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):
The Reform Party were the only main party to fight the last election on a platform of scrapping Net Zero. But their recent press conference on more detailed energy policy left a lot to be desired 🧵(1/n)
They proposed:
1) A windfall tax on renewables 2) A solar farm tax on farmers 3) A ban on batteries 4) Force new transmission cables underground
(2/n)
A windfall tax might be the only effective kludge to get around the generous subsidy contracts, but even this might fall foul of discriminatory "Qualifying Change in Law" (QCiL) provisions in CfD contracts (3/n)
Recent announcements by the Government about Allocation Round 7 (AR7) renewables auction and the subsidies for tree-burning at Drax show Net Zero isn't working. A thread 🧵(1/n)
First up, we have the Clean Industry Bonus. Effectively an extra bung for wind farm developers to build manufacturing facilities in the UK. But if wind is so cheap, why do they need extra subsidies at all. Up to £27m is on offer per GW of installed capacity. (2/n)
Now we have a very late consultation on AR7. For AR6, we knew the strike prices by now and the budget was published in early March 2024. This year, the auction won't start until the summer (3/n)
Government revisions to EPC regulations will be used as a stick to beat us. A thread 🧵(1/n)
The Government wants EPCs to act as an enabling tool to improve the energy performance of buildings, to support their Clean Power 2030 plan that called for residential electricity use to fall be 20% by 2030 (2/n)
They also want to judge our homes on their level of "Smart Readiness" - in other words how ready is your home to be controlled by penal prices when wind and solar cannot meet your electricity demand to cook dinner. Rationing by another name. (3/n)
🚨BREAKING🚨 REMAgate - How the Government’s Review of Electricity Market Arrangements is being subverted by bad data, conflicts of interest and a web of activists. Link to full article at base of 🧵 (1/n)
The Government is considering changing the way wholesale electricity prices are set from a single national price to locational pricing, either several zonal prices or hundreds of nodal prices (2/n)
The head of @ofgem Jonathan Brearley has gone on record supporting zonal prices. (3/n)
Later this month, the Climate Change Committee produce their latest carbon budget setting out how we are going to impoverish ourselves out to 2042. We have got to hope it's better than the incoherent nonsense their new CEO was spouting before Parliament last month. A🧵(1/n)
Emma Pinchbeck managed to chirp the word "cheap" (or its derivatives) 17 times when giving evidence before the Scottish Affairs Committee claiming renewables are a cheaper technology (2/n)
But despite the claim that renewables are cheaper, Pinchbeck went on to urge the Government to make electricity cheaper for consumers and businesses, and again that it was absolutely clear renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels (3/n)
Last month I gave a talk to Sacred Cows entitled "Net Zero Cure is Worse than Climate Change." The video is now available below and this mega-thread sets out my argument in more detail🧵(1/n)
The talk and slides also serve as a useful rebuttal to the Government's response to a petition demanding the repeal of the Climate Change Act (2/n)
Although the Earth has warmed since 1850, the scale of climate change has been exaggerated by people like Antonio "global boiling" Guterres and the alarmist response can be boiled down to "the earth is warming, build more windmills." Net Zero is a mitigation strategy (3/n)