Energy firms asked to keep burning coal as ministers fight to keep lights on
By Paul Homewood
Coal-fired power stations have been asked to stay open for longer as part of Government plans to avert an energy crunch amid Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, has written to the owners of Britain’s three remaining coal-fired power plants to ask them to explore keeping turbines running next winter. The turbines were due to close this September.
We will of course therefore take all prudent steps to be ready to support National Grid Electricity System Operator in delivering our energy security. Maintaining our remaining coal-fired power stations would provide us with additional backup security while we pursue more enduring solutions.”
In the long-term the country must move to cleaner energy, he added, but the “transition has to be orderly, recognising the critical role fossil fuels will play as we deploy low carbon alternatives”.
Wholesale gas prices leapt 18pc on Wednesday as Russia cut off supplies to Bulgaria and Poland, in a significant escalation of tensions. The UK gets less than 4pc of its gas directly from Russia but prices track those on the continent, which is heavily reliant.
The coal plants would be used for back-up power rather than run all of the time. Companies would be paid to agree to be on standby, likely through charges which end up on customers’ bills, in keeping with the general arrangements for power stations on standby.
The window for winning contracts to be on standby for this winter has formally ended, so they will need to come to a special arrangement with National Grid.
Buying coal to run the turbines may also be another hurdle. Russia has typically been a large supplier of coal but these supplies are being shunned due to its war.
It marks a significant change of tone towards the heavily polluting fuel source which is due to be phased out from UK power stations by 2024 in line with the UK’s push to slash carbon emissions.
That timeline remains in place, but the request highlights the potential threat to the UK’s energy market from Russia’s war on Ukraine, as disruption pushes up the price of natural gas which is used to produce more than one third of UK power.
In a letter to coal-fired power station owners EDF, Uniper and Drax at the start of April, Mr Kwarteng said: “The UK is in no way dependent on gas from Russia, however I am mindful that a shortage of gas in Europe could put significant pressure on the European gas market.
“
Coal provides less than 2pc of British power over the latest year, having been largely replaced by wind, biomass, gas and solar power in the push to cut emissions.
Drax and EDF were both due to shut down their remaining coal-fired turbines this year, while Uniper was due to shut one of its four turbines running this year and keep the other three running to 2024. The plants are in Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.
EDF said many processes have already been put in place to close West Burton A, including reducing the site’s staffing numbers and running down the coal stock.
It added: “EDF has recently been asked by the UK Government to consider what it would take to make West Burton A available next winter and this remains under discussion. A decision would be necessary in the coming weeks to enable this to happen.”
Uniper said: "We can confirm that Uniper has been asked by the Government to explore the possibility of keeping the unit at Ratcliffe power station, due to close in September 2022, open for longer. We cannot comment further at this time."
Drax said: “Drax remains committed to supporting security of supply in the UK. Drax has recently been asked by the UK Government to consider options for a limited extension of its coal operations and this remains under review.”
This is a start. But the problem of European dependence on Russian gas is not going away. The future of coal power in the UK needs to be guaranteed until at least 2030. That means scrapping the arbitrary target of closure by 2024, along with putting in place a formal Capacity Market contract till 2030.
Coal power stations need some certainty for their planning, not the sort of hand to mouth begging on offer.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
It’s karma. Or nemesis following hubris. Or even déjà vu all over again. May the chickens come home to roost and sit on the pollies’ heads.
I would think the politicians are more worried about reality (for once) and it won’t be chickens coming home to roost, more likely those large black birds in Africa who appear after the lions kill.
Corvus Corone Uks own carrion crow would do nicely
Paying for standby when it could simply be generating power. It all adds costs through duplication of plant and capacity, as it does for gas. And as the government attempts to add even more wind and solar the duplication costs will get greater.
Doubling down on stupidity. When the government is attempting to subsidise or control both the input side and the consumer side they are inevitably going to lose one way or another as costs spiral out of control and free markets, like the ERM exit in the 1990’s, will cause all this to come to a crash on the buffers.
The only question is whether the lights will go out at some point. I keep pointing out to our Conservative MP that you do not want to be the incumbent government if that happens.
“Coal provides less than 2pc of British power over the latest year ….”
The alternative truth is that for 5,192 hours last year, coal helped prevent blackouts.
Up by 45% vs 2020’s 3,571 hours.
Thanks Joe, those a great plots.
Despite increasing nameplate capacity in wind and solar, we needed to burn more coal last year than 2020.
We need to use British coal – so open up mining and fracking.
Coal . . . is what gives wind and Solar power . . . burnt in China . . . Why is that so hard to explain to the Greenies . . .
Guess 🙂
Because hey don’t want to know . . . as they cover their ears and stomp around like little kids going la la la la la la la la la . . . I can’t hear you . . . la la la la la . . .
That’s an excellent and more meaningful way of putting it..
5,192 hours is just shy of 60% of the year. Can you imagine the devastation if it wasn’t available (and nothing else reliable and dispatchable to replace it)? We need to ask our MPs if they’re willing to risk blackouts for 60% of the year. Surely they cannot say “yes”!
I notice how much coal generation was required during the SUMMER months of 2021. Was the wind not blowing? Oops!
I asked my MP what we were going to do once coal was all decommissioned, I got a boiler plate copy & paste reply about renewables, when I pressed further, she said she’d ask the Minister & I heard nothing further.
Dugh . . . They do not understand Science . . . they do not understand industrial infrastructure . . . they do not understand global trade . . . they do not understand the most basic facts of life . . . but they do understand that Pigs can fly . . . that is why they promote EV’s and solar power and wind turbines . . . all of which add more pollution than the Greenies tell them . . . We need a Savior . . .
Paul . . . will you Please run for office ??
Please read . . .
https://www.academia.edu/76965285/Clean_Green_Energy_and_Net_Zero_Fairy_Tales_on_Steroids
That Kwasi Kwarteng thinks coal is not an ‘enduring’ and by implication, a reliable solution that must be discarded, says everything.
Meanwhile here in Northern England, the weather is boreal, coldest April for a long time, swallows have not appeared – two weeks late at least, frost at night. Thank God for Gas, Coal and oil heating!
Whatever Bunter and his crew think of fossils, such fuels are indispensable. But for Bunter the train smash will still happen.
Could we somehow get our MPs and “policy makers” to ask the basic question “Can CO2 really changing the climate and is the climate really changing”? The consensus-science is so obviously wrong that it merits discussion not cover-up.
Jack…NOAA’s latest report indicates that the 1880 to 2021 global temperature anomaly is now +0.84°C, lower than it was in 2016. That’s the total amount of “climate change” warming that has taken place regardless of the cause. Not covered up, just ignored?
Finally, some reality…especially for transportation where fossil fuels are critical.
“In the long-term the country must move to cleaner energy, he added, but the “transition has to be orderly, recognising the critical role fossil fuels will play as we deploy low carbon alternatives”.
But, but, but, we’ll have all-electric, fossil fuel-less and CO2-less quarry excavators & earth-movers, freight rail, smelters, blast furnaces, ships, concrete plants, factories, lorries & construction vehicles, etc., won’t we?
ilma630… No we won’t. Not without using fossil fuels for transportation to manufacture and distribute all that. Even if his factories operate on renewables…solar or wind, Elon Musk’s suppliers and the distributors of his vehicles probably use more than a few tons of biofuels. The same is true for those who build and install solar panels and wind turbines in “farms”.
(I forgot the on the end, pointing out the futility of the whole CO2 thing)
“EDF has recently been asked by the UK Government to consider what it would take to make West Burton A available next winter and this remains under discussion”
Lot’s of lovely moolah, that’s what!
People like Kwarteng can arbitrarily kill the business. And the next election could bring even worse people to power.
‘Coal power stations need some certainty for their planning, not the sort of hand to mouth begging on offer.’
Which is simply not possible. There will be NO NEW CAPITAL in the coal business. It may carry on, but what you have now is all you are going to get. And it may not carry on long – it depends on how the business is going, and what plans they have already made.
‘Energy firms asked to keep burning coal’
Ministers: “We are going to kill you. Can you help us out a little longer?”
‘Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, has written to the owners of Britain’s three remaining coal-fired power plants to ask them to explore keeping turbines running next winter.’
Did he say, “Please?”
Coming to people hat in hand to ask for something, you don’t ask them to ‘explore.’ Unless that is some British idiom I don’t know about. You ask them to do it. Indirection, to ‘explore,’ makes them want to tell you, “No.” You don’t talk to coal plant owners the same way you talk to other ministers. [Though Millard may have put the words in Kwarteng’s mouth.]
Power and energy from Coal, Gas and Oil entirely underpin western industrial societies, raising living standards, alleviating poverty.
Anyone who can not understand this is living in denial, too liberal, privileged, entitled and blind to simple physics, chemistry and energy economics.
Our politicians are clearly blind.
Greg Jacskson (CEO Octopus Energy) on radio 4 this afternoon is still saying that renewables will build us out of reliance on fossil fuels. “This is the last fossil fuel energy crisis.” He clearly has no idea of problems of intermittency, lack of storage or basic engineering.
Correction Greg Jackson.
Not without using fossil fuels in transportation to build and install those renewables. Basic civil engineering Greg?
The same Octupus that tells me its supplying me with green renewable energy but not at the cheap prices that they keep telling us we are going to receive.
Someone can better advise. Is it not better to restore the remaining coal fired generators to continuous operation and turn gas on and off as demand requires? What coal and what gas is another matter.
“Is it not better to restore the remaining coal fired generators to continuous operation and turn gas on and off as demand requires?”
Indeed it is. Coal plants with very substantial boilers don’t take kindly to constant changes in load, as the thermal cycling puts undue stress on components. Modern CHP gas plants (while not immune) are better able to cope with rapid demand changes.
“Is it not better to restore the remaining coal fired generators to continuous operation and turn gas on and off as demand requires? What coal and what gas is another matter.”
Yes. But it involves large amounts of capital being spent on preparing the generating units for this service. It’s money best spent to cover a number of years operation. But there will be long lead time equipment to order, so it’s not all going to happen this year.
It will also require staff to be retained. They have been told for years that their jobs will soon no longer be required, leaving a skills shortage as many have left the industry. It is also difficult to recruit for jobs when the underlying message is that they are dead end.
Equally important is to stop the obnoxious “carbon taxation” which discriminates against coal fired power generation. What’s the point in spending money on coal fired generating plant to only then tax it out of existence!
And will there be a risk of litigation from operators who have already closed their coal fired capacity in response to government policy? They might not be too be impressed when they see competitor generating companies benefitting from policy changes and possibly even receiving government support.
They should have never been allowed to demolish them often before the boilers had gone cold a minister would turn up to blow up part of the power station. Any sensible country would have at least mothballed them just in case.
One of the ancient Greek philosophers is recorded as saying:
It is essential to be involved in politics otherwise you will allow yourself to be governed by your inferiors.
I think the past 30 or so years have demonstrated the veracity of this man’s observation.
As something currently circulating internet re wolves:
The difference between humans and animals?
Animals would never allow the dumbest ones to lead the pack.
Really they should be run as baseload to save as much gas as possible. Russia may have been a convenient import source, but it is far from the only one. Coal prices have of course been bid up somewhat, but even with the depreciated pound coal could provide power for under £100/MWh before carbon taxes. Guaranteed running would obviate the need for capacity payments.
“coal could provide power for under £100/MWh before carbon taxes” presents a dichotomy. As coal is a necessity, it should not be subject to the nefarious ‘carbon tax’. Kwateng can’t have his cake and eat it.
All possible if the fuel supply infrastructure is still there. What has happened to the ship unloading facilities in the last few years? How many locomotives and coal wagons have been scrapped? How many rail lines will need to be serviced to get them into a safe condition to carry 2000 tonne train loads needed to keep these coal fired power stations operating at close to maximum capacity?
The mess we are in goes on and on.
Nothing to add to previous posts re: the benefits of burning coal, other than it must surely be obvious to more and more people in the UK that coal could “save the day” in the current energy emergency.
The EU/US seem to have temporarily forgotten how foolish it is to show any human face outside the state. Revenge and self-serving Oligarchs and political puppets have and never will understand the “invisible hand” creates raisons d’états. Not even the deep state will provide Teflon for acts so obviously using ur “skill” astroturfing Realpolitik. Ur group lacks the wisdom and insight necessary not to display self-serving hubris–which, like obesity, one cannot hide.
6.55am, 71.9% of our electricity generation is from fossil fuels.
Adam,
and will be for decades, the transition to clean electricity is a fantasy not supported by facts.
The politicians over twenty of more years have made a real pig’s ear of the electrical system,
arguably the most important utility we have. Reliability is paramount followed by cost; reliability is steadily deteriorating and cost is soaring all down to our short-sighted and less than well informed government’s of all colours.
The prosperity and well being of the U.K. is dependant on reliable and cheap electricity, which we are moving away from. Government and the civil service are blind to reality.
A great summary. It all starts with the false, unproven (unprovable), unevidenced idea that CO2 controls temperature/climate. Nothing could be further from the truth, and is actually the opposite. The secondary false idea is that CO2 is ‘pollution’ (although only man’s ~3%, strangely). Again, quite the opposite.
Furthermore, a 1% increase from Nature . . . is a 9% increase in CO2, 300% more than the whole human annual contribution. One example is from the melting of the permafrost in Northern Canada and Northern Russia releasing, by some accounts, more CO2 and methane, than humans produce of either every year.
Correction,
“twenty of more years”, should be twenty or more years.