Stark Sends Out SOS

Energy Secretary and Head of Mission Control admit they do not have a clue

If you were ever uncertain that Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and his Head of Mission Control, Chris Stark were space cadets with only the vacuum of space between their ears, then the letter they sent to the NG ESO yesterday should remove all doubt.

First, it is rather unfortunate that the file name for the letter on the Government website is “SOS Chris Stark Letter Clean Power 2030.” It smacks of a certain amount of desperation. But it is the substance of the letter that is more worrying. They have written to Fintan Slye, director of the National Grid ESO (soon to become NESO) for “practical advice” on achieving a clean power grid by 2030. In other words, neither Ed Miliband nor Stark have the faintest clue how to deliver a net zero carbon grid by 2030.

The letter goes on to detail the advice they need which includes a range of pathways to enable a decarbonised power system by 2030. For each pathway they ask that Slye sets out the energy generation and demand mix and the underlying assumptions that need to be met for these to be deliverable. They also ask for the key requirements for the transmission network and interconnectors. Interestingly, they do not ask for any information about the distribution network. They also ask for a high-level view of the costs, benefits, opportunities, challenges and risks as well as the key actions to be taken by Government, NESO, Ofgem and industry to enable delivery of the pathways. Stark’s post on X/Twitter says the advice will be delivered in the Autumn, so NESO has just three months to complete this work.

Labour’s Green Prosperity Plan was launched with some fanfare back in September 2022 and was put together for them by Ember, the green energy think tank. Back then it was described as “ambitious but possible” which is consultant-speak for completely barking. As we covered last year, the plan included completely unrealistic build out plans for wind and solar power and was very sketchy on the amount of storage that would be required.

The letter from Miliband and Stark puts Fintan Slye in an exceedingly difficult position. Only last month, NG ESO launched their latest Future Energy Pathways (covered here) which were supposed to demonstrate a “a narrower range of outcomes to drive more strategic, credible routes to net zero.” The trouble is all the “credible routes” included very significant CO2 emissions for power generation in 2030 (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 - Power Generation Emissions Out to 2050 (Source - NG ESO FES 2024)

To comply with the request from Government, Slye and his team have to completely re-hash this year’s FES “credible” pathways, deliver a completely new set of pathways and somehow pretend that the new pathways are plausible. The extra difficulty arises because FES2024 had it its own credibility problem because it called for a halving of per capita energy use by 2050, had deindustrialisation built in, assumed the use of as yet unproven and expensive technologies to deliver unrealistic amounts of hydrogen and relied upon carbon capture unicorns.

The change in FES 2024 from scenarios to pathways was supposed to bring in “additional economic modelling,” but such modelling was conspicuous by its absence. Now Slye must deliver the previously non-existent cost benefit analysis for these new pathways within three months. That is a very tall order indeed.

The big question is whether NG ESO can maintain the pretence that a net zero grid by 2030 is achievable and economically viable and lose whatever remaining credibility they have, or will they be the first to point out that Mad Emperor Ed has no clothes?

---

If you enjoyed this article, please share it with your family, friends and colleagues and sign up to receive more content. This week’s regular article will cover the growing gap between Government projections of the cost of renewables and reality.