Prof Dieter Helm has published his much-anticipated review of the “cost of energy”, which the UK government commissioned in August following a manifesto pledge to do so. The 242-page report sets out in detail how the economist and energy-industry consultant believes the UK should establish a “long-term framework for the electricity industry which will provide a stable and least cost way to achieve the twin goals of meeting the Climate Change Act (CCA) and security of supply”. As Carbon Brief explained in an in-depth preview article in August, Helm faced a number of challenges, not least the limited terms of reference and scope of the review, as determined by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). Helm is also someone with long-held, sometimes controversial views about energy policy and he stresses at the start of his review that the “analyses and recommendations are mine alone”. It is not, he says in the introduction, a “comprehensive summary of the views” of other experts. The review contains 67 recommendations, according to the thinktank Green Alliance. Many of them are specific suggestions for reforming the electricity market, but Carbon Brief has focused below on summarising his related ideas for how the UK can best meet its climate targets at the least cost.
Carbon Brief 27th Oct 2017 read more »
Matthew Bell – former Chief Executive of the Climate Change Committee: Dieter Helm’s “cost of energy” review was always going to be clear in setting out the views of its author. However, he is surprisingly pragmatic on many points. His introductory statement asserts that “energy policy is not about facts: it is about setting objectives and designing regulation and markets to achieve them”. The focus on objectives is one of the outstanding successes of this review. Throughout, Helm is clear about the need to meet the objectives enshrined in the Climate Change Act and to ensure a secure supply of energy. Whatever else you hear in the debate about the review, there is no doubt that Helm is committed to both. The review then centres on a diagnosis of how we have got to where we are and on how we could do things better – and at lower cost – in the future. That is also welcome. Nobody doubts there is room for improvement. A lot of what he discusses is about quite technical issues relating to how electricity markets work (or don’t work). I will leave that debate to the specialists. I want to focus here on the way in which the review addresses the objectives set out in the Climate Change Act: achieving a reduction, from 1990 levels, of at least 80% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
Carbon Brief 27th Oct 2017 read more »
A new project aimed at gaining a better understanding of the factors influencing the cost of nuclear power plant projects has been launched by the UK’s Energy Technologies Institute (ETI). The study could help identify potential cost reductions for future projects. The Nuclear Cost Drivers Project, launched yesterday, will identify and analyse historic, contemporary and future nuclear power projects to identify areas of nuclear power plant design, construction and operation to deliver potential cost reductions. ETI said this would be achieved through the development and application of a “comprehensive, cost study evidence base”.
World Nuclear News 27th Oct 2017 read more »
