Are high energy bills a price worth paying?

I've been a professional environmentalist for 20 years and had concerns about environmental damage for much longer. I vividly remember in the 1980s the pictures of forests across Europe dying as a result of acid rain and the campaigns against it. Now I see pictures from around the world of our climate changing for the worse, be it catastrophic floods in Pakistan to changing ecosystems in the UK. I spend much of my time reading scientific papers that report on the threats to our well-being from continued environmental damage, especially climate change. It's within this context that I react with horror when I see orchestrated attacks against green energy measures in the media.

The science of climate change is clear despite the hollering of a small number of interest groups. If we don’t reduce our carbon emissions rapidly then we will all face more extreme weather events. Floods like those seen in Cockermouth and Hull will become more commonplace. Crop yields could be reduced at the same time as the global population increases, pushing up food prices for all. As global temperatures rise by 1.5 degrees or more above preindustrial levels, the risk of crossing tipping points in the climate system increases. Crossing these tipping points could lead to sea levels increasing by many metres over coming centuries flooding agricultural land and many cities.

Given this are higher energy bills a price worth paying in order to cut carbon emissions? I don't think so - I think it is entirely possible to keep energy bills under control for poorer households and make a shift to clean green energy.

Friends of the Earth has a long track record of campaigning on fuel poverty from the Home Energy Conservation Act in the 1990s to winning recent changes on energy efficiency in the private rented sector in the 2011 Energy Act. Cutting energy waste from the UK’s famously dilapidated housing stock has to make sense and the pedestrian rate of progress needs to be swiftly accelerated.

Fossil fuels are the bad guys...

But, perhaps surprisingly, investing in green energy could also lead to lower fuel bills in the future. Research by DECC has suggested that if the prices of fossil fuel are similar in 2020 than they have been in recent times then the Government's green policies will mean bills will be about the same as they would be if nothing was done (i.e. consumers won't lose out financially). If fossil fuel costs go up much then green measures will lead to cheaper bills in 2020 (consumers gain). Since all the smart money is on fossil fuels continuing to get more expensive as global demand increases it therefore makes sound sense to invest in renewables and energy efficiency. But what about people struggling to pay their bills this winter?

Almost one in four of us are now classed as 'fuel poor': millions struggle to afford to heat their home properly. Those who want to derail green action say cut costs now by cutting green measures. They suggests, without firm evidence, that cheap fossil fuels are just around the corner (but despite the hype shale gas isn't expected to lead to lower gas prices in the UK according to all the independent experts I've spoken to). They are using fuel poverty as a cover for their long-standing dislike of action on climate change.

Yes, of course Government has to make sure it helps people pay their bills this winter – but the answer is not, as some leading elements of the national media suggest, for us to scrap green spending, and to heck with the consequences down the line.

Instead there is a better recipe – speed-up energy efficiency measures targeting poorer households now, pay for more green measures through general taxation now (as with the Renewable Heat Incentive), change the tariff system to help reduce costs for the fuel poor and increase costs for richer, heavier users now (with measures to protect low income heavy energy users), and bring back higher winter fuel payments now and until the comprehensive energy efficiency programmes are completed.

In the 21st century we should be smart enough to be green and eradicate poverty. Those that advocate otherwise need to get wise to the consequences of not doing so.