Thread by @DrSimEvans

The Sunday Telegraph has a front page story on HS2 & windfarms.

The paper's editors have written an editorial too: "Hard to imagine a more costly, unattractive combination [continues]".

But it's based on a document that shows renewables could *save consumers money*.

THREAD

1/

Alarm bells started to ring when I saw that the story was written by the paper's "Sunday political editor".

It cites "experts" but only quotes two people: a spokesperson for HS2 and anti-wind campaigner John Constable.

🤔

2/

The story says HS2 is considering signing contracts to power the high speed rail line with renewables. Shocking.

Quoting those "experts" (apparently John Constable counts as more than one person), it says this would amount to a "hidden subsidy".

So what's actually going on?

3/

Amusingly, the "confidential" document behind the story is not only publicly available, it's really easy to find:

Try googling "HS2 electricity"…it's the first result!

4/

The strategy was written by KPMG and is dated April 2018.

It was released under freedom of information rules in June 2018.

That's…quite a long time ago for front page "news" in January 2019.

whatdotheyknow.com/request/releas…

5/

Here's the document.

Judge for yourself if it has been accurately reflected by the Sunday Telegraph's front page article or the accompanying editorial.

whatdotheyknow.com/request/487395…

6/

The document is actually really interesting.

TL;DR

How much electricity will HS2 need? (About 3 terawatt hours)

How much will that cost? (£200-245m under a std contract for grid power)

Are there alternatives? (Yes: a direct contract for renewables would save money)

7/

Hilariously, this means that far from being a "hidden subsidy" to renewables, it would actually *save rail users money* if HS2 were to sign contracts for renewables instead of buying power from the grid.

(All the renewable options are "likely to have lower cost")

8/

A 100% renewable HS2 would cut carbon, as well as saving money.

What's not to like?

9/

What's more, the report notes that renewable costs are falling "rapidly".

(It uses 2016 government cost estimates, which are already out of date, yet still shows that renewables would be the cheapest option.)

10/

What about the idea that the HS2 route could be lined by windfarms?

(the editorial says "tone-deaf officials" are considering this, based on a document written by, er, KPMG)

To be blunt, this is an extrapolation of a misquote.

11/

The KPMG document talks about "private wire" contracts for renewables. It discusses them in an abstract sense and says they involve generation assets "on or near" [the owners] site".

12/

KPMG also tentatively suggests private wire be part of the solution to powering phase 2 of HS2.

("HS2 has the opportunity to explore…")

13/

This is a classic cautionary tale about agenda-driven news coverage, written by a non-specialist journalist with only a casual relationship to the facts.

And the report it was based on is far more interesting than the story itself.

Read it here:

whatdotheyknow.com/request/487395…

14/14