Charles Rotter
The engineers who keep Britain’s grid in balance told investigators they are worried about whether they can keep doing it. The Times, in a piece by Emily Gosden, Ben Ellery and Juliet Samuel, reports on the review law firm Eversheds Sutherland carried out at the National Energy System Operator (Neso), which Neso published today.
The review began with a narrower question. In July, whistleblowers went to Claire Coutinho, then shadow energy secretary, alleging that control room staff were told to keep decisions in live documents with no audit trail and that the corporate affairs team leaned on operational calls to protect Neso’s reputation during the June heatwave. Neso brought in Eversheds on July 13.
Eversheds could not substantiate those specific allegations, and Neso’s announcement leads with that. What it did find:
These included a “culture of reputational sensitivity affecting operational decision-making”.
The day in question is June 23. A heat dome cut renewable output, gas units tripped and air conditioning load climbed. Grid frequency sat below Neso’s 49.8 Hz operating floor for most of the hour from 17:30 to 18:30, bottoming at 49.66 Hz, above the 49.5 Hz statutory limit. Neso followed with Electricity Margin Notices for the evening peaks of June 24 and June 26. In July, Neso said the system had operated securely throughout.
The control room saw it differently:
Control room staff said Neso should not have claimed the system was “not at risk” on June 23, given that “the system was consistently in breach of operational limits for a number of hours, with operators working around the clock to regain balance”.
On the warnings that were issued, and the ones that weren’t:
One witness described an “implicit understanding and expectation from the leadership to hear what they want to hear”, saying they felt pressure to convey a positive message and reassure bosses that “everything’s fine”. One witness said that those raising concerns “get beaten down”.
So the people at the console thought the public account of June 23 was wrong, and at least one of them thought warnings were weighed against how they would look in the press.
The report did not stop at one bad evening:
It found “high levels of stress and concern within the [control room] regarding the current state of the energy industry and the longer-term ability to maintain system balance, given the challenges of the net zero transition and increased reliance on renewables, which are less flexible than conventional generation, as well as current energy market structures”.
The Times adds a detail that explains part of that worry. Many smaller generators and batteries do not deal with Neso directly, so the engineers estimate what they are producing and cannot instruct them. Eversheds interviewed 28 senior control room staff and eight from elsewhere in the organisation. Neso has about 2,700 employees, some 130 of them in the control room.
Neso chairman Paul Golby said the findings showed no evidence for the allegations and that the board will oversee a response. Ofgem chief executive Tim Jarvis said the report raises “important and concerning issues about working culture” at Neso. Ofgem says it has not drawn conclusions about the events of June.
Eversheds was never asked whether the grid met its security standards on June 23. Coutinho made that point in the Commons in July. That question sits with Ofgem’s separate inquiry, which the Times reports is now extended into next year.