Eco-tycoon Vince weighs sale of solar energy project
The energy group founded by Dale Vince, the eco-tycoon, is kicking off a hunt for investors in a solar park which is expected to become one of Britain's biggest renewable energy projects.
Sky News understands that Ecotricity, Mr Vince's company, has hired KPMG to explore talks with prospective investors or buyers for the project at Heckington Fen in Lincolnshire.
The development was approved by Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, earlier this year, and when completed it is expected to generate roughly 600MW of solar power.
It has been designated a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project by the government.
Heckington Fen will also provide 400MW of battery storage capacity.
According to documents circulated to potential bidders, Ecotricity is prioritising the sale of 100% of the project, but is open to retaining a minority stake.
The company wants to complete a deal during the third quarter of the year.
Responding to an enquiry from Sky News, Mr Vince said: "Heckington Fen is a fabulous opportunity; it's also a massive one, possibly the biggest onshore renewable initiative in Britain.
"The project is shovel-ready with a grid connection in 2028 - something which is increasingly hard to find these days.
"Whilst this is a great project which is going to go ahead, the sums of money required to build this alone in a short timeframe, means we're looking for investors or partners to help make this happen."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
19 hours ago
- Sky News
Weight loss jabs - what else don't we know?
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈 The government's health agency, the MHRA, is warning women that they shouldn't use weight loss jabs while pregnant and that the drugs can also affect the reliability of the pill, which has led to a rise in so-called "Ozempic babies". On today's Sky News Daily Niall Paterson talks to Dr Nikita Kanani, a GP and former medical director for primary care at NHS England, about the risks, whether there are other concerns about using them and if there should be tighter restrictions on online sales of the jabs.
Sky News
2 days ago
- Sky News
Where's Rachel Reeves getting her bus money?
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈 The chancellor presents the Spending Review next week, where she will outline how the budget will be divided for government departments between 2026 and 2029. Rachel Reeves says she has an extra £113bn of capital to play with. But with so many promises and projects dependent on the cash, how does she decide who will win and who will lose? On today's Sky News Daily, Niall Paterson is joined by Sky News' deputy political editor, Sam Coates, who has used AI to predict how the chancellor might spend the cash.
Daily Mirror
3 days ago
- Daily Mirror
UK 'will be forced' to hike defence spending to 3.5% to keep Donald Trump onside
Keir Starmer yesterday reiterated his commitment to get defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 - and he said his 'ambition' to hit 3% would be reached in the next Parliament The UK will be forced to promise to hike defence spending to 3.5% of national income within ten years, according to multiple reports. Keir Starmer yesterday reiterated his commitment to get defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 - and he said he was "100% confident" his "ambition" to hit 3% would be reached in the next Parliament. But he refused to spell out the details of the 3% plan, raising questions over the certainty of the commitment. But, according to Sky News, the PM will have to further increase the target to keep Donald Trump on board, as well as keeping pace with NATO as it pushes to rearm. The reports also suggested there is confusion at the Ministry of Defence after the PM tied himself in knots over the 3% plan, when in fact he is planning to increase it again soon. Asked what would happen at a NATO summit later this month, a defence source told Sky News: "3.5% without a doubt." The Mirror understands the MoD has no response to the 3.5% rumours, with the Government's official position only set out yesterday. The news site said Mr Starmer is due to hold talks on an uplift to the defence spending target as soon as today. As well as an increase in pure defence spending of 3.5% by 2035, the PM is also said to be likely forced to commit a further 1.5% of GDP to defence-related areas such as spy agencies and infrastructure. It would mean the total broader defence spending pot would be 5%. Mark Rutte, head of NATO and a former Dutch prime minister, said last week he assumes members will agree to a broad defence spending target of 5% of GDP during the summit in The Hague on June 24 and 25. He said: "I assume that in The Hague we will agree on a high defence spend target of in total, 5%... I will not say what is the individual breakup, but it will be considerably north for 3% when it comes to the hard spending. And it will be also a target on defence related spending. We need this because otherwise we can never, ever, ever reach the capability targets we have to reach." Mr Starmer yesterday launched the long-awaited strategic defence review (SDR), which he said would make the UK "safer and stronger, a battle-ready, armour-clad nation" amid Russian threats in the air, at sea and online. Speaking at a BAE Systems' shipyard in Govan, in Glasgow, Mr Starmer said the front line "is here" - with threats facing the UK "more serious, more immediate and more unpredictable" than any time since the Cold War. But questions were raised over how his defence commitments would be funded. Paul Johnson, from the respected IFS think-tank, said: "Bluntly, it really does seem to me that the only choice that is available, if we're going to go through all of those things, is some really quite chunky tax increases to pay for it." Lord Dannatt, former head of the British Army, said that vague commitments to defence spending "does not cut the mustard". He told Times Radio: "It's a little bit like saying in 1938 to Adolf Hitler, please don't attack us till 1946, because we're not going to be ready. Well, frankly, if we'd behaved like that, we wouldn't be speaking English this morning, would we?"
