the crc league table
Participants in the CRC have to be able to calculate the extent
to which any investment in metering technology and qualifying
for the CTS will influence their position in the league table. It is
currently not possible to do that with any accuracy.
to forego reduced energy costs while they got
on with the job of running the business. In
effect, the argument is that they could not be
‘trusted’ to reduce energy usage without
compulsion.
Little understanding of business users
That sentiment is a reflection of how far White-
hall is removed from the realities of the UK
economy. If the financial benefits of energy
saving are unambiguous, managers will not
pass up the opportunity to add an extra per-
centage point to their profit or net revenue
lines.
The energy savings will be achieved, and
Problems with the CRC league table
any reductions in carbon emissions will fol- The CRC draftsmen cannot be faulted in their
low automatically. outline design for the scheme – assuming that
Notwithstanding the mandatory nature of a valid case had been made for the Commit-
the scheme, with draconian penalties for non- ment along the way. But they failed in at least
compliance, the economic argument for the one major respect. Central to the CRC process
CRC will find participants paying progres- is the ‘league table’ on which every one of the
sively more for their carbon allowances and 5,000 participants will appear.
will therefore be ‘persuaded’ to reduce their The starting position will depend on two
consumption. ‘early action’ factors, including their securing
According to DECC, the CRC “. . . aims to the Carbon Trust Standard (CTS) and more
improve energy efficiency and reduce the widespread adoption of half-hour metering
amount of carbon dioxide emitted in the UK. across their organisation. Other factors are
This is vital to achieving our overall targets of brought into the equation in the second and
reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 subsequent years.
by at least 80% compared to the 1990 base- Participants need to be able to calculate
line.” the extent to which any investment in meter-
The draft CRC guide goes on to note that, ing technology and qualifying for the CTS will
“the better an organisation performs in terms influence their position in the league table.
of reducing its emissions, the higher it will The scheme attempts to spur participants
appear in the annual performance league table into those ‘early actions’, which are rewarded
[that the] government will publish, showing by moving them into the upper half of the
the comparative performance of all the CRC league table and therefore qualifying for a pre-
participants. mium payment when their carbon allowance
“This in turn provides a further benefit: all ‘tokens’ are surrendered in due course.
the revenue raised from selling allowances is The bonus available in the first year is worth
‘recycled’ back to participants, and the league up to 10% of the price of a carbon allowance
table position affects how much of the rev- (ie £1.20 per tonne) and this doubles in the
enue each organisation receives.” second year.
The starting position in the CRC league table will depend on two ‘early action’ factors; their securing the
Carbon Trust Standard (CTS) and more widespread adoption of half-hour metering across their organisation.
The Informed Executive
13
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56