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):
UK’s energy policy is failing: high costs, low reliability & environmental harm. A physics-first approach - focusing on EROEI, reliability, environmental footprint, security & cost—can save us. Why we need to ditch renewables ideology & embrace nuclear, gas, and hydro. (1/17)
Ed Miliband’s Clean Power 2030 plan relies on wind and solar, cutting gas to 5% and virtually ignoring nuclear. Result? UK has the highest industrial electricity prices in the developed world. Net Zero’s low-energy future risks economic stagnation. (2/17)
A physics-first energy policy prioritizes:
- High Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROEI)
- Reliability and flexibility
- Small environmental footprint
- Energy security
- Low total system cost
Net Zero is a far-left tyrannical Death Star, cloaking state control as climate action. It crushes free markets with subsidies & bans. Time to fight for freedom! #NetZeroTyranny (1/11)
On the Political Compass, Net Zero is far-left: massive subsidies for renewables, bans on oil/gas, & Soviet-style plans like Miliband’s Clean Power 2030. No free market here! #NetZero (2/11)
Net Zero is peak authoritarianism. The Climate Change Committee (CCC) overrides Parliament, mandating how we heat homes, drive, & eat. Tyranny, not progress! #FreedomVsNetZero (3/11)
Late last month, the CCC released their Methodology Report that gave a little more insight into their thinking, or lack thereof, when they produced the 7th Carbon Budget. How did they get it so wrong. A thread 🧵(1/n)
First up, they assume even lower costs for fixed-bottom offshore wind than the Government's woeful Generation Cost report from 2023. The CCC's assumed costs for 2030 are less than half the value of contract awards in last year's AR6 auction. (2/n)
Floating offshore wind is even more expensive and being offered £245/MWh in AR7, some six times more than the CCC's estimate for 2030 delivery. Worse, the CCC shows a declining cost trend, whereas recent auctions have shown an upward trend in prices (3/n)
Last week, the Government released new data about energy costs in the UK & EU, and by extension the developed world. The bad news is that the UK still has the highest industrial electricity prices in Europe. But what else is going on in the data? A thread 🧵(1/n)
The chart above is for medium consumers, where UK prices are 89% higher than EU14 median. Large & v. large UK user prices are 132% & 113% respectively higher than the EU14 median. Very large UK users pay 22.32p/kWh compared to the lowest Finland with just 4.19p/kWh (2/n)
But it can't be gas driving these eyewatering electricity costs because UK industrial gas prices are below the EU14 median (3/n)
The data is in for CfD subsidies in April 2025. Overall subsidies are down from April last year, but subsidies per MWH are up. What is going on? A thread 🧵(1/n)
Overall subsidies for April 2025 came in at £155m across all technologies. This is slightly up on March 2025 (£152m) but much lower than April 2024 (£270m) (2/n)
Sounds like a move in the right direction until you look at generation. The fall in subsidies was mostly driven by a big drop in offshore wind generation. April 2025 delivered 1,263GWh, down form 2,237GWh in 2024 and lower than April 2023's 1,287GWh (3/n)