GB Energy

[IWantToGetMugged]

I'd like to get the views of people who work in the energy industry as to how a state run energy company affects the market. Is it private sector involvement already sufficient in the industry? Will GB Energy crowd private sector investment?

I'm interested in this too.

The first question is what will GB Energy be?

Will it be a generator of electricity (ie making the stuff) or a supplier (supplying the stuff) or both.

There are more than enough renewable projects that have been consented (ie planning permission). The real problem is getting a grid connection in a timely and economic manner.

This is because the current grid system was set up to deliver electricity from big (coal and gas) generators mostly in the north via big overhead lines to demand (customers) mostly in the south.

With renewables you have lots of relatively smaller generators all across the country and some big offshore wind projects in the N Sea that will only use their connections (ie overhead or underground power lines) part of the time (ie not used when it's not windy or sunny).

This means that there will need to be loads of new power lines. Given the amount of work needed to do this, the Labour promise of net zero by 2030 is completely impossible to achieve.

Stock up on candles.

GB Energy isn't going to be a company. It's a concept.

As of March 2024, there were 701 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy projects waiting to connect to the UK's electricity grid. This is an amount of electricity generation that's more than four times what's projected to be needed by 2050.

The grid is the issue.

Wait. If they are waiting to be connected to grid.... What do they do? Like where does the electricity go?

@1dayatatime the target is to be Net Zero by 2050, not 2030. And according to NESO the UK is on target to no longer use fossil fuels to generate electricity by 2035.
GB Energy will be a publicly owned electricity generator and investment body. I hope it will boost investment in low carbon energy that will be cheaper and more secure.

@IWantToGetMugged

"Wait. If they are waiting to be connected to grid.... What do they do? Like where does the electricity go?"

Without a grid connection the projects simply don't get built. So they don't exist.

@MellersSmellers

"And according to NESO the UK is on target to no longer use fossil fuels to generate electricity by 2035."

But how? What happens like recently when it's cold, no solar and low wind for two weeks? Where does the power come from?

The batteries that are being built are only good for two hours not two weeks.

It will either be transferred in from the EU grid via NL (LionLink project) or Peaking Power Plants will be used (hydro or gas usually).

@unsync

"It will either be transferred in from the EU grid via NL (LionLink project) or Peaking Power Plants will be used (hydro or gas usually)."

But if little or no renewable power can be produced in the UK because of low solar and low winds (like recently) then the weather in the rest of N Europe is going to be pretty much the same. So I can't see how the power can come from the N Europe either.

As for peaking plants, they are good for peaks of power like a few hours not weeks. As for hydro then the amount of hydro needed to keep the UK going for even two or three days with renewable power would mean flooding vast numbers of Welsh and Scottish valleys.

So the only answer is to keep the large gas fired plants but firstly having large amounts of gas power plants just sitting around as backup will be hugely expensive and it also means that "the UK is on target to no longer use fossil fuels by 2035" is a lie.

plan is for around 35gw of gas plant running for around 400 h per year to manage low sun/ wind days. I do agree that this sounds like a nonsense plan

Ah ok. I get confused when they said "there's 701 GW of renewable energy projects waiting to be connected to the grid". I thought it meant they get built but just don't get connected.

@BTsrule

"plan is for around 35gw of gas plant running for around 400 h per year to manage low sun/ wind days. I do agree that this sounds like a nonsense plan"

It's both nonsense and expensive. So if electricity demand is going to double then 35GW of gas plant is not going to be enough.

Secondly it looks like the UK is effectively building two power generating systems, one renewable system backed with Gov subsidies that when sunny and windy produces more electricity than is needed so needs to be turned down. And a second fossil fired system that when it's low solar or low wind doesn't produce enough electricity meaning massive price spikes and supply shortages.

All of this has to be paid for by the consumers, subsidies when renewables are running, subsidies for when renewables aren't running, subsidies for fossil fuel plants to stand by, price spikes when fossil fuel plants are running.

It's no wonder that the UK has some of the highest industrial customer electricity prices in the world and why there is little industry and industrial jobs in the UK.

Getting to net zero will be expensive - the counterfactual of dealing with climate change if energy doesn’t become net zero more so. Just need to shame the other in the world into playing their part.

I have an idea. Why don’t we fly world leaders, their lackeys, lobbyists all to a destination one per year they can eat well, stay in nice hotels and chat whilst countries most affected by climate change make impassioned pleas for action and are not listened to.

Why are the UK electricity prices so high?

@IWantToGetMugged

"Why are the UK electricity prices so high?

Two reasons really:

1. Grid charges to transport the electricity around- because the UK is effectively having two grid systems- one to connect the renewables and one to connect the back up fossil fuel generation then this makes UK grid charges much more expensive.

2. Subsidies - the cost for which the Government puts on top our energy bills. So subsidies to produce renewable electricity, subsidies to stop making renewable electricity when there is too much, subsidies to fossil fuel generators to be on stand by.

Lastly high industrial electricity prices in the UK actually makes pollution worse not better globally. For an example a steel plant in the UK has to close because of high prices with the resulting job losses.

There is still a demand for the steel except now it's produced in China where environmental standards are much lower resulting in more global pollution along with lower safety standards and lower workers rights.

So overall industry leaves the UK, UK jobs are lost, people are poorer from higher energy prices and global pollution goes up.

It really is insanity.

@1dayatatime I quite agree. The infrastructure needs to be sorted out properly. Microgeneration should be given more consideration too. I don't think people realise how precarious the energy system is in the UK.

It is also no good looking at things in isolation. If the Govt is after a big push in housing supply, they should be insisting on MMC so that energy demands are low. You can't just keep increasing supply, you should also be looking at ways of reducing demand.

@unsync

"You can't just keep increasing supply, you should also be looking at ways of reducing demand."

Well the quickest way to reduce demand is by keep increasing energy prices. Energy consumption is now around 10% lower than before the Ukrainian crisis because of higher prices.

It's kind of ironic that the Government is pushing a big expansion of renewable energy to cope with a forecast big increase in electricity demand. Yet this big expansion of renewables is being paid for by putting the cost on to industrial and consumer bills .

The higher prices then curtail the increase in demand meaning that the expansion of renewable generation is not needed as demand didn't increase as forecast.

It really is insane.