Electric ‘superhighway' delayed in blow to Miliband's net zero plans
Eastern Green Link 1 risks missing its target completion date because of global equipment shortages. The project involves a 120-mile cable being built between Scotland and north-east England that is capable of transmitting enough power for 2m homes.
The upgrade is meant to ease grid bottlenecks and is seen as one of the most vital enablers of plans laid out by Mr Miliband, the Energy Secretary, for a 'clean' power system in 2030.
Without it, officials have warned that the cost of 'constraint' payments to wind farm owners – where turbines are paid to switch off because the grid is too congested – risk ballooning by almost £900m per year.
The project has been granted fast-track status by Ofgem, the energy regulator, and given a target delivery of Dec 31 2028 at the latest.
After that point, developers SP Energy Networks and National Grid Electricity Transmission would face fines.
However, the companies have warned that the scheme has been hit by delays and are pleading for relief from fines until at least April 2030 – suggesting there is a risk the project will be severely late.
SP Energy and National Grid blamed global shortages of key pieces of equipment, including high-voltage cables and converters, which countries around the world are racing to buy as part of the switch to green energy.
That has led to years-long wait times, with manufacturers racing to expand their capacity but struggling to keep up with demand.
The problem highlights the risk posed to Mr Miliband's clean power plans by a lack of available parts.
Kathryn Porter, an independent energy analyst, said: 'To achieve the Clean Power 2030 target we must build twice as much grid infrastructure in the next five years as we delivered in the past decade.
'But supply chain constraints make this an unachievable goal, particularly when we note that the lead time for some transformers is now four years.'
In November, the National Energy System Operator (Neso) – the quango responsible for managing the operation of Britain's power grid – highlighted Eastern Green Link 1 as one of four upgrades that would have 'the highest impact on the country's ability' to hit Mr Miliband's target.
It has warned that some 80 infrastructure upgrades must all be delivered by the end of this decade in order for Mr Miliband's plan to succeed.
At the time, the Neso said Eastern Green Link 1 was expected to be complete by 2030. However, the Government said the latest estimate was April 2029.
According to Ofgem, the project is running at least six months later than previously expected.
The regulator has said it is 'minded' to reject the application for relief from fines, arguing that SP Energy Networks and National Grid Electricity Transmission knew about global supply chain issues and that the delays are the companies' own fault.
A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman said: 'Our Clean Power Action Plan sets out how we will deliver a new era of clean electricity, with the most ambitious reforms to the country's energy system in a generation.
'As shown by the National Energy System Operator's independent report, clean power by 2030 is achievable and will deliver a more secure energy system, which could see a lower cost of electricity and lower bills.
'We support Ofgem in ensuring projects are delivered by 2030, to protect bill payers on our journey to clean home-grown power.'
The spokesman added that state-owned Great British Energy and the National Wealth Fund would invest in UK supply chains.
They also pointed to a £350m investment by Sumitomo Electric Industries in a new high-voltage cable manufacturing facility at the Port of Nigg, Highland, Scotland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour's net-zero ‘flight tax' set to raise cost of family holiday
Labour's 'flight tax' on airlines will add more than £50 to the cost of a family holiday within a decade, analysis shows. Net zero rules introduced by Sir Keir Starmer mean planes must be filled with at least 2 per cent sustainable fuel, which will rise to 10 per cent followed by 22 per cent by 2040. The Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) mandate means airlines that do not comply with the green policy face heavy fines likely to be passed on in part to passengers. Costs associated with the new levy are expected to reach £4.5 billion by 2035, according to a new analysis by Public First. This works out at £12.79 per passenger per flight leaving the UK, adding £51.16 to the average overseas holiday taken by a family of four. The impact of the policy is expected to hit Britons as soon as 2027, with its cost hitting £200 million in that year. 'Ludicrous net stupid zero' By 2030, this figure will have ballooned to £1.5 million, the equivalent to £4.64 per passenger per flight – making a holiday for a family of four £18.56 more expensive. Richard Tice, the Reform UK deputy leader, told The Telegraph: 'This is yet another egregious tax on working citizens to pay for the ludicrous net stupid zero. A Reform government will scrap all this nonsense.' Greg Smith, a Tory transport minister, said: 'Labour said the transition to green aviation would cost pennies but now families are being hit with soaring ticket prices to fund Ed Miliband's net zero experiment. 'It's not just weekend getaways being priced out. It's regional airports under threat, tourism on the ropes, and British families paying the price for Labour's ideological fantasy. 'The truth is net zero by 2050 is impossible without bankrupting our country and Labour's plan to chase it will ground British families before it ever lands.' 80pc cost could be passed to consumers The Government's own impact assessment of the green mandate found that as much as 80 per cent of its cost could be passed on to consumers. Labour claims the pledge to use more sustainable fuel will support thousands of jobs while cutting the UK's transport emissions on the way to becoming a 'clean energy superpower'. The figures come as ministers were urged to relax red tape that means SAF cannot currently be made from non-food grade British-grown wheat. Phil New led the Government's independent review into the future of SAF and urged it to consider British bioethanol as a credible and scalable option. Mr New said: 'Ethanol made from British-grown milling wheat, which would otherwise be exported as animal feed, can be processed into SAF in a way that meets the emissions reductions required by the UK's standards. 'Home-grown, low-carbon aviation fuel industry' 'This is a real opportunity to create a home-grown, low-carbon aviation fuel industry that supports British agriculture, strengthens fuel security and helps us meet our climate ambitions.' Ben Hackett, managing director at Vivergo Fuels, added: 'The UK has the capability today to produce sustainable aviation fuel from home-grown non-food grade wheat – supporting British farmers, reducing carbon emissions, and improving our energy security. But outdated regulations are blocking this from happening. 'It makes no sense that ethanol from British wheat can be blended into petrol for cars, but not used to make jet fuel, especially when other countries are already moving ahead with this technology.' The analysis by Public First also found the UK could require the output of seven large-scale bioethanol plants by 2035 to meet growing domestic demand for SAF.
Telegraph
15 hours ago
- Telegraph
The British public deserves to know what Miliband discussed with Beijing
When the Government signed a deal on net-zero co-operation with Canada, the text of the memorandum was published. So too were the texts of deals with Ireland, Norway, South Korea and Chile. Five months after the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband signed a similar memorandum with the Chinese government, however, we are still in the dark as to precisely what was agreed. Chinese media have asserted that the Energy Secretary agreed to co-operation on power grids, battery storage, offshore wind power and carbon capture, among other areas; it is understood that Chinese investment in the UK was not discussed by Mr Miliband. The role of the Chinese state in Britain's net-zero ambitions may well be an uncomfortable issue for the Labour Government to discuss. While the Defence Secretary is insisting that Britain is 'ready to fight' over the future of Taiwan and the Foreign Secretary is explicitly referring to China as a 'sophisticated and persistent threat' that requires hundreds of millions of pounds in additional funding for the intelligence services, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been courting Chinese investment, and Mr Miliband's drive to meet his net-zero targets is heavily dependent on Chinese industry. Both the switch to electric vehicles and the decarbonisation of the energy grid will make heavy use of Chinese products. One study commissioned by the German defence ministry recently warned that this position at the heart of Western energy systems could result in Beijing enjoying the power to trigger remote shut-downs as 'an instrument of economic warfare'. Such concerns are less hypothetical than we might wish. Earlier this year, undocumented communication devices were located in Chinese-made power inverters exported to the United States, triggering fears that Beijing could use compromised equipment to 'physically destroy the grid'. This would be fully in line with the current approach of the People's Liberation Army to warfare as a clash between systems, and the extensive Volt Typhoon operation carried out by Chinese state-sponsored actors. Even given the understandable desire to avoid a sudden break with China, the delicacy of the balance between trade and reliance is such that the British public deserves to know what Mr Miliband has discussed with Beijing.
Daily Mail
20 hours ago
- Daily Mail
RICHARD TICE: Why ditching Miliband's Net Zero madness could save every family £1,000 a year
Labour is facing a make-or-break moment when it comes to its new cult, Net Stupid Zero. This week, Ed Miliband opens his latest renewable energy auction, which allows green developers to bid for lucrative taxpayer-funded contracts. The eco lobby says the auction, officially titled Allocation Round 7 (AR7), will be the centrepiece of Labour's plan to decarbonise the grid by 2030, and that this seventh round must be the biggest yet to 'keep the dream alive'. But it's a dream Britain cannot afford. Inflation is rising. Food prices are once again on the up. And families across the country are cutting back – not just on holidays or takeaways, but on essentials. According to research consultancy More In Common, 60 per cent of Britons list the cost of living as their top concern – and have done so consistently since January last year. And one of the biggest contributory factors to this crisis is an issue that almost no one in Westminster wants to talk about: Net Zero and the spiralling cost of Britain's green energy agenda. Expensive energy is the grenade exploding Britain's economic model. It is not just about switching on the lights and heating homes. It powers industry, transports goods, and underpins every job and price tag. When energy becomes expensive and unreliable, everything else does too. When you hear ministers blaming this crisis on Russian president Vladimir Putin and international fossil fuel markets, remember this: UK energy prices were already among the highest in the developed world before Russia invaded Ukraine. This emergency didn't start in Moscow. It was manufactured in Westminster. We blew up coal plants, messed up nuclear, banned fracking, deterred North Sea investment (which drove up gas imports) and prioritised unreliable green energy. From the other side of the Atlantic, even Donald Trump can see that, writing on his social media site Truth Social: 'North Sea Oil is a treasure chest for the United Kingdom. The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense... Incentivise the drillers, fast.' He rightly added that wind is 'the worst form of energy' and a con. When it comes to energy, Westminster has been Putin's most useful idiot. If the US is waking up to that fact, when will Labour? For nearly two decades, clueless politicians from Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have clung to a fantasy: that we could eliminate all hydrocarbon use, build a national grid dominated by wind and solar power, and suffer no consequences. The result? At a time of rising demand we are reliant on an unreliable energy supply and lumbered with higher bills. Three-quarters of the rise in electricity bills over the past decade can be attributed to green energy policies and the multi-billion-pound subsidies paid to renewable investors, according to Net Zero Watch. Yet hundreds of thousands of jobs are being destroyed by high energy prices, while millions more are at risk. Now suppliers are warning that prices will rise again in 2026. Professor Gordon Hughes, a former energy adviser at the World Bank, has warned they could approach 40p per kilowatt hour by 2030 – up from 25p today, which is a catastrophic increase. That's why I took action. Last month, I wrote to major windfarm developers, warning them and their investors to stay away from the AR7 auction. I made it clear that if they press ahead, a Reform government will make them regret it. As Nigel Farage said a few weeks ago about the renegotiation of green subsidy contracts, investors will see 'some haircuts'. Naturally, activists, consultants and subsidy-hunters – the 'Green Blob' – erupted in outrage. But, if these windfarms go ahead, it will be an act of grave economic self-harm. By putting a spanner in the works of Miliband's mad plan, we can stop the 20-year rise in bills. By 2030, my letter alone might be saving households £1,000 a year. But this isn't just about price. It's about security. Much of our ageing fleet of gas-fired power stations is nearing retirement. Thanks to subsidised renewables, few developers are willing to invest in replacements. Why build a power station that often won't run to full capacity, especially when Miliband's plan would make the existing situation even worse? Meanwhile, demand for new gas-fired electricity generating units is exploding globally as countries race to power the AI boom. Lead times of gas infrastructure projects are now as long as eight years. Even if we ordered replacements today, they wouldn't arrive until 2033. That's years after the capacity crunch is expected to bite. If we don't act fast, we'll be forced to ration power. Renewables may also be making the grid dangerously unstable. That's not just an economic risk, it's a public safety threat. Look at Spain and Portugal, where a blackout triggered by solar farm switch-offs killed at least eight people in June. Iberian grid operators restored power in a day, but our system is just as vulnerable. No one knows if the 'smart' gizmos grid managers hope will stabilise the system will actually work when it is under stress. Clearly, they need only fail once – and the whole country goes dark. Worse still, under political pressure, resources have been poured into connecting new renewables to the grid, rather than maintaining what we already have. As a result, our electricity grid infrastructure is crumbling. Ageing transformers are already catching fire, most famously the one that routed power to Heathrow Airport, which went up in flames in March causing the airport to close for 16 hours and 1,000 flights to be cancelled. With demand for replacements sky-high in Europe, those problems will not be fixed any time soon. This is not a functioning energy system. It's a slow-motion car crash. But Mad Miliband is determined to step on the accelerator. Labour cannot say they weren't warned. Just after the election, a YouGov poll found more than half of voters expected Labour to deliver real progress on the cost of living within two years. Twelve months in, and with Reform leading in the polls, we will be there every step of the way holding them to account. We must end the decline, not manage it. As an immediate first step that means trying to minimise the damage of AR7. It means cancelling the folly that is Net Stupid Zero. And it means restoring energy policies that prioritise affordability, reliability, and national security. This isn't just an economic battle. It's a democratic reckoning. The public, rightly, cares about the environment. But they never voted to be poorer, or to be saddled with unsustainable costs like green levies and hidden network charges that flow from Westminster's Net Zero agenda. That's why I won't apologise for going to war with the root causes of this crisis: green energy subsidies and their vested interests. The British people deserve leaders who will fight, not flinch, when livelihoods, families and the national interest are on the line. Let the battle begin.
