Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Industry
Debate between Lord Wilson of Sedgefield and Lord Howell of Guildford
Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her question. I congratulate Scotland on qualifying for the World Cup, and there were some really good goals last night. It was really sad to hear that news about the plant at Mossmorran, which produces ethylene for export, employing 179 people. The Minister has spoken to the chair of the company and the unions, and the Government stand ready to provide support through the DWP rapid response service. The plant is 40 years old, has been loss-making for five years, and would take £1 billion of investment to turn around. This is a commercial decision by the company. The chair of ExxonMobil has confirmed to the Minister that he was not suggesting that the closure was due to a lack of action by the Government. The Government will do all we can to help those who are in difficulty.
Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)
My Lords, is there not one more hydrogen potential that the Minister has not mentioned? In transporting electricity, or transporting hydrogen, the prospect can be raised of avoiding having to cover the whole country with thousands more electricity pylons, as NESO is currently predicting. I agree that that means lower costs for hydrogen, but better lower costs and transport than paying huge sums of money to owners of wind farms not to produce electricity at night at all.
Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for his question, which raises a very important issue. It is fair to say that hydrogen cannot provide all the answers to issues around energy provision, but it can reach those hard-to-reach businesses such as steel and chemicals, for example. We need to set up a system in which we can do that. The Government are investing in that; we are spending tens of millions of pounds on doing just that. It is something that we want to see grow into the future. As I have said, by 2050 it will be a $1 trillion industry, and the UK has to be part of it.
Modular Nuclear Programme
Debate between Lord Wilson of Sedgefield and Lord Howell of Guildford
Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
Under the agreement that we have just signed with the USA, that is going to happen as soon as possible, but no later than 2028.
Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)
Given that Hinkley, the French-designed nuclear project, has been billed as the most expensive the world has ever seen, and the plan is to repeat that in a replica at Sizewell, can the Minister tell us what thoughts the Government had on an alternative design at Sizewell of small reactors, which would be quicker to build, cheaper, attract more private investment and vastly reduce the demand on government funds?
Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
The Sizewell C position is that it will create many jobs in construction and apprenticeships, and for the next 60 years will supply energy to around 6 million homes. It is absolutely right that the idea of the SMR programme is to create a modular reactor which is easy to assemble and duplicate and will keep down costs into the future. It is imperative that we keep ahead of the curve on this.