PFI01017 Written evidence submitted by the University of East Anglia (UEA) i. About UEA The University of East Anglia (UEA) is an internationally renowned and research- intensive university, ranked in the world’s top 50 for research citations in the Times Higher Education Rankings 2020. UEA has a long history of pioneering climate research and is known throughout the world for its uniquely holistic and interdisciplinary approach. Founded in 1967, the School of Environmental Sciences is one of the longest established and largest departments of its kind in Europe, a 150-strong department bringing together natural and social sciences. UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences was awarded the Queen's Anniversary Prize for Higher and Further Education, the UK's most prestigious higher education award for world-class research, to recognise half a century of ground- breaking environmental science. The Climatic Research Unit (CRU) sits within the School of Environmental Sciences and is one of the world’s leading centres in the measurement of . Given its expertise in this field, the University is keen to use our academic research to inform policy-making and the work of the Environmental Audit Committee. ii. Summary: UEA’s Submission This submission makes the case for the inclusion of the following issues relevant to priority topics the Committee has identified for the forthcoming year:

Topic Issue 1: Monitoring ocean CO2 absorption Nature based solutions to climate change 2: Biomass Energy Carbon Capture & Nature based solutions to climate Storage (BECCS) change

3: Promoting more granular Community Energy decarbonisation projects

4: Community Energy Suppliers Community Energy Access to the National Grid

School of Evironmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, , Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK 1. Monitoring ocean CO2 absorption To effectively monitor the ocean uptake of carbon dioxide emissions from human activity, a long-term funding model for accurate ocean CO2 observations and their synthesis is required. This relates to the Committee’s sugested focus on ‘Nature based solutions to climate change’.

a. How effective is government policy in the policy area covered by each inquiry?

Despite the clear policy implications of failing to measure the CO2 uptake by the oceans, funding for these activities has been largely overlooked by governments across the world, and is frequently inadequate. In the UK, funding has fallen through the gaps between different organisations and most long-term ocean CO2 data collection efforts have now stopped or are under threat. 70% of all global sustained ocean observations are funded by short-term research budgets, making the practice volatile and unpredictable. Climate change is a long-term issue and the system requires a suitable funding model if it is to achieve its objectives. Given the significance of the issue in question, the Government should consider instituting an agreement like that which exists between BEIS and the , designed to guarantee the long-term sustained atmospheric CO2 measurements in the UK.

Given the global implications of current shortcomings on this issue, there needs to be a higher degree of international cooperation to find sustained solutions. Last year’s COP25 international climate conference was dubbed the ‘Blue COP’, aiming to address the nexus between ocean and climate change, and for the first time an ocean section was included in a COP decision text. While it is encouraging that policy makers are beginning to appreciate the significance of oceans in the climate crisis, it is vital that next year’s COP26 in Glasgow builds on this. Championing an international agreement to safeguard ocean CO2 monitoring would be a worthy cause for the British delegation, and would help cement the country’s reputation as a leading light in the fight against climate change.

b. Why should the Committee consider a particular inquiry as a priority?

To explain the importance of this research to policy, the Earth’s oceans have absorbed about 30% of the CO2 that humans have emitted since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Without CO2 uptake by the oceans, climate change would be much more rapid and more severe. At the same time the continuing ocean CO2 uptake is changing the chemistry of the oceans, a process commonly referred to as ocean acidification. The amount of CO2 that oceans absorb differs across the world’s oceans and fluctuates over time, due to a multitude of variables. The past 20 years have seen significant multi-year variations in the uptake of CO2 across the world oceans; most significantly in the Southern Ocean, which is responsible for around a third of global ocean CO2 uptake. Failing to measure the CO2 uptake by the oceans risks undermining the Government’s efforts to fully engage with the aims of the Paris Agreement to limit average global warming to well below 2°C.

c. Further Background

Researchers from UEA have been closely involved in efforts to monitor oceanic CO2 uptake. Dr Dorothee Bakker is a Reader in the Centre for Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (COAS), in Environmental Sciences at UEA, Chair of the Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (SOCAT – a high-profile activity by scientists worldwide), and is available to provide expert insight. UK scientists, including Dr Bakker, actively contribute to the SOCAT and Global Ocean Data Analysis Project (GLODAP) synthesis efforts of ocean CO2 measurements, which aid quantification of ocean CO2 uptake for the Global Carbon Budget, the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change and the UNFCCC climate negotiations.

2. Biomass Energy Carbon Capture & Storage (BECCS) The Committee should scrutinise the merits of the UK Government utilising biomass energy carbon capture and storage as a method of achieving net zero by 2050. This relates to the Committee’s sugested focus on ‘Nature based solutions to climate change’.

a. How effective is government policy in the policy area covered by each inquiry?

The UK Government has promised to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050 and is introducing an Environment Bill in the current Parliament to support these efforts, with carbon capture and storage playing a key role. Biomass Energy in Carbon Capture makes a substantial contribution to the removal of emissions from the atmosphere. The Government’s UK Carbon Capture Usage and Storage Action Plan acknowledges that “Low carbon gas from biomass is one of the potential routes to decarbonise homes, businesses and industry currently served by the gas grid” and the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has suggested that producing negative emissions could be the most valuable use of biomass by 2050.1

Recent research anticipates that half of all global CO2 storage required by 2100 will occur in the USA, Western Europe, China and India, in line with current estimates of regional CO2 storage capacity.

Current modelling research that informs international decision making has assumed strong policy action on carbon capture and storage (CCS) and implicitly assumes sufficient governance in place to ensure bioenergy feedstocks are produced sustainably (i.e. not impacting on food production or causing deforestation). However, only one-third of the bioenergy crops are grown in regions associated with more

1 BEIS, ‘The UK carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) deployment pathway: an action plan’ (November 2018); Committee on Climate Change, ‘Biomass in a low-carbon economy’ (2018). developed governance frameworks. Scenario planning of future CCS deployment rates suggests expanding CCS will likely be very challenging compared to historical rates of fossil, renewable or nuclear technologies and may be entirely dependent on stringent policy action, which the Committee should consider.2 Modelling suggests half of the biomass resource is derived from agricultural and forestry residues and half from dedicated bioenergy crops grown on abandoned agricultural land and expansion into grasslands (i.e. land for forests and food production is protected). Poor governance of the sustainability of bioenergy crop production can significantly limit the amount of CO2 removed by BECCS, therefore the estimates of the amount of BECCS that could be delivered are potentially over optimistic and rely on policys and governance structures that do not yet exist.

b. Why should the Committee consider a particular inquiry as a priority?

The Committee should consider the feasiblity and progress towards the Government’s carbon emissions target in light of the reality of global participation and the latest research findings. As the Committee on Climate Change has stated, “Maximising absorption of carbon from the atmosphere through the strategic use of land and biomass stocks is required to meet the goals of the Paris [Climate Change] Agreement”.3 Assessing the UK’s plans in light of the reality of global co-operation is therefore crucial ahead of the COP26 conference, which the UK is due to host, and enabling the UK to provide global leadership on this agenda.

c. Further Background

New research from the Feasibility of Afforestation and Biomass Energy in Carbon Capture and Storage in Greenhouse Gas Removal (FAB- GGR) project, due later this year, will better define the real-world feasibility and consequences of large-scale afforestation and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) approaches to greenhouse gas removal (GGR). These two greenhouse gas removal approaches have a common basis in growing biomass on available land and play the largest roles of any GGR approaches in future low emission scenarios that keep global mean temperature increase to below 1.5C and 2C. UEA’s Dr Naomi Vaughan is a leading carbon dioxide removal scientist, studying the technologies and methods of removing CO2 from the atmosphere in the road to achieve net zero, and currently leads the FAB-GGR project.

3. Promoting more granular decarbonisation projects

2 N. Vaughan et al., ‘Evaluating the use of biomass energy with carbon capture and storage in low emission scenarios’, Envrionmental Research Letters 13/4 (March 2018). 3 Committee on Climate Change, ‘Biomass in a low-carbon economy’ (2018), p. 8. The Committee should examine the relative merits of large scale energy projects, versus smaller scale but broadly used localised solutions. When seeking to achieve net zero, finding alternatives to how energy is consumed at home (i.e. using smart technology) can often be more beneficial, and result in quicker change, than large and expensive projects. We believe an investigation into how the potential use of smaller-scale and household-size green changes impact on achieving net zero, and how there are benefits to encouraging the utilisation of a portfolio of small scale technologies (e.g. E- bikes, smart meters, solar panels), to result in large overall change. Favouring smaller scale intiatives should be a criterion for designing public policy and targeting public R&D funding to reduce carbon emissions. This relates to the Committee’s sugested focus on ‘community energy’.

Additionally, we would encourage the committee to examine the future of UK energy supply, as there are many issues around storage, creation and trading that remain unaddressed. One area in particular which could be examined to contribute to a general reduction in emissions would be to identify the drivers of take-up of emission lowering schemes.

a. How effective is government policy in the policy area covered by each inquiry?

In June 2019, Parliament legilsated a target for a net zero target by 2050. As part of the UK’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions, the Government’s Clean Growth Strategy has pledged to forster greater competition, coordination and innovation across the energy sector.4 Ofgem has stated that achieving “net zero will require a huge increase in renewable and low carbon electricity... build[ing] an energy system that is as efficient as possible.”5 Recent government-backed projects to advance decarbonisation have tended to favour large-scale, high-profile initiatives.

For public policy, a greater number of smaller scale decarbonisation projects is more favourable to focusing a smaller number of large, high profile projects which tend to be more politically attractive. Research shows that small scale, more granular projects can be completed more rapidly, accelerating generation of reenewable energy or decreasing energy consumption.6 Additionally they usually have a lower capital over-run cost, posing a lower risk investment which improves capital flow and advance the ‘green finance’ agenda. A greater number of smaller projects can also be geograpically dispearsed, spreading associated new jobs across the country and supporting the Government’s “levelling up” agenda – creating a higher total number of new jobs whilst being more economicall efficient.

Such smaller scale projects go beyond simply energy generation. Possible policy recommendations would be to allow innovation in this area, particularly with regard to new technologies, and allowing market

4 BEIS, ‘Clean Growth Strategy’, (April 2018). 5 Ofgem, ‘Ofgem’s Decarbonisation Action Plan’ (February 2020). 6 C. Wilson et al., ‘Granular technologies to accelerate decarbonisation’, Science 368/6486 (April 2020). disruptors to demonstrate the value of their products. For example, by integrating all transport networks through a single payment app to reduce the number of car journeys.

b. Why should the Committee consider a particular inquiry as a priority?

Achieving net zero will not be possible without a radical change in the creation and usage of energy across the UK. While there has been a tendency to look for big, catch-all solutions, it is often the smaller changes that, when adopted widely, can have the fastest and biggest impact. The Committee will have the opportunity to shine a light on this phenomenon, and make a real impact on achieving net zero via its findings. Changing the emphasis of public policy and funding to support more granular decarbonisation projects is both economically and socially rational, aligning with broader public policy goal – granularity should therefore be a criterion for policy design and public funding.

c. Further Background

UEA has a depth of research expertise in decarbonisation. For instance Dr Charlie Wilson is a Reader in Energy and Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at UEA and a specialist in the intersection between innovation, behaviour and policy in the field of energy and climate change mitigation.

4. Community Energy Suppliers Access to the National Grid The Committee should evaluate ease of access to the national grid and consider the merit of improved access to the national grid for smaller and start- up suppliers to facilitate greater investment in the renewable energy sector. This relates to the Committee’s suggested focus on ‘community energy’.

d. How effective is government policy in the policy area covered by each inquiry?

The UK’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan commits the UK to being “a lead actor in the transformation of energy markets... developing liberalised markets and embracing the opportunity to increase renewable generation, decarbonise the economy and maintain affordability”7. In particular, the Plan aims to “move towards a more dynamic market, empowering the consumer and realising the potential of renewables [and] small scale generation.” However, many innovative and renewable suppliers face barriers to entry, which hamper the supply of renewable energy to consumers and restricts investment in renewable energy, investment which is essential to the UK’s aim to achieve net zero emissions.

e. Why should the Committee consider a particular inquiry as a priority?

Research shows that improving supplier access to the national grid is clearly one of a portfolio of policy tools that can more effectively

7 BEIS, ‘The UK’s Draft Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP)’, (January 2019). facilitate investments in the renewable energy sector, although a ‘one size fits all’ approach does not work in encouraging innovation in renewable energy. This is an objective in line with the Committee’s own recommendations in its 2018 Green Finance report8. Compared to other OECD countries, the UK is able to make more progress on this9. To deliver the UK’s renewable energy commitments, the Committee should explore opportunities for public policy to better support investment in and growth of renewable community energy suppliers. Within this context, community energy can be operationalised by commercial suppliers who and introduce an active role for community stakeholders. International success stories can be used to draw lessons on community energy schemes10.

f. Further Background

Beyond community-run energy schemes, the role of the community in energy supply can be enhanced by policies that remove barriers for consumer engagement in the energy market. Enabling widespread digitalisation of the energy supply and consumption and the emergence of individual prosumers can be a first key step in mass adoption of community energy platforms. Thereby prosumers become members of schemes were they commit their energy resources (production, storage, flexibility) to schemes that can commercialise them11.

Prof Konstantinos Chalvatzis, a Professor of Sustainable Energy Business at UEA’s , is able to provide expert evidence on this subject. His research focuses on energy policy, energy supply security and innovation in the energy sector including smart grid and storage and he has been the inaugural Chair of the DG Energy Working Group on Consumer Engagment for energy storage and smart grid. He has also supported the Working Group III of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the EU Directorate General for Climate Action.

April 2020

8 A. Pitelis, N. Vasilakos, & K. Chalvatzis, ‘Fostering innovation in renewable energy technologies: Choice of policy instruments and effectiveness’, Renewable Energy 151 (May 2020), pp. 1163-1172; House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, Greening Finance: embedding sustainability in financial decision making, (House of Commons, London: May 2018). 9 Pitelis, A.T., Vasilakos, N., Chalvatzis, K. and Pitelis, C.N., ‘Can industrial policy foster innovation in renewable energy technologies in the OECD and in EU regions?’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, (2019) 12(2), pp.271-292. 10 Stephanides, P., Chalvatzis, K.J., Li, X., Lettice, F., Guan, D., Ioannidis, A., Zafirakis, D. and Papapostolou, C., ‘The social perspective on island energy transitions: Evidence from the Aegean archipelago’, Applied Energy, (2019) 255, p.113725. 11 Bridge Customer Engagement Working Group Report; 2018. Mikkelsen T, Chalvatzis KJ, Li X, Vafeas A, Joumblat Mason L, Tawil-Jamault D, Paravan D, Barreto M, Bijnens M, Negreira J, Karg L, Watson M, Miralles AS, Darby S, Fikiin K. DG Energy, EU Commission.