Latest news with #OceanWinds
ABC News
23-06-2025
- Business
- ABC News
European developers inch closer to building WA's first offshore wind farm
Two major European multinationals are close to being awarded feasibility licences for Western Australia's first offshore wind farm. EDF power solutions Australia — part of the French government's EDF Group — said it was behind a proposal titled Bunbury Offshore Wind Farm North, which received preliminary approval from federal Energy Minister Chris Bowen earlier this month. Mr Bowen said the project would create 900 construction jobs and 450 ongoing jobs, and generate 1.5 gigawatts of energy. It equates to about one-tenth of the entire zone's estimated capacity, and about 3 per cent of the additional generation expected to be needed by 2042. EDF's second proposal for the southern part of the zone, Bunbury Offshore Wind Farm South, was also shortlisted alongside a project called Westward Wind. Industry insiders have told the ABC Westward Wind belongs to Ocean Winds — a joint venture between Spain's EDP Renewables and France's ENGIE. Ocean Winds said it could neither confirm nor deny its involvement. The two shortlisted proposals will have to resolve the geographic overlap between them in order to progress. Perth-based Wind with Purpose also applied for a licence in partnership with the UK's Barrington Energy, but was rejected. The race to build a wind farm off WA's south-west coast has been a test of endurance since the federal government named Bunbury as one of six proposed offshore wind zone locations in 2022. Faced with significant financial and regulatory headwinds, an initially eager pool of at least nine interested developers whittled itself down to three. One early proponent forced to pull the plug, Copenhagen Energy, warned at the time the process would favour larger multinationals less willing to engage the local community. The prediction appears to have been at least somewhat accurate — both EDF and Ocean Winds are large multinational companies, and neither has an office in WA. However both developers have demonstrated sustained interest in the Australian market, having previously applied to work on similar projects on the east coast. Ocean Winds was recently approved for a feasibility licence in Gippsland, Victoria, while EDF's application to work on Newcastle's offshore wind zone was unsuccessful. EDF told the ABC it welcomed the minister's "preliminary" decision to approve its proposal for the Bunbury zone, and was "committed to a responsible and consultative development process". "This marks an important step in progressing a project that has the potential to support WA's energy transition and deliver long-term benefits for local communities, industry and the regional economy," a spokesperson said. Back home in Europe, both power providers have faced growing political resistance on the renewable energy front. In France, the conservative Opposition recently pushed through a moratorium on new solar and wind projects, while recent blackouts in Spain have put a target on the back of novel energy sources. While the Bunbury offshore wind farm has its own detractors in parliament and the local community, and the WA government remains on the fence. Labor's decisive victory in this year's federal election has provided some security to developers that the sector has a future in Australia. Wind with Purpose said it was disappointed by the government's decision to reject its Catalpa Offshore Wind Farm proposal, which was focused on powering the Kwinana Rockingham Industrial area. It was the only developer to have signed an equity ownership agreement with local Aboriginal corporation Gnaala Karla Booja (GKB). The company has until early July to appeal the decision. "We're working through that process at the moment," chief executive and co-founder Chris Kearney said. "It's certainly a little disappointing but there are a couple of areas we need to address … [so] we're still hopeful. "The government was impressed and pleased by the partnership we've established [with GKB] … they don't just want to see developers ticking the box to say they've engaged with traditional owners." The government said applicants were assessed based on a range of factors, including their technical capacity and financial situation. The final decision on feasibility licences will depend on the outcome of consultations with First Nations groups, including Gnaala Karla Booja.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Innovative company completes offshore project that will bring low-cost energy to 800,000 homes: 'Another meaningful step'
A wind farm off the coast of France has brought the country closer than ever to large-scale clean energy use. In May, the sustainable energy company Ocean Winds announced the successful installation of its first wind turbine. It plans to install 61 turbines by September. Upon completion of this wind farm, Ocean Winds is expected to provide almost 800,000 French residents with clean, renewable energy. "We are proud to support the installation of 61 turbines for EMYN," said Peter De Pooter, the manager of Offshore Energy Structures at Jan De Nul. "This project represents another meaningful step toward accelerating the shift to renewable energy, and it strengthens our track record in delivering offshore wind projects in France and across Europe." Wind energy is essentially a no-lose proposition. It emits far less carbon dioxide than its fossil fuel and gas counterparts and has relatively low operation costs as well. The turbines may not look pretty, but they don't take up that much space and are a consistent form of energy generation, especially in rural areas. Additionally, investment in wind energy farms will lower energy costs, provide more stability for local electrical grids, promote energy independence, and create new jobs; the Ocean Winds turbine project is expected to provide over 1,500 jobs in the area. As many nations and cities continue to look for ways to provide a cleaner and safer future for their citizens, harnessing the wind is about as safe a bet as it gets. All involved were celebratory about this major step forward. "The installation of EMYN's first turbine is a powerful demonstration of Ocean Winds' commitment to France's energy transition and our contribution to offshore wind development in the country and in the region." said Marc Hirt, Ocean Winds' country manager for France, in a press release. "The installation of the first offshore turbine at Yeu-Noirmoutier marks an important milestone toward achieving the ambitious targets of offshore wind in France," added Yara Chakhtoura, the managing director for Siemens Energy and Siemens Gamesa France. "We are proud to manufacture and install the turbines for this offshore wind farm and thereby contributing to the energy transition and decarbonization in France." Should we be harnessing the ocean to power our homes? Absolutely Leave it be It depends I'm not sure Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Britain's energy bills problem - and why firms are paid huge sums to NOT provide power
It is 1am on 3 June. A near gale force wind is blasting into Scotland. Great weather for the Moray East and West offshore wind farms, you would have thought. The two farms are 13 miles off the north-east coast of Scotland and include some of the biggest wind turbines in the UK, at 257m high. With winds like that they should be operating at maximum capacity, generating what the developer, Ocean Winds, claims is enough power to meet the electricity needs of well over a million homes. Except they are not. That's because if you thought that once an electricity generator - whether it be a wind farm or a gas-powered plant - was connected to the national grid it could seamlessly send its electricity wherever it was needed in the country, you'd be wrong. The electricity grid was built to deliver power generated by coal and gas plants near the country's major cities and towns, and doesn't always have sufficient capacity in the wires that carry electricity around the country to get the new renewable electricity generated way out in the wild seas and rural areas. And this has major consequences. The way the system currently works means a company like Ocean Winds gets what are effectively compensation payments if the system can't take the power its wind turbines are generating and it has to turn down its output. It means Ocean winds was paid £72,000 not to generate power from its wind farms in the Moray Firth during a half-hour period on 3 June because the system was overloaded - one of a number of occasions output was restricted that day. At the same time, 44 miles (70km) east of London, the Grain gas-fired power station on the Thames Estuary was paid £43,000 to provide more electricity. Payments like that happen virtually every day. Seagreen, Scotland's largest wind farm, was paid £65 million last year to restrict its output 71% of the time, according to analysis by Octopus Energy. Balancing the grid in this way has already cost the country more than £500 million this year alone, the company's analysis shows. The total could reach almost £8bn a year by 2030, warns the National Electricity System Operator (NESO), the body in charge of the electricity network. It's pushing up all our energy bills and calling into question the government's promise that net zero would end up delivering cheaper electricity. Now, the government is considering a radical solution: instead of one big, national electricity market, there'll be a number of smaller regional markets, with the government gambling that this could make the system more efficient and deliver cheaper bills. But in reality, it's not guaranteed that anyone will get cheaper bills. And even if some people do, many others elsewhere in the country could end up paying more. The proposals have sparked such bitter debate that one senior energy industry executive called it "the most vicious policy fight" he has ever known. He has, he says, "lost friends" over it. Meanwhile, political opponents who claim net zero is an expensive dead end are only too ready to pounce. It is reported that the Prime Minister has asked to review the details of what some newspapers are calling a "postcode pricing" plan. So is the government really ready to risk the most radical shake-up of the UK electricity market since privatisation 35 years ago? And what will it really mean for our bills? The Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, is certainly in a fix. His net zero policy is under attack like never before. The Tories have come out against it, green politicians say it isn't delivering for ordinary people, and even Tony Blair has weighed in against it. Meanwhile Reform UK has identified the policy as a major Achilles heel for the Labour government. "The next election will be fought on two issues, immigration and net stupid zero," says Reform's deputy leader Richard Tice. "And we are going to win." Poll after poll says cost of living is a much more important for most people, and people often specifically cite concerns about rising energy prices. Miliband sold his aggressive clean energy policies in part on cutting costs. He said that ensuring 95% of the country's electricity comes from low-carbon sources by 2030 would slash the average electricity bill by £300. But the potential for renewables to deliver lower costs just isn't coming through to consumers. Renewables now generate more than half the country's electricity, but because of the limits to how much electricity can be moved around the system, even on windy days some gas generation is almost always needed to top the system up. And because gas tends to be more expensive, it sets the wholesale price. Supporters of the government's plan argue that, as long as prices continue to be set at a national level, the hold gas has on the cost of electricity will be hard to break. Less so with regional – or, in the jargon, "zonal" - pricing. Think of Scotland, blessed with vast wind resources but just 5.5 million people. The argument goes that if prices were set locally, it wouldn't be necessary to pay wind farms to be turned down because there wasn't enough capacity in the cables to carry all the electricity into England. On a windy day like 3 June, they would have to sell that spare power to local people instead of into a national market. The theory is prices would fall dramatically – on some days Scottish customers might even get their electricity for free. Other areas with lots of renewable power - such as Yorkshire and the North East, as well as parts of Wales - would stand to benefit too. And, as solar investment increases in Lincolnshire and other parts of the east of England, they could also see prices tumble. All that cheap power could also transform the economics of industry. Supporters argue that it would attract energy-intensive businesses such as data centres, chemical companies and other manufacturing industries. In London and much of the south of England, the price of electricity would sometimes be higher than in the windy north. But supporters say some of the hundreds of millions of pounds the system would save could be used to make sure no one pays more than they do now. And those higher prices could also encourage investors to build new wind farms and solar plants closer to where the demand is. The argument is that would lower prices in the long run and bring another benefit - less electricity would need to be carried around the country, so we would need fewer new pylons, saving everyone money and meaning less clutter in the countryside. "Zonal pricing would make the energy system as a whole dramatically more efficient, slashing this waste and cutting bills for every family and business in the country," argues Greg Jackson, the CEO of Octopus Energy, one of the biggest energy suppliers in the UK. Research commissioned by the company estimates the savings could top £55 billion by 2050 - which it claims could knock £50 to £100 a year off the average bill. Octopus points out Sweden made the switch to regional pricing in just 18 months. The supporters of regional pricing include NESO, Citizens Advice and the head of the energy regulator, Ofgem. Last week a committee of the House of Lords recommended the country should switch to the system. There are, however, many businesses involved in building and running renewable energy plants that oppose the move. "We're making billions of pounds of investments in renewable power in the UK every year," says Tom Glover, the UK chair of the giant German power company RWE. "I can't go to my board and say let's take a bet on billions of pounds of investment." He's worried changing the way energy is priced could undermine contracts and make revenues more uncertain. And he says it risks undermining the government's big push to switch to green energy. The main cost of wind and solar plants is in the build. It means the price of the energy they produce is very closely tied to the cost of building and, because developers borrow most of the money, that means the interest rates they are charged. And we are talking a lot of money. The government is expecting power companies to spend £40bn pounds a year over the next five years on renewable projects in the UK. Glover says even a very small change in interest rates could have dramatic effects on how much renewable infrastructure is built and how much the power from it costs. "Those additional costs could quickly overwhelm any of the benefits of regional pricing," says Stephen Woodhouse, an economist with the consultancy firm AFRY, which has studied the impact of regional pricing for the power companies. That would come as already high interest rates have combined with rising prices for steel and other materials to push up the cost of renewables. Plans for a huge wind farm off the coast of Yorkshire were cancelled last month because the developer said it no longer made economic sense. And there's another consideration, he says. The National Grid, which owns the pylons, substations and cables that move electricity around the country, is already rolling out a huge investment programme – some £60bn over the next five years - to upgrade the system ready for the new world of clean power. That new infrastructure will mean more capacity to bring electricity from our windy northern coasts down south, and therefore also mean fewer savings from a regional pricing system in the future. There are other arguments too. Critics warn introducing regional pricing could take years, that energy-intensive businesses like British Steel can't just up sticks and move, and that the system will be unfair because some customers will pay more than others. But according to Greg Jackson of Octopus, the power companies and their backers just want to protect their profits. "Unsurprisingly, it's the companies that enjoy attractive returns from this absurd system who are lobbying hard to maintain the status quo," he says. Just Stop Oil was policed to extinction - now the movement has gone deeper underground Can UK afford to save British Steel – and can it afford not to? UK taxpayers no longer own NatWest - but 17 years on, are banks safer from collapse? Yet the power companies say Octopus has a vested interest too. It is the UK's biggest energy supplier with some seven million customers, and owns a sophisticated billing system it licenses to other suppliers, so could gain from changes to the way electricity is priced, they claim. And the clock is ticking. Whether the government meets its clean power targets will depend on how many new wind farms and solar plants are built. The companies who will build them say they need certainty around the future of the electricity market, so a decision must be taken soon. It's expected in the next couple of weeks. Over to you, Mr Miliband. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
BBC News
08-06-2025
- Business
- BBC News
The huge sums energy firms get to NOT provide power
It is 1am on 3 June. A near gale force wind is blasting into Scotland. Great weather for the Moray East and West offshore wind farms, you would have two farms are 13 miles off the north-east coast of Scotland and include some of the biggest wind turbines in the UK, at 257m high. With winds like that they should be operating at maximum capacity, generating what the developer, Ocean Winds, claims is enough power to meet the electricity needs of well over a million they are because if you thought that once an electricity generator - whether it be a wind farm or a gas-powered plant - was connected to the national grid it could seamlessly send its electricity wherever it was needed in the country, you'd be electricity grid was built to deliver power generated by coal and gas plants near the country's major cities and towns, and doesn't always have sufficient capacity in the wires that carry electricity around the country to get the new renewable electricity generated way out in the wild seas and rural this has major consequences. The way the system currently works means a company like Ocean Winds gets what are effectively compensation payments if the system can't take the power its wind turbines are generating and it has to turn down its means Ocean winds was paid £72,000 not to generate power from its wind farms in the Moray Firth during a half-hour period on 3 June because the system was overloaded - one of a number of occasions output was restricted that the same time, 44 miles (70km) east of London, the Grain gas-fired power station on the Thames Estuary was paid £43,000 to provide more like that happen virtually every day. Seagreen, Scotland's largest wind farm, was paid £65 million last year to restrict its output 71% of the time, according to analysis by Octopus Energy. Balancing the grid in this way has already cost the country more than £500 million this year alone, the company's analysis shows. The total could reach almost £8bn a year by 2030, warns the National Electricity System Operator (NESO), the body in charge of the electricity pushing up all our energy bills and calling into question the government's promise that net zero would end up delivering cheaper the government is considering a radical solution: instead of one big, national electricity market, there'll be a number of smaller regional markets, with the government gambling that this could make the system more efficient and deliver cheaper in reality, it's not guaranteed that anyone will get cheaper bills. And even if some people do, many others elsewhere in the country could end up paying more. The proposals have sparked such bitter debate that one senior energy industry executive called it "the most vicious policy fight" he has ever known. He has, he says, "lost friends" over political opponents who claim net zero is an expensive dead end are only too ready to is reported that the Prime Minister has asked to review the details of what some newspapers are calling a "postcode pricing" plan. So is the government really ready to risk the most radical shake-up of the UK electricity market since privatisation 35 years ago? And what will it really mean for our bills? Net zero under attack The Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, is certainly in a fix. His net zero policy is under attack like never before. The Tories have come out against it, green politicians say it isn't delivering for ordinary people, and even Tony Blair has weighed in against Reform UK has identified the policy as a major Achilles heel for the Labour government. "The next election will be fought on two issues, immigration and net stupid zero," says Reform's deputy leader Richard Tice. "And we are going to win."Poll after poll says cost of living is a much more important for most people, and people often specifically cite concerns about rising energy prices. Miliband sold his aggressive clean energy policies in part on cutting costs. He said that ensuring 95% of the country's electricity comes from low-carbon sources by 2030 would slash the average electricity bill by £ the potential for renewables to deliver lower costs just isn't coming through to consumers. Renewables now generate more than half the country's electricity, but because of the limits to how much electricity can be moved around the system, even on windy days some gas generation is almost always needed to top the system up. And because gas tends to be more expensive, it sets the wholesale price. Could 'zonal' pricing lower bills? Supporters of the government's plan argue that, as long as prices continue to be set at a national level, the hold gas has on the cost of electricity will be hard to break. Less so with regional – or, in the jargon, "zonal" - of Scotland, blessed with vast wind resources but just 5.5 million people. The argument goes that if prices were set locally, it wouldn't be necessary to pay wind farms to be turned down because there wasn't enough capacity in the cables to carry all the electricity into England. On a windy day like 3 June, they would have to sell that spare power to local people instead of into a national market. The theory is prices would fall dramatically – on some days Scottish customers might even get their electricity for free. Other areas with lots of renewable power - such as Yorkshire and the North East, as well as parts of Wales - would stand to benefit too. And, as solar investment increases in Lincolnshire and other parts of the east of England, they could also see prices that cheap power could also transform the economics of industry. Supporters argue that it would attract energy-intensive businesses such as data centres, chemical companies and other manufacturing London and much of the south of England, the price of electricity would sometimes be higher than in the windy north. But supporters say some of the hundreds of millions of pounds the system would save could be used to make sure no one pays more than they do those higher prices could also encourage investors to build new wind farms and solar plants closer to where the demand is. The argument is that would lower prices in the long run and bring another benefit - less electricity would need to be carried around the country, so we would need fewer new pylons, saving everyone money and meaning less clutter in the countryside. "Zonal pricing would make the energy system as a whole dramatically more efficient, slashing this waste and cutting bills for every family and business in the country," argues Greg Jackson, the CEO of Octopus Energy, one of the biggest energy suppliers in the commissioned by the company estimates the savings could top £55 billion by 2050 - which it claims could knock £50 to £100 a year off the average bill. Octopus points out Sweden made the switch to regional pricing in just 18 supporters of regional pricing include NESO, Citizens Advice and the head of the energy regulator, Ofgem. Last week a committee of the House of Lords recommended the country should switch to the system. Energy firms push back There are, however, many businesses involved in building and running renewable energy plants that oppose the move."We're making billions of pounds of investments in renewable power in the UK every year," says Tom Glover, the UK chair of the giant German power company RWE. "I can't go to my board and say let's take a bet on billions of pounds of investment."He's worried changing the way energy is priced could undermine contracts and make revenues more uncertain. And he says it risks undermining the government's big push to switch to green energy. The main cost of wind and solar plants is in the build. It means the price of the energy they produce is very closely tied to the cost of building and, because developers borrow most of the money, that means the interest rates they are we are talking a lot of money. The government is expecting power companies to spend £40bn pounds a year over the next five years on renewable projects in the UK. Glover says even a very small change in interest rates could have dramatic effects on how much renewable infrastructure is built and how much the power from it costs."Those additional costs could quickly overwhelm any of the benefits of regional pricing," says Stephen Woodhouse, an economist with the consultancy firm AFRY, which has studied the impact of regional pricing for the power would come as already high interest rates have combined with rising prices for steel and other materials to push up the cost of renewables. Plans for a huge wind farm off the coast of Yorkshire were cancelled last month because the developer said it no longer made economic sense. And there's another consideration, he says. The National Grid, which owns the pylons, substations and cables that move electricity around the country, is already rolling out a huge investment programme – some £60bn over the next five years - to upgrade the system ready for the new world of clean power. That new infrastructure will mean more capacity to bring electricity from our windy northern coasts down south, and therefore also mean fewer savings from a regional pricing system in the are other arguments too. Critics warn introducing regional pricing could take years, that energy-intensive businesses like British Steel can't just up sticks and move, and that the system will be unfair because some customers will pay more than according to Greg Jackson of Octopus, the power companies and their backers just want to protect their profits. "Unsurprisingly, it's the companies that enjoy attractive returns from this absurd system who are lobbying hard to maintain the status quo," he says. Yet the power companies say Octopus has a vested interest too. It is the UK's biggest energy supplier with some seven million customers, and owns a sophisticated billing system it licenses to other suppliers, so could gain from changes to the way electricity is priced, they the clock is ticking. Whether the government meets its clean power targets will depend on how many new wind farms and solar plants are built. The companies who will build them say they need certainty around the future of the electricity market, so a decision must be taken expected in the next couple of weeks. Over to you, Mr Miliband. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
The Herald Scotland
20-05-2025
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Grid transmission charge reform could save consumers £16 bn
Three firms behind some of Scotland's largest offshore wind farms have warned that the industry is in 'significant and immediate risk' due to punishing grid costs. But, they point out, according to new analysis, reform of the transmission charging system could save billpayers £16 billion. A new report from Aurora Energy Research, commissioned by companies and published ahead of a key decision on changes from the energy regulator, Ofgem, shows that investment in the industry could be protected through reforms to the transmission charging system. The trio of companies - Ocean Winds, Northland Power,and West of Orkney Windfarm - collectively through their projects generate enough power for a third of the UK's homes. Adam Morrison, UK Country Manager at Ocean Winds, said: 'The magnitude and volatility of transmission charges are harming existing Scottish projects and undermining investments which will be vital for Clean Power and Net Zero ambitions. 'Amid a rapidly changing energy market, the UK has to reckon with the fact that the charging methodology is broken as it is pulled in directions it was never designed to go. 'Most importantly, the system bares a hidden cost to billpayers of billions of pounds of unnecessary subsidies for projects not burdened by these locational prices. The report assesses what are called Transmission Network Use of System (TNUoS) charges, a levy on generators which was designed for an era when gas dominated the UK power market, and which incentivised the building of generation projects near major cities in England but penalised generation in remote areas, particularly Northern Scotland. The three companies are warning that the system undermines UK Government plans to build huge wind projects off Scotland's northern shores, creating a signal not to invest. Winds of Change on offshore wind and transmission charging (Image: Derek McArthur) Existing projects, they note, are also under threat as the volatile charges can erode as much as half of their value, an impact which is only likely to worsen, as the report warns that Northern Scotland transmission charges are expected to climb by 100% within five years without intervention. As the Aurora Holdings Research report puts it: "The divergence of... TNUoS charges across regions has increased significantly in recent years and is expected to rise further over the next decades with TNUoS increasing in Scotland and decreasing in the South of Great Britain. This uncertainty disadvantages Scottish wind farms, increasing their cost of capital and opportunities to secure debt financing, increasing their bid prices in contracts for difference auction." Claire Mack, chief executive of Scottish Renewables, said: "Scotland's abundant natural resources should make it the home of the UK's biggest and most productive renewable energy projects but our outdated transmission charging rules, designed over 30 years ago, are unbalancing how the modern-day electricity network should be paid for which is negatively impacting the development of major sites. "These charges are both volatile and unpredictable, unfairly penalising Scottish projects by tens of millions of pounds every year." The analysis by Aurora Energy Research highlights that this transmission charging means a 1 GW Northern Scottish project would cost one billion pounds more through its life to run compared to an equivalent in Southern England. Ofgem is deciding on a 'cap and floor' model in coming weeks to mitigate the costs and many voices within the renewables sector are calling for change. READ MORE: 'Quite simply,' said Ms Mack, 'the UK Government will not meet the targets set out in its Clean Power 2030 Action Plan without the abundance of wind power generated around Scotland and it must work with Ofgem to urgently implement a 'cap and floor' model for transmission charging that alleviates these costs and keeps projects on track.' An Ofgem decision to back a reform proposal - known as CMP444 WACM 1 - would save billpayers £16.2bn between 2028-2050, according to the data, which reduces Scottish Transmission Charges by 59% and mitigates subsidies. The report sets out that transmission charging is having a bearing on billpayers due to its combination with the 'pay as clear' model of the contracts for difference (CfD) process which grants the same price to all projects on the basis of the highest successful bid. Transmission charges push up the costs of Scottish projects, and therefore CfD prices - southern projects unaffected by transmission charges do not need the same level of CfD, but still receive it. Emanuele Dentis, Commercial Manager at Northland Power commented: 'The investment signals are just inconsistent at the moment. Ofgem has greenlit billions of pounds of transmission investment works in Northern Scotland, without recognising that – without reform – these works are too expensive for generators to pay back. It's like building brand new motorways that too few users are going to use because the toll is too expensive. 'In the meantime, projects in the Southern England are paid (rather than pay) transmission credits. This was historically justified as an investment signal to minimise transmission costs, but this system is simply incompatible with renewable energy deployment, whereby generation is most efficiently produced where natural resources are strongest. 'We are in support of a regime that redistributes transmission charges costs more fairly, is better aligned with other locational incentives such as option lease fees and the contracts for difference (CfD), and delivers on the government's Clean Power 2030 targets and beyond. CMP444 WACM 1 and CMP432 are the best tools in the short term to kickstart this reform.' A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: 'Our priority is to expand Britain's energy infrastructure to get more clean, homegrown, electricity onto the grid and protect billpayers from volatile fossil fuel markets. "We continue to work with Ofgem to ensure an update on transmission is provided as quickly as possible and ensure that any proposed changes to transmission network charges continue to support investment in clean energy projects across the country, while delivering value for money for consumers.'
