
The huge sums energy firms get to NOT provide power
It is 1am on 3 June. A near gale force wind is blasting into Scotland. Great weather for the Moray East and West offshore wind farms, you would have thought.The two farms are 13 miles off the north-east coast of Scotland and include some of the biggest wind turbines in the UK, at 257m high. With winds like that they should be operating at maximum capacity, generating what the developer, Ocean Winds, claims is enough power to meet the electricity needs of well over a million homes.Except they are not.That's because if you thought that once an electricity generator - whether it be a wind farm or a gas-powered plant - was connected to the national grid it could seamlessly send its electricity wherever it was needed in the country, you'd be wrong.The electricity grid was built to deliver power generated by coal and gas plants near the country's major cities and towns, and doesn't always have sufficient capacity in the wires that carry electricity around the country to get the new renewable electricity generated way out in the wild seas and rural areas.And this has major consequences.
The way the system currently works means a company like Ocean Winds gets what are effectively compensation payments if the system can't take the power its wind turbines are generating and it has to turn down its output.It means Ocean winds was paid £72,000 not to generate power from its wind farms in the Moray Firth during a half-hour period on 3 June because the system was overloaded - one of a number of occasions output was restricted that day.At the same time, 44 miles (70km) east of London, the Grain gas-fired power station on the Thames Estuary was paid £43,000 to provide more electricity.Payments like that happen virtually every day. Seagreen, Scotland's largest wind farm, was paid £65 million last year to restrict its output 71% of the time, according to analysis by Octopus Energy. Balancing the grid in this way has already cost the country more than £500 million this year alone, the company's analysis shows. The total could reach almost £8bn a year by 2030, warns the National Electricity System Operator (NESO), the body in charge of the electricity network.It's pushing up all our energy bills and calling into question the government's promise that net zero would end up delivering cheaper electricity.Now, the government is considering a radical solution: instead of one big, national electricity market, there'll be a number of smaller regional markets, with the government gambling that this could make the system more efficient and deliver cheaper bills.But in reality, it's not guaranteed that anyone will get cheaper bills. And even if some people do, many others elsewhere in the country could end up paying more.
The proposals have sparked such bitter debate that one senior energy industry executive called it "the most vicious policy fight" he has ever known. He has, he says, "lost friends" over it.Meanwhile, political opponents who claim net zero is an expensive dead end are only too ready to pounce.It is reported that the Prime Minister has asked to review the details of what some newspapers are calling a "postcode pricing" plan. So is the government really ready to risk the most radical shake-up of the UK electricity market since privatisation 35 years ago? And what will it really mean for our bills?
Net zero under attack
The Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, is certainly in a fix. His net zero policy is under attack like never before. The Tories have come out against it, green politicians say it isn't delivering for ordinary people, and even Tony Blair has weighed in against it.Meanwhile Reform UK has identified the policy as a major Achilles heel for the Labour government. "The next election will be fought on two issues, immigration and net stupid zero," says Reform's deputy leader Richard Tice. "And we are going to win."Poll after poll says cost of living is a much more important for most people, and people often specifically cite concerns about rising energy prices.
Miliband sold his aggressive clean energy policies in part on cutting costs. He said that ensuring 95% of the country's electricity comes from low-carbon sources by 2030 would slash the average electricity bill by £300.But the potential for renewables to deliver lower costs just isn't coming through to consumers. Renewables now generate more than half the country's electricity, but because of the limits to how much electricity can be moved around the system, even on windy days some gas generation is almost always needed to top the system up. And because gas tends to be more expensive, it sets the wholesale price.
Could 'zonal' pricing lower bills?
Supporters of the government's plan argue that, as long as prices continue to be set at a national level, the hold gas has on the cost of electricity will be hard to break. Less so with regional – or, in the jargon, "zonal" - pricing.Think of Scotland, blessed with vast wind resources but just 5.5 million people. The argument goes that if prices were set locally, it wouldn't be necessary to pay wind farms to be turned down because there wasn't enough capacity in the cables to carry all the electricity into England. On a windy day like 3 June, they would have to sell that spare power to local people instead of into a national market. The theory is prices would fall dramatically – on some days Scottish customers might even get their electricity for free.
Other areas with lots of renewable power - such as Yorkshire and the North East, as well as parts of Wales - would stand to benefit too. And, as solar investment increases in Lincolnshire and other parts of the east of England, they could also see prices tumble.All that cheap power could also transform the economics of industry. Supporters argue that it would attract energy-intensive businesses such as data centres, chemical companies and other manufacturing industries.In London and much of the south of England, the price of electricity would sometimes be higher than in the windy north. But supporters say some of the hundreds of millions of pounds the system would save could be used to make sure no one pays more than they do now.And those higher prices could also encourage investors to build new wind farms and solar plants closer to where the demand is. The argument is that would lower prices in the long run and bring another benefit - less electricity would need to be carried around the country, so we would need fewer new pylons, saving everyone money and meaning less clutter in the countryside.
"Zonal pricing would make the energy system as a whole dramatically more efficient, slashing this waste and cutting bills for every family and business in the country," argues Greg Jackson, the CEO of Octopus Energy, one of the biggest energy suppliers in the UK.Research commissioned by the company estimates the savings could top £55 billion by 2050 - which it claims could knock £50 to £100 a year off the average bill. Octopus points out Sweden made the switch to regional pricing in just 18 months.The supporters of regional pricing include NESO, Citizens Advice and the head of the energy regulator, Ofgem. Last week a committee of the House of Lords recommended the country should switch to the system.
Energy firms push back
There are, however, many businesses involved in building and running renewable energy plants that oppose the move."We're making billions of pounds of investments in renewable power in the UK every year," says Tom Glover, the UK chair of the giant German power company RWE. "I can't go to my board and say let's take a bet on billions of pounds of investment."He's worried changing the way energy is priced could undermine contracts and make revenues more uncertain. And he says it risks undermining the government's big push to switch to green energy.
The main cost of wind and solar plants is in the build. It means the price of the energy they produce is very closely tied to the cost of building and, because developers borrow most of the money, that means the interest rates they are charged.And we are talking a lot of money. The government is expecting power companies to spend £40bn pounds a year over the next five years on renewable projects in the UK. Glover says even a very small change in interest rates could have dramatic effects on how much renewable infrastructure is built and how much the power from it costs."Those additional costs could quickly overwhelm any of the benefits of regional pricing," says Stephen Woodhouse, an economist with the consultancy firm AFRY, which has studied the impact of regional pricing for the power companies.That would come as already high interest rates have combined with rising prices for steel and other materials to push up the cost of renewables. Plans for a huge wind farm off the coast of Yorkshire were cancelled last month because the developer said it no longer made economic sense.
And there's another consideration, he says. The National Grid, which owns the pylons, substations and cables that move electricity around the country, is already rolling out a huge investment programme – some £60bn over the next five years - to upgrade the system ready for the new world of clean power. That new infrastructure will mean more capacity to bring electricity from our windy northern coasts down south, and therefore also mean fewer savings from a regional pricing system in the future.There are other arguments too. Critics warn introducing regional pricing could take years, that energy-intensive businesses like British Steel can't just up sticks and move, and that the system will be unfair because some customers will pay more than others.But according to Greg Jackson of Octopus, the power companies and their backers just want to protect their profits. "Unsurprisingly, it's the companies that enjoy attractive returns from this absurd system who are lobbying hard to maintain the status quo," he says.
Yet the power companies say Octopus has a vested interest too. It is the UK's biggest energy supplier with some seven million customers, and owns a sophisticated billing system it licenses to other suppliers, so could gain from changes to the way electricity is priced, they claim.And the clock is ticking. Whether the government meets its clean power targets will depend on how many new wind farms and solar plants are built. The companies who will build them say they need certainty around the future of the electricity market, so a decision must be taken soon.It's expected in the next couple of weeks. Over to you, Mr Miliband.
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Sun
26 minutes ago
- The Sun
Sweet-toothed fans are racing to Iceland for retro snack inspired by iconic 2000s drink
SHOPPERS are flocking to Iceland to get their hands on a snack inspired by an iconic 2000s drink. Nesquik now comes in yogurt form, and they are bringing back some core memories for millennials. 1 The cereal treat is a split pot with a generous helping of sweet yogurt made from 83 percent milk and crunchy chocolate balls. The four-pack of 107g Chocoballs pots is being sold exclusively at Iceland for £2.80. There is also a deal on now where you can buy three packs for just £6.00 - saving yourself £2.40. Or you can mix and match them with a choice between Muller Corners or Quality Street's Toffee Dessert. One savvy shopper spotted the tasty treat in their local Iceland and shared a photo on Snack Reviews Facebook page. "I need," one wrote, adding the eyes emoji. "I want these for me, not the kids," another joked. Nesquik was a huge hit in the 2000s and is known for its range of flavoured milk drink powders, particularly the iconic chocolate variety. It has been a staple in many British households for decades, often associated with childhood memories and nostalgic comfort. In addition to the classic powders, Nesquik in the UK has expanded its product range to include ready-to-drink bottles and cereal, further cementing its presence in the breakfast and snack categories. Dunnes Stores fans set for frenzy as major new food section lands in supermarkets This comes as Nesquik's creator Nestle revealed it hiked the cost of its chocolate and coffee for customers. The Swiss company said it's raised its prices by 2.1% overall - but for some items the hikes are in the double digits. It blamed surging costs of coffee beans and chocolate. "Despite the significant level of the increases in many markets, the actions were implemented with limited customer disruption," Nestle said. Nestle produces a range of products, including chocolates, sweets, cereals, drinks, ice cream and pet foods. Among its popular brands are Aero, Milkybar, Smarties, Milo, Haagen Dazs, San Pellegrino, and Felix cat food. The company said it had better-than-expected sales growth of 2.8% in the first three months of the year. The higher prices accounted for much of the rise. Nestle said it had seen demand drop significantly following the price increases but it is now bouncing back. It also warned there could be further impacts on customers due to higher global tariffs. Donald Trump recently launched a global trade war when he announced major tariffs on dozens of countries. The move has raised fears of a global recession, sent stock markets tumbling and caused economic uncertainty for businesses trading internationally. Mr Trump has called on American companies to produce their products in the US to avoid costly tariffs. But for chocolate makers this is near impossible as the key ingredient, cocoa, can only be grown in tropical climates. On top of this, the price of cocoa has soared in recent years. Farmers in West Africa, where 70% of the world's cocoa is harvested, have been struggling with climate-related issues that have decimated their cocoa production. It's estimated 400,000 tonnes less of cocoa has been produced over the last few years, hiking the price significantly.


BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Tariffs: US and China set to meet for trade talks in London
A new round of talks aimed at resolving a trade war between the US and China is set take place in London on President Donald Trump announced on Friday that a senior US delegation would meet Chinese representatives. Over weekend, Beijing's Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that Vice Premier He Lifeng will attend the announcements came after Trump and China's leader Xi Jinping had a phone conversation last week, which the US president described as a "very good talk".Last month, the world's two biggest economies agreed a temporary truce to lower import taxes on goods being traded between them, but since then both countries have accused the other of breaching the deal. Writing on his Truth Social platform on Friday, Trump said US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would meet Chinese officials in London on Saturday, China's foreign ministry said Vice Premier He would be in the UK between 8 and 13 June, and that a meeting of the "China-US economic and trade mechanism" would take new round of negotiations came after Trump said his phone conversation with Xi on Thursday mainly focused on trade and had "resulted in a very positive conclusion for both countries".According to Chinese state news agency Xinhua, Xi told Trump that the US should "withdraw the negative measures it has taken against China".The call was the first time the two leaders had spoken since the trade war erupted in Trump announced sweeping tariffs on imports from a number of countries earlier this year, China was the hardest hit. Beijing responded with its own higher rates on US imports, and this triggered tit-for-tat increases that peaked at 145%.In May, talks held in Switzerland led to a temporary truce that Trump called a "total reset".It brought US tariffs on Chinese products down to 30%, while Beijing slashed levies on US imports to 10% and promised to lift barriers on critical mineral agreement gave both sides a 90-day deadline to try to reach a trade deal. But since then, relations appeared to have soured. Last month, Trump said China had "totally violated its agreement with us", and then a few days later China said the US had "severely violated" the US accused China of failing to restart shipments of critical minerals and rare earth magnets vital to car and computer Saturday, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said it had approved some applications for rare earth export licences, although it did not provide details of which countries announcement came after Trump said on Friday that Xi had agreed to restart trade in rare earth speaking on Sunday, White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett told CBS News that "those exports of critical minerals have been getting released at a rate that is, you know, higher than it was, but not as high as we believe we agreed to in Geneva".


Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
'It's simply not safe': A thousand doctors write to MPs urging them to vote against assisted dying bill
More than 1,000 doctors have written to MPs urging them to vote against the assisted dying bill, calling it a "real threat to both patients and the medical workforce". The bill - which is due to be voted on by MPs for a final time on 20 June - would allow terminally ill patients from England and Wales to end their lives "on their own terms", providing they have a life expectancy of six months or less. A separate bill is currently passing through the Scottish parliament. But doctors from across the NHS have written to MPs, warning them of their "serious concerns". Notable signatories include Sir John Burn, a geneticist who has led decades of cancer research, Sir Shakeel Qureshi, who was knighted for his work in paediatric cardiology, Professor Aileen Keel, the former deputy chief medical officer for Scotland, and Baroness Finlay, a Welsh doctor, professor of palliative medicine and member of the House of Lords. The letter is signed by four doctors who hold OBEs, two who have MBEs, and one CBE. The letter says that while a debate is needed on end of life care, "this bill is not the answer". It raises concerns that not enough evidence has been heard from doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. "This bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe," it goes on to say, calling it a "deeply flawed bill". 1:40 Professor Colin Rees, a member of the Royal College of Physicians working group on assisted dying, said it was the "single most important piece of healthcare legislation in 50 or 60 years". "It will have very profound consequences for the future and many doctors are really concerned that members of parliament are not hearing the views of the medical profession." He said many doctors who remain neutral, or who even support the principle of assisted dying, remain concerned about the bill. "We don't think it's a bill that is safe, that protects patients, protects families, and protects the medical workforce." What stage are the two assisted dying bills at now? The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill passed the House of Commons with a majority of 55 in November. Scotland's Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland Bill) pass with a 14 majority in May. But the legislation has not been without controversy, with 150 amendments made to get it through the first stage. The bill will return to the House of Commons for a third reading this Friday. If voted through by MPs it will then proceed to the House of Lords. 'No safeguards against coercion' One of the areas of concern raised by the medics was the inability to properly identify patients at risk of coercive control. "Vulnerable patients are at risk of coercion with women, victims of domestic abuse, and the elderly at particular risk," the letter says. It also warned it would widen social inequalities, with patients who do not have the resources for a comfortable death more likely to opt for assisted dying. "People who struggle to pay for heating or care or wish to preserve their assets for their children are at high risk of choosing to die if the option is available and the alternative is more difficult." Data from the Annual Report of Dying With Dignity from Oregon in 2024 found 9.3% of those people who choose assisted deaths do so for financial reasons. Concerns have also been raised around the inaccuracies of medical prognosis. "Research demonstrates that doctors get prognosis wrong around 40% of the time," the letter says. "As such, patients may end up choosing an assisted death and losing what could have been happy and fulfilling months or years of life." 1:50 The bill is also a risk to families, the letter says, as it does not require doctors to speak with family members. "A close relative may know nothing until they get a call to arrange collection of their relative's body," it says, adding that there is no mechanism for a family member to raise concerns about a request. The letter also addressed the potential impact on the medical workforce. Evidence from the Netherlands suggests "doctors feel pressurised when dealing with patient requests for assisted deaths, meaning that doctors may end up having involvement despite it being against their principles, because they want to help their patients".