Latest news with #CleanPower2030ActionPlan
The Herald Scotland
29-07-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Nuclear power drive obsesses over baseload. Do we need it?
Lately there has been a mounting noise on behalf of more nuclear power in Scotland, pleas for John Swinney to do a u-turn on his ruling out of new nuclear reactors. For the Herald's recent Torness series, I covered the calls by campaign group Britain Remade for a new small modular reactor to be built on the site of Scotland's only working power station which is set to be shut down in five years. 'Scotland, a country with a proud nuclear heritage, 'said Britain Remade founder Sam Richards, a former Boris Johnson advisor, ' should be looking to build a next generation of reactors.' Calls for Scotland to embrace nuclear have been greeted with a certain amount of enthusiasm in some quarters, including many SNP voters. But what troubles me, in the current debate, is that all too often it feels like we are stuck in an old vision of the grid – and one of the terms that suggests this is 'baseload'. Baseload is defined as the minimum amount of electricity required by a grid to meet the continuous demand for power over a day. Currently, it's mostly used to refer to the generating capacity that we need to always be there if the wind stops and the sun doesn't shine. Britain Remade, for instance, talks about nuclear in terms of 'clean, reliable baseload power'. But what if nuclear is actually a technology that does not suit a modern renewable grid? What if wind and nuclear are not good bedfellows and, as a baseload, new plants will only make our electricity more expensive? In a recent Substack, David Toke, author of Energy Revolutions: Profiteering versus Democracy, described the 'accepted truth' in the media that new nuclear power is needed because there is no other practical or cheaper way to balance fluctuating wind and solar power, as 'demonstrably false'. He said it 'runs counter to the way that the UK electricity grid is going to be balanced anyway' – which, he noted, is by gas engines and turbines 'that are hardly ever used'. Simple gas fired power plants, he said, are many times cheaper per MW compared to nuclear power plant. Toke advocated for a system balanced by more batteries and other storage as well as gas turbines or engines which will proved 'capacity' rather than generate much energy. He has a strong point. Of course, the problem with gas, is that it is, famously, a fossil fuel and produces greenhouse gas emissions. However, if, as Toke says, that gas is an increasingly small percentage of electricity generation, about handling the moments when demand is not met by wind and solar, the 5% predicted by the UK Government's Clean Power 2030 Action Plan, to be what we require, perhaps that's no big deal. It's a bigger deal, though, if the gas power station emissions required to balance the grid are, as another Substack write calculated recently more like 19 percent. Interestingly, Toke, whose main criticisms of nuclear are its high cost of electricity generation and lack of grid balancing flexibility, also noted that if we are thinking about the financial costs of reducing emissions we might be better off spending our money in other ways. For instance: 'setting up a scheme to pay £15000 each to 500,000 residents not on the gas grid to switch to heat pumps will likely save as much carbon as Sizewell C is likely to save'. One of the problems with the nuclear and renewable energy debate is that it plays into the idea of energy production as an ideological issue. But it seems to me the question is not whether nuclear power is simply right or wrong, but what its place is within the kind of modern grid we are developing, a grid which faces transmission challenges between Scotland, already producing more energy than it uses, and elsewhere, and whether the costs are worth it. It's hard to get clear answers on this. The problem in part is the sheer complexity of the grid and the absence of any clear map for how that is really going to be done. NESO itself doesn't give any kind of guidance on what the grid actually needs. It is technology agnostic, and simply has to work with whatever the politicians and the market dictate. Too often those that argue for nuclear sell it via the concept 'baseload'. But you only have to do a quick scan of the internet to see it is brimming also with articles about how baseload is extinct or outdated. These critics point out that what the grid actually needs is more flexible sources, both of storage and power. One of the problems is that traditional nuclear power stations tend to be all on or all off. Torness, for instance, has either one or both of its reactors, either at full or zero capacity. That kind of inflexibility in nuclear plants has already led to constraint payments being made to wind farms, which have been switched off because there was too little demand even as the nuclear power stations kept producing. In 2020 energy consultants Cornwall Insight estimated the quantity in MWh of constraints that could have been avoided had nuclear power plants in Scotland been shut during two recent years. It found that, in 2017, 94 per cent worth of windfarm output that had been turned off (constrained) could have been generated had nuclear power plant not been operating. But a new nuclear power station wouldn't have to be like Torness. Ideally, it would be flexible, of what's called 'load-following', reacting quickly to changes in demand on the grid. France, for instance, does have some load-following flexibility in its nuclear system, So, is that what we in the UK are developing? Not if we look at the two nuclear power stations in the pipeline, Hinkley Point C or the £17 billion Sizewell C, which is not due to generate electricity till after 2040. Hinkley Point C, though it is set to have some load-following capabilities, is not designed to be a load-following reactor. As written evidence to the UK Parliament from the Nuclear Industry Association in 2023 put it: 'Load-following is not the intended method of operation for the EPRs at Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C because the ratio of nuclear capacity to grid demand will only shrink in the medium term and because in a net zero grid, nuclear could be used for instance to power hydrogen production at times of excess power on the system rather than reducing output…. 'This would avoid sacrificing clean energy production and would produce a clean[1]burning fuel for hard-to-decarbonise sectors such as heavy industries that need high temperatures for production.' As the statement shows, Sizewell C, which got the green light only last week, will be a near replica of Hinkley Point C, in order to reduce production costs – and will therefore also not be load-following. Winds of Change on nuclear power (Image: Derek McArthur) The good news is that the UK government has a 44.9% stake – but this is only good news if it's the right technology for the right purpose and doesn't go ludicrously over budget. This is a project with estimated costs of £38 billion, which, it has been calculated, could see the public exposed to up to £54.6bn of costs. So, if neither Hinkley Point C, nor Sizewell C, are set to be load-following, what about the new generation of Rolls Royce Small Modular reactors which the UK Government are backing. These new SMRs are more flexible – but are they even, in any case, what Scotland needs? But balancing capacity in a grid that requires flexibility is not the only potential use of nuclear – as the Nuclear Industry Association statement shows, it may also be used for hydrogen production. READ MORE: Nuclear has been touted as an answer in some of the harder to abate industries, like steel and cement. Sam Richards from Britain Remade raised with me its potential as a source of energy for AI firms. Gillian Martin recently responded to calls to end the moratorium on new nuclear in Scotland by saying, "We think the investment is much better placed in areas of renewable energy, which is cheaper to produce and is also cheaper for consumers. "We already have in Scotland more renewable electricity than can often fit onto the grid. We also have hydro power stations which are a way of filling in any gaps in the generation of power." When people start arguing their case by saying things like 'because baseload' without ever discussing how the grid works, or what that means, it's clear there is a problem. When the lights went out in Spain, many, including myself speculated over whether the problem could have been lack of inertia, or even inadequate baseload in a grid that was over-reliant on renewables, but the problem turned out to be a flaw, according to the most recent report, in the rules governing what renewables and battery storage are required to do in terms of voltage regulation. I suspect that when we look back in the future we will consider baseload a security blanket and an unnecessary cost, incompatible with the kind of grid we have in Scotland. But, who doesn't need that blanket? Meanwhile, our evolving energy system is such a complex thing that what we need is more debate and discussion rather than kneejerk answers. The one thing we can be sure of is that it will be different from the grid of the past.
Epoch Times
14-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
British Gas Boss Says Renewables Will Not Bring Electricity Prices Down
Britain's shift to renewables will not reduce electricity prices, the boss of British Gas has said. Chris O'Shea, the chief executive of British Gas's parent company, Centrica, Centrica has one of Europe's largest renewable energy portfolios and hopes to invest up to 4 billion pounds ($5.3 billion) by the end of 2028. O'Shea argued the strike price under a Furthermore, floating offshore wind and tidal stream remain significantly more expensive. 'They may give price stability, and avoid future price spikes based on the international gas market, but they will definitely not reduce the price,' said O'Shea. Related Stories 6/8/2023 3/16/2025 He said that 'the next time you hear someone say the build out of renewables will reduce UK electricity prices, ask them to explain how.' 'Because we need to get the facts out there so we can make the right decisions-we need to stop having a polarised debate populated with unsubstantiated, but convenient, sound bites,' he said. He said that he fully supports 'the move to a cleaner energy system.' In 2019, the UK passed laws requiring the UK to bring all greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. The UK is known for being a global leader in renewable energy, especially in terms of offshore wind energy. It has more capacity installed than any other country, accounting for roughly 20 percent of global offshore wind capacity, according to UK Research and Innovation, a national funding agency investing in science and research. However, the UK also has some of the According to the British government, electricity prices in the UK have gradually become higher than those of most other EU countries. In the early 2000s, its domestic electricity prices were the second lowest in the EU, which was then the EU-15. Leaders have said that the huge spending needed to shift away from fossil fuels will reduce energy bills. Labour UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband, who is pursuing a goal to decarbonize the whole economy via his Clean Power 2030 Action Plan, has promised to shave 300 pounds ($400) off the average household electricity bill by 2030. He nergy bills are rising due to spikes 'in global gas markets.' National Energy System Operator NESO said the Clean Power 2030 Plan would cost 40 billion pounds ($53 billion) or more annually by the end of 2030. Critics of British net-zero policy have argued that renewables have added to the cost of bills. The think tank Net Zero Watch, which scrutinises climate and decarbonisation policies, recently disputed claims that high electricity prices are due to the influence of gas prices on wholesale markets. It It said that around 'three quarters of the increase in bills since 2015 can be attributed to Net Zero' and that a 327-pound ($435) real-terms increase is driven primarily by renewables subsidies (83 pounds), carbon taxes (39 pounds), grid balancing (26 pounds), Capacity Market costs (26 pounds), and grid strengthening (23 pounds). A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman told The Epoch Times: 'We are making the UK a clean energy superpower to get off the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets controlled by dictators and replace that with clean homegrown power we control. That is how we can protect family finances and our national finances. 'As shown by the National Energy System Operator's independent report, clean power by 2030 is achievable and will deliver a more secure energy system, which could see a lower cost of electricity and lower bills.'
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Despite headwinds, strong ambition remains on clean power targets for 2030
By Emma Moir, Senior Associate at Shepherd and Wedderburn WITH ambitious targets set for the transition to net zero by both the UK and Scottish Governments, the role of Scotland's offshore wind sector has never been more important. The recently published Clean Power 2030 Action Plan (CP30) reinforces the importance of the transition to clean power, and the urgency for more offshore wind, making it clear that delivery of the UK Government's ambition of up to 50GW of offshore wind 'requires a dramatic acceleration in progress compared to anything achieved historically and can only be achieved with a determined focus on pace and a huge collective effort across the industry.' The Scottish Government's ambition is to increase offshore wind capacity by 11GW by 2030. To put that into context, there are currently nine fully operational offshore wind farms in Scottish waters, with a total installed capacity of 2.97GW. Scotland therefore needs to almost quadruple its offshore wind infrastructure within the next five years. Projects currently with consent and to be constructed or under construction will provide approximately 3.5GW of capacity. It is therefore evident that the dramatic acceleration referred to in CP30 is essential to meet the ambitious targets set by Westminster and Holyrood. CP30 recognises the urgency of progressing the current pipeline to meet 2030 targets, noting that 'Accelerating delivery is exceptionally critical for offshore wind, where lead times for projects are often more than a decade. This means that all that can be deployed by 2030 has either already been consented or is in the development and consenting process.' The ScotWind leasing round provided a promising boost to Scotland's offshore wind sector, awarding seabed rights to 20 projects with a combined 27.6GW of capacity, and an additional 13 projects focused on reducing emissions from oil and gas production. Notwithstanding the pipeline that is there to be realised, the offshore wind industry is facing a number of challenges in achieving these targets: increasing costs, supply chain shortages, uncertainty over electricity market reforms and grid pricing increases, uncertainty over timing of upgrades required to the grid network to transmit the clean energy generated, and not least the time that it takes for projects to achieve consents. Taking the 4.1GW Berwick Bank project as an example, the offshore consent application was submitted in December 2022 and awaits a decision almost 2 and a half years on. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced into Parliament in March 2025 and seeks to streamline the Scottish electricity consents process. This reform is welcome, but what the Bill falls short of doing (notwithstanding a key recommendation of the Winser Report, on which much of the package of reforms is based, was mandatory timeframes for all parties) is prescribing statutory timescales for consent determinations, which would bring the Scottish system into alignment with the equivalent consenting process south of the border. The Bill provides that the Secretary of State or the Scottish Ministers may make regulations specifying a time limit for consent determination. There is, however, no guarantee that such regulations would be forthcoming. One hopes that the Scottish Ministers will utilise the powers to create time limits for decision-making, in turn creating a renewed focus on consenting appropriate projects quickly and driving realisation of a sustainable Scottish offshore wind industry. However, as it currently stands, it remains to be seen whether the promise of improved efficiency will come to fruition and, critically, whether the necessary reforms will be in place in time to meet the ever-looming deadline to achieve 2030 targets. ■ 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
The Herald Scotland
29-04-2025
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Despite headwinds, strong ambition remains on clean power targets
The recently published Clean Power 2030 Action Plan (CP30) reinforces the importance of the transition to clean power, and the urgency for more offshore wind, making it clear that delivery of the UK Government's ambition of up to 50GW of offshore wind 'requires a dramatic acceleration in progress compared to anything achieved historically and can only be achieved with a determined focus on pace and a huge collective effort across the industry.' The Scottish Government's ambition is to increase offshore wind capacity by 11GW by 2030. To put that into context, there are currently nine fully operational offshore wind farms in Scottish waters, with a total installed capacity of 2.97GW. Scotland therefore needs to almost quadruple its offshore wind infrastructure within the next five years. Projects currently with consent and to be constructed or under construction will provide approximately 3.5GW of capacity. It is therefore evident that the dramatic acceleration referred to in CP30 is essential to meet the ambitious targets set by Westminster and Holyrood. CP30 recognises the urgency of progressing the current pipeline to meet 2030 targets, noting that 'Accelerating delivery is exceptionally critical for offshore wind, where lead times for projects are often more than a decade. This means that all that can be deployed by 2030 has either already been consented or is in the development and consenting process.' The ScotWind leasing round provided a promising boost to Scotland's offshore wind sector, awarding seabed rights to 20 projects with a combined 27.6GW of capacity, and an additional 13 projects focused on reducing emissions from oil and gas production. Notwithstanding the pipeline that is there to be realised, the offshore wind industry is facing a number of challenges in achieving these targets: increasing costs, supply chain shortages, uncertainty over electricity market reforms and grid pricing increases, uncertainty over timing of upgrades required to the grid network to transmit the clean energy generated, and not least the time that it takes for projects to achieve consents. Taking the 4.1GW Berwick Bank project as an example, the offshore consent application was submitted in December 2022 and awaits a decision almost 2 and a half years on. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced into Parliament in March 2025 and seeks to streamline the Scottish electricity consents process. This reform is welcome, but what the Bill falls short of doing (notwithstanding a key recommendation of the Winser Report, on which much of the package of reforms is based, was mandatory timeframes for all parties) is prescribing statutory timescales for consent determinations, which would bring the Scottish system into alignment with the equivalent consenting process south of the border. The Bill provides that the Secretary of State or the Scottish Ministers may make regulations specifying a time limit for consent determination. There is, however, no guarantee that such regulations would be forthcoming. One hopes that the Scottish Ministers will utilise the powers to create time limits for decision-making, in turn creating a renewed focus on consenting appropriate projects quickly and driving realisation of a sustainable Scottish offshore wind industry. However, as it currently stands, it remains to be seen whether the promise of improved efficiency will come to fruition and, critically, whether the necessary reforms will be in place in time to meet the ever-looming deadline to achieve 2030 targets. ■ 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
The Independent
09-04-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Connecting the United Kingdom through sustainable infrastructure
Morgan Sindall Infrastructure is a Business Reporter client A personal reflection from a company that supports the UK's connectivity through infrastructure, with a workforce of over 2,000 employees playing their role in delivering sustainable infrastructure across seven key infrastructure sectors. Every day, the UK's infrastructure connects us in ways we often take for granted. It's everywhere, and it's always a hot topic, especially when it comes to energy. But as the country's population grows and its assets age, the demand on existing infrastructure skyrockets. The government's Clean Power 2030 Action Plan sets ambitious goals: 43 to 50GW of offshore wind, 27 to 29GW of onshore wind and 45 to 47GW of solar power, all aimed at drastically reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. Energy has been in the spotlight for years, but recently, three critical factors have driven the urgent need to upgrade our energy infrastructure: affordability, security of supply and environmental impact. These elements have never been more crucial. Affordability Remember the cost-of-living crisis? While the term might not be as common now, we're still feeling the pinch with rising energy bills. This doesn't just affect our daily expenses; it ripples down the supply chain, increasing the cost of the products we buy and use. Security of supply Global unrest, such as the war in Ukraine, has highlighted the need for national resilience. As conflicts continue, the importance of home-grown power becomes clear. We need to be self-sufficient to ensure a stable energy supply and cut down the spikes we see in costs. Environmental impact This is a big one. We all have a role in reducing our environmental footprint. In November 2024, world leaders gathered at COP29 to discuss this very issue. Our demand on electricity networks will only grow, especially with the rise of electric vehicles. There are now around 1.8 million electric and hybrid vehicles in Britain, increasing the strain on our already pressured energy network. Adding yet further to this is our increased technological requirements, in an era where technology is playing a far more central role in reducing our environmental impact. This is why infrastructure connectivity is so vital and why it's a top priority for the government. To put the challenge into perspective, the industry will deliver more infrastructure upgrades in the next decade than in the past three combined. In 2024, National Grid announced the Great Grid Partnership, a groundbreaking initiative we are proud to be part of. This partnership aims to accelerate the delivery of essential national electricity infrastructure by addressing UK supply chain and skills issues. By co-ordinating planning and execution, each supplier can pool its resources, skills, insights and experience with those of the National Grid. Meanwhile, ScottishPower Energy Networks announced a major contract in 2024 to undertake the biggest rewiring of the electricity grid since its inception. As a tier-one contractor in the infrastructure sector, we at Morgan Sindall Infrastructure understand the critical role we play in upgrading the network and are committed to this mission alongside our supply chain partners. A key enabler to the above is our supply chain and skills. The upgrade of the network will create jobs and opportunities for thousands of people, but the scale and size of the project is so large it provides longevity of work up and down the supply chain. To start preparing to meet demand, in early 2024, we opened our first overhead lines training centre in Staffordshire. The training centre has been designed to upskill and train individuals who will be working on upgrading and erecting the overhead lines and towers. This is a unique experience and skillset, but one that will be a key enabler for the mission to be met. Our supply chain family also bring their own increased skillsets. Whether they be an SME or tier two contractor, the delivery of the energy infrastructure, as highlighted in some of the delivery frameworks announced last year, will be down to collaboration. Our longstanding relationships with our supply chain partners are essential to the successful delivery of our projects. Our supply chain network is part of our extended team, delivering high-quality solutions and services. The Morgan Sindall Supply Chain Family consists of more than 415 members who benefit from tailored training, on-site advice, access to contract information and dedicated relationship management teams. Our relationship with the Supply Chain Sustainability School (SCSS) remains a critical partnership for delivering climate-related education to our suppliers to drive down value chain emissions. As shared at the start, one key enabler for the energy sector is environmental impact. We are proud to play a part in delivering a new UK energy infrastructure for the future, and alongside our robust and ever-growing supply chain network we are committed to supporting a stronger energy network for tomorrow, along with all the other infrastructure that we are rely on and use each day. Morgan Sindall Infrastructure delivers some of the UK's most complex and critical infrastructure across seven core sectors: energy, water, nuclear, highways, rail, defence and aviation for public and private customers. Working on projects and long-term frameworks, we believe in connecting people, places and communities through innovative and responsible infrastructure. Through our expertise, we harness innovative ideas and approaches that enable us to safely and responsibly design and deliver resilient infrastructure.
