Getting our priorities right

The House of Commons Trade & Industry Committe has published its report (Local Energy -Turning consumers into producers) and decided to promote the term "local energy" instead of "microgeneration".

I am sure this will make all the difference to the uptake of micro CHP and of reinforcing consumer confidence; it would probably help to establish consumer confidence rather more if the Government was seen to be supporting relevant microgeneration technologies which could actually make a difference to the UK rather than just chucking money down a bottomless pit. The LCBP is being bled dry by the solar industry with little prospect of any significant reduction in cost (as was the intention) as a result.

George Monbiot rightly criticises the microgeneration industry for overyhyping the potential of micro wind and PV; unfortunately, he throws out the baby with the bathwater. There are at least two microgeneration technologies which could make a real difference to our energy efiicnecy and carbon impact. For gas-heated homes, micro CHP can reduce carbon by around 15% (typically 1-1.5 tonnes per year per household), and for homes which do not have gas, GSHP (Ground Source Heat Pumps) can reduce carbon by 4 tonnes or more, depending which fuel is being displaced. The problem with promoting technologies with dubious environmental credentials (like PV) is that the public (and commentators like George) lose confidence and assume that all microgeneration is a scam.