Latest news with #REMA
Business News Wales
11-07-2025
- Business
- Business News Wales
Offshore Energies UK Urges More Action to Reach Government Clean Power 2030 Target
Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) has proposed key reforms to accelerate offshore wind generation following the UK Government's publication of its Review of Electricity Market Arrangements (REMA). OEUK says the decision to take a national approach to pricing will encourage more wind energy investment to help the Government hit its Clean Power 2030 targets and boost growth in the critical offshore energy supply chain. The National Energy System Operator has given 5,000 energy projects in the queue for grid connections until 29th July to submit evidence for preferential treatment. The move is intended to prioritise 'shovel-ready' projects and scrap the first-come, first-served approach, which has allowed speculative schemes to delay viable clean energy developments. This proposal must be matched by reforms to the Contacts for Difference (CfD) scheme and planning system to ensure the next allocation round – AR7 – delivers the scale and pace needed. OEUK's analysis shows that to meet the CP30 goal of 95% clean power by 2030, the UK must deliver half of this target from offshore wind. This means at least 43 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity must be installed by 2030, but current projections fall short at just 35GW. The next three CfD rounds must therefore secure an additional 20GW- equivalent to powering around 15 million homes. Only two offshore wind generation projects – GreenVolt in Scotland and East Anglia Two – have been supported by the Government's CfD scheme since 2022. A clear regulatory framework that secures investment and maintains the UK's position as a global leader in offshore wind is now imperative, says OEUK. It added that offshore wind is one of the UK's greatest energy success stories – generating low carbon electricity at scale, creating jobs, and revitalising coastal communities. Fixed-bottom turbines, with so-called monopiles attached to the seabed in shallower waters, have driven the UK's rapid growth of wind energy generation to date but floating wind turbines using newer technologies, can be anchored in deeper waters with stronger wind resources, opening new areas for development. The also have fewer environmental constraints than fixed-bottom projects and can progress more smoothly through the consenting process, said OEUK. Speed and clarity to reform grid access and a more transparent approach with equal treatment for fixed and floating wind farms would give developers and the supply chain greater confidence to invest, it added. OEUK's key recommendations for AR7 and beyond: Support for offshore wind: Provide assurance that sufficient funding is available for both fixed and commercial floating wind projects over the next three years, including projects to decarbonise offshore oil and gas operations, strengthen the UK supply chain, and create export opportunities. Grid and consent reform: Improved risk sharing between developers and grid network operators plus increased administrative capacity and streamlined planning to reduce delays to grid connection. Compensation should be offered for unexpected hold ups. Eligibility and investment: Reform eligibility criteria to allow both fixed and floating wind projects that have not received full consent to bid in the auction, extend CfD contracts from 15 to 20 years and introduce a well-balance cap and floor to transmission charges to improve investor confidence, lower subsidies and reduce costs to consumers. Introduce a well-balanced cap and floor to transmission charges. OEUK's Wind Energy Manager, Thibaut Cheret, said: 'AR7 must be the turning point in making UK wind ambitions a reality. That means enabling floating wind to compete on equal footing, unlocking grid access, and giving developers the confidence to invest at scale. 'We're calling for clear eligibility rules that allow well-progressed but unconsented projects to bid, longer CfD terms to reduce costs to consumers, and a firm commitment to grid and consenting reform – including compensation for delays. These are the changes our members need to deliver the next 20GW. 'At the same time, we are working with our members to reduce project risk and borrowing costs as well as improving contractual relationships and promoting standardisation of modular wind turbine components to make them cheaper and faster to install. 'There is only one energy supply chain for offshore wind and oil and gas – and it cannot be allowed to decline. With the right reforms and a pragmatic energy strategy which supports homegrown oil and gas alongside the acceleration of UK renewables, the North Sea can remain a global energy powerhouse, supporting economic growth, jobs, and our climate goals.' ScotWind: OEUK supports the ambition of the ScotWind leasing round and is calling for clarity on delivery timelines, grid access, and supply chain investment to ensure projects can rapidly move forward. OEUK supports the ambition of the ScotWind leasing round and is calling for clarity on delivery timelines, grid access, and supply chain investment to ensure projects can rapidly move forward. INTOG: OEUK backs INTOG schemes using wind energy to decarbonise offshore oil and gas production. We are urging government and regulators to ensure these projects are prioritised for grid access and CfD eligibility, and that planning processes reflect their dual role in emissions reduction and clean power generation. OEUK backs INTOG schemes using wind energy to decarbonise offshore oil and gas production. We are urging government and regulators to ensure these projects are prioritised for grid access and CfD eligibility, and that planning processes reflect their dual role in emissions reduction and clean power generation. Celtic Sea Round 5 of Celtic Sea wind auctions held last month aims to unlock the potential for floating offshore wind off the coasts of South Wales and Southwest England. The Crown Estate has selected Equinor and Gwynt Glas to develop two 1.5GW floating wind farms. The leases come with grid connections already approved, but only two out of three leases on offer have been taken up. TNUoS: Transmission Network Use of System Charges. Transmission has a cost which is paid by the generator and the user which appears in electricity bills. This cost is expected to increase dramatically in future years as more energy is brought from Scotland to England. The connection cost for the generator rises for remote areas but in heavily populated areas generators are paid to connect. The price difference must be adjusted with a proposed cap and floor system that would introduce an upper maximum cost to Scottish projects. Transmission Network Use of System Charges. Transmission has a cost which is paid by the generator and the user which appears in electricity bills. This cost is expected to increase dramatically in future years as more energy is brought from Scotland to England. The connection cost for the generator rises for remote areas but in heavily populated areas generators are paid to connect. The price difference must be adjusted with a proposed cap and floor system that would introduce an upper maximum cost to Scottish projects. Review of electricity market arrangements (REMA): The government is still to announce the full outcome of its REMA consultation beyond the already published decision on zonal pricing. OEUK is calling for introduction of 'deemed contracts for difference' (based on potential, not actual output). This would mean wind energy producers being paid according to their potential capacity in a system that would give producers the opportunity to benefit from high global wind energy prices when they are available and keep a proportion of the additional profits
The Star
26-06-2025
- Business
- The Star
Finance experts from Africa, Arab states meet on biodiversity financing
KIGALI, June 26 (Xinhua) -- A regional dialogue on biodiversity finance for Africa and the Arab states opened in the Rwandan capital of Kigali on Wednesday to discuss ways to fill the biodiversity financing gap. The three-day meeting, hosted by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in partnership with the Rwandan government, brings together biodiversity finance experts and government representatives from over 50 countries across Africa and the Arab states to explore how national biodiversity finance plans are being transformed into practical solutions. Delegates will explore innovative strategies for biodiversity finance by connecting public policy reform with financial instruments and strengthening collaboration with the private sector, according to the Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA). "We have the policies. We have the political will. But the resources remain limited, fragmented, and heavily donor-dependent. This is what brings us together, a shared commitment to closing the biodiversity gap," Juliet Kabera, director general of REMA, said in her opening remarks. Fatmata Sesay, resident representative of the UNDP in Rwanda, said Rwanda is pioneering a new model of biodiversity finance through digital innovation. She cited IremboPay, a platform that digitizes the issuance and tracking of environmental fines, which are then reinvested into the country's conservation initiatives. Africa and the Arab states are home to some of the world's most important ecosystems. However, despite their natural wealth, these regions face serious financing gaps, officials said. Running from June 25 to 27, the meeting will identify biodiversity finance solutions that can be adapted to the national context and set next steps for scaling up, organizers said. Valentine Uwamariya, Rwanda's minister of environment, said biodiversity requires sustained financing because it supports key economic sectors, including agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and tourism, which generate significant income and employment.
New Statesman
24-04-2025
- Business
- New Statesman
Could zonal pricing reduce energy costs?
Photo byThis article was originally published as an edition of the Green Transition, our weekly newsletter on the economics of net zero. To see more editions and subscribe, click here. It's unorthodox to start an opinion piece both by explicitly avoiding taking a view and yet still expecting to piss everyone off. But it must be so when talking about energy market reform, the sector's issue de jour. Energy market reform, more formally known as the Review of Electricity Markets Arrangements (REMA), was a policy developed by the previous Conservative government. But with a Labour victory at the general election came a new plan for the energy system – Clean Power 2030 – backed by an interventionist state. This complicated REMA. Government needs a lot of private investment to build the infrastructure to decarbonise power by 2030. REMA changes the rules, risk and therefore cost to government of that investment. A decision is still expected by the summer and is vital to the confidence business will have in government's plans. But that decision now effectively boils down to one thing. Despite once being about every part of non-retail electricity markets, from contracts for difference to the balancing market and beyond, we are now essentially talking about one issue – locational, marginal, or zonal pricing. On one side are the champions of a free-market policy where energy varies by location (let's call them the insurgents). Their argument is predominantly pro-consumer, that zonal pricing is a silver bullet for lower costs and an easier energy transition. On the other are investors, legacy energy companies and climate advocates, who worry that the risk of shifting to zonal threatens infrastructure investment and therefore decarbonising the energy system (let's call them the status quo). Their argument is predominantly about growth and investment. Both sides have the economic modelling to prove that zonal raises/lowers bills (delete where appropriate). There is no middle position, everyone must pick a side. This is a nightmare for government, who have no off-ramp. We need a decision, the uncertainty either way is just as damaging to the UK's investment prospects. Politics means meditating interests to get to a decision. To help, advocates should think a little about the political process. First, think about the evidence. Paying for more numbers to prove your point clearly isn't moving the dial. The best conclusion government can currently reach is that any decision has highly uncertain impacts which vary wildly on the underlying assumptions. At worst they will think that whatever action they take someone will accuse them of raising the cost of the energy transition. The mudslinging about incumbents, vested interests or profiteering may be good tactics for firms but they are terrible strategy for all those who care about net zero. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Second, recognise the government's strategy. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) is planning a decarbonised system. It is going to have a concrete plan for where it thinks energy assets should go. How can it reconcile a free-market policy, which was developed under the previous Tory government, with its more statist instinct? Clearly this government wants to be a reforming one. The status quo is not an option, and too often advocates against zonal stop at – 'just don't do it'. The government is already doing a lot of reform, not least on CfD terms, balancing market arrangements, or grid connections. But 'we are already reforming so we aren't doing this' is not an announcement. It leaves open the question over whether REMA is paused, salami-sliced, killed or complete. There is no 'no-change' option available here, the world and energy system are already changing, fast. The government wants to be a part of that. If zonal doesn't go ahead DESNZ will still need answers on things like maximising the effectiveness of storage or efficacy of interconnectors. If it does, it needs a plan for managing the politics of a situation in which different towns, cities and industries pay different energy prices. With both sides only representing their own interests it's always going to be hard for government to mediate. In formulating a response, it can draw from both sides. From those advocating for reform, the government can take a laser focus on consumers, and a clarity over where we're trying to get to and why. Being positive about the future carriers a lot of weight. DESNZ should talk about households and their benefits, not investors. From those lobbying to keep the status quo, the government should push that whilst it is already reforming, there are myriad more options to do so. But it can't appease both; and the government must recognise not everyone will be happy. Government can go further than either side has in looking at more radical ideas for bill reduction that don't feature in the current debate. They include, returning to ways to finally break the link between gas and electricity prices, thinking about hypothecating carbon pricing revenues or rethinking how Ofgem calculates network costs? Too often industry focuses solely on their thing and can't abstract it to a political process. But it's naïve to think that government can do that alone. There's a reason REMA has been three years in the making, it's hard. Time to start compromising. Related
