As we head deeper into the energy and climate crises, the calls to “just install more renewables and shut down nuclear and fossil fuels” get louder. Whilst I agree with the sentiment, I am discovering it is far more complicated than that. In recent months I have come across some surprising things that are standing in the way of decarbonising and changing our energy system in the UK. Some are relatively easy to solve, others will take years and billions of pounds of investment, but unfortunately it all means that just building more wind turbines will not get us out of the hole we are in. So, what are these unexpected problems?
Problem one: the grid is not designed for renewables.
Since the Industrial Revolution, we have built a grid to carry very high voltage energy between about 50 power stations across the UK. This is then distributed through sub stations to our homes and businesses, so we have a few very high-capacity cables. In contrast, renewable power is spread more sparsely around the country, a small wind farm here and a solar farm there. These individual producers don’t generate nearly as much power as the larger producers, but there are many more of them dotted across the landscape. The high voltage cables that distribute our energy rarely pass by the mountains and fields that are often supplying this renewable energy, which means we have to lay new cables at great cost and with long waits. As an example, I know of a wind farm in South Wales that wanted to add three turbines to their existing two. The cost of the turbines was £1.5 million, but the cost of linking to the grid was £3 million. There are turbines in the Cotswolds that haven’t turned for two years because they are not hooked up to our grid. The wait list can be up to 10 years and grid infrastructure is now the single biggest barrier to new, onshore renewable construction.
Problem two: the market skews prices and holds back investment.
The current market structure dictates consumer costs by the most expensive fuel. At this point it is gas and so, despite renewables and nuclear costing no more to generate than a year ago, we are all paying extortionate prices for our heating and energy. Like our grid system this market structure is based on old thinking and the physical grid itself. A better structured market would reflect the actual cost of generation and see consumers paying directly for the energy they require from the producer of their choice. This would have the added incentive of encouraging investment in renewable energy.
Problem three: we cannot generate and distribute energy locally.
Problems one and two lead to this third problem. Because we built our energy system around a few very high-power generators, our legislation stops companies from building wind or solar farms and selling the energy to people and businesses that live nearby. Local heat and energy networks do exist, but consumers are usually locked into consumption for many years or have to part-purchase the energy generating company. These complications restrict the flexibility, price and construction of local grids. More local grids would encourage a sense of local ownership and local competition, thus lowering prices. It’s also a more efficient way to distribute energy (especially heat), as between 8-15% of energy is currently lost in transmission as it moves around the country.
Problem four: we need more electricity.
Estimates for future UK energy use put it at almost two and a half times our current consumption level by 2050. As we move from gas boilers to heat pumps, petrol to electric cars and industry starts to switch to electrical systems, demand for electricity is going to soar. Ironically, electricity is a far less efficient way of heating than burning gas or other fossil fuels. So, we will need many times more electricity generating sites over the coming years to meet growing demand, let alone meet demand in 2022.
Problem five: we are desperately inefficient energy users in the UK.
Only 1.8% of new homes in the UK are A rated for energy and are below the average for energy efficiency across the EU. We are using 15% more energy to heat our homes than we need to. Without serious investment we will continue to waste energy, further widening the gap between consumption and net zero.
Problem six: we have very little storage capacity.
In fairness, few countries have sufficient energy storage capacity. Large scale battery or energy storage is not yet fully commercially viable, as it’s very expensive and relatively inefficient. This means that, in order to keep the lights on, we have to make sure there is always a sufficient baseload of energy generation when the sun isn’t shining or the wind blowing. This keeps us reliant on fossil fuels or nuclear. Until we can store excess energy efficiently and cheaply, we cannot rely on renewables to fulfil all our energy needs.
The long and winding road
So, the problems are many and complex and the call to simply build more renewables hides a difficult path ahead for reaching net zero and reducing our fuel bills. Of course, things are moving forward. While they have their challenges, tidal power (which could provide baseload energy) is beginning to prove itself, and battery storage is getting more efficient and becoming cheaper. The National Grid is beginning to look at demand flexibility, where our household appliances switch themselves on and off to manage demand (but this is a long way off and will require smart technology in all our products). We are slowly building a more evenly distributed grid and the government is consulting on market reform. The war in Ukraine, energy prices and the impacts of climate change are all beginning to focus minds and money, but we are only at the beginning of the transition. There is a long way to go and building more renewables is only part of the answer.
