moved Amendment No. 52:
52: Clause 14, page 7, line 38, leave out ““above ground””
The noble Duke said: My Lords, the purpose of my amendment is to determine whether it is the Government’s intention that all necessary alternatives for electric lines are clearly within the powers of the Infrastructure Planning Commission.
I realise that to be an effective amendment, further consequential points would be required. It may be that the Minister has an argument that the phrase, "““an electric line above ground””,"
can comprehend all sorts of other electric lines without my amendment, but that is not clear to the ordinary member of the public.
There are already certain forms of transmission that are outside the strict description in the Bill, such as electric lines underground or electric lines under territorial waters. Clause 16, which is devoted to electric lines, has a very useful stipulation that the Government wish only to include lines of more than 132 kilovolts. There may be practical limits on installing electric lines underground or under the sea, and there may be voltage limits; I am certainly not in a position to go into the technical limitations on these matters.
As noble Lords will be aware, developments of this kind in Scotland are the responsibility of the Scottish Administration. By way of illustration, I use the Scottish plan for a 400 kilovolt line from Beauly to Denny, which is presently under consideration. A number of arguments are being put forward that sections of that line should be put underground. If that is approved, it will still be a consideration for the Infrastructure Planning Commission, operating throughout England and Wales, that the same issue might arise. I am not sure whether that would be a possibility for consideration by the Infrastructure Planning Commission.
I thank the Minister for the assistance of his department on the question of undersea cables. It suggested that rather than coming under planning legislation, undersea cables might be dealt with under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. At present, the Bill looks as if the national policy statement, and even the Infrastructure Planning Commission, will have no role in saying whether offshore interconnectors might be part of the plan.
Many noble Lords will, like me, have received a paper from Ofgem entitled Connecting Renewable Generation, which lays down the considerable difficulties faced regarding the structure and capacity of the grid to take on renewable energy on the scale that will be required to meet our EU target of 15 per cent renewables by 2020. Ofgem estimates that this will require 37 gigawatts. Given that renewable energy is seen as highly intermittent, it will be even more important that the largest possible adequate grid is available, so that periods of shortfall from the area which is supplying renewable energy can be compensated for from other parts.
Surely it must be a worry for Ofgem, which has a statutory responsibility for security of supply, if the Infrastructure Planning Commission is looking only at the structure of the national grid where it is composed of overhead wires. Ofgem will already have to cope with a divided responsibility, whereby it would have to reach agreement with the Scottish Executive on construction of overhead lines to ensure continuity of supply, or that the renewable target is met, if renewable generation from Scotland were not immediately available.
The powers that would be required to lay undersea cables inside or outside the 12-mile limit are fully exercisable by the Scottish Executive, as are the interconnectors. This will presumably be of vital significance if renewable energy from the north of Scotland is to be carried by cables off the western or eastern coasts, particularly if they are within the 12-mile limit, because the Infrastructure Planning Commission will be a great deal short of the distance required to make the connections.
Another complication arises for any offshore generating station built north of Berwick—if I may put it that way—whose supply line crosses the border in the remainder of UK waters anywhere between the 12-mile and 200-mile offshore limits. My noble friend Lord Taylor is concerned that offshore generating stations should not come under this legislation at all, but the Bill includes them. Nothing in it considers how the connections will be achieved, particularly if they cross the boundary between the two national authorities.
I have another point which I hope noble Lords will allow me to raise, because it comes almost within the concept of an electric line, although it is not strictly electric—the fibre-optic network, which is increasingly important. Can the Minister say whether the Government envisage that this area might fall within the powers of the Infrastructure Planning Commission? If not, would the Government consider ensuring that an amendment were proposed for our consideration at Third Reading? I beg to move.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Duke of Montrose
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c450-1 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:56:01 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508030
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508030
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508030