There is no limit to our electricity bills as new spending on renewables has diminishing impact on emissions intensity. Our bills are going to infinity and beyond. A thread (1/n)
First up, we need to acknowledge that measuring the emissions intensity of electricity generation is an imprecise science. Three different datasets from Ember, DUKES and NESO give different results although have a similar shape. (2/n)
The numbers are also a bit of a con, because they ignore the CO2 emissions from burning trees at places like Drax. If these are added back, assuming similar emissions as for coal, the the picture is less impressive (3/n)
Going back to the NESO data, it is clear that the main driver of reduced emissions intensity (solid orange line) has been the removal of coal from the system (grey area) (4/n)
From a peak in 2012, emissions intensity fell from 519g/kWh in 2012 to 195g/kWh in 2019 as coal generation fell from 137TWh to single digits. Each extra GW of wind and solar capacity led to a reduction in emissions intensity of 11.9g/kWh (5/n)
Since 2019, extra emissions reductions have been hard to come by, with emissions intensity falling to 151g/kWh after an addition of a further 9.2GW of wind and solar capacity. A reduction of just 4.8g/kWh per GW of added capacity (6/n)
This is hardly a surprising result because despite big increases in wind capacity, the minimum generation has hardly changed since 2015. 1 x 0 =0, 10 x 0 = 0 and 100 x 0 = 0 (7/n)
Looking at the dotted lines out to 2030, we first have to make an adjustment to the forecast emissions intensity. NESO and the Government decided to ignore the emissions from waste incineration and combined heat & power plants, another con. (8/n)
Adding that back means that emissions intensity falls from 151g/kWh in 2023 to 51g/kWh in 2030 after an addition of a further 81.8GW of wind and solar. This gives a measly reduction of just 0.8g/kWh per GW of extra capacity (9/n)
If we believe the Government can achieve the big acceleration of wind and solar deployment, NESO estimate it will cost £260-290bn. Assuming 8% cost of capital & 2% operations costs, we can expect our bills to rise by £26-29bn per annum or about £1,000 per household (10/n)
The diminishing returns on extra wind and solar capacity means that to achieve the truly "zero-carbon electricity" promised in their manifesto, Labour will send our electricity bills to infinity and beyond. (11/n)
If you enjoyed this thread please like and share. You can sign up for free to read the full article here (12/12):
Ed Miliband’s Clean Power 2030 plan is officially off the rails. Soaring costs, missed wind & solar
targets, and now Drax walking away from BECCS. The promises of cheaper bills? Gone. A thread 🧵(1/12)
NESO and DESNZ claimed CP2030 could be delivered “without increasing costs for consumers” and would “bring down bills for good”. Reality: grid integration and generation cost are exploding. (2/12)
Grid balancing, transmission and Capacity Market costs are forecast to rise £17bn — from £8bn in 2024/25 to £25bn by 2030/31. That’s ~£600 extra per household. (3/12)
UK electricity bills are heading sharply higher — despite all the “clean energy superpower” promises. My new article reveals how subsidies & grid costs will explode to £40bn+ by 2030/31. Tory and Reform policies will not be enough to reverse the trend. A thread 🧵(1/11)
We have the highest industrial electricity prices. The Government claims renewables will bring down energy bills for good. But Octopus & E.On bosses said to Parliament that even if wholesale gas prices halve or go to zero, bills will rise. (2/11)
OBR (& DESNZ) forecasts show direct subsidies (ROCs, CfDs, FiTs, Sizewell C, GGL etc.) rising from £11.8bn to £15.2bn by 2030/31 (3/11)
The UK government loves celebrating how it has halved emissions since 1990. But is it real… or just clever accounting? My new thread exposing how official claims of emissions reduction are cooking the books. (1/8)
Official figures show ~49% territorial CO₂ cuts. But look at consumption emissions (what we actually use, including imports): only ~27% reduction. (2/8)
Much of the “success” comes from destroying UK industry. Industrial energy use down over 40%. We’re not greening the economy — we’re de-industrialising and both energy and electricity generation are down sharply. (3/8)
UK energy policy is economic self-harm. Labour banning new North Sea drilling licences + fracking — right as the Strait of Hormuz crisis hits. Yet oil & gas extraction is one of our MOST productive industries. A thread (1/10)
UK per capita energy consumption has fallen 2.4% per year — faster than most G7 countries. Result? GDP per capita growth is a miserable 0.4% annually. Energy is the foundation of modern economies. Without abundant supply, we stagnate. (2/10)
Globally, GDP per capita grows ~2% with rising energy use. Asia boomed by embracing energy-intensive growth. Britain chose “energy austerity” instead — and now uses less energy per person than Poland or Malaysia. This is a self-inflicted wound. (3/10)
Renewables funds like Greencoat UK Wind (UKW), Octopus Renewables (ORIT) & The Renewables Infrastructure Group (TRIG) market themselves as low-risk investments. But plunging share prices and wide discounts to NAV suggest management in denial. A thread (1/11)
Labour govt changes: ROC indexation cut (RPI to CPI) & Carbon Price Support removal in 2028. Funds took NAV hits but downplayed them. New Wholesale CfDs offered as partial offset. These are minor vs. what could come from Reform & Tories. (2/11)
Bigger risks: Tories & Reform pledge to scrap Net Zero elements. Remove CPS + ETS (carbon taxes boosting wholesale prices), abolish ROC scheme early. This would slash revenues for ROC-dependent assets far more than current tweaks, further impacting NAV & share prices. (3/11)
Yesterday, @EnergyUKcomms caught a bad case of Net Zero Derangement Syndrome by claiming that removing carbon taxes will increase bills. A thread (1/n)
They first claimed that decarbonisation and economic growth go hand-in-hand. But data from OWID shows that faster decarbonisation leads to slower growth (2/n)
They went on to claim that scrapping the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) would increase gas demand by 25%. This claim would mean almost doubling the amount of gas used for electricity, which is implausible (3/n)