Joined: 05 September 2004
"This Memorandum identifies the provisions in the Energy Bill which confer power to make delegated legislation. It explains the purpose of the delegated power proposed; why the matter is to be dealt with in delegated legislation; and the nature and justification for any parliamentary procedures that are proposed."
It ever there was a monster invented to suffocate this country under layers and layers of unnecessary regulation then it is the Energy Bill and all its Henry VIII clauses.
But according to the CfD impact assessment
this is ok because they answer the question
"What policy options have been considered, including any alternatives to regulation? Please justify preferred option (further details in Evidence Base)"
"The lead policy option to deliver low-carbon investment was identified in the EMR White Paper IA2 as a feed-in tariff Contracts for Difference (FiT CfD); a summary of the evidence informing that decision is presented in this IA. Evidence supporting the lead option to mitigate risks to electricity security of supply, using a capacity market, is presented in the Capacity Market IA, which was published alongside the Energy Bill.
As announced when the Energy Bill was published, this IA has been updated to present Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) and price and bill impacts as a result of updated assumptions, including technology costs and electricity demand at the time the analysis was undertaken. These assumptions are set out in more detail in Annex A and include fossil fuel price sensitivities, in addition to reflecting the recent agreement over the Levy Control Framework to 2020/21.
To reflect the decision to take a power in the Energy Bill to set a decarbonisation target range and show the wider range of costs and benefits of EMR, this Impact Assessment - in addition to analysis based on a carbon emissions intensity of 100gCO2/kWh for the power sector in 2030, consistent with previous EMR impact assessments - includes analysis based on an average emission level of both 50gCO2/kWh and 200gCO2/kWh in 2030. The analysis uses DECC's in-house Dynamic Dispatch Model (DDM)3, and rather than a point estimate, presents a range representing possible counterfactuals that meet the same decarbonisation objectives. This shows that the design of EMR
and specifically the FiT CfD will lower the cost of financing the large investments needed in electricity infrastructure, irrespective of the level of decarbonisation in the sector to 2030."
Which in layman's terms (as far as I can tell) reads: our policy is so good and so well justified that we didn't need to consider any alternatives.
Outlining the Assumptions for the Dynamic Dispatch Model needs a document 3 pages long, two of which are the front cover and back cover.
The document doesn't bother listing them, but gives reference to other documents from which the evidence form making them was gleaned.
So as usual the government documentation is written to confuse and mystify, rather than clarify and elucidate.