Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to make changes to the traffic light system for monitoring induced seismic activity resulting from drilling and fracking for oil and gas; and what is the procedure for making such changes.
Answered by Lord Henley
There are no plans to make changes to the traffic light system for monitoring induced seismicity.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the potential overall cost effectiveness and environmental impact, including carbon footprint, of the process of pyrolysis of waste plastics into synthetic gas and oil within a closed system.
Answered by Lord Henley
Pyrolysis is an advanced conversion technology (ACT). We recognise that ACT has the potential to play an important role in helping us to decarbonise. To date we have not undertaken any assessments by feedstock type and therefore do not have data on the cost effectiveness and environmental impact of the pyrolysis process of waste plastics into synthetic gas and oil.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what the criteria are for the provision of grants under the Faraday Battery Challenge, established under the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, for the development and production of battery technology; and, in particular, what emphasis is given, if any, in those criteria, to the improvement of environmental and working conditions in those regions involved in the mining and production of lithium and other battery components, both now and in the future.
Answered by Lord Henley
The Faraday Battery Challenge is a competitive fund delivered coherently by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Innovate UK and the Advanced Propulsion Centre, joining up the stages of technology development from fundamental research, through innovation to industrial scale-up. Its focus is on the development of new and improved battery technology to address the challenges of future electric vehicles and other applications. The scope of the programme includes the environmental challenges of longer first life, recyclability and reuse of batteries. Upstream issues such as mining are out of scope of the programme.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of (1) the contribution of soot particles in the atmosphere as agents of global warming, and (2) removing soot from the atmosphere as a means of combating climate change due to global warming; and what action they are taking to reduce soot particles and other short-term climate pollutants from the atmosphere and prevent an increase in such pollutants in (a) the short term, and (b) over a longer period.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Soot particles, also known as black carbon, exert a warming influence on the climate through their enhanced ability to absorb sunlight. They also affect the climate through their impact upon cloud formation and upon the reflectance of the Earth’s surface. These effects make the overall impact of black carbon on the climate less certain.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 5th Assessment Report in 2013 showed that soot ranks third behind carbon dioxide and methane as a climate warming agent, excluding its influence on clouds. Recent work by the Hadley Centre found that the elimination of soot emissions between 2010 and 2100 could lead to an approximately 0.15 degree centigrade decrease in global mean surface temperature. However, as several measures that reduce black carbon emissions also reduce other emissions of cooling pollutants such as sulphate and brown carbon it may not be technically possible to realise this benefit in full, even if measures could be fully deployed globally.
The government is taking a number of actions to reduce emissions fine particles (PM2.5) for air quality and health reasons which will lead to decreases in emissions of black carbon and reduce wasted energy resources. These include measures to reduce vehicle particle emissions, increasing the efficiency of wood burning stoves through product standards and raising awareness of the benefits of using quality fuel and the implementation of the Non Road Mobile Machinery Regulations.
Other short lived climate pollutants include methane and tropospheric ozone. Reductions of emissions of methane and precursors of ozone are occurring through measures on vehicle and combustion plant emissions and through the natural gas mains replacement programme. In the longer term we have agreed, in the revised Gothenburg Protocol to the Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution, stringent emission ceilings which constrain total UK emissions of fine particles (PM2.5) and oxides of nitrogen from 2020 onwards. Methane is included in our ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets under the Climate Change Act 2008.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the report from the Dutch Safety Board in February 2015 into the man-made earthquakes in Groningen proven to be a result of shale gas extraction; and what assessment they have made of the parallels that can be drawn in relation to UK geology and the safety of the UK's shale gas operations.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
Extraction of shale gas has not induced any earthquakes in Groningen.
The UK has over 50 years’ experience in regulating onshore oil and gas, and strong controls are in place to mitigate seismic risks. Operators have to use all available geological information to assess the location of faults before wells are drilled to avoid hydraulic fracturing near faults. They must then monitor seismic activity in real time, before, during and after operations, and halt injection if seismic activity exceeds a predefined level.
Operators must immediately stop injection if a tremor of magnitude 0.5 or greater is detected, reduce pressure of fluid in the well and then monitor seismicity for 24 hours to determine whether any later events are recorded before any further activity can take place.
This 0.5 threshold has been adopted as an initial precautionary level set on the basis of a report by a group of independent experts, and a tremor of this magnitude would only be detectable at the ground’s surface through the use of sensitive equipment.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps will be taken to mitigate the effects of sand used in the fracking process being released into the atmosphere.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
Sand is used in the hydraulic fracturing process to keep the tiny fractures in the shale open. Sand itself does not pose a risk to health, but in some situations where sand is used on well sites the risk of occupational exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS) should be considered by the employer. Occupational Health and Safety is under the remit of the Health and Safety Executive, who have issued guidance and advice to help employers manage risks and to raise awareness of the importance of controlling exposure to harmful materials at work.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many ESOL classes were run by further education colleges and other public sector bodies in each of the last 10 years including the current academic year.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
We do not collect data on numbers of classes, but on participation. English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) participation is published as part of a Statistical First Release. The table below shows ESOL participation since 2005/06.
It is worth noting that figures for 2011/12 onwards are not directly comparable to earlier years as a Single Individualised Learner Record (ILR) data collection system has been introduced. Small technical changes have been made in the way learners from more than one provision type are counted, leading to a removal of duplicate learners and a reduction in overall learner numbers.
Adult (19+) FE and Skills - English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) Participation (2005/06 to 2015/16 Reported-to-Date) | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| ESOL participation |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2005/06 Full Year | 272,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2006/07 Full Year | 214,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2007/08 Full Year | 193,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2008/09 Full Year | 188,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2009/10 Full Year | 178,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2010/11 Full Year | 163,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2011/12 Full Year | 139,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2012/13 Full Year | 146,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2013/14 Full Year | 139,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
2014/15 Full Year | 131,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
Notes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
1) The source is the Individualised Learner Record. | ||||||||||||||
2) This table includes Apprenticeships, Workplace Learning, Community Learning and Education and Training provision taken at General Further Education Colleges (including Tertiary), Sixth Form Colleges, Special Colleges (Agricultural and Horticultural Colleges and Art and Design Colleges), Specialist Colleges and External Institutions. | ||||||||||||||
3) Volumes are rounded to the nearest hundred. | ||||||||||||||
4) Figures for 2008/09 onwards are not directly comparable to earlier years as the introduction of demand led funding has changed how data is collected and how funded learners are defined from 2008/09 onwards. | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data reported so far for the first quarter of 2015/16 show that 71,500 learners participated in ESOL between August and October 2015. This is in-year data which is subject to revisions and cannot be compared with data from earlier years.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether persons coming to live in the UK on spousal visas are entitled to make use of existing schemes of English language tuition provided through public funds; and on what terms.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
Funding for english for speakers of other languages (ESOL) provision in England is normally restricted to people who have been resident in the UK or another EEA country for at least the previous 3 years on the first day of learning. For the 3-year residency rule not to apply to a person coming to live in the UK on a spousal visa, the spouse in the UK whom they are joining would have to have been resident in the UK for at least 3 years.
Full-funding is prioritised for people who are in receipt of certain work-related benefits and are mandated to undertake skills training to improve their English in order to find work. This is funded through a provider’s Adult Skills Budget. People on other state benefits who are unemployed and where poor English skills are a barrier to finding work, may still be eligible for full funding at the discretion of the training provider. All others can be co-funded but are expected to make a contribution towards the costs of training.
Other opportunities to learn English on publicly-funded programmes include BIS supported community-ESOL programmes and DCLG community-based English language projects.
Asked by: Lord Greaves (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the expenditure on the provision of English courses for speakers of other languages (1) in further education colleges and other public sector bodies, and (2) in other ways, in each of the last 10 years, including the current academic year; which bodies will deliver the extra language tuition to be provided from the £20 million announced by the Prime Minister; and when that extra tuition will commence.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The table below shows estimated funding for adult skills budget ESOL provision from 2009/10 onwards. We do not hold data before 2009/10 or collect data by the status of the providers.
BIS funding for ESOL is allocated by the Skills Funding Agency as part of a provider’s adult skills budget. In addition, there are a number of ESOL courses funded through the Agency’s community learning budget, but we do not collect data which enables us to provide a breakdown of the expenditure on these. SFA-funded providers which deliver ESOL include Further Education colleges, local authorities and a few other providers. The Department for Communities and Local Government funds a range of organisations contracted to deliver their current community-based English language projects.
Our new £20 million community-based English language training offer will be informed by the findings of Louise Casey's Review and the learning from the six community projects we have funded as part of our current integration programme. In particular, we will work with Louise Casey to identify the most isolated communities in England to make sure this programme is targeted at those women who need it most and on the detail of how it will be delivered. We are working towards as early a launch date as possible for the programme in 2016-17.
YEAR | BIS ACADEMIC YEAR ESTIMATED FUNDING* (Adult Skills Budget) | DCLG FINANCIAL YEAR FUNDING FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROJECTS |
09/10 | £203m |
|
10/11 | £169m |
|
11/12 | £117m |
|
12/13 | £128m | £0.12m |
13/14 | £120m | £2.14m |
14/15 | £104m | £3.66m |
*Funding values are estimated using data from the Individualised Learner Record (ILR). Estimated funding provides an indication of the level of government funding and should not be treated as actual spend.