Electricity transmission charges spark debate across Scotland
Energy suppliers and generators pay transmission network operators for the right to use the transmission system, which includes the cost of maintaining and building the network's physical infrastructure. They then pass all of these costs on to billpayers.
These 'TNUoS charges' (Transmission Network Use of System) total approximately £4.4billion per year.
The regulatory background to all of this is complex. Indeed, the Court of Appeal, which has plenty of experience with difficult and complex matters, has described the system as being of 'byzantine complexity'. And this matters, because TNUoS charges raise extremely important questions for renewable energy projects, both now and in the future.
The system is designed to ensure that each generator pays a level of TNUoS charges that reflects how much it costs them to use the network, as this incentivises them to use it efficiently. Electricity generators therefore pay a locational charge as part of their TNUoS costs, which reflects the cost of electricity being added to the grid at different geographical points.
As a result, a renewable energy project in the north of Scotland, which can generate a lot of energy but is far away from the places where most of it is consumed, might pay more than its counterparts in England and Wales. The rules also include a process to be used when a company wants to change its transmission charges: it has to propose amendments to the underlying regulatory code documents, and these proposals are then assessed by the regulator, Ofgem. Several such proposals are currently progressing through the system.
For Ofgem, the decisions are difficult. Amendments can have significant consequences for electricity generators (depending on their business model, type of generation, and physical location), and the regulator needs to weigh up many difficult and competing issues.
For example, should charges be even more closely linked to location? This would provide an incentive to shift generation away from areas where grid capacity is low, but in practice that means discouraging new investment in renewable energy projects and potentially even threatening the UK's net zero ambitions.
The mere possibility of such changes is already having an impact on renewable energy projects throughout the UK, both those that are planned and those that are already in operation.
And generators also face the prospect of another challenging development: wide-ranging changes to the process by which generators can access and connect to the grid. It all creates uncertainty for those developing and investing in renewable energy projects.
Ofgem recognises the need for strategic reform to transmission charging, including improvements to the current TNUoS system. It has also acknowledged that charges can be unpredictable, and that this may hinder investment decisions. In May 2022, it created the TNUoS Task Force, with a brief to focus on making transmission charges more stable and predictable.
The Task Force has modelled several different options, including both fixing and flexing TNUoS charges, but these ideas have yet to be implemented in a meaningful way.
At a time when the focus really needs to be on clean energy deployment, the consistency, predictability and overall fairness of UK transmission charges are issues which need to be resolved in short order if we are to keep progress moving in the right direction.
■ Shepherd and Wedderburn is headline sponsor of All-Energy, the UK's largest renewable and low-carbon energy exhibition and conference, taking place
in Glasgow on 14–15 May 2025. Visit the All-Energy hub at www.shepwedd-allenergy.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
11 hours ago
- The Sun
How to reclaim over £3,900 ahead of summer from mis-sold car finance to energy bills
GET extra cash in your pocket ahead of summer with our guide to reclaiming cash. You could be in line to get over £2,600 back - and there are some key dates to mark in your diary. 2 Lucy Andrews explains what to do. PRE-PAYMENT METER CLAIM £1,000 Tens of thousands of prepayment meter customers will get compensation and their debts written off by energy suppliers. Ofgem has found that energy suppliers have broken rules when installing prepayment meters to collect debt. Some £18.6 million in compensation will be paid by eight energy suppliers to at least 40,000 customers. They are: Scottish Power, EDF, Octopus, Utility Warehouse, Good Energy, Tru Energy and Ecotricity. There is no need to take action - you will be contacted directly by your supplier if you are affected. The amount you could get will vary depending on which rules were broken in your case, ranging from £40 for failures like poor record keeping, to £1,000 if you were forcibly switched. But you should make a complaint now if you think you were treated badly. ENERGY BILLS CLAIM £215 It's normal for customers to build up energy credit during the warmer months, but ask for a refund if you've accrued too much. Consider claiming your money back if you have built up more than two months' worth of bill payments, said comparison site Uswitch. The formula for working out how much to ask back is to look at your credit balance, and minus two months' payments. Energy suppliers are sitting on £3.3 billion of customer's money, while the average customer racked up £215 in surplus credit last year, according to watchdog Ofgem. Each company has its own refund process, so ask yours how to claim. Get an up-to-date meter reading ready, as this will be needed in order for your supplier to process the refund. Claiming credit back is a good idea, otherwise you are losing out on any interest you could make on your cash. Put your refund in a high interest easy access savings account, so you can easily dip back into it when bills go up in the colder months. Atom Bank offers the best rate at 4.75 per cent, according to comparison site Moneyfacts. CAR FINANCE CLAIM £1,100 If you bought a car, van or motorbike on finance between 2008-January 28, 2021, you could be in line for a payout worth £1,100. The Financial Conduct Authority is investigating hidden commissions earned by car dealers who negotiated deals with high interest rates for customers. This week it issued an update on compensation. It said it could be an opt-in or opt-out redress scheme. Opt-in means that you will need to sign up for compensation, so you could miss out if you don't register. Opt-out means you are automatically included, but the downside is that you could have to wait longer for your money. The watchdog has estimated that on average, people paid £1,100 more in interest on a typical £10,000 four-year car finance. The scandal could cost lenders as much as £16 billion, according to the consumer site Which?. You can make a claim now by contacting the lender who you signed the finance agreement with, not the car dealer. Check your paperwork if you don't know how your lender is. You will have to wait for any potential payout. The Supreme Court should decide by next month what the final bill for compensation will be. Then, the FCA will respond in six weeks with a plan of action as to how people can get their payout. 'Consumers should expect compensation early next year,' said Alex Neill from the consumer group Consumer Voice. TAX OVERPAYMENT CLAIM £1,562 IF you are taxed through PAYE, make some important checks to see if you have overpaid. The average tax refund was £1,562 in 2023, according to Rift Refunds. You might be on the wrong tax code if you changed jobs, signed up to employee benefits like a company car, or your HR department has made a mistake. You should have recently received an important slip of paperwork, a P60, from your employer. Check your 'final tax code' on the form. If it's wrong, then you could end up underpaying, or overpaying, tax. The most common tax code is 1257L, which is used for most people with one job. If this code also has W1, M1 or X on the end, you are on an emergency tax code and paying more than you should. If you think you are on the wrong tax code, phone HMRC on 0300 200 3300 for a quick response. If you have overpaid, you will be reimbursed and paid 3.25% interest on top. Depending on your situation, you will either be able to claim a refund online, get a cheque in the post, or the tax will be refunded back to you through your wages. MASTERCARD CLAIM £70 Around 47 million Mastercard customers are in line for a compensation payout of up to £70. Make a claim if you bought anything from a shop or supermarket that accepted Mastercard between 1992 and 2008. The Competition Appeal Tribunal has approved a settlement for Mastercard to pay £200 million to affected customers. It was accused of wrongly slapping fees onto transactions made over a 15-year period. Although retailers paid the fees, shoppers lost out because retailers passed the cost on by hiking prices. You are eligible to make a claim if you bought anything from a shop or supermarket that accepted Mastercard between 1992 and 2008 - even if you didn't use a Mastercard. You can't file a claim yet. An online portal is expected to launch in the next few weeks on the website. Register for updates so you'll be notified when this is live. Payments are expected to be made by the end of this year. The amount you could get will depend on how many people register, although it's estimated each person could get £45 to £70. 2
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Telegraph
Our two-tier justice system is turning Lucy Connolly into a martyr
Court of Appeal judges may believe that they were right to deny early release to Lucy Connolly, the 42-year-old Northamptonshire childminder who is serving 31 months in prison for an offensive tweet about asylum seekers. But even if they maintain that her sentence was just, I think they would have been wise to let her out anyway – for a simple and pragmatic reason. Keeping her locked up is eroding public faith in the justice system. Because, almost every single day now, we read of criminals being convicted of what seem like far worse crimes than hers – and yet somehow avoiding jail. Indeed, some of them manage to avoid it more than once. In 2022, a paedophile in South Shields admitted three charges of 'making indecent images of children' (as the law calls it), as well as one charge of possessing extreme pornography (which involved bestiality). As the judge at the time noted, however, 'You identify as transgender and that has caused issues for you and anxiety for you in how you would cope with that if you were sent immediately to prison.' Well, I suppose it would, although why we're meant to worry about prison being unpleasant for paedophiles, I'm not sure. But at any rate, he wasn't sent to prison. And nor was he sent there this week, when he was hauled back to court after breaching a sexual harm prevention order. On this occasion, the judge (a different one this time) said: 'You would undoubtedly be at risk of physical or sexual assault in custody because of your presentation in a male prison.' These words are of course wonderfully kind and compassionate. But, just for a moment, let's set aside questions of 'identity', and ask: which do we think is the worse crime? Writing something horrible on the internet about asylum hotels? Or downloading images of children being sexually abused – thus boosting the market for such images, and ensuring that more children will be sexually abused in future? Now, I haven't conducted a nationwide opinion poll on the above question. But I'm fairly confident that I can guess what the result would be. And I'm equally confident that I'm not alone in remembering the name 'Lucy Connolly' every time I read about some thug or pervert sauntering off with a suspended sentence. I don't for a moment deny that what Mrs Connolly wrote was awful. Nor do I deny that she broke the law. Yet our two-tier justice system is contriving to turn her into a martyr. So, even if the powers that be have no sympathy for her, they should at least look after their own interests. Which means letting her out.
Leader Live
4 days ago
- Leader Live
Wrexham councillors vow to fight Cefn Road 900 homes plan
An outline planning application has been submitted for up to 900 new homes on land off Cefn Road. It has been lodged by Harworth Group for a development named Erlas Park - located close to the Erlas Victorian Walled Garden and Wrexham Rugby Club. The proposed development site is mainly made up of open grassland and a smaller area of woodland. The proposed development site layout. (Image: Planning documents) The land had been earmarked as part of Wrexham's Local Development Plan (LDP). Last year, Cllr Marc Jones won a landmark Court of Appeal case over the controversial LDP. The Court of Appeal ruling quashed the High Court judgment of Mr Justice Eyre made in December 2023 and dismissed the controversial judicial review brought by developers seeking to force through a local plan rejected in April and June 2023 by a cross-party majority of Wrexham councillors. The Welsh Government then lost its appeal against the decision at the Supreme Court earlier this year. Cllr Andy Gallanders, representing the Rhosnesni ward, said: 'I was disappointed to learn today that a fresh application has been submitted to the authority for up to 900 dwellings off Cefn Road. Cllr Andy Gallanders (Image: Local Democracy Reporting Service) 'I urge all residents to submit comments to the consultation. The site has been on the cards with the now failed LDP and we'd hoped the developers would have heard the voices of the people of Wrexham. 'If this site is allowed to be developed on it would cause a huge disruption for residents of Rhosnesni with a decade of building works and loss of valuable green space." He added: 'This isn't a case of nimbyism but an honest look at the infrastructure we have in the area. For example, The Greyhound roundabout has been declared 'at capacity' by highways with very minor changes proposed. This is just one example but look at the GPs and schools - all struggling for a multitude of reasons. 'We need homes, of course we do, but they have to come with the infrastructure, be affordable for our residents and not at the cost of green land.' What the Erlas Park development would look like. (Image: Planning documents) Cllr Carrie Harper, whose Caia ward is adjacent to the proposed site, said: 'The majority of councillors voted against adopting the LDP precisely because of development proposals like this. This scale of development will damage Wrexham. 'There is undoubtedly no need for it, especially with over 3,000 houses locally already having planning permission and not yet built. These houses won't be affordable for the vast majority and development on this scale will put huge pressure on local services and infrastructure." Cllr Carrie Harper (Image: Newsquest) She continued: 'It's important to remember that councillors were threatened with jail for refusing to adopt the plan which included this site. Some faced a six-month police investigation by North Wales Police and other complaints against councillors are still ongoing. 'Despite everything thrown at us, we won the argument at the Court of Appeal and ultimately the Supreme Court. They backed the local democratic process and our right not to accept this plan. "This was no easy victory, we had to crowd fund to finance lawyers to take on the Welsh Government, Wrexham Council and a series of developers who were all determined to force this plan on us." MORE NEWS: Cllr Harper added: 'Following the court case, there is no planning framework to support this application, the LDP has been legally quashed. "The likely situation is that Wrexham will now revert the previous Unitary Development Plan and its policies, which set out that this development site is outside of settlement and should not be granted planning permission. "Campaigners will fight this development all the way, it's not morally or legally acceptable to try and force these developments on our city following the court case.'
