Thread by @DrSimEvans

I see the £50bn price tag of building another 30GW of offshore wind is making headlines, so some context

Most impt is that the invst will be private & we'll pay via bills, which will be lower than for alternative sources

carbonbrief.org/wind-and-solar…

Also worth noting that estimated investment of £50bn to build 30GW of offshore wind capacity is about 2x the amount invested for the first 10GW

So 2x invst yielding 3x capacity, which will yield perhaps 50% more electricity per GW as larger turbines etc.

auroraer.com/insight/reachi…

Finally, investment over a decade is bound to sound big. But we already collectively spend colossal sums on energy in the UK.

50bn/10yrs = 5bn/yr
~67bn/yr = consumer energy spend
~18bn/yr = consumer spend on electricity

gov.uk/government/col…

Of course, the other obvious comparison is to new nuclear, given the 20bn pricetag on Sizewell C's 3.2Gw of proposed capacity…

…and then there's the proposed SMR programme with the first 0.4GW costing 2.2bn

ft.com/content/d7016b…

In summary, huge-sounding investments can be good value. The key is not to be scared off by big numbers.

PS this govt also wants to spend 27bn on roads in this parlt – so that's also 5bn/yr, with difference being it's directly funded by taxpayers

theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/m…