Billion pound investment in wind farms in Wales and South West England announced
The UK Government has announced Port Talbot and the Port of Bristol will help deliver the new infrastructure which is hoped will generate 4.5 gigawatts of renewable energy, which is enough to power more than four million homes.
The Crown Estate, which manages the seabed around England, Wales and Northern Ireland, will partner with Equinor and Gwynt Glas a joint venture between EDF Renewables UK and ESB. They say it will drive thousands of new jobs and bring in more than a billion pound investment to the UK economy.
It's expected to be the first phase of a new industry in the Celtic Sea, with The Crown Estate identifying the potential for a further 4-10 gigawatts to be brought to market by the end of the decade.
In a further boost to the UK's offshore wind industry, The Crown Estate has set out new details of its plans to invest up to £400 million of capital in the supply chain for projects across the country.
The move builds on new investment powers conferred by the Crown Estate Act 2025, and is expected to see The Crown Estate working in partnership to invest in the construction of port and supply chain infrastructure that will support the delivery of offshore wind projects across the UK.
The Crown Estate has said the preferred bidders are committed to ensuring that at least 3.5% of the workforce consists of apprenticeships and that a minimum of 10% of employees aged 19-24 are not currently in education, employment or training.
Dan Labbad, Chief Executive of The Crown Estate, has said 'it's now 25 years since we first laid the foundations for a new market for offshore wind in the UK, creating the right conditions for a new technology to establish and grow into the world-leading industry we have today.
'The selection of EDF Renewables UK, ESB and Equinor to write the next chapter of this story in the Celtic Sea is an exciting reflection of how far we've come in that time, and a vote of confidence in this new technology and the long-term future of the UK market as a place to invest.
'The Crown Estate exists to create value for our country into the long term. Coupled with our investment of up to £400 million in the supply chain, the steps we have taken to establish floating offshore wind in the Celtic Sea mark a vital contribution to the UK's energy resilience and growth, and countless opportunities for communities and businesses alike.'
The Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has said: 'Floating offshore wind will be transformative for economic growth in Wales and the South West, unlocking thousands of jobs in places like Port Talbot and Bristol, bolstering our energy security and delivering industrial renewal.
"The Celtic Sea has huge untapped potential to support our mission to become clean energy superpower, so we can get energy bills down for good through our Plan for Change.'
Meanwhile the Secretary of State for Wales Jo Stevens has said: 'this is a hugely significant moment for the clean energy industry in Wales and one which will have a positive impact for generations to come.
'Floating offshore wind will help deliver the transition to clean energy, bring down bills for households and help secure the UK's home-grown energy supply.
'Increased economic growth and thousands of new well-paid jobs will come from this huge vote of confidence in Wales' energy industry and its workforce.'
Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning, Rebecca Evans, said:
"The establishment of floating offshore wind in the Celtic Sea marks the start of a new industrial opportunity for Wales.
"Over the last six months, we have been working through our Task and Finish Group to ensure Wales is in the best possible position to reap the rewards from the energy transition.
"This is an exciting and important step in that journey, and we look forward to working with the industry, The Crown Estate and counterparts in Westminster to write the next chapter in this story."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Ed Miliband's dash for Net Zero could cost every UK household £389 a year by 2030, bombshell research warns
ED Miliband's Net Zero policies will cost every household £389 a year by 2030, Tory analysis today reveals. The Labour government has pledged to totally decarbonise Britain's energy grid within the next five years. 4 They plan to do this by splurging vast amounts on new wind and solar farms as well as banning new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea. Brits have already spent £700 million this year to pay wind farms to STOP producing energy because the National Grid cannot cope with energy surges. The government's dash to go green will send the cost of bills rocketing to a whopping £22.8 billion by 2030, Tory number crunchers say. This will leave the government's pledge to cut £300 from energy bills in tatters, according to the research. Instead it will end up adding another £389 to the cost of household bills for 27 million UK Brits. Tory MP Nick Timothy - who carried out the research - said: 'Energy becomes more expensive with each day Ed Miliband remains in office. 4 'While Miliband blames fossil fuels for higher bills, he is pumping up prices by throwing more government-imposed costs onto energy bills. 'Wind and solar are being propped up by a complicated web of hidden cash to hoodwink you into thinking they are cheap. But they are not. 'Renewables will cost billions more. This is Ed Miliband's world – and you're paying for it.' Sir Keir Starmer is under massive pressure to act on UK energy costs - which are some of the highest in the world. In stark contrast the US - which uses more fossil fuels - has far lower prices. Donald Trump used a meeting with the PM in Scotland earlier this week to launch a blistering attack on wind farms for pushing up prices and scarring the countryside. In toe-curling scenes, the PM sat ashen-faced as the US President unleashed both barrels on his wind farm push - branding them a 'con job'. Speaking at his Turnberry golf course, Mr Trump fumed: 'Wind is the most expensive form of energy, and it destroys the beauty of your fields and your plains and your waterways.' Urging the PM to lift the ban on new oil and gas drilling, he added: 'You can take a thousand times more energy out of a hole in the ground this big - it's called oil and gas.' The analysis carried out by Mr Timothy's office looked at the hidden cost of renewable energy by trawling through official figures and research papers. 4 It found that Brits pay billions of pounds to subsidise the building of renewable energy plants, like wind and solar. But the National Grid - which carries electricity from power plants to peoples homes - is very old and cannot cope with large surges of energy. This results in a barmy situation which means the government actually PAYS wind farms to stop turning when it is too windy. Some £700m has already been paid this year to turn wind farms off. Wind farms are also paid more for their energy than fossil fuel providers, the analysis found. Offshore wind will cost £113 per MWh under the latest contracts. The average cost of electricity last year was £72 per MWh. These direct subsidies for renewables inflate the cost of energy bills. There are also extra costs known as 'Balancing Costs' - the name given to the process the National Grid has to pay to ensure balance and supply of power is maintained daily. These charges end up being passed onto consumers in higher bills, researchers said. The study found the hidden cost of renewables on our bills was £12.3BN in 2023/24. This is predicted to hit £22.8BN by 2030. This is just the estimated cost to Brits's bills over the next few years - and the overall cost of going green by 2050 is far higher. The Office for Budget Responsibility estimated it will cost a massive £803 billion to hit Net Zero by 2050. 4 A spokesman for the department for Net Zero said: 'These claims are fundamentally misleading. 'They wilfully ignore the benefits of clean power and wrongly assume the required network infrastructure will not be built over the next five years. 'Only by sprinting to clean power by 2030 can the UK take back control of its energy and protect both family and national finances from fossil fuel price spikes.' IT was the most excruciating television I have seen in years. Sitting next to the Prime Minister, Donald Trump said Labour's taxes on North Sea oil and gas 'make no sense' and he called Ed Miliband's wind farms a 'con job'. Keir Starmer looked like a rabbit in the headlights, because he knew what Trump said was true. The eco policies this Labour government is pursuing simply make no sense. They are spinning us a lie. The government tells us we must urgently hit Net Zero targets because the cost of fossil fuels are unaffordably high. But renewables cost more money and push up bills. They say Britain must build more wind and solar farms so we can wean ourselves of foreign gas and become energy sufficient. But at the same time No10 bans new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea - leaving us more dependent on imports. And the government tells us this dash to go green will create thousands and thousands of new jobs. Yet the trade unions who actually represent energy workers say Labour's zealous eco policies could cause tens of thousands of well-paid British workers to be laid off. It is a mad Alice in Wonderland world where down is up and up is down. Ed Miliband has gone through the Looking Glass. His policies are the stuff of the Mad Hatter. And today I can reveal that Labour's Net Zero drive will cost an estimated £23 billion a year by 2030. That is the equivalent of slapping another £389 a year onto the cost of living for households. It is a cost this country cannot afford. Let me give you a few examples to show you just how barmy our energy policy has become under 'Red Ed'. First- the oil and gas industry. Just weeks after winning the election, Labour banned new licences to drill for oil and gas in the North Sea. Furious trade unions said that up to 30,000 UK jobs could be lost, but their dire warnings fell on deaf ears. But the most ridiculous thing is that Britain still imports oil and gas taken from the very same seabed from Norway. So, Norway gets to keep the taxes, profits and jobs, while the UK goes without. It is a grotesque example of self-harm. Second - the bizarre case of the Drax power station in North Yorkshire. It imports wood from halfway around the world to burn, yet the UK taxpayer has spent billions of pounds in green subsidies on the power station. This simply makes no sense. Third - the sky high cost of wind and solar energy. Labour has set the UK insane targets to quadruple offshore wind and double onshore wind in just five years. But energy produced by these wind farms is actually MORE expensive. Ed Miliband has promised wind farms a fixed price of £113 per MWh for the next 20 years. That is 50 per cent HIGHER than the average cost of electricity. The cost of building new wind and solar farms is also enormous. An estimated £40 billion a year will be spent upgrading the National Grid, and rolling out new pylons and battery storage sites. Worst of all, wind and solar are even paid NOT to produce energy. This is because our creaking National Grid cannot handle big surges of energy. So when it is particularly windy they have to pay wind farms to switch off. This year alone we have paid £700 million to wind farms to STOP generating power. It is bananas. Brits also have to pay for environmental levies. These are extra charges baked into energy bills to pay for the development of new greener energy supplies. Labour are sending environmental levies hurtling towards £14.8 billion in 2030. The PM promised he would cut energy bills by £300 by the next election. But the opposite is true. They are getting bigger and bigger. No wonder President Trump thinks we are mad. Our energy costs are twice those in America. As a result their economy is booming while ours is stagnating. The US President could see the truth and was unafraid to say it. Britain needs to completely change course. It's time to junk the clean power target and support energy policies that actually work. We should take the US President's advice and 'drill baby drill' in the North Sea. We should expand nuclear energy. And we should ditch our expensive green energy levies and subsidies. Otherwise we remain Ed Miliband's mad world – and we will all pay the price.
Scotsman
8 hours ago
- Scotsman
Why Labour's Ed Miliband is moving too quickly towards end of North Sea oil and gas
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... In the days before he was Secretary of State for Energy, Ed Miliband once described me to a group of people as his 'lift buddy'. As his office was then directly above mine, it was where we bumped into each other. Our conversations were generally about energy, and while we agreed on the need for change, we tended to differ on how, and how quickly. For me, energy security and employment, never mind keeping the lights on, are key. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I think it's fair to describe the Energy Secretary as favouring a speedier end to all oil production. In recent days, the topic has begun to dominate the airwaves as golf course entrepreneur and US President Donald Trump, and then environment charities, threw scorn on developments of offshore wind farms. Unlikely bedfellows, and although their reasons are very different, they reflect a growing unease. READ MORE: Chancellor Rachel Reeves defends windfall tax on oil and gas giants on visit to Scotland Ed Miliband tours Balltech Engineering Solutions, which specialises in offshore wind as well as oil and gas engineering, in Morecambe (Picture: Christopher Furlong) | Getty Images For Trump there is the dual scourge of spoiling the view from his controversial golf developments on a previous Site of Special Scientific Interest on the Aberdeenshire coast, and going against his 'drill baby drill' philosophy. For his former environmental opponents, it is about protecting wildlife. While I have a lot of sympathy with the latter, I also agree with those pointing to the irony of our growing dependence on gas imports rather than using our own. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Add that to the concerns that Chinese involvement in, and control of, windfarm facilities might threaten our energy security and it seems the future picture is far from universally agreed. Oil and gas supporters have long warned that premature shutdown of the North Sea would mean importing carbon fuels from countries with fewer safeguards and damaging our carbon footprint in the process. This week their argument has been given fresh impetus as government figures show UK gas imports grew by 20 per cent between January and March this year. With damaging price increases caused by our dependence on Russian gas supplies at the outbreak of war in Ukraine still fresh in the public memory, reliance on any foreign source feels risky and even unnecessary. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Will this autumn's Budget signal a change of direction from Downing Street? The Climate Change Committee has estimated that between 13 and 15 billion barrels of oil and gas could still be needed while we work towards net zero. Experts reckon that our domestic production could only fulfil about one third of that. If it could be doubled, it would not only reduce our foreign dependence, but industry lobby group Offshore Energy UK claim it could raise more than £160 billion of useful revenue. There is no simple or cheap solution. Shutting down the North Sea now might seem on the surface like the best way to ensure net zero, but it brings a host of other obstacles to overcome. Conversely, continuing to depend too heavily on a naturally declining basin would not only delay net zero but wouldn't guarantee cheaper energy. Getting the balance right will be the key and right now I am not sure that we have it right, either to protect the climate or help the Exchequer stabilise our economy and create growth. Once the UK Parliament returns, I will be looking to my lift buddy to navigate the best route forward.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Network Rail cuts maintenance spending after net zero increases electricity costs
Network Rail has slashed its maintenance budgets after the Government's net zero targets pushed up electricity prices. Sir Andrew Haines, the chief executive of Network Rail, said rising electricity prices had forced the organisation, which looks after train tracks and stations, to 'focus more on refurbishment than renewal' in the coming years. He said the change in focus meant more money had to be spent buying power for trains instead of replacing worn-out railway infrastructure. A rail trade body chief described this as a 'consequence of Britain's broken energy policy'. Writing in Network Rail's annual financial accounts, published this week, Sir Andrew said: 'We've seen our spend on traction power rise by 40 per cent, squeezing what we have left further. 'Our Control Period 7 plans reflected that, setting out that we are expecting to focus more on refurbishment than renewals, but with a continued focus on safety and performance.' Control Period 7 is the name for Network Rail's £43.1bn operations and maintenance budget over the next four years. It covers everything from electricity for trains to buying new rails and revamping stations. It comes as the country struggles with soaring electricity prices caused by net zero policies. Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, has previously claimed bills are rising because of the price of gas used in some power stations. Others point to the number of wind and solar farms being built, with Government officials guaranteeing to developers that high prices will be paid for the electricity those sites generate. Steven Mulholland, the chief executive of the Rail Plant Association, which represents railway maintenance vehicle companies, condemned the shrinking maintenance budget. He said: 'Network Rail's decision to cut back renewals and rely on patch-up repairs is a direct consequence of Britain's broken energy policy. 'Track renewal isn't optional. It underpins safety, reliability and growth. If the Government allows short-term costs to dictate strategy, it risks dismantling the supply chain we'll need to rebuild later at far greater cost.' Freight firms fading In July, The Telegraph revealed an electric freight train company was on the brink of collapse, partly because of high power prices. Varamis Rail has suspended all operations and stopped paying its staff after finding it too difficult to compete against road freight, although it hopes to restart in mid-September. Among the high costs it has faced are those for traction electricity used to power its trains, which, according to Telegraph analysis of Network Rail figures, doubled in price between 2020 and 2024. Other rail freight companies have invested in ' bi-mode ' locomotives, which can run on either electricity from the overhead lines or an onboard diesel engine. Operators of such engines, including GB Railfreight, which is currently introducing its bi-mode Class 99 locomotives into service, can therefore run them on whichever propulsion method is the cheapest, depending on diesel and electricity prices. A Network Rail spokesman said power costs had increased by 50 per cent between the 2022-23 financial year and now. He said: 'Although utility costs represent a larger share of our spending in this control period compared with the previous five years, they still represent a relatively small portion of our overall expenditure. 'It is true to say that wider inflationary pressures are having an impact, however. While a third of our income comes from Track Access Charges, which are subject to inflation, the remainder is fixed for the control period and the increase in costs from our supply chain and across the board over the past year means there is increased pressure on funding and therefore the amount of work we can deliver.'
