Motor Fuel (Composition and Content) and the Biofuel (Labelling) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2021

Baroness Randerson Excerpts

Monday 12th July 2021 Grand Committee

[Baroness Randerson (LD)]

My Lords, these regulations involve the transition from E5 to E10 for premium petrol. I thank the Minister and her officials for their previous assistance and help in explaining the purpose of these regulations. However, I share the concerns just expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas.

The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has some harsh things to say about the way the regulations have been presented. It says that

“issues are raised in the Impact Assessment … that are glossed over in the Explanatory Memorandum”.

Specifically, the committee cites

“the role of E10 in propping up the UK’s struggling ethanol production sector”.

The impact assessment mentions the reason for this problem being lower than expected demand for ethanol across Europe. What are regarded as the reasons for this lower than expected demand? It may be that there is a sound reason for that, which could be increasing awareness of the disadvantages of ethanol as a solution to the problem of how to make our petrol less polluting by reducing emissions from it, or it could involve other European countries finding an alternative solution.

The second thing the committee cites is

“comparative CO₂ savings from ethanol and other biofuels.”

It believes that there needs to be more clarity here.

Thirdly, the committee talks about

“the long term costs to motorists as E10 delivers lower miles per gallon.”

Taking this last point, although a gallon of E10 petrol might emit less CO₂ than E5 petrol, if it burns faster and allows you to do fewer miles per gallon, surely the CO₂ savings are all but, if not entirely, cancelled out? The picture is further complicated by the fact that E10 can actually be anything between E5.5 and E10, so changes or improvements are likely to be gradual. Is the Minister convinced that this is really the right way to go to reduce CO₂ emissions? Are the Government convinced and confident that this is not their version of Gordon Brown’s ill-conceived push to encourage us all to buy diesel cars?

The Minister says that the industry supports this measure. It would, would it not? The ethanol industry is said to be struggling, so it would be bound to support this measure. The Government also say that the industry will not introduce E10 unless mandated by the Government. I am concerned that the Government are being led by the industry rather than by the environmental needs of the country and the needs of drivers.

Clearly, I support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport, which are now the largest single source of those emissions in the UK, but the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, rightly criticised the fundamentals of this. Ethanol production is mainly from crop feedstocks: wheat, sugar beet or corn. This is controversial as it takes up farmland that could be used for growing food. We are increasingly aware of the importance of growing more of our own food in the UK and relying less on imports because their environmental footprint is larger. Biodiesel is made from waste cooking oil, but the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, pointed to problems with that too.

The impact assessment warns that ethanol could at least temporarily replace other biofuels such as biodiesel, which has a higher greenhouse gas saving. Even if this does not happen, it will enable the Government to achieve only 7% of their additional transport savings required under their fifth carbon budget. That leaves 93% to be tackled by other means.

My question to the Minister is: why are the Government not being bolder? We no longer have to wait and work at the pace of the EU. EU targets are more than a decade old and have certainly led to significant improvements, but we now face real urgency to do something in this country. There is still another 14 years of sales of petrol and diesel vehicles before the Government’s 2035 target comes into view. The Government must devise new ways to counter the increase in average emissions from new cars as drivers opt for larger vehicles. Despite the technology being there, the emissions are going up on average—not down, as they should be.

Far-distant targets are not effective. We now need annual targets so that there is a constant process of improvement. We need a system of tax rewards and penalties to encourage faster take-up of the less polluting models, with the greatest rewards for those buying ZEVs.