The Conversation: Poor Getting Slammed by UK Climate Levy

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Conversation has noticed that climate taxes on energy used for home heating hurts poor people.

Poorest households hit hardest by UK climate change levy despite using least energy

March 2, 2018 10.58pm AEDT

John Barrett

Professor of Energy and Climate Policy, University of Leeds

Anne Owen

Research Fellow in Sustainable Consumption, University of Leeds

The UK is one of the leading countries in addressing climate change. As well as signing international agreements, the country has its own target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. And as part of the effort to meet that target, the government has added a levy to business and household energy bills. The average household energy bill is around £1,030 a year and the levy costs an average of £132 (2016 figures).

The good news is that the levy is working. About 20% of the levy is spent on improving the efficiency of homes. This is done by funding schemes such as the Energy Company Obligation, which provides insulation and other energy-saving measures to low-income households. The average household energy bill would be £490 higher without these improvements. The money is also spent on research to improve renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, and help bring down their cost.

But is this really a fair way to raise the money? Our new research shows that the poorest households not only are hit hardest by the levy but also receive less money back in the form of home improvements than they contribute in the first place.

We found that, in a year, the richest households each consumed on average the same amount of energy that would be produced by 12.7 tonnes of oil, compared to 3.3 tonnes for the poorest households. But the poorest spent a much greater proportion of their income (10%) on energy than the richest (3%). And the energy used for heating and powering their homes – the part that their climate change levy bill is measured on – represented a much greater proportion of their overall energy use.

This means that adding the climate change levy to household energy bills hits the poorest households hardest. Energy bills account for a much greater share of their household income and more of their energy use is charged. In fact, the levy only affects a quarter of the total energy consumption of the richest households, compared to 53% for the poorest households. As a result, the richest homes use nearly four times more total energy than the poorest but only pay 1.8 times more towards energy policy costs.

Read more: https://theconversation.com/poorest-households-hit-hardest-by-uk-climate-change-levy-despite-using-least-energy-92707

The full research paper is available here.

This research echoes similar research in the USA, research which suggests California’s regressive climate taxes are hurting poor people – an issue covered by WUWT a few days ago.

This issue really upsets me. I’m not a fan of big government, but green socialists pushing policies which actually hurt poor people seems insanely cruel.

As a child and young adult I could always relate to the objectives of my socialist friends – better opportunities, helping the poor and vulnerable – even though as a right winger I thought their policy ideas and methods, their plan to rely on governments to do the right thing, was implausible and counterproductive.

Then something monstrous happened – the gentle socialists I knew suddenly stopped caring about the here and now, they became fixated on a hypothetical distant future none of them would ever live to see. They started demanding policies they knew would hurt the people they claimed to care about, but waved away all and any objections in the name of saving the world.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
149 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 2, 2018 6:06 pm

The Conversation is an academic website based in Australia and largely funded by universities. It does have some good articles (I read it most days) but its dominant theme is promoting the One Truth about Global Warming (which on other than very hot days it calls Climate Change).

Ed Zuiderwijk
March 2, 2018 6:23 pm

The last paragraph just says that they changed one bad utopian idea for another. Realists don’t fall for either.

Jim Heath
March 2, 2018 6:25 pm

The weak and the poor voted for it, good luck to them.

Amber
March 2, 2018 7:03 pm

The” Green” agenda is a population control measure designed to eliminate the poorest and weakest ,
a reverse Robin Hood stealing from the poor to give to landlords and the bird blender industry more cake and finally a brand spanking new fountain of guilt laden tax revenue . Even the government recognizes the diminishing returns of taking more the half of peoples income through layers of tax . But hey people don’t want to freeze do they ?
The only thing that will stop this assault are people in the streets and it’s coming fast .

MarkW
Reply to  Amber
March 2, 2018 7:59 pm

When did being a landowner make you part of the evil rich?

A C Osborn
Reply to  MarkW
March 3, 2018 5:38 am

When you put up Wind Turbines to get the Subsidies extorted from the poor.

Rob
March 2, 2018 7:06 pm

This isn’t new. They’ve murder thousands of seniors over the years with their high taxes on heating fuels.

crossopter2
March 2, 2018 8:22 pm

Meanwhile, UK’s Drax PS draws ~ £1500/sec in renewable subsidies…
That’s right, last year, 2017, Drax coffered £729m.
Don’t believe it?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2018/02/27/drax-biomass-subsidies-rise-to-729m-in-2017/

JBom
March 2, 2018 8:31 pm

In the UK it is the House of Lords, er in Ireland and Scotland they say “House O’Lards”, rules!
The Lard does take’ith by the Lard’s Law.
Ha hahahahahahahahha

Dreadnought
March 2, 2018 10:04 pm

Yes indeed, but it’s not just the appalling climate levies which have helped put six million U.K. households into fuel poverty.
The eye-watering subsidies paid for ruinable energy are, effectively, a transfer of money from the poor to the wealthy. Those with land and/or big roofs can adorn their properties with solar panels and wind turbines and sit back while the money rolls in, and ‘the little guy’ is left feeding the meter with ever more hard-earned coin in order to keep his family from shivering in the dark.

March 3, 2018 12:08 am

This is not something new. Government energy policy has been known for years as “the reverse Robin Hood effect”, i.e. robbing from the poor and giving to the rich.

paqyfelyc
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
March 3, 2018 1:36 pm

why just energy policy? ALL policy.
by definition, government will help the powerful, that is, those who have the ability to help a politician reaching top.
Robin hood robbed from the government, and give their tax money back to those taxed.

Paddy
March 3, 2018 12:50 am

This was patently obvious, and discussed, years ago – why is it “news” now?

A C Osborn
Reply to  Paddy
March 3, 2018 5:40 am

It is news because someone made it “News” instead of just ignoring it.

George Tetley
March 3, 2018 3:08 am

AND IN GERMANY !!
1Kwh euro 0.67 ( $0.86 1Kwh )
Thank you, savetheworldmukel

Bryan
March 3, 2018 5:46 am

The Government know how unpopular the increasing energy costs are.
So they blame the ‘BIG SIX ‘ energy companies for ‘vast profits’.
The truth is that the share price of any publicly quoted energy company has about haft in the last three years
Further the smaller private energy companies get relief of around £100 from climate levy giving them an unfair advantage over the big six.

Bryan
March 3, 2018 5:46 am

The Government know how unpopular the increasing energy costs are.
So they blame the ‘BIG SIX ‘ energy companies for ‘vast profits’.
The truth is that the share price of any publicly quoted energy company has about haft in the last three years
Further the smaller private energy companies get relief of around £100 from climate levy giving them an unfair advantage over the big six.

Gordon Pratt
March 3, 2018 7:45 am

Both the left and the right want higher energy taxes which will cause higher food prices.
Obama “justified” this with bogus climate science. Trump’s excuse is to build infrastructure.
We are ruled by people who hate us.

Amber
March 3, 2018 7:13 pm

Obama helped finance the failed Al Gore green cash register , Chicago Climate Exchange . Enough said .
Britain lost it’s “Great ” about 30 years ago .
Stupid ,stupid policy decisions need to be reversed and at least Trump is trying it in the USA .
Would CNN even exist if it didn’t have a bad case of Trump derangement syndrome ?
The reason most of the USA media attack anything Trump 7/24 is the free pipeline of leaks is drying up and they are going to shown to have conspired to facilitate the “insurance plan ” .

Jonny Scott
March 5, 2018 9:45 am

If you could prove with data tomorrow that this was all a natural phenomenon and that nothing we are doing has the slightest effect except to impoverish nations you would find that you will have made a lot of zealots very angry by attacking their religion with the curse of data. Your life expectancy after making that announcement would be counted in days if not hours. They do not need data, evidence they have belief. It is one of the strangest aspects of mankind that we as a group need religion AND one that will bring down hellfire and damnation on us if we stop toeing the party like