The Alternative Green Energy Thread

michaels

JKenH said:

I came across this very useful paper from Cornwall Insight which sets out how electricity bills could be reduced by £207 for a dual fuel user (£300 for electricity only) by removing policy costs and additional environmental and social levies.




https://mcsfoundation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Policy-Costs-in-Domestic-Energy-Bills.pdf

edit: not all the policy costs are directly related to renewables - it also includes the WHD scheme I believe. I will try and provide further edits to break down these costs. As an example a bill for OFGEM’s typical 2700kWh user would be around 60p/day standing charge - say £219 plus 2700kWh at 24p  - £648 gives a total of £867. Without the policy costs it would be £660. Policy costs therefore add around  31% to the typical  domestic electricity bill. 

Please note that these figures do not include future network up grade costs which are likely to be running at £5bn+/year. Based on Cornwall Insight’s figures (£6.5bn = £300/household) this would mean network upgrade costs could be adding another £230+ per annum in future years. I don’t know how much of this is additional and how much is included in existing bills. 

Below is a breakdown of policy costs but this doesn’t tally with the Cornwall Insight figure so there is obviously a difference as to what is included.

https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/whats-in-an-energy-bill/policy-costs/#:~:text=Policy%20costs%20are%20government%20levies,cover%20investments%20in%20renewable%20energy.

Sorry I have to go out now but will try and have a look at this again later.

edit -  correction. I used electricity only user costs where I should have used dual fuel. I haven’t had time to look at the network costs again as I really do have to go out now. 

Me being lazy, but could you add definitions for the acronyms please.

Also slightly confusing that the table and diagram don't map?

Personally I think 'social policy' should be funded by the taxpayer but things like carbon cost are part of the cost of using the energy and CfD are part of the cost of supplying the energy.  Not sure where FIT should sit.

JKenH

JKenH said:

Exiled_Tyke said:

Well Kathryn's Twitter (sorry X) profile tells us all we need to know about her perspective, bias and propensity for objective reporting! 

Kathryn Porter

@KathrynPorter26

Independent energy consultant helping businesses with projects across the electricity, gas and oil industries.

For heaven’s sake, she is an energy consultant. She works in all three fields.

Have you never noticed all the links posted from renewables advocates like PV Magazine and ReNews singing the praises of their industries and lobby groups like Transport and Environment submitting heavily biased content. Of course it may appear balanced to you because their content aligns with your own biases. 

It really is difficult to find truly objective sources. I am even sceptical about the promises made by NESO who in my view have an overly optimistic take on our achieving NetZero by 2030 without additional cost. The bods there are hardly likely to say it isn’t possible without putting their careers at risk. 

I am trying to limit the amount of time I spend on this forum but in relation to the above I felt this exchange (obtained by others under a FOI request) between NESO and DESNZ sufficiently interesting in relation to the independence of NESO’s advice in their report Clean Power in 2030 to warrant a post.

Of particular note  is this from Kayte O'Neill at NESO to DESNZ: "We are keen to get views on the messaging, tone and structure (overall and for the main sections) as well as anything that you think is missing and anything you strongly dislike or can’t live with!"

https://www.neso.energy/document/352516/download

That’s the “independent” analysis and advice NESO gave DESNZ. From their press release:


“We’ve released comprehensive and independent analysis of how to achieve Clean Power in 2030.”

For more comment see here: https://x.com/KathrynPorter26/status/1887582188360901060

JKenH

It seems we have loads of BESS plans in the pipeline - perhaps more than we need - but will it get connected in time.

Cornwall Insight: BESS connection queue double the grid’s requirement for 2030

New data from Cornwall Insight has revealed that the current grid connection queue for battery energy storage system (BESS) projects is more than twice what is required to meet the UK’s needs by 2030.

The UK government’s Clean Power 2030 (CP30) plan lays out the target capacity ranges for specific technologies by 2030 and 2035, with the required BESS capacity for 2030 established as 27GW across both transmission and distribution and the 2035 target adding a 2GW uplift to distribution level BESS capacity. However, Cornwall Insight’s analysis notes that the current grid connections queue for BESS projects seeking connection before 2030 is 61GW, well over twice the target capacity range, while the queue to 2035 currently sits at 129GW, over quadruple the 2035 target capacity.

https://www.current-news.co.uk/cornwall-insight-bess-connection-queue-double-the-grids-requirement-for-2030/

Meanwhile we are throwing electricity away and paying for the privilege. If only 29% of the energy from this field is being used and 71% is curtailed we are paying 3.4 x the headline CfD price for output from this wind farm. I don’t know what the CfD price is for this wind farm but if it was nominally 6p/kWh we would effectively be paying over 20p/kwh (and that’s at wholesale prices). -and this doesn’t take into account the £50bn being spent on grid upgrades to support the offshore wind industry.

The Seagreen offshore wind farm in the North Sea – the largest of its kind in Scotland – had its output curtailed for 71pc of the time it was due to operate in 2024, grid data show.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/21/wind-farm-was-paid-65m-cut-power-output-three-quarters/

It was announced yesterday that the Government wants to extend the contract term for CFDs beyond the current 15 years

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) said it is proposing to relax the eligibility criteria on planning consent for fixed-bottom offshore wind and to increase the CfD contract term beyond the current 15 years.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/uk-presents-plans-subsidy-reform-speed-up-green-energy-projects-2025-02-21/

Will offshore wind ever be able to function without subsidy/guarantees? Wasn’t the argument for subsidies/CfDs/guarantees to prime the pump? It seems the renewables industry is never going to be able to come off life support. And all this renewable energy is going to knock £300 off our bills - oh, actually I think that promise has been quietly dropped. 

And even with all this new investment in renewables capacity Elexon are calling for an increased role for demand flexibility -aka rationing by price - to enable us to cope.

Ofgem urged to consider ‘critical’ role of flexibility

This report comes less than a month after Elexon, which manages the balancing and settlement code in the UK, urged energy regulator Ofgem to pay more attention to the importance of flexibility in our modern grid. In its response to Ofgem’s consultation on the electricity distribution price control (ED3) framework, Elexon called for the regulator to better articulate the value of flexibility in the modern electricity network, noting that it “believes there is an opportunity for Ofgem to enhance the strategic messaging around […] the critical role of flexibility as emphasised in the government’s Clean Power 2030 action plan is equally recognised.”

https://www.current-news.co.uk/report-demand-side-flexibility-progress-needs-to-hasten-to-keep-up-with-challenges/

On top of all this Norway the “battery of Europe” are threatening to take their ball home after electricity exports have caused huge increases in prices in their domestic market. There is a bit too much in the article linked below to copy everything relevant but in essence Norway are saying no more interconnectors and those we have might not be renewed.

Norway turning away from electricity interconnection 

https://watt-logic.com/2025/02/21/norway-turning-away-from-electricity-interconnection/

JKenH

Greg Jackson, yes that Greg Jackson, writing in the Telegraph

Wind farm owners are clinging to a flawed system - and pushing up bills

With zonal pricing, all households’ and businesses’ energy bills could fall – not “eventually”, but well in advance of 2030. In fact, as soon as the decision is made we can scrap plans for thousands of miles of unnecessary and costly pylons.

To listen to some corporates, you would be forgiven for thinking the goal of energy policy is to fork out as much of customers’ money as they demand to build turbines that often stand statue still – then pay them again for gas generation to compensate.

https://telegraph.co.uk/gift/a2c0cf1246772ce6

edit: this link should be accessible 

70sbudgie

It has taken me a while to catch up with this thread, but I have found it to be interesting reading.

There are multiple references to the NESO Clean Power 2030 report, which offers advice to the government. The document that is more relevant is the DESNZ reply: Clean Power 2030 Action Plan

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/clean-power-2030-action-plan

There is a huge amount of politician speak, but that buries some interesting data.

In the middle of the 137 pages of the main document is a table which shows the predicted effect on bills of the various actions. 

The Connections reform annex has some interesting information about how DESNZ disagrees with NESO's assessment of how much onshore wind will be required and also a breakdown of how the total GW capacity for PV, onshore wind and battery will be shared between the DNOs. 

Kathryn Porter does write some interesting articles, but I don't think it can be argued that she is impartial. As previously pointed out, her background of economics for fossil fuel companies makes it clear where her loyalties lie. I particularly enjoyed the article pinned to her LinkedIn page last time I looked, which gave a very informative strategy for killing off the fossil fuel industry. (Of course, her article didn't make it out to be as good a thing as I interpreted it to be ) If the government manages to push the energy industry in to meeting the CP30 targets, the current 35GW of gas generating capacity, will have a capacity factor of only 5%. So of course someone with an interest in gas generators making money is going to react badly to the increase in renewable generation and will do what they can to ensure those targets aren't met.

There was one other comment, that I can't find again, about NESO's bias. Having come from a DNO background, I appreciate that my perspective might be different, but remember that NESO is staffed by people who, until October, were National Grid Transmission employees. Their bubble is the transmission network, but there is a significant proportion of distribution generation connected and in the queue. (I can't remember the total now, but of the previous total of 700GW, 150GW were distribution connections) NESO's advice focuses on the "big stuff", not the 20%. Which is where there are a lot of opportunities for efficiencies (imho), as at distribution voltages, the generation is closer to the demand.

I did an extremely rough calculation and worked out that if roof top solar was installed across all warehousing, nearly half the CP30 target for PV would be met. It was a very rough calculation, but even 1/4 of the target isn't insignificant. 

Demand flexibility is not rationing by price. It is flexing demand to match supply. Energy markets (afaik) are the only ones where there seems to be the attitude that supply should always flex to meet demand and that the demand is sacrosanct. If the harvest of sunflowers is reduced, you don't expect the farmers to magically increase supply, you find an alternative oil to cook with. Demand flexibility is just facilitating demand adapting to intermittent supply.

JKenH

70sbudgie said:

Demand flexibility is not rationing by price. It is flexing demand to match supply. Energy markets (afaik) are the only ones where there seems to be the attitude that supply should always flex to meet demand and that the demand is sacrosanct. If the harvest of sunflowers is reduced, you don't expect the farmers to magically increase supply, you find an alternative oil to cook with. Demand flexibility is just facilitating demand adapting to intermittent supply.

You will presumably, therefore be in favour of Zonal Pricing.

In relation to CP2030, I came across this table - NESO Change in Electricity Demand 2023-2030 (TWh)

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/epc-stick-to-beat-us-energy-performance-certficates

You will note that NESO expects residential electricity demand to fall by 20% from 2023 to 2030. Presumably this excludes EV charging at home but if there is to be a significant move to electricity for heating using heat pumps then is this not a little fanciful? At the same time peak demand will increase. Peak demand tends to coincide with the 4pm to 7pm evening meal slot. 

The article I have linked above refers primarily to changes to how EPCs are calculated and speculates that the focus of EPCs may move away from the estimated cost of energy consumed (as at present) to thermal performance. Many of us have very successfully incorporated (wall mounted) ASHPs in to our homes - in fact as I write this the only heating I have on is from my two ASHPs powered by my solar PV (opportunity cost in lost export c.14p/kWh). In fact I run the ASHPs most of the day (just avoiding the peak 4-7pm period when oil CH takes over in winter).

However one of my neighbours opposite who has an air to water heat pump is moaning that in 6 weeks his electricity bill was £1,000. Yes, I know air/water can be made to work efficiently with the right installation by the right engineers in the right house but, on the whole, widespread adoption of the technology is likely to increase rather than decrease domestic electricity consumption and for most people (with the ever increasing cost of electricity) result in higher bills than their old gas or even oil fired CH. 

Of course this is just speculation about what new EPCs may consider but I would be very surprised if the intention wasn’t to favour renewable based heating.

70sbudgie

You will presumably, therefore be in favour of Zonal Pricing.

That is very presumptuous! 

I live in NW England, so yes, I would be a winner under zonal pricing. 

But that doesn't mean I am in favour of it. Not least because my import costs would reduce, but the RoI for my solar PV would suffer. (And I am concerned by the impact on more than just me)

The whole point of zonal pricing is to encourage new generators to locate near to demand centres and for new large demands to locate near to generation. And to encourage users who are far from generation to be more mindful of their consumption, while indirectly compensating those that live close to generation.

But, you have to take into account the population spread and how many people will be effected positively or negatively. 

So although, from a technical perspective zonal pricing is a no brainer, it is my personal opinion that the UK population distribution means it won't have the intended effect because too many people will be adversely affected.

Edit to add: I am also interested how you got from me observing that energy markets don't behave like other markets, to me being a supporter of zonal pricing. It would be very useful if, in real life, I could leap that far. 

70sbudgie

JKenH said:

In relation to CP2030, I came across this table - NESO Change in Electricity Demand 2023-2030 (TWh)

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/epc-stick-to-beat-us-energy-performance-certficates

You will note that NESO expects residential electricity demand to fall by 20% from 2023 to 2030. Presumably this excludes EV charging at home but if there is to be a significant move to electricity for heating using heat pumps then is this not a little fanciful? At the same time peak demand will increase. Peak demand tends to coincide with the 4pm to 7pm evening meal slot.

You have quoted a table for just one of the two scenarios in the NESO CP30 report. This one in particular is further flex and renewables. (As opposed to the other scenario which is New Dispatch)

The reason that it looks like residential demand will decrease is because under this scenario NESO are predicting an increase in domestic generation. NESO have no way of measuring this (they can't even measure onshore, distribution connected wind), it just looks like a reduction in domestic demand. 

Data so far has shown that EVs don't add to the peak demand. Even if an EV driver isn't as keen as the inhabitants of this forum to reduce their costs, the number of EVs that are charged between 4pm and 7pm is insignificant on a grid scale.

An although domestic heat pumps haven't been around in numbers as long, early data is suggesting there will be a similar effect. 

The reason that these technologies don't add to the peak demand, is because the users are flexing their demand. 

Hence the name of the scenario is further flex and renewables. 

70sbudgie

With respect to your comment on EPCs. Everyone knows that they are too subjective to have real value. Therefore any change would be welcome (imo). I'm not sure an EPC could become less useful.

michaels

70sbudgie said:

JKenH said:

In relation to CP2030, I came across this table - NESO Change in Electricity Demand 2023-2030 (TWh)

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/epc-stick-to-beat-us-energy-performance-certficates

You will note that NESO expects residential electricity demand to fall by 20% from 2023 to 2030. Presumably this excludes EV charging at home but if there is to be a significant move to electricity for heating using heat pumps then is this not a little fanciful? At the same time peak demand will increase. Peak demand tends to coincide with the 4pm to 7pm evening meal slot.

You have quoted a table for just one of the two scenarios in the NESO CP30 report. This one in particular is further flex and renewables. (As opposed to the other scenario which is New Dispatch)

The reason that it looks like residential demand will decrease is because under this scenario NESO are predicting an increase in domestic generation. NESO have no way of measuring this (they can't even measure onshore, distribution connected wind), it just looks like a reduction in domestic demand. 

Data so far has shown that EVs don't add to the peak demand. Even if an EV driver isn't as keen as the inhabitants of this forum to reduce their costs, the number of EVs that are charged between 4pm and 7pm is insignificant on a grid scale.

An although domestic heat pumps haven't been around in numbers as long, early data is suggesting there will be a similar effect. 

The reason that these technologies don't add to the peak demand, is because the users are flexing their demand. 

Hence the name of the scenario is further flex and renewables. 

Not sure how your comments on demand flexibility impact on what the table appears to be showing which is (labelled) total demand?