Energy efficiency: TUC response to DECC consultaion, 2012

TUC RESPONSE

DECC Call for Evidence: Energy Efficiency, April 2012

The TUC is the voice of Britain at work. Our vision is of a fair, prosperous and sustainable economy, bound together by quality public services, democratic institutions and a strong trade union movement committed to a fair and just transition to a low carbon society.

We welcome the opportunity to comment on DECC's consultation paper on energy efficiency, and believe that this is a timely opportunity to review our approach to the sustainable production and consumption of goods and services in the UK.

The TUC would prioritise further Government focus on two key areas:

The workplace, because workplaces account for a fifth of UK carbon emissions (DECC, 2009) and provide an under-developed opportunity to encourage behaviour change through joint union/employee/management initiatives.

Technology innovation in the energy intensive industries, because these sectors are essential to the UK's future manufacturing base.

Our response therefore focuses on these two issues.

A focus on greening the workplace

Efforts to reduce the environmental impact of the workplace are crucial to limiting the impact of climate change. The UK is committed to cutting CO2 emissions by 60% by 2030, with massive implications for the way we produce goods and services in every sector. The TUC believes that the need to engage employees and employers in building sustainable workplaces has never been greater.

Potential for greening UK workplaces

Findings from TUC GreenWorkplace pilot projects (www.tuc.org.uk/greenworkplaces) demonstrate that the most effective way of creating sustainable workplaces is through genuine employee engagement programmes (GreenWorks: the TUC, green workplaces Project Report, TUC 2010). The Carbon Trust (2009) states that employee engagement is crucial to enable the UK to meet its climate change targets and that 'employers are failing to galvanise their employees' enthusiasm'.

Of course, there is no regulatory measure in the UK with an employee dimension to encourage behaviour change as a driver of energy and resource efficiency. However, the 'tick box' system in the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) encourages employers to report, on a voluntary basis, whether they engage employees in energy savings at work.

Since 2006, the TUC has focused on promoting sustainable consumption and production (SCP) at the workplace, initially piloting thirteen green workplace projects across the UK which have supported the development of specific behaviours that result in increased energy efficiency.

In 2009, a TUC survey of over 1,300 union reps highlighted the need for a more systematic approach in the training and facilities made available to those union environmental representatives ('green reps') who have taken forward energy and resource efficiency issues in their workplace. Such an approach would help to maximise their potential influence among their work colleagues: Unions and climate change, Labour Research Department, LRD 2009. In broad terms, the TUC survey showed that unions at local level have acted as green champions in the workplace. Green reps reported a remarkable range of initiatives to tackle energy and resource use, recycling and green travel. The research also registered the tremendous progress made by unions on environmental issues in recent years. The TUC's report Greening the Workplace (2005) highlighted a handful of union examples, suggesting that this area of voluntary activity has grown dramatically. Furthermore, the TUC has completed an update of the national survey, with preliminary findings from the 2012 survey showing a similar level of green workplace projects nationally to 2009 (in excess of 1,200 initiatives) suggesting that interest has been well sustained despite the economic downturn that has marked the intervening period

The 2009 survey uncovered 430 different joint management-union committee structures or working parties discussing climate-related issues at work, pointing to high levels of enthusiasm among union reps to be involved in the environmental workplace agenda. About one in seven reps had attended union courses on environmental issues, reflecting findings from the Carbon Trust (2009) that the vast majority of employees want to reduce workplace greenhouse gas emissions but only one fifth have access to training. We believe that our findings, and our experience with pilot projects, demonstrate both the significant potential that exists to build the Green Workplaces agenda across UK workplaces, and the extent of the unmet training and support needs of employees.

Green workplaces and evidence of energy efficiency

The top five comprehensive activities on climate change reported by green reps in our 2009 report are listed below, including measures to promote energy efficiency, increase cycling and use of public transport and boost recycling.

Energy efficiency

Replacing VDU screens	30%
Computer standby/switched off when not in use	22%
Lighting controls	19%
Cutting night time and weekend electricity consumption	19%
Electric machinery switched off when not in use	17%

Transport

Loans for cycling equipment	30%
Secure cycle storage, lockers, showers	23%
Subsidies for cycling equipment	19%
Loans for public transport passes	18%
Tele/video conferencing	18%

Reduce, re-use, recycle

Recycling paper/card	54%
Recycling other items (metals, plastics, equipment, food)	32%
Reduced waste to landfill	25%
Purchasing recycled paper	22%
Green purchasing (e.g. fair trade products)	22%

The GreenWorkplaces projects seek to create a new sense of workplace level accountability, ownership and corporate responsibility for addressing climate change. Supported by innovative environmental education programmes, evaluation of our training sessions show union workshops engender a new sense of employee confidence in challenging the way employers' decisions are made on resource allocation and enhanced employee-management communication. The pilot projects were especially successful in linking management-led green champion approaches to workforce engagement with approaches developed in the same workplaces by local union reps (GreenWorks, TUC, 2010).

Importantly, they also help provide employment security through more sustainable ways of working. For example, at the InBev Magor Brewery, South Wales, union members of Unite working for the worlds' biggest brewer initiated a project to cut resource use and carbon emissions. This has led to a joint union-employer project that has achieved significant results in two years: water usage has fallen by 46%; electricity usage fall 49%; heating bills by 23%; and there has been an overall 40% reduction in CO₂ emissions. The project has saved £2m in costs and helped increase the level of job security.

The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (July 2011) has highlighted the TUC GreenWorkplaces project as a 'good practice example' of promoting both good industrial relations on an issue of common concern, and tackling resource usage at work. Industrial relations and sustainability: the role of social partners in the transition towards a green economy notes that : 'The TUC is clearly trying to strengthen the common rights of employees - a move which, if successful, would have an effect on the system of industrial relations'.

The study highlights the TUC-Unison project at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, where a joint environment committee including senior management and union representatives covers all key occupations and functions in the hospital, and members are granted reasonable time off to carry out environmental audits, including CO₂ reduction strategies. This is characterised as a 'noteworthy outcome of social dialogue practices in the field of greening the economy'. Further examples of green workplace project outcomes include those listed below:

A&P Marine, Falmouth: A&P Marine is the largest dockyard employer, with over 450 staff. Its main activities include refitting and repair to large vessels, but it has recently branched out into developing wave power generators. The company has a joint workplace energy team, which has identified various energy saving initiatives including replacing the compressor system with a more efficient model (a £100,000 outlay that paid for itself within 18 months); and installing new energy efficient pumps for a dry dock. The TUC and the recognised unions have provided joint training on environmental awareness across the site.

BT's Adastral Park complex: establishing a joint environmental forum, with joint initiatives to boost frontline employee involvement in greener workplace activities, part of BT's wider commitment to reduce its global carbon intensity by 80% by 2020. Early initiatives include engaging staff in site-wide carbon impact assessments covering energy, water and waste and introduction of widespread water efficiency savings and a Green Travel Plan.

British Museum: A green workplace project has been assessed as saving £700,000 in energy costs and projected carbon savings of 1050 tonnes in two years.

Bristol City Council: a joint environmental agreement provides for a green reps committee, including facility time to audit sites and access training needs. This includes a green rep in every department. The committee's work programme focuses on four priority areas: implementing a standard approach to waste and recycling in all major council buildings; replacing all large bottled water dispensers with filtered, cooled mains water where practicable; developing a waste management policy for all council-organised festivals and events; and an eco-driving scheme targeting high mileage drivers at the council. Eco-driving training, training 60 drivers so far, has helped deliver fuel savings of at least £350 every year for each diesel van covering at least 25,000 miles in a year.

European evidence on energy efficiency at work

The study by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions summarised trade union activities carried out at a national, sectoral, plant or individual level

include a broad range of instruments and dialogue forms, including:

involvement in political debates on green topics in multi-stakeholder forums (in all countries and especially to establish a national sustainable development strategy) or on a bilateral level with the state (for example, the Trade Union Sustainable Development Advisory Committee (TUSDAC) in the UK), or with employers and employers' associations (for example, the eco-voucher initiative resulting from collective bargaining agreements in Belgium);

publishing of position papers or demands (in all countries);

publications that specifically address green issues (for example, several studies and guides by the TUC in the UK on adapting workplaces and union actions to deal with the impacts of climate change);

courses for green skills run by unions for employees or employee representatives (in Germany and the UK); and

actions for individual employees/workplaces (for example, the TUC GreenWorkplaces projects to design environmentally friendly workplaces and to improve workers' involvement in and commitment to green topics).

In Germany company agreements between management and works councils on green issues appeared as early as the 1980s. Since then, unions and companies have more systematically concluded sectoral agreements that enlarged the information, consultation and co-determination rights of works councils in respect of corporate environmental management issues. Works council members can contribute specific knowledge to management's efforts towards resource efficiency. DGB and the German Ministry for the Environment have been running a project called resource efficiency in firms since 2008. Works council members and employees are trained to recognise and implement ways to improve energy efficiency.

In Italy, a 2006 agreement in the chemical industry extended workplace dialogue to environmental issues, enhancing the competence of safety reps to cover environmental issues. And in Belgium, the Walloon region has established dedicated environmental training centres with social partner involvement, which covers energy management and renewable energy. This allowed for the development of good practices through social dialogue in several companies.

The TUC is pleased to learn from the consultation document that the Energy Efficiency Deployment Office (EEDO) is commissioning two evidence reviews of empirical evidence to highlight the effectiveness of interventions designed to influence specific energy-related behaviours in non-domestic sectors, and we would welcome an opportunity to meet with EEDO to discuss our experience over more than five years in this field.

A focus on technology innovation

We would agree with the comment in the consultation paper that, 'Energy efficiency is not only about how we consume energy. It is also about producing and converting energy as efficiently as possible; that is, making sure that we get the highest possible amount of energy output from a given fuel input.' The paper goes on to cite examples such as higher efficiency boilers, flue heat recovery systems and CHP .

The TUC believes that the DECC review of energy efficiency should also focus on energy and carbon-intensive industrial processes, both for environmental and economic reasons. Securing the future of the energy intensive industries in the transition to a low carbon economy is a high priority for both the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and the Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG), and is reflected in the work of the Green Economy Council (GEC) and the work prioritised through the energy intensives task group of the GEC.

Over 800,000 people work in our energy intensive industries and their supply chains. Iron and steelmaking, cement and lime manufacture, chemicals, ceramics, glass, non-ferrous metals, pulp and paper, coke and refined petroleum product industries form the bedrock of UK manufacturing.

The widespread belief that energy intensive industries (EEIs) are labour intensive and heavily polluting remnants of a bygone era could not be further from the truth. They are the core of the real economy. These industries produce primary inputs for much of what we manufacture and consume in some of the most advanced plants of their kind globally. They contribute hugely to the social and economic fabric of the country. And they are the key to our green and sustainable future, providing steel for wind turbines, glass for double glazing and fibres for loft insulation.

By their very nature, these industries use large amounts of energy (electricity and gas) in their manufacturing processes or as raw material. They account for roughly half of UK industrial energy consumption. And they account for an estimated 55 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions a year, or most of industry's emissions.

Yet, as a result of decades of innovation and investment, the UK's heavy industries are often more efficient and less polluting than competitor operations in other parts of the world. Whilst these industries are mature, with the right policies and business environment, they will continue make a significant contribution to UK growth, both through their own profits and those of the many companies they supply products to. .

The potential for new technology to save energy and money

The joint TUC/EIUG study, Technology Innovation for Energy Intensive Industry in the United Kingdom, concluded that there were a number of potential technologies that could result in significant decarbonisation of the manufacturing sectors, with additional benefits ranging from improved quality to a reduction in the use of scarce resources. These technologies may be categorised in broad terms according to the way in which they address emissions reductions:

? Use of carbon capture and storage/utilisation (CCS/U);

? Process change;

? Switching to biomass.

From a technology perspective, carbon capture and storage (CCS) offers the greatest opportunity for carbon dioxide (CO2) abatement within the UK's energy intensive industries. The viability of this approach, both technologically and economically, varies between sectors, with ammonia production, iron and steel production and chemical processing being best suited to its early adoption. It is least applicable for paper and pulp, ceramics and glass sectors due to the nature of these industries in terms of size and production distribution.

Technologies potentially available differ in their potential timescales for commercialisation and deployment. Whilst some may be expected to be commercially competitive by 2020, assuming that demonstrators can be developed in the near future, achieving the UK's 2050 emissions targets will require a further set of technologies requiring more fundamental research and development. These might become available in 2030-2050, if proven, but are subject to a much higher degree of uncertainty both from a technology and economic perspective.

Based on interviews with employers across the energy intensives sectors, the TUC's research has found the top eight barriers to low carbon investment to be:

Price of energy: A number of representatives identified the high and rising costs of energy and energy taxes in the UK, as well as rising commodity prices, as a barrier to investment. Parent companies see relatively poor returns on investment in the UK compared with other countries. The representatives consulted referenced the point made in the TUC/EIUG report (2010) on the cumulative impacts of climate change policy on the energy intensive industries, with both electricity and gas costs expected to rise by up to 22% by 2020. In this respect, the Autumn Statement 2011 has provided some welcome initial relief to company costs.

Availability of capital: A large proportion of UK companies operating in the energy intensive sector are subsidiaries of global organisations and compete internally for capital investment. Higher costs make it more difficult to justify internal group investment in the UK. The Green Investment Bank was, however, seen as potential source of capital for energy efficiency projects.

Lack of financial support for R&D: Some respondents commented on the difficulty of accessing government support to promote industry R&D.

Regulatory uncertainty: Long term clarity was seen as vital to underpin high cost, long term technology investment.

Technology limitations: For many industries, much has already been done to improve the efficiency of the processes involved and there are efficiency limitations on current processes.

Cross industry infrastructure: Respondents commented on the need for investment in national infrastructure, notably for carbon capture and storage, and electricity decarbonisation and recycling.

Industrial geography: Dispersed geographic location characterises large integrated industries, such as Iron and Steel, with different parts of the process located in a dispersed manner which can lead to large inefficiencies, and prevent heat capture and transfer opportunities. Some industrial regions may benefit from a concentration of production (e.g. Aire valley), as plants located outside identified regional carbon capture & storage CCS clusters may be prevented from accessing CCS transportation and storage networks due to high pipeline connection costs.

Supply chain geography: National policy and infrastructure need to be improved to generate greater CO2 savings, for example, in glass recycling policy and operations.

The TUC would therefore encourage DECC to ensure that Government develops an industrial strategy that secures the range of long term investments required to advance process efficiency and secures the energy intensives place in the UK economy for the long term.

---

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/26/en/1/EF1126EN.pdf

For details, see :

http://www.tuc.org.uk/greenworkplaces

TUC GreenWorkplaces Project 2006-07, Objectives and outcomes report, TUC 2008.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/workplace/tuc-19223-f0.pdf

---

[s1]?

[s2]?

[s3]Of promoting greener workplaces, or of good industrial relations? What about 'of how good industrial relations can be used to promote greener workplaces'?

[s4]?

[s5]I am not sure that on their own these examples add that much.

[s6]?

[s7]?

[s8]?