Energy providers to UK government: more handouts for ‘green’ projects please

Posted: February 20, 2023 by oldbrew in Big Green, government, net zero, Subsidies
Tags: ,


An interesting (?) concept from renewables promoters here, partly to boost ‘innovative’ (generally expensive) technologies. We’re supposed to believe that bigger subsidies, or ‘fiscal incentives’, will lead to lower bills.
– – –
The energy sector is ramping up pressure on the government to bolster investment in green projects, with Renewable UK the latest to raise concerns the country could be overtaken by rivals such as the US and EU, reports City AM.

The industry body, which supports wind and tidal energy, has called on Downing Street to bring in fiscal incentives such as new capital allowances for renewable technology.

It also favours sustained supply chain investment in the UK to expand green jobs, and speeding up the planning process – with offshore wind developers waiting an average of five years for planning approval under current restrictions, and some projects taking up to a decade to secure a grid connection.

Onshore wind also remains effectively banned under current restrictions, even though projects could in theory take as little as a year to complete from development to generating, according to Renewable UK.

Alongside incentives, the group has urged the government to set sustainable prices for renewable electricity in in this year’s upcoming auction for clean power, which takes into account the effect of inflation on the rising cost of labour and raw materials.

Renewable UK argues these measures are essential for ensuring the UK can boost offshore wind generation in line with energy security targets, while commercialising innovative technologies like floating wind, tidal stream and green hydrogen.

Full report here.
– – –
For solar and wind, add ‘daylight and/or weather conditions permitting’.

Credit: City AM

Comments
  1. ilma630 says:

    Energy consumers to providers: “NO”!

  2. oldbrew says:

    ensuring the UK can boost offshore wind generation in line with energy security targets

    Wind power and security aren’t compatible. The UK doesn’t do reliable weather.

  3. Graeme No.3 says:

    If they are worried about losing out to the EU in the Green Lemmings race perhaps they should build more coal fired and nuclear generation.

  4. Phoenix44 says:

    It disingenuous – the “UK” won’t lose out, their shareholders will. If I’ve got to pay for wind I want it from the cheapest/best supplier. I sense wind is beginning to feel the pinch.

  5. oldbrew says:

    with offshore wind developers waiting an average of five years for planning approval under current restrictions, and some projects taking up to a decade to secure a grid connection

    Yet governments claim there’s a ‘climate crisis’ that requires ever more greencrap wind turbines and solar panels?

  6. ivan says:

    Since when is it the job of government to provide the finance for green projects? Since the green energy providers are private companies why aren’t they asking their share holders for the money, or are they assuming the general public will back them regardless? Whatever happened to free enterprise, if they expect the public to pay for them can the public cash in their shares and get a windfall payment.

    This whole ‘green energy’ thing is a scam just as is ‘climate change’ all they do is what Josh depicts in the cartoon that heads this article, transfer money from the people of the country to the pockets of a few scammers for no gain to the public (just look at the long term graphs of wind provision on the Gridwatch page).

  7. watersider says:

    Does this mean that King Jugears has to wait a little longer for his fat cheque from the poor tax payer for using “his” seabed to build these bird killers?

  8. oldbrew says:

    Aequitas – it’s an old idea…

    David Fleming first published on the TEQs model in June 1996
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradable_Energy_Quotas

    More bureaucracy for no benefit 😣

  9. ilma630 says:

    And everyone will say “after you”.

  10. Aequitas says:

    Oldbrew, when I was making that comment I had wished there was a font for extreme sarcasm. Thanks for informing me that it has been around for decades.