Infrastructure: transmission networks and the Winser Report
There is a hard
but necessary journey ahead
but will the Government take it?
Steve Wardlaw, October 2023
I was going to start my series of articles on solar panels and what government support might transform the sector as well as the UK’s energy needs. However, the Chancellor threw out something of interest in the Autumn Statement this week. In summary, the Chancellor has agreed with the findings of the Winser Report on electricity transmission and wants to implement them, as well as reducing the connection delays by 90% as set out in OFGEM’s Connections Actions Plan.
However, there are some challenges along the way (spoiler – this is an understatement) and a concern will be that this is a headline-grabbing announcement, where Jeremy Hunt knows he does not have to follow through.
What is the background to this report?
It is clear to anyone who is not a blue-rinse bridge playing pensioner in Berkshire that the planning system in the UK is broken. Others can talk better about home building or other infrastructure but for now let’s focus on electricity. It needs dedicated infrastructure to be moved – you can’t put it on the back of a lorry. Interestingly, there is no national public guidance (which can guide the local and regional planning framework) on where assets should go, how they should be built, and design elements etc. So this means that every infrastructure planning process basically starts from scratch.
Existing power infrastructure is old. Very few new transmission assets have been built in the last 30 years, so much of it predates privatisation. Furthermore, often transmission assets are not designed for the future – they are based around transmitting power from massive onshore generators downwards. They are not built in the right places to allow for a huge increase in offshore wind – 50GW. So there will nned to be whole new routes - and the cost of putting these lines underground is prohibitive (see HS2). With the current planning system new transmission assets can take 14 years to approve and commission (NOT build!).
The concern here is that our net zero targets are at risk because of high congestion on existing assets or – at worst – clean energy generating units not running at full capacity as there is no transmission route. The Winser recommendations look to reduce that time by half. But that is a challenge – this excellent IEA chart shows why:
Average lead times to build new electricity grid assets in Europe and the United States, 2010-2021
Unlike other infrastructure then, we don’t just need to update. We need new routes for new clean generation. But further we also need much greater transmission capacity all over the country. The reason? Electric vehicles. The government has relaxed its target on electric-only vehicle sales from 2030 to 2035. While that is clearly a retrograde step environmentally I’m afraid it’s common sense. I (and others) have noted for a while that electric cars without infrastructure are useless. A recent report shows that, for example, less than one quarter of motorway service stations have met the government’s target of six rapid chargers by the end of 2023. Those supplying the chargers put the blame directly on lack of grid connections.
And yet, the government put in place random sales targets with no infrastructure targets. That made it, in effect, just a gimmick.
How much more infrastructure do we need? With thanks to OctopusEV, the figures are stark. Current demand for the grid is 334.2TWh (terrahwatthours). With electric vehicles we would need to have an additional 100TWh. Back to our original point that we have two moving parts – extra generation and extra/stronger transmission.
Extra generation merits a separate discussion on its own. For now we are looking at new transmission networks. The main issues are capacity, connection delays, but also system losses. These should be factored in as power that is lost in transmission (summary – transmission is AC/alternating current and so there is an amount of power that is lost as resistance in power lines converts power into heat). Currently (2022 figures) transmission losses amounted to about 25TWh, or about 8% of electricity generated in that year, and therefore system losses represent 1.5% of the UK’s total greenhouse gas emissions.
So, both expansion and modernisation. In a time frame that has never been achieved before in the UK. Excellent.
Obviously I would commend everyone to read Nick Winser’s report. As background, Winser was appointed the UK’s first Electricity Networks Commissioner. I’m not a fan of a slew of tsars and commissioners with a lot of headlines but no power. However, Winser is a serious player in the sector and I hope that he gets given the resources to work on this – and also kick OFGEM on connections delays, where they have clearly dropped the ball.
The cynic in me would probably want to know why this is being looked at only now, when net zero targets have been in place since 2008. Why has OFGEM not pushed on connection delays until now? Why is OFGEM not challenging the government headlines more? Why has the government not moved on planning? If it is the fear of offending its own supporters (likely), what has changed now? If anything, a government at the end of its administration might be more scared of losing more votes now.
The Winser report requires much change in the planning sector, and I fear that the Tories will go for the headline announcement and then simply delay grasping that nettle. This will leave the next government with an even worse situation – the need to move at break-neck speed just to catch up. And that means Labour also starting on day one, should they form the next government. This – all – is about our country’s future and cannot be delayed.
In summary, looking at the need to deal with the expansion of the UK’s power transmission network, what are our takeaways
The Winser report is excellent and should be implemented properly. In particular we need to update the energy national policy statements to be more directive as to the criteria for build and design, retaining the ability for public consulation but without that consultation delaying the process.
Delays in connection will hinder development. We risk expensive assets sitting idle while we argue about pylon placement. Hunt has committed to cutting average connection delays to six months – from the current five years – but the OFGEM reports is woolly in how that is achieved.
We lag in terms of ‘system losses’ ie power wastage in transmission. In an era when reduced consumption is often the cheapest way of reducing emissions, this is a vital area that is being overlooked.
Does there need to be holistic oversight of this expansion/roll out of EVs/net zero? Probably, but that is not going to happen. For example there is little interface between the Winser report and OFGEM’s work.
Nevertheless, this is all achievable with the correct political drive and determination. Will that happen?....... There, we must wait and see.
October 2023
Cover: stock