> We're already at 70%+ of our energy coming from non-fossil-fuel sources
Is it actually the case on an annualised basis? Or was it just the case when you looked at the live grid data? (There is also the issue with "biomass", which is wood imported from abroad to be burnt)
Hi, these projects already have grid connection dates so no new grid upgrades are required to deliver. The developers of the wind farm have to factor in transmission charges (tnuos) into their bids that pay for these.
But surely it's not an apple to apples comparison?
Wind farms can only generate electricity when it's windy. While you might be able to get cheaper energy from wind when it's windy, but unlike other technologies such as gas or nuclear with wind you still need to build out and maintain infrastructure for base power load when it's not windy.
Surely you need to factor that double build cost in with wind and solar since it's not required if you were to build out say nuclear power plants with similar output?
UK bills are pretty spicy but at least energy mix is trending in a good direction. Lots of wind, more interconnects, bit of nuclear and solar and with battery tech improving I’m hopeful this will land well eventually
>All sorts of congratulatory posts about AR7...the £94 /MWh being roughly the level of today's wholesale power price is being used as some sort of positive signal
So here are some facts:
* The average wholesale power price
in 2025 was £80 /MWh
* The carbon price was £35 /t a year ago
and £73 /t today
* Carbon was c11-12% of the wholesale
power price a year ago
* It's c28% today
* AR7 contracts are for 20 years vs 15
years in AR1-6
* AR7 is the highest price since the
first auction
* We started subsidising wind in 1990!!
How anyone can think this is good news is beyond me. It's obviously good news for the subsidy farmers who will enjoy 20 year contracts at inflated prices, unless Reform wins the next General Election and rips them up in which case it will be pretty bad news
It is terrible news for consumers, embedding high prices for decades to come
This hardly matters unless electricity prices for end consumers go down. And that can hardly happen without improved transmission lines and storage. And those are consistently being blocked by NIMBYs.
This is not a matter of policy, but of physics. Producers are far from consumers, in both time and space. Wind turbines are dispersed and far from cities, wind doesn't blow when there is high demand. And yet, these sources are being plugged into a grid that was built over decades under completely different assumptions.
No wonder the energy prices are high.
Edit:
Since some people don't believe that this matters, I'm attaching some basic sources about current state of UK power grid and necessary upgrades.
>The 8.4GW secured at this latest auction just about keeps the offshore wind target in reach, several analysts have told the BBC. But all those projects will still need connecting to the grid to generate electricity.
>"Getting that amount of capacity online by 2030 [will be] extremely challenging," said Nick Civetta, project leader at the Aurora Energy Research think tank.
That doesn't address the problem at all. Viking is connecting two grids together. This can help stabilize them in some scenarios. But much like in any other network, even if you have enough capacity almost everywhere, it doesn't matter, if you have a bottleneck on the path.
Existing grid has been built up with several high density sources, often very close to urban and industrial areas. Wind farms are, by their nature, neither of those.
There is enough material online about this issue. I'll gladly direct you to it.
We don't think reason about electricity generation in terms of portfolio construction. Renewables are cheap (although that's debatable in some ways) but volatile.
However good this news is, it means nothing if the average household is not seeing any price decrease in their bill.
It's well and good to say that eventually sometime in the future prices will be lower but in the meantime it doesn't help that the prices continue to rise.
While a bill reduction is definitely useful and important for the people of the UK, energy independence is also important for the nation.
Exposure to international fossil fuel markets has been a problem for many nations in recent years, as turmoil upsets supply. And greater energy independence also means handing less money over to countries and governments with conflicting defence goals.
> energy independence is also important for the nation.
None of this matters to people who can't afford to heat their homes in the winter.
The price reduction was a Labour campaign promise and on that front it has failed dramatically.
This is why people lose trusts in politicians and what has fueled the rise of the far right across Europe, when politicians make promises that they know they won't be able to keep.
Readit News
We're already at 70%+ of our energy coming from non-fossil-fuel sources, much higher than I expected: https://grid.iamkate.com/
Just to be picky… electricity…
We've still got a lot to do to decarbonise the rest of our energy usage EVs, heat pumps, improving housing stock, electric trains etc
If we can drop the price of electricity enough it will naturally become the favoured choice for heating and transportation too.
Is it actually the case on an annualised basis? Or was it just the case when you looked at the live grid data? (There is also the issue with "biomass", which is wood imported from abroad to be burnt)
No discussion of what grid upgrades are required, although increasing production near England should reduce that.
(by comparison, ongoing nuclear project Hinkley Point C is currently scheduled to come online some time around 2030, assuming no further delays)
Wind farms can only generate electricity when it's windy. While you might be able to get cheaper energy from wind when it's windy, but unlike other technologies such as gas or nuclear with wind you still need to build out and maintain infrastructure for base power load when it's not windy.
Surely you need to factor that double build cost in with wind and solar since it's not required if you were to build out say nuclear power plants with similar output?
Or am I wrong?
https://www.lowcarboncontracts.uk/our-schemes/contracts-for-...
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/us-cou...
So here are some facts:
* The average wholesale power price in 2025 was £80 /MWh * The carbon price was £35 /t a year ago and £73 /t today * Carbon was c11-12% of the wholesale power price a year ago * It's c28% today * AR7 contracts are for 20 years vs 15 years in AR1-6 * AR7 is the highest price since the first auction * We started subsidising wind in 1990!!
How anyone can think this is good news is beyond me. It's obviously good news for the subsidy farmers who will enjoy 20 year contracts at inflated prices, unless Reform wins the next General Election and rips them up in which case it will be pretty bad news
It is terrible news for consumers, embedding high prices for decades to come
> https://x.com/KathrynPorter26/status/2011693634278625460
Get in. we've just locked in / subsidized the most expensive form of energy.
This is not a matter of policy, but of physics. Producers are far from consumers, in both time and space. Wind turbines are dispersed and far from cities, wind doesn't blow when there is high demand. And yet, these sources are being plugged into a grid that was built over decades under completely different assumptions.
No wonder the energy prices are high.
Edit:
Since some people don't believe that this matters, I'm attaching some basic sources about current state of UK power grid and necessary upgrades.
https://electricalreview.co.uk/2024/09/20/survey-grid-connec...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp84yymxpjno
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68601354
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ofgem-approves-37-bi...
Even in the linked article:
>The 8.4GW secured at this latest auction just about keeps the offshore wind target in reach, several analysts have told the BBC. But all those projects will still need connecting to the grid to generate electricity.
>"Getting that amount of capacity online by 2030 [will be] extremely challenging," said Nick Civetta, project leader at the Aurora Energy Research think tank.
We were always going to have to build out infrastructure as we decarbonise just as we'd have to build infrastructure if we remain on fossil fuel
Plus we get cleaner air and less health issues caused by pollution
> Producers are far from consumers
Distance from London to the biggest windfarms are 350 km [1]
This is the same distance as from Miami to Orlando (in Florida). Do you really think it is a problem transmitting electricity this distance.
You should try look at the international connections in Europe. Some are longer than this.
The Viking link between UK and Denmark is 765 km.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_offshore_wind_farms_in...
Existing grid has been built up with several high density sources, often very close to urban and industrial areas. Wind farms are, by their nature, neither of those.
There is enough material online about this issue. I'll gladly direct you to it.
https://electricalreview.co.uk/2024/09/20/survey-grid-connec...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp84yymxpjno
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68601354
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ofgem-approves-37-bi...
As you can see, this isn't a new concern, and it isn't something I made up. Then something about delays:
https://www.thetimes.com/static/green-energy-net-zero-nation...
It's well and good to say that eventually sometime in the future prices will be lower but in the meantime it doesn't help that the prices continue to rise.
Exposure to international fossil fuel markets has been a problem for many nations in recent years, as turmoil upsets supply. And greater energy independence also means handing less money over to countries and governments with conflicting defence goals.
None of this matters to people who can't afford to heat their homes in the winter.
The price reduction was a Labour campaign promise and on that front it has failed dramatically.
This is why people lose trusts in politicians and what has fueled the rise of the far right across Europe, when politicians make promises that they know they won't be able to keep.