Skip to content

Windfarms To Power Economic Recovery, Claims Guardian

May 15, 2020

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Philip Bratby

 

 

Silly Jilly sums up everything that is wrong with the Green Recovery Agenda:

 

 image

Britain’s biggest green energy companies are on track to deliver multibillion-pound windfarm investments across the north-east of England and Scotland to help power a cleaner economic recovery.

Scottish Power plans to “repower” Scotland’s oldest commercial windfarm as part of a £150m scheme to develop a clean energy cluster in central Scotland capable of supplying 100,000 homes with green electricity.

The windfarm cluster is expected to create 600 jobs at its peak, and 280 long-term jobs, to help the UK emerge from the worst economic downturn in 300 years while taking steps to meet its climate goals.

Separately SSE and Equinor have revealed plans to use the Port of Tyne to host the operations base for the world’s largest offshore wind development, which will create 200 permanent jobs and support a local supply chain industry based on clean energy.

Alok Sharma, the secretary of state for business, said projects like the Dogger Bank offshore windfarm will be “a key part of ensuring a green and resilient economic recovery as well as reaching our target of net-zero emissions by 2050”.

“Renewable energy is one of the UK’s great success stories, providing over a third of our electricity and thousands of jobs,” he said.

Keith Anderson, the boss of Scottish Power, told the Guardian that work to upgrade Scotland’s first commercial windfarm, Hagshaw Hill, will come alongside two separate agreements to buy two nearby development projects to create a clean energy cluster in South Lanarkshire totalling 220MW.

The project is part of the company’s plan to develop 1,000MW of onshore wind power and battery storage after the government’s u-turn on support for onshore wind, but could also play a role in resuscitating the UK economy following the coronavirus pandemic, he said.

“We’re kickstarting as many of our projects as we can so they are ready to help boost the economy when the pandemic ends. Not only do these projects help funnel money back through the supply chain and into jobs but they also make sure that the economic recovery is based on sustainable investments,” he said.

Ignacio Galán, the chairman and chief executive of Iberdrola, which owns Scottish Power, said it is essential the financial recovery is aligned with climate goals. “As we begin to emerge from the coronavirus crisis, investment in green infrastructure can quickly be delivered, creating jobs and offering immediate economic and environmental benefits. This will help to support the UK’s overall recovery at this critical time,” he said.

In the north-east, the £9bn Dogger Bank offshore wind development is on track to bring investment to the UK “at a challenging time for us all”, according to Stephen Bull, the head of Equinor’s UK business, which runs the site. Equinor and SSE Renewables picked the Port of Tyne to host the operations hub through a competitive tendering process, following its £10m overhaul to prepare for a surge in demand from windfarm developers.

“The north-east has a strong industrial heritage and a supply area that stretches north and south of the River Tyne,” said Bull. “The Port of Tyne is clearly well set up to attract other clean energy investment which we hope will complement our activities.”

Matt Beeton, the Port of Tyne’s chief executive, said the project is “extremely important for the wider region” in terms of spurring economic benefits for the local supply chain and creating employment opportunities. “This announcement is a huge step towards developing a cleaner future for the Port, the region and for industry in the north-east,” he said.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/13/green-energy-firms-on-track-to-deliver-multi-billion-pound-wind-farms

 

Let’s take Dogger Bank as an example. It is costing £9bn, and for what?

We get a project which simply replicates what we already have, which also happens to be more efficient and cheaper. As with all of these make work proposals, somebody has to foot the bill, thus taking money out of the rest of the economy.

Worse still, how much of that £9bn goes offshore? There have long been complaints that the promised gold rush of green jobs has failed to materialise from wind power development  with much of  the work going abroad.

If we have got £9bn going spare, surely there are many more productive and valuable projects it could be spent on?

 

But what about claims that wind power is now cheaper than the current market price? Jilly herself claimed this a few months ago, when she stated that Dogger Bank would cost around £40/MWh. Unfortunately numbers are not Jilly’s strong point!

In fact the current pricing is between £45.83/MWh for Phase I, and £48.09/MWh for Phase II and III. This will be index linked for every year until the end of the contract.

However current wholesale prices are £21/MWh. Even prior to the lockdown, prices have been averaging around £30/MWh:

image

https://www.energybrokers.co.uk/electricity/historic-price-data-graph

 

Nobody has a clue what future prices will look like, but given the surplus of oil and gas at the moment, it is inevitable that power prices will remain depressed for a long time to come.

There is also a question mark as to whether Dogger Bank can really supply power at £48/MWh. John Constable has investigated this in the past, and concluded that the costs simply don’t stack up.

My analysis comes to the same conclusion. The government did a lot of work on levelised costs of generation in 2016, in conjunction with expert consultants. They found that typical construction costs were £2420/KW, at 2015 prices. Dogger Bank is rated at 3.6GW, which equates to a total cost of £8.7bn. On top of that comes another £323m of infrastructure costs.

Dogger Bank is reckoned to be costing £9bn, which seems to confirm the government assumptions. Based on this, and an ultra low discount rate of 3.5% (as used in the HM Treasury Green Book), levelised costs work out at £73/MWh.

Using normal commercial discount rates, costs are much higher, at £106/MWh.

So how can SSE make a profit at £48/MWh? According to the government costings, Operations & Maintenance will cost £27/MWh alone.

The costs simply don’t stack up.

According to Constable, one possibility is that SSE and others are banking on the market price of electricity rising sharply by the time their new wind farms are commissioned. If this happens, they can simply pull out of their CfD agreements (at a small penalty), and enjoy much greater returns in the market. The prospect of higher market prices is, of course, enhanced by the introduction of much higher carbon prices and closure of cheaper conventional plants.

Given the plunge in the price of fossil fuels, there may now be some very worried faces at SSE.

There is, however, an alternative scenario. Envisage a scenario in ten years time, when the UK is ultra reliant on wind power. Imagine an era of low power prices and struggling renewable generators, at danger of going bankrupt. The government would probably have to offer some sort of subsidy, to stop the lights going out, or at least to safeguard their climate targets.

Maybe a direct subsidy, funded by a surcharge on bills – perhaps similar to the Renewable Obligation scheme. Maybe even higher carbon taxes, or maybe a legal requirement for businesses and public sector bodies to buy direct from renewable operators via Power Purchase Agreements.

What price then Silly Jilly’s green economic recovery.

33 Comments
  1. spetzer86 permalink
    May 15, 2020 2:40 pm

    If they set up hand-cranked generators for every house in the UK, how many long-term jobs would that create? Seems like it would be many more than what they’re talking here, so let’s get right along with this new scheme for full employment.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      May 15, 2020 3:16 pm

      I can see that being a great opportunity for youth employment if they can be put in a wheel to run round in. Who knows, they could make a career of it given there won’t be much else to do.

      • May 15, 2020 4:42 pm

        And the exercise will warm them up, reducing the need for expensive electric heating. Win-win.

      • May 15, 2020 4:56 pm

        There has been a massive increase in the sale of exercise bikes. Surely they could all be hooked up to the National Grid at 400kV. That would solve a lot of problems.

      • David Ashton permalink
        May 15, 2020 5:08 pm

        And solve the obesity problem at the same time.

      • Chaswarnertoo permalink
        May 15, 2020 5:44 pm

        And while we’re at fit wind turbines on every electric car and train to power them…..

  2. Pancho Plail permalink
    May 15, 2020 3:37 pm

    I will admit to knowing nothing about electricity sector manning levels, but 280 long term jobs just for this project seems an awful lot to me, or could it be that offshore wind farms have a very high maintenance requirement.

    • May 15, 2020 6:23 pm

      Why are many jobs seen as a plus? Getting our energy with the fewest jobs is the ideal.

      If more jobs for the same task that is the objective get rid of tractors and dig the fields by hand?

      • Gamecock permalink
        May 16, 2020 2:59 am

        Correct. Jobs are a COST, not a benefit.

  3. NeverReady permalink
    May 15, 2020 3:54 pm

    Hey…just been thinking…seeing as how we’re in to big global experiments at the moment, how about we do a small exploratory trial in the UK.

    Shut down all non-renewable energy sources and just let renewables take the strain. I reckon an hour before the screaming begins, although if the media can suppress the screaming then maybe a couple of days of intermittent or no power will quickly bring the discussion on renewables back in to the realms of reality.

    Pity it can’t really be done.

  4. May 15, 2020 4:20 pm

    What is really concerning (but not a surprise, given the ignorance of the government ministers is “Alok Sharma, the secretary of state for business, said projects like the Dogger Bank offshore windfarm will be “a key part of ensuring a green and resilient economic recovery as well as reaching our target of net-zero emissions by 2050”.”

    • May 15, 2020 4:45 pm

      Politicians seem to struggle with the fact that wind is always variable, down to and including zero.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        May 16, 2020 10:49 am

        Politicians struggle with facts fullstop. Health Secretary Hancock told a blatant lie about care homes during his press conference and yet in the media – nothing. There is even documented proof of the policy of chucking patients out of hospitals to care homes.

        [Please keep on topic – Paul]

  5. Chaswarnertoo permalink
    May 15, 2020 5:42 pm

    Clown 🌍

  6. markl permalink
    May 15, 2020 5:42 pm

    So how are they going to pay for all of this after they gut industry to appease the Greens? Take away millions of jobs to add thousands? The devil is always in the details.

  7. Teddy lee permalink
    May 15, 2020 5:48 pm

    Obviously not a scientist,or electrical engineer or indeed a lateral thinker! Clueless! However a perfect shoe in for CEO of EDF et al.

  8. Thomas Carr permalink
    May 15, 2020 5:48 pm

    Again the decision makers ( Alok Sharma first) need to be kept abreast every week throughout the year of the gulf between design capacity of the wind farms and their delivery. Historic evidence about their costs in use and reliability is building.
    The facetiousness of some of us as commentators is no help except to suggest a lack of conviction — it suits the green believers , if anything.
    The Tower of Babel was a similar job creation scheme giving employment but without lasting achievement but Stephen Bull -supra – may not recognise the coincidence.

  9. Curious George permalink
    May 15, 2020 5:58 pm

    Spend your way to economic recovery! Multibillion-pound windfarm will create whopping 200 permanent jobs! The more you spend, the more you save…

  10. Stuart Brown permalink
    May 15, 2020 6:24 pm

    Maybe we could do what SFEN would like to see in France:
    https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/SFEN-Nuclear-essential-to-economic-recovery

    “It referred to a recent study by Deloitte in France that said every euro invested in nuclear power generates EUR2.5 in the rest of the economy. The same study estimates that by 2030 every terawatt hour produced by nuclear energy will contribute EUR360 million to the national GDP, which is more than three times wind power’s contribution of EUR100 million.”

    So nuclear’s contribution to the economy is a factor of 2.5 and wind is 2.5*100/360 = 0.69? Hmm. Well they would say that, I suppose.

    Anyway, £9bn ought to buy a 1GW nuclear plant that should last over twice as long as the windfarm. OK, maybe not Hinckley Point C, but… Sizewell B allegedly cost 2bn in 1995.

    Can’t help but feel a few more nukes would be a better economic recovery project.

  11. John189 permalink
    May 15, 2020 8:37 pm

    The Guardian article looks to me like an uncritical re-hash of a developer’s press release. I lost interest after seeing the words: “scheme to develop a clean energy cluster in central Scotland capable of supplying 100,000 homes with green electricity”. Windfarm developers are still using phrases like this, and it usually amounts to a claim based on optimum wind speeds 365 days a year with no downtime for maintenance. Interesting too that Scotland’s oldest windfarm already needs re-investment.

  12. mikewaite permalink
    May 15, 2020 8:46 pm

    Expect the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project to be raised from the dead. A perfect opportunity to throw money we have not got at a project that will not deliver in order to demonstrate economic recovery via Green projects.

  13. Jonathan Scott permalink
    May 15, 2020 10:44 pm

    With the amount of bullshit created by the Gween Wobby it is a pity that cannot be converted to biofuel! This is about only two things, dangerous far left wing power grabbers in bed with the rotten end of capitalism. The rest…Gweeta, vaguely present Al G and pretty boy Leonardo….. they are just useful idiots albeit that vaguely present Al is allowed to make some money. This will not end well.

  14. Gamecock permalink
    May 16, 2020 2:58 am

    ‘Britain’s biggest green energy companies are on track to deliver multibillion-pound windfarm investments across the north-east of England and Scotland to help power a cleaner economic recovery.’

    They expect no return on their investments? I could have never gotten a project approved it the objective was “to help power a cleaner economic recovery.”

    ‘The Guardian article looks to me like an uncritical re-hash of a developer’s press release. I lost interest after seeing the words: “scheme to develop a clean energy cluster in central Scotlandcapable of supplying 100,000 homes with green electricity’

    Indeed, John189. It is a useless unit of measure. I want to know the equivalent in Hiroshima Bombs.

  15. May 16, 2020 5:58 am

    “Green energy firms on track to deliver multi billion pound windfarms”

    That’s great! Except that what the world needs is reliable energy delivery not windfarms.

  16. Phoenix44 permalink
    May 16, 2020 9:03 am

    One of the key factors in economic recoveries is that stuff is much cheaper than it was, including and especially energy and labour. That gives a kick-start to recoveries, allowing surviving businesses to grow into markets where rivals have gone bust and allowing investors to make a return. If you prevent that, say goodbye to a quick recovery, and say hello to a long drawn-out depression.

    • mikewaite permalink
      May 16, 2020 11:51 am

      Phoenix : AEP over at the Telegraph regularly gets a well-merited mauling here when he pronounces on renewables and clmate change. Howevr he produced a piece last week wIich concentrated on financial recovery and basically was agreeing with your comments .
      Ironically, whilst his nonsense on renewables is lapped up by the politicos, his sensible comments on economic recovery will be disregarded.

  17. tom0mason permalink
    May 16, 2020 1:02 pm

    Paul,
    Here are the average capacity factors for offshore wind farms in UK waters from Andrew ZP Smith, https://energynumbers.info/uk-offshore-wind-capacity-factors by Andrew ZP Smith, ORCID 0000-0002-8215-4526 has some interesting data, graphics and animations.
    His figures are —
    UK offshore latest rolling 12 month capacity factor is 40.6%, on total electricity generated of 144,048 GWh from an installed capacity of 8,542 MW.
    At the top of the article are links for Danish, Belgium, and Germany’s offshore figures.

    Compare to the German figures …
    German offshore latest rolling 12 month capacity factor 36.9% on total electricity generated of 39,178GWh from an installed capacity of 4572MW.

    But at what cost? (?How many Thousands Billion Euros?)

  18. Russ Wood permalink
    May 16, 2020 2:56 pm

    Some South African idiot (probably in government) has suggested that SA builds FLOATING wind farms, ‘cos that’s where the wind is. This is supposed to be one way of pulling us out of the expected post-Covid drop of 18% in GDP! I think I remember someone on this site ‘sinking’ the idea a few years ago.
    But then, anyone who institutes an 8 pm CURFEW to ‘stop the virus’ and backs it up with most of the Army can’t be expected to ACTUALLY ‘follow the Science’!

  19. May 16, 2020 6:00 pm

    telling us something important about global climate change

    Yes, it’s telling us the climate has nothing to do with robins or traffic. Having to point that out tells us something about Mr Lightbulb.

  20. sarastro92 permalink
    May 16, 2020 9:12 pm

    Soak ’em… let the saps who vote for Green politicians and renewable energy pay through the nose… it’s an inefficient way to learn economics … but hey, never give a sucker an even break.

  21. jack broughton permalink
    May 17, 2020 3:22 pm

    As a non-accountant I struggle with IRRs and LCOE generally. Converting the Dogger Bank £ 9b investment to a simple payback even at a CF of 50% produces a simple payback (capital cost / Annual revenues) of over 30 years: probably longer than the asset life-span. Thus, there must be an intended increase in base price underlying this, or the investors are totally irresponsible and have failed in their duty of care to shareholders.

    How did this ever attract funding???

    • May 17, 2020 4:18 pm

      I get a similar number. At 40% loading and capacity of 3.6GW, it will generate 12.6 TWh a year.

      With a CfD of £48/MWh, less £28/MWh for running costs, this nets to £20/MWh = £252m a year revenue, payback of 36 yrs.

      There will of course be inflation on income each year, but also interest on borrowing which I would imagine would cancel out.

      As John Constable suggests, the numbers simply don’t stack up

Comments are closed.