean means helps to reduce that produced otherwise and I'll promote it all I can for the benefit of the generations who follow us.
I don't know, but it does rather make me wonder if you are subscribing to the most appropriate forum upon which to manifest your opinions.
Re: Lords and Baronesses not backing down
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 10:25 am
by Bugtownboy
Just for the record, I support the community approach too - anything that empowers local communities, supporting greater responsibility for environmental issues.
Our small town (c6000 people) has the topography and situation to support wind, solar and hydro (disused weir).
Given that mix, we could potentially be self sufficient.
Re: Lords and Baronesses not backing down
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 10:32 am
by NikoV6
Will they let DIYers without MCS certificate sell back to the grid??
Swwils wrote: ↑Tue Jan 10, 2023 8:27 pm
This seems like a really inefficient way to add generation to the grid.
Well, I'm all for it. Having our own energy generation on the roof we know the benefit of it, both environmentally and as it worked out financially also.
So thats energy produced locally and used locally thus saving on transmission costs that I notice you were critical of on another thread. Any energy amount produced via clean means helps to reduce that produced otherwise and I'll promote it all I can for the benefit of the generations who follow us.
I don't know, but it does rather make me wonder if you are subscribing to the most appropriate forum upon which to manifest your opinions.
Have you actually done any environmental assessment of your own generation?
I have solar and storage on my house too, it IS great but I am careful not to claim that at a community or larger scale that it's actually environmentally beneficial especially when that would need to be weighed against other solutions.
Self sufficiency goes beyond just the base energy use of your home; you enjoy hundreds of modern products and services that require significant electrical and thermal energy.
These are basic data for potential projects and not opinions.
Surely you do not want to create an echo chamber and actually have the other pragmatic issues highlighted?
Swwils wrote: ↑Tue Jan 10, 2023 8:27 pm
This seems like a really inefficient way to add generation to the grid.
Well, I'm all for it. Having our own energy generation on the roof we know the benefit of it, both environmentally and as it worked out financially also.
So thats energy produced locally and used locally thus saving on transmission costs that I notice you were critical of on another thread. Any energy amount produced via clean means helps to reduce that produced otherwise and I'll promote it all I can for the benefit of the generations who follow us.
I don't know, but it does rather make me wonder if you are subscribing to the most appropriate forum upon which to manifest your opinions.
Have you actually done any environmental assessment of your own generation?
I have solar and storage on my house too, it IS great but I am careful not to claim that at a community or larger scale that it's actually environmentally beneficial especially when that would need to be weighed against other solutions.
Self sufficiency goes beyond just the base energy use of your home; you enjoy hundreds of modern products and services that require significant electrical and thermal energy.
These are basic data for potential projects and not opinions.
Surely you do not want to create an echo chamber and actually have the other pragmatic issues highlighted?
I'm all for pragmatism, unfortunately I fail to see how the toxicity of nuclear can fit anywhere within it.
Adokforme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 11, 2023 9:49 am
Well, I'm all for it. Having our own energy generation on the roof we know the benefit of it, both environmentally and as it worked out financially also.
So thats energy produced locally and used locally thus saving on transmission costs that I notice you were critical of on another thread. Any energy amount produced via clean means helps to reduce that produced otherwise and I'll promote it all I can for the benefit of the generations who follow us.
I don't know, but it does rather make me wonder if you are subscribing to the most appropriate forum upon which to manifest your opinions.
Have you actually done any environmental assessment of your own generation?
I have solar and storage on my house too, it IS great but I am careful not to claim that at a community or larger scale that it's actually environmentally beneficial especially when that would need to be weighed against other solutions.
Self sufficiency goes beyond just the base energy use of your home; you enjoy hundreds of modern products and services that require significant electrical and thermal energy.
These are basic data for potential projects and not opinions.
Surely you do not want to create an echo chamber and actually have the other pragmatic issues highlighted?
I'm all for pragmatism, unfortunately I fail to see how the toxicity of nuclear can fit anywhere within it.
You do know that nuclear generated the most energy out of single generation type in EU last year? What would you replace the 600 TWh with?
Have you actually done any environmental assessment of your own generation?
I have solar and storage on my house too, it IS great but I am careful not to claim that at a community or larger scale that it's actually environmentally beneficial especially when that would need to be weighed against other solutions.
Self sufficiency goes beyond just the base energy use of your home; you enjoy hundreds of modern products and services that require significant electrical and thermal energy.
These are basic data for potential projects and not opinions.
Surely you do not want to create an echo chamber and actually have the other pragmatic issues highlighted?
I'm all for pragmatism, unfortunately I fail to see how the toxicity of nuclear can fit anywhere within it.
You do know that nuclear generated the most energy out of single generation type in EU last year? What would you replace the 600 TWh with?
As we are no longer in the EU I don't see it's relevance. We can't undo the mistakes of the past but can do our best to ensure we don't continue making the same ones in future.
