Health and Safety Executive Board HSE/10/41

Meeting Date: 28 April 2010 FOI Status: Fully Open

Type of Paper: Above the line Exemptions: None
TRIM Reference: 2010/177859

An update on the Emerging Energy Technologies Programme

Purpose of the paper

1. This paper updates the Board on progress with the Emerging Energy
Technologies (EET) Programme as requested at its January 2009 meeting. It invites
a steer on the degree of strategic involvement it would like HSE to take on in
regulating the new energy industries before we finalise proposals for an
organisational strategy for EET, which will be brought to you later this summer.

Background

2. The Board will recall the presentation and discussion at its meeting on 28 January
2009 (HSE/09/15). The key programme work streams are repeated in Annex 1. EET
aims to deliver by 2011:

• a coherent organisational strategy for HSE’s regulation of the (non

nuclear) emerging energy technologies; and
• guidance to enable HSE divisions to plan and deliver against this
strategy.
3. These objectives are set in the context of HSE being seen and recognised as a
responsible enabling regulator, working in the public interest to facilitate the safe
introduction and proliferation of the new energy technologies. EET contributes
significantly to the HSE Strategy goal of avoiding catastrophe though not all the
hazards associated with EET activity fall into this category – many are simply novel
and untried, bringing regulatory challenges of their own as a result. EET also
supports a number of the other goals such as increasing competence and taking the
wider view. The programme also plays into many of the objectives in the 2010/11
business plan released at the end of March.

4. The new energy industries are emerging at differing rates and scale. Wind farms,
and biomass plants are proliferating; carbon capture and storage (CCS)
demonstration projects and underground coal gasification projects are in the design
stage. Smart meters are very much in the public eye. Progress will undoubtedly
accelerate in line with Government incentives.1 There is diversity in the industry
sectors in terms of size and expertise. They sit in the middle of HSE’s mainstream
business but do not easily integrate with many of the conventional responses to that
work. Quite a lot of EET activity is characterised by new entrants and low barriers to
entry.

5. The UK energy strategy is a pivotal point in the economy and HSE is uniquely
placed as a regulator, with a wide remit and both broad and deep expertise and with

1
Examples, i) Delivery of 30% of our electricity by renewables by 2020; ii) special tariffs for offshore energy
projects and localised onshore small generation; iii) public funding of 4 large scale CCS systems; and iv) no
new large combustion power stations unless deemed ready to install CCS.
Page 1 of 12
no one industry sponsor. In addition we have an entirely neutral stance in respect of
the various technologies. HSE is therefore well placed to make both a significant
and a balanced contribution to the successful development of these new industries
and the protection of their burgeoning workforce.

6. A futures report commissioned from HSL confirms that the future energy economy
in the UK will be a diverse mix by 2020. This will be made up of conventional fossil
fuels (transformed by CCS, underground coal gasification, and storage of imported
gas underground and under the sea) and a significant and rapidly increasing
onshore and offshore renewables sector. (See Annex 2)

7. Safety aspects are key to the Government’s energy agenda. Factors such as safe
design and the development of industry standards which anticipate health and safety
challenges will not only contribute to securing the health and safety of workers in the
new energy industries and the public, they will also buttress securing and sustaining
the energy supply, head off costly safety failures and contribute to public confidence
in the new energy industries.

Argument

8. The Board is invited to consider action under three broad headings of: regulation
and intervention; resources and costs; and communications and knowledge.

Regulation and intervention

9. Clear regulatory and intervention strategies for EET provide assurance to

operators and to the markets that support them, as well as underpinning public
confidence in the new technologies.

10. In his letter to the Energy Minister in 2006, Geoffrey Podger stated that the UK
health and safety regime is sufficiently mature and flexible to regulate EET effectively
but that regulatory changes may be necessary as we gain experience.

11. Experience now shows the present regulatory regime is not fully fit for purpose
when viewed across the range of the emerging energy sectors. We can say the
options for future regulation lie at or between the broad application of HSWA2 and a
reform package specifically directed at EET that would bring clarity to EET duty
holders and an appropriate degree of consistency between onshore and offshore
provinces. All the options are being tested against better regulation principles. We
have not – so far – seen a case for developing wholly new regulatory approaches.
We believe that regulatory reform will be a matter of extending and adapting familiar
regulatory approaches to new situations (we expand slightly on this point in
paragraph 16).

12. Consideration of the desired regulatory strategy poses a number of challenges

related to the degree of regulation HSE should or can exercise. There will be
challenges for design and operations of new energy facilities, and for the
development of new guidance and standards applying to relatively untested
technologies. This needs to be seen in the light of regulating under the pressures of
some EET coming into the industrial sector now, before we have determined and
implemented the regulatory strategy for the longer term.

2
We secured the application of HSWA offshore to renewable energy industries beyond the UK territorial seas
(12 miles from the land line) in 2009 by making a temporary variation order to the Application Outside Great
Britain Order 2002. It is intended to consolidate this provision by April 2011.
Page 2 of 12
13. Overseas, there is no clear pattern for EET regulation in Europe or elsewhere
that indicates – currently at least – scope for a joined up approach to regulation3. An
exception is to classify CO2 as ‘hazardous’ under the Seveso II directive4. In this we
encourage the European Commission (EC) to lead, with HSE in support along with
aligned member states such as Holland5.
14. There are opportunities for developing and harnessing relationships with new
intermediaries entering the industry, such as new trade associations6. Similarly,
there are new relationships which we are developing with other regulators and
sponsor departments to avoid potential conflict of interests between climate change,
energy security, marine exploitation, and safety agendas.
15. The challenges posed by the emerging energy sectors cut across (and between!)
HSE’s operational divisions and require inputs from across HSE emphasising that
HSE’s EET interventions strategy will require the capacity for cross-functional and
cross-organisational, working and learning.
16. In meeting the challenges to our regulation of EET, the breadth of the industries
and scale of players involved means that, in terms of regulation, there will not be a
‘one size fits all’ solution. While it is unlikely that major regulatory reform is
necessary, hazards familiar in some sectors are appearing in new energy
applications7 . New entrants, and existing players diversifying into new high hazard
operations, are driven by the incentives and opportunities. They often lack an
appreciation of risk assessment and hazard controls familiar to operators of
established industries. This has foreseeable consequences for HSE’s conventional
approach to forging partnerships in regulated industries both to develop standards
and to secure consensus on effective regulation.

17. The issues above need to be seen in the context of appropriate linkage to the
current HSE Strategy and any future (post election) policy developments. It may
prove to be the case that new entrants are so unfamiliar with the new industrial
environment they operate, that specific regulation is necessary. The key message is
that even if we commence with light regulatory reform, we may need to increase
regulation, in places, later.

Resources and costs

18. Development of the EET health and safety regime will raise a range of resource
challenges for HSE. Growth of the industries and development of the regulatory
regime will come at a time of constrained public expenditure. HSE has not yet been

3
The EC has formed a new DG solely focused on energy (by separating transport from the predecessor
directorate). This does not necessarily signal an intent to incorporate health and safety (or the environment) into
European energy strategies. For example the recent CCS Directive focuses on incentivising and enabling CCS
technology. A characteristic of EU and other overseas regulation is to prioritise permanency of geological
storage of CO2 rather than the hazards arising from the process chain
4
We are currently seeking adoption of the principle of CO2 as a hazardous substance – e.g. under Seveso II –
which will result in the extension of existing major hazards legislation to CCS regulation rather than new
regulation per se.
5
We are engaged with EU members on some standards work. For example, related to wind farms we encompass
mobile offshore construction vessels, marine foundations, and machinery standards.
6
Broadly speaking, the new associations show serious intent to work with HSE and regulatory partners to
develop standards and skills for their sectors
7
Examples: dust explosions occurring in wood chip burning power plants; asphyxiation and explosion hazards
in bio waste plants on farms; unguarded high speed rotating shafts in wind turbine housings.
Page 3 of 12
able to secure the powers to recover its costs for EET work8 as it does for its existing
high hazard work and resolving this is a high priority.

19. There will be new demands on HSE as a statutory consultee in the new planning
regime9 administered by the Infrastructure Planning Commission. Hitherto we have
not succeeded in securing cost recovery powers when acting as a statutory
consultee within the new national arrangements, but we will continue to press to do
so.

20. On the personnel side, there will be considerable pressure for skills associated
with the new industries. HSE will be operating in a competitive market and could
experience the poaching of its existing personnel at a peak time for regulatory
change. Pressure may emerge to release HSE staff from other regulatory areas,
with the right skill sets for EET work, when we do not anticipate any diminution of
existing risks that HSE has to continue to oversee.
21. There are some areas where there is a ready read-across to EET-specific
hazards such as working at height, confined space entry and hazardous
atmospheres, but we cannot rely on this approach more widely to prepare staff for
the new challenges that EET will create. There will be significant training needs for
inspectors involved in regulating the new industries although every indication that
HSE could upskill existing staff rather than recruit EET specialists.
22. Apart from technical specialists, development of any new regime will present
significant demand for policy advisers, lawyers, administrative staff and others linked
to regulatory development such as economists. Other pressures will arise from an
enhanced role for policy in developing new approaches to risk control of emerging
energy sectors in a global economic environment. Meeting these demands on HSE
at minimum cost exposure is a key area of work for the EET programme.
Communications and Knowledge

23. Government communications on the EET agenda are mainly directed at securing
public acceptance of the climate change priorities. There are other targeted
communications associated with specific consultations on policy. Overall, the media,
NGOs, trade associations and local opposition groups are probably the most active
in communication on EET. The situation may arise where HSE needs to respond to
public requests for information or assurance related to energy projects whilst
avoiding the appearance of being the sponsor Department to the project in question.
Conversely, there are real opportunities for HSE to establish a respected,
authoritative position in the emerging energy economy particularly where public
scepticism is greatest e.g. with (onshore) wind farms and underground gas storage.

24. Therefore the main communications challenges are:

• Communicating the foreseeable hazards and regulatory framework;
• Communicating the strategy for HSE as a responsible, enabling
regulator
• Enhancing HSE’s corporate profile.

8
For example, the UK is set to install up to 7,000 wind turbines offshore. In the future these will be of massive
height (even relative to oil and gas installations) with associated transformer and accommodation platforms.
Design, construction, maintenance and decommissioning activities will introduce a number of work related
hazards, some but not all similar to the offshore oil and gas sector.
9
HSE is a statutory consultee n the new planning system for all nationally significant infrastructure projects
Page 4 of 12
25. Whilst it is not HSE’s responsibility to justify the importance of EET to the media
and NGOs, HSE must be ready to deliver the message that, as a mature regulator, it
has the expertise to address the challenges posed by EET and have the evidence in
support. In addition we have to establish transparency in our regulation of untested
technologies as they are introduced into the UK. This means steering a responsible
course between opposition groups looking for evidence that the technologies are too
dangerous, and the market protagonists who will readily brand HSE as risk averse.

26. The knowledge challenges include enabling the regulation of emerging sectors
where there is currently insufficient scientific resolution to establish the need for
regulatory change10.

27. There is a prima facie case for ensuring HSE maintains its position as a learning
organisation, keeping ahead of the knowledge curve – where we are now - for EET
rather than chasing it. Components for a learning organisation include establishing
robust principles and a framework for HSE’s participation in research, guidance and
standards-making where there is a specific benefit to us (e.g. to improve regulatory
capability, or to secure influence over standards). Opportunities currently exist and
are being pursued for steering the broader research agenda and harnessing the
rapidly expanding energy science groupings in the UK and EU to improve our access
to available funding.

28. As a learning organisation we would need to scrutinise HSE’s internal

capabilities for knowledge acquisition, data processing, horizon scanning, and
information management through fit for purpose systems and organisational culture.
Work is currently being carried out within CSAG on these internal aspects with
support from the EET team.

Conclusions of our work so far

29. Our examination of the current and future demands for health and safety
regulation of the emerging energy sectors confirms the need to develop a coherent
organisational strategy for regulating EET. Advice from external members of the
programme board is that HSE is ahead of regulators in other countries in developing
a strategic response to EET. We conclude HSE does not yet have the full capability
to be a responsible enabling regulator of the new energy industries. There is an
intermediate plan (for 2010/11) dealing inter alia with:

• The offshore regulatory framework (see footnote 7)

• Revising the pipeline safety regulations to incorporate CO2 as a
hazardous substance
• Supporting DECC’s competition for the first UK demonstration scale
(300mwe) CCS project by undertaking design analysis for the capture
plant, pipelines and offshore stages.
• Negotiating in EU to classify CO2 under the Seveso II directive (see
also footnote 5)

10
This is notably in the area of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and the hazardous nature of dense phase
CO2, for example, in establishing suitable consultation distances around plant and pipelines for land use
planning purposes. Other examples are: i) there is a global lack of knowledge in full scale underground coal
gasification, e.g. control of underground process and dealing with high temperatures and toxic impurities. UK
operations are planned to start in 18 months; ii) the transition of a one-to-many power transmission and
distribution system for electricity to a many-to-many system (the so-called smart grid) introduces challenges for
isolation standards, control of contractors, and competency.
Page 5 of 12
 • Influencing joint research proposals in areas of key EET knowledge
gaps
• Developing a science plan with the Chief Scientific Advisor’s Group
(CSAG) and the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) in areas of
strategic regulatory interest
• Influencing health and safety considerations by key stakeholders in the
electricity transmission and distribution systems
• Working actively with the EET trade associations to encourage the
development and introduction of guidance, standards and training
• Giving leadership with other regulatory partners to ensure a joined up
approach to the here and now pressures caused by rapid growth of
EET sectors
• Gearing up our engagement with key stakeholders via a formal
communications plan

30. However HSE requires a coherent organisational strategy for the long term. In
paragraphs 9 – 28 above we have set out the ground on which the EET programme
members and its programme board11 have been working. The main elements of the
strategy are:

• Adequate regulatory cover (paras 9 – 13)

• An intervention strategy – how we will deploy our resources (paras 14
– 17)
• A resources plan – what human resources and systems we require and
how to pay for them (paras 18 – 22)
• A communications strategy (paras 23 – 25)
• A knowledge strategy – maintaining a flexible learning capability (paras
26 – 28)
31. In support of the options for the organisational strategy we are going to
publish a status report on the hazards and risks, standards and regulation that
attaches to EET. We will also explain in (relatively) lay terms the various
technologies. The knowledge and communications strategies should be available for
clearance in the next few months. However we will require a strong steer from SMT
and the Board on the preferred direction of travel for the regulatory, intervention and
resource components to the strategy. Before we bring the options – which is work in
hand - to the Board we ask for agreement to the broad thrusts that lay behind the
options. We also ask some key ‘how to’ questions at paragraph 33.

Broad thrusts for developing options for the regulatory strategy

32. The following areas are the broad thrusts along which we believe HSE should
develop options for an organisational strategy for EET, and that have guided our
work thus far:

11
The PB comprises Gordon MacDonald, Steve Dennis, Susan MacKenzie, Dr David Snowball, Clive Fleming
and Taf Powell (chair)) as executive members; Abigail Dean (Tsol) Tom Kerr (International Energy Agency),
Dr Martin Bigg (Environment Agency), Bronwen Northmore (DECC) and Dave Gorman (SEPA) are non exec
members. The work stream leaders (all HSE) are: Tim Galloway, Dr Lee Kenny, Steve Wing, Dr Brian Fullam,
Dr Neil Johnson and Linda Murray. Rosie Whitbread is Programme Manager. Rachel Russell is senior
researcher.
Page 6 of 12
 • HSE has a key role to play as an enabling regulator in facilitating the
development of the new energy industries and providing assurance for
the workforce and public that they are being properly regulated;
• HSE recognises that failure to provide support to the vital new energy
industries would constitute a core business risk to HSE;
• Work is needed to ensure that the health and safety legislative regime
is fit for purpose and able to cope with the range of risks posed by the
new energy industries; and
• The spread of the new energy industries and technologies will not
follow current lines. HSE requires clarity, consistency of approach and
joining up across the residual structural divides
Action

33. The Board is invited to agree the broad thrusts at paragraph 32 above. It is also
asked to agree the principles and desirable outcomes on which the EET team should
continue to work i.e. how to:-

• secure early intervention in technological development in order to

inform approaches to health and safety and encourage best inherent
design and practice;
• ensure that health and safety is embedded into developing energy
policies;
• give clarity and consistency to the on and offshore health and safety
regimes;
• ensure the affordability of any new health and safety regime in relation
to HSE’s principles12 and its policy on cost recovery;
• get the best out of the organisation taking account of any necessary
joining up across the organisational divides to improve alignment with
the new energy industries; and
• best interact with other regulators involved in the new energy
industries.
34. Once we have the agreement of the Board on the areas for attention, we will
return later this summer with options for a coherent organisational strategy for EET.
Consultation and paper clearance

35. Consultation has taken place through the EET Programme Board which includes
representative from PEFD, HID, FOD plus external representatives from DECC, EA
& SEPA and the International Energy Agency. It was first cleared by the HSE Senior
Management Team on 4 April 2010. Kevin Myers cleared amendments to this paper
on 16 April 2010.

12
That regulation is targeted, transparent, consistent, proportionate and accountable
Page 7 of 12
 Annex 1
Emerging Energy Technologies – work streams for phase 1, and
associated hazards

Carbon Capture and Storage: removing carbon from the power generation process in the
form of CO2 and transporting it in its dense (liquid) phase to be stored permanently in deep
geological strata.

The carbon dioxide capture process will bring onto combustion plants dangerous substances
such as Amines, Ammonia and Oxygen which, depending on the classification and
quantities, have known major accident hazard potential (toxic, flammable and explosive).

Carbon dioxide has been recognised as a work place hazard for over a century. Early
evidence indicates that the quantity of carbon dioxide compressed, transported and injected
could have major accident hazard potential because of its asphyxiant properties (it displaces
air) and toxicity (note CO2 is not currently classified as a toxic substance).

Handling carbon dioxide in its dense or supercritical phase introduces additional hazards
e.g. in offshore evacuation, escape and rescue, because it is heavier than air.[ There was a
major incident in Germany, August 2008, 40m3 CO2 released from a factory. 100 people+
required medical treatment, including early responders; 19 hospitalised; 50 houses
evacuated; cloud dispersed by helicopters]

Natural Gas Storage and LNG: replacing occurring reserves with imported gas stored in
natural strata or prepared underground voids. Also the importation, storage and
regasification of liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Both have known major hazard risks from fire and explosion, during transport, storage or
regasification, Regasification may be from ships directly into the national gas grid, or via
purpose built offshore installations.

Renewable Energy: the range of renewable energy sources including; bio fuels, wave and
tidal, and wind generation (on and offshore).

(a) Wind, wave and tidal powered electricity generation: (on and offshore, large scale to
micro sites.)

Potential for multiple fatalities from collapse of offshore jack up during turbine or substation
construction; known hazards from construction and maintenance activities, including falls
from height, electrocution, machinery guarding; potential for multiple fatalities following
turbine collapse or blade throw eg from failure of a school or hospital turbine. 3 FAI in last
quarter 2009 (2 offshore marine operations) Offshore access and evacuation (including
medivac from turbine housings) are particularly difficult.
To meet Government target for 30% renewables sourced electricity by 2020 requires c.
7,000 offshore turbines placing huge pressures on personnel, equipment and installation
vessel sources

(b) Biomass: (covers direct burning of biomass for heat and power, distillation of biomass to
produce biodiesel or bioethanol, and biogas production, all at domestic/small, medium and
large scales.)

Known fire and explosion hazards with potential for multiple fatalities from gas and fuel
production and storage, sparking of electrical equipment in explosive atmospheres, and
explosion of pressure vessels. Known chemical and biological hazards, asphyxiation risks in

Page 8 of 12
confined spaced (anaerobic digesters). See also distribution (for contamination of pipelines
and appliances)

Distributed Generation: increasing power generation at or close to the end user, including
the development and proliferation of hydrogen cells.

The known hazards are from fire and explosion during transport, storage or use; burn risk
from cryogenic storage; electrical risks from fuel cells.

Other hazards relate to the standards of equipment, much of it imported and available via
the internet; and installation and maintenance by domestic and other amateur users
The hazards also relate to distribution – see below

Cleaner Coal Technology: the refinement and development of mature cleaner coal
combustion techniques and energy abstraction from new coal seams without mining.

(a) Coal bed methane extraction:

There is potential for major hazard from fire and explosion from gas leakage at surface
during blending, transport, storage or use. Wells unpressurised (unlike oil and gas wells) so
a lower risk of well-related fire and explosion.

(b) Underground coal gasification:

There is a known major hazard fire and explosion from oxygen on site, and from syngas
leakage at the surface – as above.

(c) Advanced coal combustion technologies (at coal fired power stations):

(i) Supercritical power plant (coal fired power stations)

This introduces potential major hazard consequences from catastrophic failure of

medium/large volume boilers operating at higher temperatures and pressures. Occupational
health and safety hazards from maintenance and cleaning.

(ii) Cofiring of coal and biomass:

The spontaneous combustion of large scale storage of biomass is a known hazard but
relatively new to the power sector/stations. There are increased dock-related hazards with
initial large imports of biomass, known risk of death from oxygen depletion in confined
spaces, and exposure to hazardous VOC emissions, dusts moulds and endotoxins. There
are known deflagration and explosion hazards in co-milling of biomass and coal. Also major
hazard risks from acid gas removal activities.

(d) Advanced coal utilisation: Integrated gasification combined cycle power plants
(gasification of coal and then gas combustion):

The known major hazards arise from oxygen and hydrogen sulphide. There is major
accident potential from catastrophic failure of gasifiers (pressure vessels). Occupational
health and safety hazards arise from maintenance and cleaning.

Distribution and transmission: the physical capability of the national gas and electricity
transmission grids and dependent distribution networks in the future energy economy
transformed by distributed generation, new energy hubs, CCS and waste to fuel. Also
includes the capability of the operators and the supply side.

Electricity transmission: national, international, regional and local/domestic and on and

offshore to workers, contractors and the public: known electrical hazards including death

Page 9 of 12
from electrocution, falls from height, burns from flashovers; plus construction and excavation
risks attached to cable laying, substation construction on and offshore.

Injection of biogas or syngas into gas networks: Unknown impact of off-specification gas on
pipelines, equipment and end user appliances.

General suitability of main electricity and gas transmission systems (both fairly old, and built
for different national distribution of major power sources ) to safely manage transition to
distributed generation.

Demand management and load balancing technologies for electricity and gas eg SMART
grids, meters and appliances: known gas and electrical hazards. Potential consequences of
energy blackouts.

Common challenges across the sectors

The hazards inherent to the phase 1 workstreams can also be viewed in the light of
common challenges across the non nuclear EET sectors:

• engineering unknowns as technologies are upscaled to major industrial output

• lack of reliable data for failure and incident frequencies
• gaps in the standards
• inconsistency in applicable regulations
• new and inexperienced entrants to medium and high hazard activities – applies to
SME’s and large organisations alike
• low skills and competency baseline amongst operators and supply side and
contractors (and regulators)
• new regulatory interfaces with no legacy of joined up working
• growing public awareness of EET and local opposition to new projects (wind farms,
underground gas storage, and waste-to-fuel plants

Page 10 of 12
 Annex 2
A new energy mix – the impact on UK based work activities
In December 2008 the Committee for Climate Change advised Government to adopt an
ambitious target to reduce the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% in 2050. The
target should apply across all sectors of the UK economy and would be achievable at
affordable cost of between 1-2 % of GDP in 2050. The Government accepted the
Committee’s advice and legislated for this 80% reduction target in the Climate Change Act.

It is the Committees view that meeting the 2050 target will be challenging but feasible based
on a range of options for reducing emissions in the period up to 2050 including
decarbonisation of the power sector, energy efficiency improvement and transport sector
decarbonisation (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Source Committee of Climate Change

Delivering this target will result in a significant shift in the range of UK work activities
currently regulated by HSE. It we consider the decarbonisation of the power sector alone at
present, around 75% of our electricity is currently generated from gas and coal; renewables
will expand to around 30% of our generation by 2020 (Figure 213). In addition steps will be
taken to abate the CO2 emissions from gas and coal fired power stations through the
demonstration and retrofit of Carbon Capture and Storage technologies.

These changes will not simply represent a new range of hazards and risks for duties holders
working in the large scale power generation sector. With the development of a UK smart grid
we will increasingly see power generation embedded into the industrial, agricultural and
service sectors adding a new dimension to their current hazard profiles. We can also
anticipate a rise in community-scale low carbon power generation.

13
The 2020 chart is a projection of possible shares of electricity generated from different sources, from the DECC energy model which assumes
existing nuclear power stations are closed in line with published retirement dates and 1.6GW of new nuclear capacity is constructed by 2020.
Estimated energy demand today and in 2020 is around 370TWh.

Page 11 of 12
Figure 2

Decarbonising the transport sector and domestic heating will see an increased role for bio
energy:
• Commercial production of bio ethanol and biodiesel will increase to meet the
Government’s commitment to source 10% of UK transport energy from sustainable
renewable sources by 2020. (In the near future, biomass-to-liquid technologies are likely
to be used to produce bio fuels).
• A preliminary estimate from National Grid suggests that sustainable biogas could supply
almost 20% of the UK’s household gas needs by 2020.

A change in the UK energy mix will undoubtedly impact on UK employment. Work

commissioned by BERR and published in the ‘Low Carbon and Environmental Goods and
Services: an industrial analysis’ report (Innovas, 2009) shows that the UK this sector
(LCEGS) is forecast to increase in value by up to £45 billion in the eight years to 2015. This
increase takes into account some dampening in expectations from the economic slowdown.

In 2007/8 there were over 881,000 jobs within the LCEGS sector. The Innovas report
concludes that the forecast growth suggests that employment in this sector could grow by an
additional 400,000 jobs over the next eight years, many of these in the Renewable Energy
and Emerging Low Carbon industries.

Of particular interest to HSE is that just under a third (31%) of overall activity in this sector is
in manufacturing. In 2007/8 there were 54,835 companies active in the LCEGS sector in the
UK, of which 17,303 were involved in manufacturing. About 91.5% of the companies in the
sector are SMEs.

Page 12 of 12