From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Cunningham
Britain’s electricity network will require up to £240bn of upgrades to support clean power targets, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has admitted.
In new estimates released by the Government, the cost of building new pylons and power lines will skyrocket in the next 24 years to achieve the Government’s net zero ambitions.
The energy department has already warned that grid upgrades will cost £80bn by 2030.
However, the latest forecasts indicate that this is just the start of a much larger upgrade programme – with households poised to foot the bill.
The costs of grid expansion are loaded onto consumers’ energy bills to pay for upgrades carried out by the UK’s monopoly transmission operators: National Grid, SSE and Scottish Power.
This includes building new pylons across the country to transport electricity generated by renewables, including rural wind and solar farms.
The scale of the upgrades was revealed at a conference this month, attended by officials from DESNZ.
‘Demand expected to double’
Will Lochhead, a deputy director of DESNZ, told delegates: “The electricity grid we rely on today was largely built in the 1960s and was never designed for the scale of home-grown energy generation now being deployed, or the future levels of electricity demand.”
He added: “As we electrify transport, heating, industry and other sectors, electricity demand is expected to more than double by 2050.
“Meeting this demand would require between £100-240bn of investment in the electricity network by 2050.”
He cited DESNZ analysis suggesting that annual electricity demand will rise 10pc by 2030, 50pc by 2035 and more than 100pc by 2050, driven by the increased use of clean power technology such as electric cars and heat pumps.
However, such predictions are controversial. For example, the UK’s policy of spending billions of pounds on upgrading and expanding the grid is based on forecasts from 2005 predicting inexorable growth in UK power demand.
These forecasts have since proven to be wrong after soaring energy prices decimated British industry, forcing factories to close and reducing nationwide energy demand.
The UK’s average electricity demand was 40 gigawatts (GW) in 2025, but this has since fallen to 31GW. The UK recently recorded its lowest ever demand of just 12GW.
Despite this, DESNZ and the National Grid still expect a surge in electricity demand in the coming years as part of their efforts to decarbonise the grid.
David Adkins, at the National Grid, said this week that power demand could soon be even greater than predicted by DESNZ because of the growth of AI.
“The general [transmission] investment plans across Great Britain total £77bn by 2031 with National Grid delivering about £35bn of that,” he said.
“We believe there’s a continued need for similar scale of investment over the next period.”
Miliband’s focus on net zero
Mr Adkins said the cost of post-2030 grid expansion was being reviewed by the National Energy System Operator (Neso), the body responsible for keeping the lights on, as part of its forthcoming Centralised Strategic Network Plan.
A draft version is expected within weeks and that is expected to reinforce plans to expand electricity generation and grid capacity.
Neso has already published a “Beyond 2030” plan recommending that the UK spend £58bn on new cabling and substations for new offshore wind farms. This would be in addition to the £77bn cited by Mr Adkins.
Full story here.
Whether we might end up needing slightly less electricity is irrelevant. These are long term strategic plans, which need to be implemented years in advance. By necessity, they must build in enough capacity to handle all eventualities.
I have commented before that the £80bn upgrades presently planned for 2030 will not be enough and that NESO are already factoring in much more expenditure after 2030. This has been confirmed by NESO:
Neso has already published a “Beyond 2030” plan recommending that the UK spend £58bn on new cabling and substations for new offshore wind farms. This would be in addition to the £77bn cited by Mr Adkins.
I must also stress that none of this spending covers upgrading the local distribution network, which is variously estimated to cost hundreds of billions more.
All of these issues have long been known by those in charge of our energy systems and those imposing their Net Zero dogma. But the costs have quite deliberately been kept secret from the public, until it is too late for us to do anything about it.
Figuring Net Zero costs is about the only thing that Socialists do Conservatively. Actual costs are more likely to be 10-20 times the £240B or £2.4T to £4.8T split amongst the 19.7M households.
£2.4T equates to £121,827 per household
£4.8T equates to £243,654 per household
Don’t forget to add the cost of batteries, inverters and fire fighting equipment to contain the lithium ion battery fires.
What we desperately need is a return to common sense- taken from us in 1989
Burnham wavers on net zero – but Miliband holds sway behind scenes
Mayor of Greater Manchester expected to promote Energy Secretary to Chancellor if he becomes PM, Westminster insiders say – Telegrah
On this occasion we really are doomed
You caan’t just upgrade the transmission lines. Substations, transformers, switching gear, control center upgrades all combine to probably cost more that the transmission lines.
How much is it going to cost to replace all the windmills and industrial Solar at their end of life?
Seems like a tiny sum in relation to other spending.
“Appearances can be deceiving.”
…”‘Tis but a scratch.” …”I’ve had worse.” …”What! Just a flesh wound.” …
You mean “spending” as in “funding” all the various forms of fraud we’re currently “supporting”?
How large is it in context of a sector not overall? But that is a standard tactic to downplay losses and failures whether by pension fund managers or others.
Then you pay it. !!
£250 billion represents approximately 18% of the UK’s total public spending or 8.6% of the UK’s Public Sector Net Debt.
What have they already done to unsubsidized electric rates across time to this point?
So very many people thought that NET ZERO referred to reduction in mankind’s emissions of CO2, whereas reality shows it actually is a more-appropriate reference to reductions in each person’s net income.
/sarc
Haha, net zero income by 2030.
I come here for the facts and common sense, but I get laughs and wit as a bonus almost every time.
Why the /sarc tag? It’s true
They talk about 2030 … These people will probably be booted out of office in the next election (2019 or hopefully sooner…). 240 Billion pounds would be a much bigger heap of cash to burn,
than what is shown in the picture…
At some point everyone will have at home generators and make their own, on the cheap.
Or net-zero hamster wheels?
Over the next couple of years Farage will become stronger, Labour will become weaker, Trump will keep the pressure on the UK to drop net zero and build up on defense. Things will change very quickly.
At least that is my opinion.
Use the NYC method of taxing the rich again and again to cover up policy mistakes.
There aren’t enough rich people in Britain who can be taxed to the level required to pay for the Labour Party’s spending plans under their likely new Prime Minister. For example, implementing a wealth tax will simply cause Britain’s richest people to leave. The richest people are the most mobile people in our society; they can live anywhere they chose.
In fact, the only way to balance the books would be to completely abandon Net Zero. I can’t see the Labour Party doing that.
It’s about time for Soros to make another run at them for an overvalued currency and economy.
Since the only NET ZERO mammals are those that are dead,
this NET ZERO thing doesn’t inspire confidence in me (to say the least).
The reality is, if you cannot get there from here, you won’t no matter how hard you try.
Looks like UK is headed for a major crackup. Starmer is toast, his coverup of grooming gangs now fully exposed. His likely replacement is just as bad on Net Zero, so Miliband will stay on.
‘Fun’ to watch from afar.
Sad to watch from afar. I agree, the UK is most likely hosed.
We shouldn’t use their terminology. There is nothing ‘clean’ or ‘green’ about the bird choppers, sun panels or EVs (lithium batteries) all made with coal power and slave labour in China. The environmental cost of producing all this stuff and disposing of it after a mere 20 years, is incalculable.
Everyday the humans in the UK exhale 70 million kg of CO2. To this should be added all the CO2 exhaled by all the domestic animals ranging from cattle to canaries and goldfish. Baking and brewing also releases CO2. Thus, we need to inform Mad Ed that his goal of Net Zero is not possible and he should abandon it. There is a obvious reason Net Zero is not possible: Winter! Whatever is Mad Ed thinking?
CO2 is the good stuff because it puts the sparkle in soda pop, beer, and French champagne. I drink about a liter of Coke Zero everday.
It’s a shame that most of the public never realise that the 240bn will be paid by themselves. Either directly through their electric bills or via direct taxation.
I shiver when the words ‘public or government money’ are mentioned.
Gas and nuclear are clean with the added bonus that they are reliable
And don’t have to be replaced every 20 years, like windmills and industrial Solar.
Built in the 1960’s. Population 52.5 million, 2026 79 million. Gee power line upgrades need to be done so all those folks can recharge their phones and turn on the TV. It appears that the politicians who run the place did the usual , put off actual building to spend the money on buying votes to get reelected.