Another step towards our Green WASHED Energy Revolution?

Celebrations broke out everywhere this week. And I’m not talking about Gareth Southgate’s exhilarating tactics securing England’s place in the Euro’s final.

No, the celebration I speak of came from the British public, united in their vision of a greener future, championed by their new hero—not the manager of the England squad but Britain’s new Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband.

Just a few days ago, Ed proudly boasted all over social media, national media, and most newspapers about how, within just 72 hours of being in Government, he ripped up the Onshore Wind Energy ban , which had been in place for nine years by the Conservative party. This, he claimed, was him keeping his promise to secure the country’s energy security, create jobs, and boost the economy.

You probably think that’s great. You probably can’t believe there was even an onshore wind ban in the first place. How could we possibly reach our Net Zero targets with such "evil" Conservative policies banning onshore wind in England?

Well, let’s take a closer look at what we’re actually celebrating here.

As of today, renewable projects in the UK (wind/solar) face a backlog of 10-15 years before successfully connecting to the grid. This backlog is one of the worst in Europe and is the single biggest threat to green energy targets, despite the government and private sector having invested ￡198 billion in renewable power infrastructure since 2010.

So why is this happening? Well, the grid system isn’t designed to have intermittent power plugged into it. A lot of smart people have worked overtime around the world to accommodate the grid system’s needs without the psychic necessity to predict whether it will be a sunny or windy day... or both… or worse, neither.

What’s the solution? Let's look at battery storage. If we can save that surplus energy and release it to the grid when production is reduced—or non-existent—the batteries can provide a steady flow of power into the grid. The problem the UK faces is that it’s very far behind its targets to implement energy storage solutions. According to the EIC (Energy Industries Council) , there is about $31 billion of energy storage CAPEX in the UK, but most projects are currently in the design stage and several years from going into operation.

Furthermore, the worst part is the jobs economy. Most of the supply chain for these products comes from Asia, and the added cost of intermittent energy and expensive batteries only means the average person pays more for their electricity and local people haven't got much to work on.

I’m all for building a clean energy economy that protects our planet. My concern is, with this strategy, at what cost?

In stark contrast, look at EDF (UK) 's Hinkley Point C, “the most expensive power station in the world.” It has its own transmission line built into the project cost, produces zero carbon emissions, and its abundant energy production is sustainable. This means it’s as easy as plug-and-play into our current grid system and will probably contribute to our energy use faster than some wind farms already erected today.

The cost of Hinkley Point C is high for sure, but it’s the first nuclear project the UK has executed in 30 years, and 2/3 of the cost was due to financing. So, maybe if we used some of that ￡198 billion invested in renewable energy since 2010, the British Government could have financed the entire project itself and cut the electricity cost by 67%!

So what about jobs and the supply chain? Well, looking at Hinkley, the entire area is being transformed. More than ￡5 billion has been spent with local businesses, 23,000 jobs created, and 8,000 people have received training from its Welding, Electrical & Mechanical Centres of Excellence.

And I don’t think I need to make my point any further, reminding everyone that there are no yellow-character cartoon television shows about an entire town having a vibrant economy thanks to its local wind farm.

To me, what’s even crazier is the land use comparison. Hinkley Point C is set to produce 3,200 MW of electricity for 60 years, uninterupted. That’s the same as 152,000 hectares of good topography land, if you were to use GE’s 14 MW Haliade-X wind turbines and if you were lucky enough to have every single one of those catching the wind. That’s nearly the size of Greater London. For perspective, the largest wind farm in the UK is offshore, Dogger Bank, with three farms making up an area of roughly that size without anyone knowing about it, without any trees being cut down, and without any farmers being disgruntled.

So, what are we celebrating here, Ed? More wind farms that can’t physically connect to our grid? Outsourcing most of our jobs to a supply chain outside of the UK? More expensive electricity for everyone? Let’s stop pretending like you’re doing a big and wonderful thing for our Net Zero targets by ripping up an onshore wind ban.

Get our wind and solar farms connected by expediting investment into the grid and fast-tracking energy storage projects. But most of all, focus on nuclear. ;)