Hidden among the usual media frenzy around the latest Autumn statement, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) was busy trying to define what ‘Community Benefit’ might mean for communities hosting new major, clean energy, infrastructure projects.

In practice these projects, an integral part of our bid to decarbonise our energy system, refer largely to wind energy projects. And the communities impacted, including businesses, will be those living on or near the coast.

‘Community Benefit’ in the context of this consultation has been described as "communities that are hosting future electricity transmission network projects … [who] directly benefit from the contribution they are making to supporting the delivery of cheaper, secure and low-carbon energy that benefits all of Great Britain." 

You may have heard of 'The Great Grid Upgrade' - the banner that electricity transmission companies are using to describe these major infrastructure projects needed to tap into our ever-growing off-shore wind generation surrounding our coastlines. 

You might also have seen the headlines surrounding the "up to £10,000 off electricity bills" announced as part of the Autumn Statement (page 61 of The Autumn Statement). But beyondcutting energy bills for certain consumers, the eagerly-awaited government guidance to electricity transmission operators, which should set out how it expects them to make decisions on community grant-making for those asked to host clean energy projects, has yet to appear. 

What is ‘Community Benefit’? 

What might ‘Community Benefit’ mean for those communities asked to host this additional major infrastructure and the associated short-term disruption this will inevitably create? How could we both reduce the disruption from construction plus harness the opportunities that this major investment could potentially bring to homes and businesses?

As we await the final guidance due to be published in 2024, Sustainability First has been thinking about the scale of opportunity that genuine long-term engagement with communities on energy and climate literacy could have. Could this be the next big step in our energy revolution? 

Devil in the detail 

Sustainability First sent in its response to the formal consultation on this new guidance in the summer. We argue that ‘Community Benefits’ will play an important role in bringing communities on the Net Zero journey and ensuring a just transition. We argue that providing more funding combined with information to improve public understanding of the energy and climate challenges, will make a big difference. We highlighted the importance of community involvement in determining how funds are invested, through the establishment of community fora or panels supported by strategic partners. 

We also suggested that part of a successful local engagement could be facilitated through the creation of ‘community champion’ roles in each local area, with access to the knowledge of the energy system and sector, as well as community engagement skills, nominated to help communities to set local priorities.

Borrowing the example of Project Leo in Oxfordshire, where a combination of schemes took place including the retrofitting of housing to improve energy efficiency, a local hydro micro-generation scheme was installed, along with domestic solar PV installations, we highlight that it is possible to embed positive community-engagement at the heart of practical projects to shift away from fossil fuels.  

Helping vulnerable people

Mapping vulnerability, including fuel poverty indicators, across the UK and overlaying the geographic plans for Britain's Great Grid Upgrade should help electricity transmission companies and government. They could target those places that could benefit the most from grants generated as a result of the planned investments into this programme of Major Infrastructure Projects (MIPs). 

Improving energy efficiency on a national scale would be a key step to helping people in communities throughout the country. Funding projects to include the repair and retrofit of cold, damp homes and buildings for energy efficiency, and/or offer communities more opportunities to take ownership of their own renewable energy projects could help address inequality. And if the funding targets those communities with the highest volume of vulnerability 'red flags', we really would see equity in action (a fair transition) through this new source of funding. 

From a Great Grid Upgrade to a great climate conversation 

The benefits of repair and retrofit of cold damp homes, and democratisation of energy generation, remain the same in every community the length and breadth of the country. To really see the rewards of this thinking, we need to increase our collective efforts to create a great climate conversation that is just as large as the scale of investment and ambition shown through the Major Infrastructure Projects themselves. 

By increasing public awareness, knowledge, and access to information, people can and will take action themselves at home and in their communities to tackle climate change, and fuel poverty at the same time. If you lack the funds but have knowledge, this is where government can step in. 

Paying it forward

Some politicians suggest that consumption decisions based on environmental concerns are too costly now for people who are struggling during a cost-of-living crisis. It is exactly at times of crisis where governments could step in to ease shorter-term pain for longer term gain. 

Positive measures designed to reduce energy bills through energy efficiency measures, for example, targeted to support those of us hit the hardest by the latest energy price shocks and cost of living crisis is exactly where government intervention would make a meaningful difference. This could be supported by public and private funding (taxes and levies).  We cannot afford for climate change to be turned into a political football as we head towards another general election. Intergenerational equity and Brundtland's 1987 definition of sustainable development (meeting our needs today without compromising the needs of future generations) both point in the same direction. 

It should not cost the earth for the world's current population to 'pick up the tab' for every post-industrial-revolution misstep that has brought us to this point of climate crisis. Similarly, the scale of investment needed today to attempt to stop and then put right the global temperature tipping point of 1.5C, may well require more investment than today's consumers may be willing or able to cope with.

Instead, a sensible spreading out of investment across both current and future generations to make these big money decisions more acceptable now, is surely the best decision for the planet. But for these decisions to work, we need to involve the people and businesses impacted; community engagement must be at the heart of this shift.