It is perhaps somewhat surprising that Miliband has agreed to a capacity target of only 45GW for 2028/29 in the T-4 auction: not much room for more EVs and heat pumps, even with heavy deindustrialisation. The methodology is now looking out a bit further to 2033/34, but shows very little increase in capacity requirement. This is supposed to tie in with FES. There does seem to be a belated realisation that multiple interconnectors may not offer much of a supply guarantee when they are all essentially to the same grid which is liable to be overreliant on limited dispatchable capacity as it disappears down the renewables plughole.
It is also no surprise that the T-1 has had to call for an extra 6.5GW of top-up at very short notice. Miliband downgraded the EMR recommendation for 6.8GW, and is presumably betting on mild windy winters. The price for this is likely once again to come in at the top end of the range and may under procure. No-one is going to be in a hurry to commit to building new dispatchable capacity while Miliband and the courts (2 cases currently, one from Greenpeace against all new fossil fuel capacity even with CCUS, the other against a new CCGT in Tyneside) want to prevent it.
Thanks - excellent article. I'll use some of what you said about hydrogen in my upcoming post on the uneconomical fundamentals of hydrogen production.
Also, your explanation of 'curtailment' takes a hard-to-understand issue and makes it simple and clear: "We also know electricity costs are going to soar because of the vast amounts of curtailment they envisage. Curtailment means that wind farms are turned off, or curtailed, when the wind is blowing because there is insufficient demand for their output. Wind farm operators will either demand to be paid for this curtailed electricity or will adjust the prices they bid into auctions to take this curtailment into account."
I got a kick out of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing in "It is rather odd that they plan to chop down loads of trees for BECCS to produce negative emissions and also plant more trees under LULUCF for even more negative emissions."
The bigger issue currently is that the transmission system isn't adequate to move the power to where its needed. This has been known about for years but policy has perpetuated connect and manage new windmills without making them pay for the full upgrade to make use of their energy. They don't care of course because they get paid to be constrained off oh and it saves wear and tare on the equipment to boot. This is going to get a lot worse in the short term especially with any windmill in N.Scotland as the transmission capacity is already well below the nominal rated capacity so adding anymore now just worsens the problem. The fix is the multi billion pound Eastern DC Links but they are five years away. Whatever your views on climate change so far its been utter mismanagement by DENZ & OFGEM to be fair to transmission operators they've been forewarning of what would happen. The positive here though is it shows how unlikely an all round coherent plan will ever be formulated to deliver on 2030.
No the fix is to start building NPPs and invest in SMRs like the British Moltex design that the liars in the British gov't refused to allow, they had to move to Canada. And above all not the French EPR which is the worst designed, most expensive, GenIII reactor on the planet. They should be going all APR1400's for conventional reactors.
They could sign on with Copenhagen Atomics for reactors that would easily replace all power and most heat sources in the UK, at a lower cost than gas, coal, wind or solar. And no need for any long distance transmission. Or energy storage.
Why Thorium will be a Game-Changer in Energy. Copenhagen Atomics:
I recently drove through parts of Wales where they have been felling trees on the hillsides to reduce the surface roughness and turbulence for the wind turbines they will be erecting in top.
oh no... that's a productive way to produce energy and save the world! So sad in this modern age they are resorting to last century techniques to power a modern grid!
Maybe they are using those trees for wood chips for energy - here the solar farms just burn them on site! More carbon!
What is perhaps notable is that this year there is a little more realism in the early years projections, even if the ultimate destination remains unchanged. It's the first time I've seen much acknowledgement of rising curtailment costs for example, though why these should reduce again after 2035 remains a mystery. There is also an acknowledgement of a prolonged role for gas that was previously fantasised away. I note they have yet to release the key document on their modelling methods and assumptions. That will be worth getting teeth into.
I can see no viable logic for that. The reason for curtailment is that it is uneconomic to transmit and use the higher levels of intermittent surplus. DACCS cannot change that reality. This chart shows how low utilisation kills the economics
David a demolition derby par excellence with so much to cover its difficult to know where to start. The fact the ESO has now come up with pathways v scenarios tells me that they needed a change of direction to try an engage people but its still reliant upon the same gobbledygook. Its a work of fiction and utterly undeliverable anyhow albeit that's heavily reliant upon the rest of the Western world seeking to do largely the same thing thus overwhelming the supply chain. However, one has to acknowledge the dose of reality that gas will still be playing a key role in delivering our even reduced energy needs (yeah right) so perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt that they are in reality warning the govt off destroying the N.Sea just yet. Be interesting to see what Millibrain makes of it although I suspect, even know, that its is beyond his comprehension anyhow. Starkie should be more aware of reality so presumably we can expect him to give us a view on it at some point.
Personally ive never taken much notice of the FES and fortunately even OFGEM has not either and thus the expansion of the grid has never come through as fast nor has there been a drastic shift DENZ policy to drive up unreliables any faster. I remain unconvinced that AR6 will be run away success even with higher rates and hope Reeves is true to her word and doesn't allow anymore increases beyond inflation for AR7.
Anyhow the FES lot can now hunker down and start regurgitating the same nonsense in 12mths time.
I see that over at NALOPKT you noted that the BBC have allowed you to escalate your complaint about Justin Rowlatt's lies about renewables costs to OFCOM. How did you manage to short circuit the process which normally takes over a year?
Can you share your complaint reference so that we can file amicus briefs in support? I would propose to submit the critique I originally sent to newsiteerrors@bbc.co.uk which I published in a comment at NALOPKT here
We are writing to say sorry that we’ve not been able to reply to your complaint within the time period we aim for. We manage this for most complaints, but it’s not always possible – we apologise that it’s now overdue.
We will respond as soon as we can – we appreciate your understanding.
If you wish to refer this delay and the substance of your complaint to the BBC’s regulator Ofcom, you can do so online
I suspect we will end up having to complain to OFCOM itself that its procedure for handling complaints is totally inadequate when there are hundreds of billions if not trillions of pounds at stake.
It may also be an idea to try to line up an MP or two. It might get deliciously embarassing for the BBC to have to broadcast a PQ questioning their veracity on energy matters.
Herman Wouk, in his play "The Caine Mutiny Court Martial" described the US Navy as "a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots".
The UK is apparently following a "master plan" designed by idiots for execution by geniuses (or magicians). However, it appears there has been no effort to assure that there is an adequate supply of geniuses (or magicians).
Thank you and you are spot on. In the U.S. we are on a similar stupid path unless Trump wins the election. Then common sense energy policies may return. My take is offered on my blog. In the U.S. the policy makers are not trained in energy or electricity generation. They are proponents of Socialism masquerading as environmental Zealots. Thanks again for your article! http://dickstormprobizblog.org/2024/07/10/we-the-people-vs-net-zero-indoctrination-by-the-ten-headed-swamp-monster/
I’m trying to imagine what I will be doing at home in 2050 that will require two-thirds less energy than currently. Reading more books by candlelight, wearing thermal vests, hoodies and gloves indoors, walking to the local store to spend my food ration coupons perhaps. Is this the scenario they have planned for us? Or do they assume we will be living off-grid generating our own electricity from rooftop solar and Tesla Power Walls.
Easy, they have that all figured out. You didn't read the WEF's "The Great Reset Strategy. You will own nothing, and be happy"?
That means you will be living in your 500 sq.ft. apartment, in a grungy apt. block owned by BlackRock or State Street. Located in a 15min ghetto, for which you will need a permit to exit, as you will be tracked everywhere you go. And your protein will come from bug meal.
And I can imagine in that regime, managed from Geneva or Davos, that when wind and solar craps out, well you can just learn to live without power, while being told repeatedly that energy is gift from your rulers that you should be grateful for whenever they happen to provide it.
UNMISSABLE: Main National TV Station Pumps INSANE Propaganda - ENJOY!
"You're gonna love this one! Our National main TV station just aired an INSANE piece of WEF/UN-style propaganda - it's a parody of itself! Nonetheless I have a great time taking it down hardcore".
will you be able to afford rooftop solar and Tesla power walls? That ration card won't pay for them....!!! You may also get a ration card to be on your computer.... or cell phone, now that would put the fear of God in a lot of people - maybe then they would speak up!!!
Imagine you have a company - with a very strong technical/engineering bias - charged with ensuring the efficient operation of the supply of electricity to the nation via the National Grid. This is (was) NG ESO. The national grid was powered by efficient, reliable sources of energy such as coal, gas and nuclear (much of it from national reserves), ensuring security, stability and reliability, as well as abundance and affordability.
Then along came the Green Blob demanding a 'just' transition to 'clean' energy from weather dependent renewables. NG ESO transformed from an efficient team of highly qualified engineers and planners into an ideologically driven outfit intent upon delivering 'sustainable' electricity, 'clean' electricity, planet and biosphere saving electricity. In keeping with the 'just and equitable' transition to clean energy, it implemented a massive recruitment drive to employ a 'just and equitable and diverse workforce', essential to oversee the 'just and equitable' transition - from 'dirty', racist, colonial, reliable, fossil fuel generated electricity to 'clean' and 'sustainable' and unreliable generation.
Then imagine this newly diversified and ideologically driven organisation was tasked not just with delivering a 'clean' electricity transition but a 'clean' ENERGY transition, extending its tendrils into our primary energy use as a nation, with the target of replacing fossil fuels not just in electricity generation, but in transport, industry, home heating, in fact ALL of our energy requirements as a nation. Supposedly, this can be achieved via the 'electrification of everything', then energy itself becomes entirely synonymous with 'clean' electricity.
Then imagine that this organisation gave itself two years, just TWO years, to completely transform the direction we are headed in re. energy consumption in this country (by creating ever more narrow 'pathways'):
"I repeat, decisive action is needed with the next two years to deliver the fundamental change required for a fair, affordable, sustainable and secure Net Zero Energy System by 2050" (to be achieved via, amongst other things, "Whole Energy Market Reform")
Imagine your worst nightmare, then imagine your worst nightmare was 10 times as bad as you could imagine. Then imagine your unimaginable worst nightmare came true.
Thank you for the link to the NG ESO presentation and panel section, which I've now watched. Not a single mention of £ or £/MWh. Lots of mention of hydrogen as an energy store, I regret to note. The only slight puncturing of the bubble I noticed was the question/comment that UK industry currently uses 700 kilo-tonnes of hydrogen per year, and to produce this by electrolysis would require a continuous power of 50 gigawatt (I make it nearer 35, but it's still a big number). As I write, the UK grid is currently running at 33.45 gigawatt.
The whole thing recalled Woody Allen: "I'm sorry, I'm due back on earth in half an hour".
The gestation period has geen a little longer I think. Steven Holliday who became CEO of National Grid in 2007 pushed the idea of abandoning baseload power and telling us that we should expect our supply to become intermittent. Oddly a decade earlier he had been the manager of Fawley refinery. Fintan Slye's appointment was rapidly followed by an influx of an Irish dominated harem including Roisin Quinn, Kayte O'Neil and Claire Dykta (who led the FES effort). Power to the sisterhood is a main theme, as these posts show
Almost as bad as Emma Pinchbeck. It's not all women of course (we have the likes of Dale Vince, Greg Jackson & Chris Packham to balance the scales somewhat), but they do seem pretty well-represented in the scummy liar department. Just as they were with the Covid debacle actually (Christina Pagel, Trish Greenhalgh, Julia Grace Patterson & many others).
There are lots more at NG: Alice Delahunty who heads the network investment programme, Cordi O'Hara OBE who has many hats - she started out as a gas trader for Accord which struck a chord with me: I recall at one stage there was a lot of chat about market manipulation; Katie Jackson now headhunted to Rio Tinto, and so on through the ranks.
Energy's preferred pronouns are 'clean' and 'sustainable'. In reality, they are 'expensive' and 'not enough'. But that's thermodynamics and economics deniers for you!
Excellent comment. Nailed it. None of the people on that launch panel have even the slightest experience of running a power system. Yet they're presented as the "experts".
Fortunately these are the back office people who don't actually run the grid in real time. Those that actually control it second by second know exactly what is needed to keep the lights on although there job is getting harder. They have all the tools at there disposal on an open ended costs basis to achieve that mission and perhaps in some respects because they are so good at their job we are unlikely to see blackouts anytime soon that would prick the green bubble if they started happening.
I see you are a retired engineer. As an ex network engineer myself (distribution), with subsequent experience in all other areas of the industry, including wholesale and retail I markets, I am less optimistic.
If gas and nuclear stations are decommissioned without baseload and dispatchable replacement, we could be in big trouble from a security of supply standpoint. We've sensibly increased our gas storage capacity, but without the plants to burn it, plentiful gas won't help us.
Regardless, I am far more concerned with the adverse socio-economic aspects of the Net Zero lunacy. We'll never get that far before engineering, logistical and economic reality kick in, but in theory the costs are likely to exceed £2.5 Trillion all in (including non power system costs such as heat pumps, home insulation & electric vehicles). Retail electricity prices could approach £1/unit.
Even getting half way there would destroy what's left of the socio-economic cohesion of the UK - and, shamefully, we have plenty of actual engineers promoting the lies.
Totally its utterly fundamental now that the CCGTs don't end up in the same boat as the coal stns and get destroyed. Yes it will cost money to keep them available yes its daft to have two systems but eco loons have the upper hand at the moment and its going to take a while to walk people back from where they have been lured too. So we have to accept that but without the CCGTs we will be doomed to blackouts and social disorder.
Nothing is anywhere near as old as Ratcliffe and they kept that going. The issue is its going to cost but the owners will be reticent given there being driven off the system on too many hours now but they are needed as per the FES. So that should at least shape the capacity market to keep them in play as long as Millibrain is contained.
Oh look, what a surprise. Larry Fink at BlackRock is pushing the DEI agenda hard on companies right across the globe. Why? BlackRock just happens to be the majority shareholder in NG ESO's parent company, National Grid PLC.
Thank you for another absorbing Sunday morning read, though I found it jaw-droppingly horrifying. Once I've recovered, it will get a second read.
Before I curl up into a ball, sobbing, I'll observe that it brought to mind Billy Connolly's welder colleague of many years ago: if the people of the NG ESO who produced this aren't on drugs, they ought to be.
Very much hope so too, more than 50% decrease in energy usage per capita and based on a non existent hydrogen tech, economic suicide is the mildest way to put it
Would love explore a collaboration with you on a discussion of hydrogen’s economics for @cedarowl
Related to this is the recent announcements for the next Capacity Market auctions which can be found here
https://emrdeliverybody.nationalgrideso.com/IG/s/article/2024-25-CM-Auction-Guidelines-and-Parameters
It is perhaps somewhat surprising that Miliband has agreed to a capacity target of only 45GW for 2028/29 in the T-4 auction: not much room for more EVs and heat pumps, even with heavy deindustrialisation. The methodology is now looking out a bit further to 2033/34, but shows very little increase in capacity requirement. This is supposed to tie in with FES. There does seem to be a belated realisation that multiple interconnectors may not offer much of a supply guarantee when they are all essentially to the same grid which is liable to be overreliant on limited dispatchable capacity as it disappears down the renewables plughole.
It is also no surprise that the T-1 has had to call for an extra 6.5GW of top-up at very short notice. Miliband downgraded the EMR recommendation for 6.8GW, and is presumably betting on mild windy winters. The price for this is likely once again to come in at the top end of the range and may under procure. No-one is going to be in a hurry to commit to building new dispatchable capacity while Miliband and the courts (2 cases currently, one from Greenpeace against all new fossil fuel capacity even with CCUS, the other against a new CCGT in Tyneside) want to prevent it.
History will embarrass the UK Green Industrial Complex and its governmental tentacles.
Magical thinking doesn't do it justice. It's an afront to the word "thinking"
Thanks - excellent article. I'll use some of what you said about hydrogen in my upcoming post on the uneconomical fundamentals of hydrogen production.
Also, your explanation of 'curtailment' takes a hard-to-understand issue and makes it simple and clear: "We also know electricity costs are going to soar because of the vast amounts of curtailment they envisage. Curtailment means that wind farms are turned off, or curtailed, when the wind is blowing because there is insufficient demand for their output. Wind farm operators will either demand to be paid for this curtailed electricity or will adjust the prices they bid into auctions to take this curtailment into account."
I got a kick out of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing in "It is rather odd that they plan to chop down loads of trees for BECCS to produce negative emissions and also plant more trees under LULUCF for even more negative emissions."
The bigger issue currently is that the transmission system isn't adequate to move the power to where its needed. This has been known about for years but policy has perpetuated connect and manage new windmills without making them pay for the full upgrade to make use of their energy. They don't care of course because they get paid to be constrained off oh and it saves wear and tare on the equipment to boot. This is going to get a lot worse in the short term especially with any windmill in N.Scotland as the transmission capacity is already well below the nominal rated capacity so adding anymore now just worsens the problem. The fix is the multi billion pound Eastern DC Links but they are five years away. Whatever your views on climate change so far its been utter mismanagement by DENZ & OFGEM to be fair to transmission operators they've been forewarning of what would happen. The positive here though is it shows how unlikely an all round coherent plan will ever be formulated to deliver on 2030.
No the fix is to start building NPPs and invest in SMRs like the British Moltex design that the liars in the British gov't refused to allow, they had to move to Canada. And above all not the French EPR which is the worst designed, most expensive, GenIII reactor on the planet. They should be going all APR1400's for conventional reactors.
They could sign on with Copenhagen Atomics for reactors that would easily replace all power and most heat sources in the UK, at a lower cost than gas, coal, wind or solar. And no need for any long distance transmission. Or energy storage.
Why Thorium will be a Game-Changer in Energy. Copenhagen Atomics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMv5c32XXoE
There a 10yr + horizon we need to a strategy to protect the CCGTs from Millibrain stupidity
I recently drove through parts of Wales where they have been felling trees on the hillsides to reduce the surface roughness and turbulence for the wind turbines they will be erecting in top.
oh no... that's a productive way to produce energy and save the world! So sad in this modern age they are resorting to last century techniques to power a modern grid!
Maybe they are using those trees for wood chips for energy - here the solar farms just burn them on site! More carbon!
What is perhaps notable is that this year there is a little more realism in the early years projections, even if the ultimate destination remains unchanged. It's the first time I've seen much acknowledgement of rising curtailment costs for example, though why these should reduce again after 2035 remains a mystery. There is also an acknowledgement of a prolonged role for gas that was previously fantasised away. I note they have yet to release the key document on their modelling methods and assumptions. That will be worth getting teeth into.
https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/future-energy-scenarios-fes/fes-documents
The decline after the mid 2030's is due to DACCS.
Not sure how that works since they will use almost as much energy as they hope to offset?
I can see no viable logic for that. The reason for curtailment is that it is uneconomic to transmit and use the higher levels of intermittent surplus. DACCS cannot change that reality. This chart shows how low utilisation kills the economics
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nZM72/1/
David a demolition derby par excellence with so much to cover its difficult to know where to start. The fact the ESO has now come up with pathways v scenarios tells me that they needed a change of direction to try an engage people but its still reliant upon the same gobbledygook. Its a work of fiction and utterly undeliverable anyhow albeit that's heavily reliant upon the rest of the Western world seeking to do largely the same thing thus overwhelming the supply chain. However, one has to acknowledge the dose of reality that gas will still be playing a key role in delivering our even reduced energy needs (yeah right) so perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt that they are in reality warning the govt off destroying the N.Sea just yet. Be interesting to see what Millibrain makes of it although I suspect, even know, that its is beyond his comprehension anyhow. Starkie should be more aware of reality so presumably we can expect him to give us a view on it at some point.
Personally ive never taken much notice of the FES and fortunately even OFGEM has not either and thus the expansion of the grid has never come through as fast nor has there been a drastic shift DENZ policy to drive up unreliables any faster. I remain unconvinced that AR6 will be run away success even with higher rates and hope Reeves is true to her word and doesn't allow anymore increases beyond inflation for AR7.
Anyhow the FES lot can now hunker down and start regurgitating the same nonsense in 12mths time.
I see that over at NALOPKT you noted that the BBC have allowed you to escalate your complaint about Justin Rowlatt's lies about renewables costs to OFCOM. How did you manage to short circuit the process which normally takes over a year?
Can you share your complaint reference so that we can file amicus briefs in support? I would propose to submit the critique I originally sent to newsiteerrors@bbc.co.uk which I published in a comment at NALOPKT here
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/06/18/justin-rowlatts-renewables-disinformation/#comment-288885
Your Reference CAS-7850603-J0D8H9
We are writing to say sorry that we’ve not been able to reply to your complaint within the time period we aim for. We manage this for most complaints, but it’s not always possible – we apologise that it’s now overdue.
We will respond as soon as we can – we appreciate your understanding.
If you wish to refer this delay and the substance of your complaint to the BBC’s regulator Ofcom, you can do so online
Complaint duly submitted. The page to watch is here:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-standards/bbc-online-bulletin/
I suspect we will end up having to complain to OFCOM itself that its procedure for handling complaints is totally inadequate when there are hundreds of billions if not trillions of pounds at stake.
It may also be an idea to try to line up an MP or two. It might get deliciously embarassing for the BBC to have to broadcast a PQ questioning their veracity on energy matters.
“We manage this for most complaints”
They are such scummy liars.
https://johnsullivan.substack.com/p/the-lady-doth-protest-too-much-methinks
Sorry, tried to insert a picture but it didn't work. See section 4 of link for my own experience of the BBC's complaints handling “skills”.
Herman Wouk, in his play "The Caine Mutiny Court Martial" described the US Navy as "a master plan designed by geniuses for execution by idiots".
The UK is apparently following a "master plan" designed by idiots for execution by geniuses (or magicians). However, it appears there has been no effort to assure that there is an adequate supply of geniuses (or magicians).
Thank you and you are spot on. In the U.S. we are on a similar stupid path unless Trump wins the election. Then common sense energy policies may return. My take is offered on my blog. In the U.S. the policy makers are not trained in energy or electricity generation. They are proponents of Socialism masquerading as environmental Zealots. Thanks again for your article! http://dickstormprobizblog.org/2024/07/10/we-the-people-vs-net-zero-indoctrination-by-the-ten-headed-swamp-monster/
We have a similar situation here with policymakers being totally unqualified for their role. See next week's article.
I look forward to your next article. Thank you
I'll have to check out your blog - thanks for the link.
I’m trying to imagine what I will be doing at home in 2050 that will require two-thirds less energy than currently. Reading more books by candlelight, wearing thermal vests, hoodies and gloves indoors, walking to the local store to spend my food ration coupons perhaps. Is this the scenario they have planned for us? Or do they assume we will be living off-grid generating our own electricity from rooftop solar and Tesla Power Walls.
Easy, they have that all figured out. You didn't read the WEF's "The Great Reset Strategy. You will own nothing, and be happy"?
That means you will be living in your 500 sq.ft. apartment, in a grungy apt. block owned by BlackRock or State Street. Located in a 15min ghetto, for which you will need a permit to exit, as you will be tracked everywhere you go. And your protein will come from bug meal.
And I can imagine in that regime, managed from Geneva or Davos, that when wind and solar craps out, well you can just learn to live without power, while being told repeatedly that energy is gift from your rulers that you should be grateful for whenever they happen to provide it.
UNMISSABLE: Main National TV Station Pumps INSANE Propaganda - ENJOY!
Ivor Cummins:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZwdn2kBcmY
"You're gonna love this one! Our National main TV station just aired an INSANE piece of WEF/UN-style propaganda - it's a parody of itself! Nonetheless I have a great time taking it down hardcore".
will you be able to afford rooftop solar and Tesla power walls? That ration card won't pay for them....!!! You may also get a ration card to be on your computer.... or cell phone, now that would put the fear of God in a lot of people - maybe then they would speak up!!!
Look on the bright side - you won't need to spend as much to power your fridge.
Imagine you have a company - with a very strong technical/engineering bias - charged with ensuring the efficient operation of the supply of electricity to the nation via the National Grid. This is (was) NG ESO. The national grid was powered by efficient, reliable sources of energy such as coal, gas and nuclear (much of it from national reserves), ensuring security, stability and reliability, as well as abundance and affordability.
Then along came the Green Blob demanding a 'just' transition to 'clean' energy from weather dependent renewables. NG ESO transformed from an efficient team of highly qualified engineers and planners into an ideologically driven outfit intent upon delivering 'sustainable' electricity, 'clean' electricity, planet and biosphere saving electricity. In keeping with the 'just and equitable' transition to clean energy, it implemented a massive recruitment drive to employ a 'just and equitable and diverse workforce', essential to oversee the 'just and equitable' transition - from 'dirty', racist, colonial, reliable, fossil fuel generated electricity to 'clean' and 'sustainable' and unreliable generation.
Then imagine this newly diversified and ideologically driven organisation was tasked not just with delivering a 'clean' electricity transition but a 'clean' ENERGY transition, extending its tendrils into our primary energy use as a nation, with the target of replacing fossil fuels not just in electricity generation, but in transport, industry, home heating, in fact ALL of our energy requirements as a nation. Supposedly, this can be achieved via the 'electrification of everything', then energy itself becomes entirely synonymous with 'clean' electricity.
Then imagine that this organisation gave itself two years, just TWO years, to completely transform the direction we are headed in re. energy consumption in this country (by creating ever more narrow 'pathways'):
"I repeat, decisive action is needed with the next two years to deliver the fundamental change required for a fair, affordable, sustainable and secure Net Zero Energy System by 2050" (to be achieved via, amongst other things, "Whole Energy Market Reform")
https://www.youtube.com/live/YDiv2BH4o0o
Imagine your worst nightmare, then imagine your worst nightmare was 10 times as bad as you could imagine. Then imagine your unimaginable worst nightmare came true.
Ladies and gentleman, I give you NESO.
Thank you for the link to the NG ESO presentation and panel section, which I've now watched. Not a single mention of £ or £/MWh. Lots of mention of hydrogen as an energy store, I regret to note. The only slight puncturing of the bubble I noticed was the question/comment that UK industry currently uses 700 kilo-tonnes of hydrogen per year, and to produce this by electrolysis would require a continuous power of 50 gigawatt (I make it nearer 35, but it's still a big number). As I write, the UK grid is currently running at 33.45 gigawatt.
The whole thing recalled Woody Allen: "I'm sorry, I'm due back on earth in half an hour".
Totally agree with you, excellent comment. (Ex-CEGB power systems engineer - protection).
The gestation period has geen a little longer I think. Steven Holliday who became CEO of National Grid in 2007 pushed the idea of abandoning baseload power and telling us that we should expect our supply to become intermittent. Oddly a decade earlier he had been the manager of Fawley refinery. Fintan Slye's appointment was rapidly followed by an influx of an Irish dominated harem including Roisin Quinn, Kayte O'Neil and Claire Dykta (who led the FES effort). Power to the sisterhood is a main theme, as these posts show
https://uk.linkedin.com/posts/clairedykta_i-have-to-admit-that-i-didnt-realise-it-activity-6945119831864061952-DZCK
#CluelessClaire.
https://x.com/EyesOnThePriz12/status/1813849663071478139
Almost as bad as Emma Pinchbeck. It's not all women of course (we have the likes of Dale Vince, Greg Jackson & Chris Packham to balance the scales somewhat), but they do seem pretty well-represented in the scummy liar department. Just as they were with the Covid debacle actually (Christina Pagel, Trish Greenhalgh, Julia Grace Patterson & many others).
There are lots more at NG: Alice Delahunty who heads the network investment programme, Cordi O'Hara OBE who has many hats - she started out as a gas trader for Accord which struck a chord with me: I recall at one stage there was a lot of chat about market manipulation; Katie Jackson now headhunted to Rio Tinto, and so on through the ranks.
No, it could be worse, if energy had gender.
Energy's preferred pronouns are 'clean' and 'sustainable'. In reality, they are 'expensive' and 'not enough'. But that's thermodynamics and economics deniers for you!
Excellent comment. Nailed it. None of the people on that launch panel have even the slightest experience of running a power system. Yet they're presented as the "experts".
https://x.com/EyesOnThePriz12/status/1813849663071478139
Fortunately these are the back office people who don't actually run the grid in real time. Those that actually control it second by second know exactly what is needed to keep the lights on although there job is getting harder. They have all the tools at there disposal on an open ended costs basis to achieve that mission and perhaps in some respects because they are so good at their job we are unlikely to see blackouts anytime soon that would prick the green bubble if they started happening.
I see you are a retired engineer. As an ex network engineer myself (distribution), with subsequent experience in all other areas of the industry, including wholesale and retail I markets, I am less optimistic.
If gas and nuclear stations are decommissioned without baseload and dispatchable replacement, we could be in big trouble from a security of supply standpoint. We've sensibly increased our gas storage capacity, but without the plants to burn it, plentiful gas won't help us.
Regardless, I am far more concerned with the adverse socio-economic aspects of the Net Zero lunacy. We'll never get that far before engineering, logistical and economic reality kick in, but in theory the costs are likely to exceed £2.5 Trillion all in (including non power system costs such as heat pumps, home insulation & electric vehicles). Retail electricity prices could approach £1/unit.
Even getting half way there would destroy what's left of the socio-economic cohesion of the UK - and, shamefully, we have plenty of actual engineers promoting the lies.
https://x.com/EyesOnThePriz12/status/1810943137298133501
Totally its utterly fundamental now that the CCGTs don't end up in the same boat as the coal stns and get destroyed. Yes it will cost money to keep them available yes its daft to have two systems but eco loons have the upper hand at the moment and its going to take a while to walk people back from where they have been lured too. So we have to accept that but without the CCGTs we will be doomed to blackouts and social disorder.
And they're getting to the end of their lives.
https://open.substack.com/pub/davidturver/p/wait-for-the-blackout?r=nhgn1&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Nothing is anywhere near as old as Ratcliffe and they kept that going. The issue is its going to cost but the owners will be reticent given there being driven off the system on too many hours now but they are needed as per the FES. So that should at least shape the capacity market to keep them in play as long as Millibrain is contained.
Oh look, what a surprise. Larry Fink at BlackRock is pushing the DEI agenda hard on companies right across the globe. Why? BlackRock just happens to be the majority shareholder in NG ESO's parent company, National Grid PLC.
https://www.common-wealth.org/publications/national-grid-ownership
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-10/blackrock-plans-to-push-companies-on-racial-diversity-in-2021
Not majority shareholder, but the largest
It must be a coincidence that NG ESO is pushing a model that requires massive spending on the grid.
Thank you for another absorbing Sunday morning read, though I found it jaw-droppingly horrifying. Once I've recovered, it will get a second read.
Before I curl up into a ball, sobbing, I'll observe that it brought to mind Billy Connolly's welder colleague of many years ago: if the people of the NG ESO who produced this aren't on drugs, they ought to be.
I hope you’re advising Reform UK on how they can best take on moronic Miliband on these issues.
Oddly enough, we plan to try exactly that. Not easy to get an audience, but watch this space!
Excellent, hope you succeed.
Very much hope so too, more than 50% decrease in energy usage per capita and based on a non existent hydrogen tech, economic suicide is the mildest way to put it