Greg Barker MP at The Carbon Trust

Speaking in a debate at the Carbon Trust's stakeholders meeting, Greg Barker MP gave a spirited call to arms for the low carbon industry. He posited that with falling energy prices and a lack of finance, we need a radical rethink, as tinkering will never meet the targets.


Obama's administration is performing a policy U turn that will impact the UK. The USA will drive a new business agenda based on cleantech and if we don't respond in a radical and ambitious way we will be stuck in recession. We need greater partnership between the private and public sectors. The government needs to remove the risk and provide seedcorn to create a new paradigm in energy; an "electricity internet". The aim is to remove the burdens that prevent innovation, invest in incubators that will leverage intellectual property and shift taxation to favour low-carbon innovation. The movement will be led by entrepreneurs but the government must enable it.


It's essential not to focus on carbon alone, because a collapse in oil prices will mean we cannot achieve a realistic carbon price. In fact, we need a sophisticated range of instruments offering a choice of levers. The Conservatives are recommending feed-in tariffs, £6.5k to improve the energy efficiency of every single house and a low carbon heat tariff.


In Greg Barker's view, energy efficiency will become an indicator of global competitiveness in the same way as productivity was during the 70s. And cleantech could be the catalyst that will re-energise economies and build nations.

Energy cash handout

I'm not sure how to react to the news that the PM has failed to secure a £1bn cash handout from energy companies for families to help defray the impact of rising energy costs. Whilst I sympathise with families who are experiencing genuine hardship as a result of the recent price hikes, all but the most disadvantaged should be able to recoup most of the increase through energy saving measures. In fact, as far as climate crisis is concerned, increasing fuel costs is probably a good thing - if ecological arguments have failed to motivate us to cut energy consumption, then economic arguments surely will.
Offering handouts to compensate for rising energy prices would have sent entirely the wrong signals to a generally affluent nation which urgently needs to curb its consumption. Yet the replacement of the proposed fuel poverty package with an energy efficiency programme was announced almost apologetically. I'm not saying that we should not provide state support for those whose income is insufficient to sustain them, but support should be provided holistically, not focused on a single category of expense - and especially not on a commodity on which our disproprotionate reliance could prove to be our downfall.

In-car versus mains charging

I've been pondering today - is it better to charge my mobile phone in my car, or to plug it into the mains at home? I know I have to unplug it when it's fully charged, as it will otherwise continue to draw power, but is there a difference between the carbon impact of electricity drawn from the national grid and from my car? I feel that somehow the electricity drawn from my car is "free" - but does it affect fuel consumption? And is the effect significant enough to make a difference?

A mischevious colleague has just suggested that I should charge it in my car and, if necessary, take the car for a drive just to provide a charging opportunity. Thanks, Steve, but of course I mean when I'm using the car anyway. In fact, if the impact of charging my phone in the car is lower, maybe it can even help mitigate the carbon impact of driving in the first place. And because I'm bound to be there in the car to hear it beep when the battery is full, I'm likely to unplug it sooner than if it beeped at home when I'm in another room. So which is greener?

Anybody know? I'd love to find out!