Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government when they intend to publish the
electricity network connection action plan promised for the
summer in Powering Up Britain: Energy Security Plan.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Energy
Security and Net Zero () (Con)
My Lords, the Connections Action Plan is published today. The
plan will significantly reduce connection delays from the current
average of five years to no more than six months beyond the date
requested by the customer. It will release 100 gigawatts of spare
capacity, equivalent to around a quarter of electricity needs in
2050. The plan also establishes an Ofgem-chaired monthly
connections delivery board to ensure timely and effective
implementation; that board will first meet on 6 December.
(Lab)
My Lords, in declaring that I am in receipt of an IPT fellowship
in wave energy, I thank the Minister very much for that
reassuring news, but one consequence of the essential greater
grid capacity could be many more unpopular and unsightly pylons.
What thought have the Government given to supporting burying
them, or to MP’s proposed amendment to
the then Energy Bill in the other place? The amendment said:
“Within six months of the passage of this Act, the Secretary of
State must by regulations provide for a fast-track planning
process for electricity pylons along motorways and rail
lines”,
which would considerably lessen the visual impact.
(Con)
I congratulate the noble Baroness on tabling her Question for
today, which is a fantastic coincidence and shows her great
foresight on this. She is right that the construction of new
electricity infra- structure, particularly pylons, is a
controversial matter, particularly in the communities that are
affected. She will know that the Winser review made a number of
recommendations as to how we can involve communities further and
take them with us on these plans. We are taking forward all those
recommendations.
Lord Swire (Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness is precisely right in her Question.
While I welcome the new generation of T-pylons, of which we are
less visually aware, the visual impact provision scheme has £465
million from Ofgem to bury power lines. The truth of the matter
is that National Grid is very against the burial of power lines.
It is possible; if it was not, we would not bury them in areas of
outstanding beauty and national parks. When will the Government
recognise the fact that this huge explosion of interconnectors
and power lines that we are about to witness needs to be taken
seriously when it comes to destroying our beautiful, unrivalled
landscapes?
(Con)
I have a certain amount of sympathy with what my noble friend
says, but the reality is that we need this new infrastructure
and, unfortunately, it is not possible to say that no community
will be affected. It is possible to bury power lines, of course,
but it is up to 10 times more expensive and that cost will fall
on the bill payer. As in many things, it is about getting the
balance right.
(CB)
My Lords, I declare my interests in the register. The future
systems operator will be key to planning and rolling out network
infra- structure. Now that we have the enabling legislation in
place, can the Minister please update the House on the timescales
and process for set-up of the future systems operator in the
coming months, and the associated consultations?
(Con)
The noble Lord is absolutely right: the FSO role is absolutely
key, and we are progressing work on that as quickly as possible.
It is really important to get it up and running, and relieve the
responsibility from the national grid, which I think has had a
number of conflicts of interest in this space.
(PC)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that there is a pressing need
for new interconnector links down the west coast of Wales to
facilitate potential hydroelectric schemes? Is he aware of the
uncertainty concerning the help to minimise the physical impact
on houses nearby and on substations? Who will fund these
payments, and who will determine the planning issues? Are the
Government working in close co-operation with the Welsh
Government to make sure that there is clarity on this issue and
that they can move forward quickly?
(Con)
Indeed, we are working with both the Scottish and Welsh
Governments. There is tremendous public support for offshore
wind; it has been our biggest expansion mechanism. But of course
it requires a lot of onshore infrastructure as well, which is
unpopular in the communities affected. There is a
well-established planning process, looking at all these impacts,
and we will continue to work with the devolved
Administrations.
(LD)
My Lords, since the Government have just dabbled with changing
the planning conditions for onshore wind in England, there has
been no action whatever from the industry, in that it still sees
the planning restrictions as a major barrier. When does the
Minister expect the next connection into the grid by onshore wind
in England so that households can benefit from the cheapest form
of energy we can produce in this country?
(Con)
Of course, there are still some onshore wind connections being
built in both Scotland and Wales, and a few in England as well.
We are committed to looking at the barriers that exist and
overcoming them.
(Lab)
Ofgem’s new mandate to prioritise the UK’s net-zero target comes
into force on Boxing Day—welcome progress secured by an amendment
to the recent Energy Bill. Given that the review on reform of the
electricity connections system began before this change, what
discussion have the Government already had with Ofgem to make
sure that decisions are made in line with the new mandate,
thereby ensuring that every opportunity it presents is taken to
ensure progress?
(Con)
I think the noble Baroness will find that Ofgem’s view is that it
was already fulfilling that mandate—and, of course, the vast
majority of the new connections are because of new renewable
electricity, which is to fulfil our net-zero obligations. Ofgem
is fully in line with that.
(Con)
My Lords, does my noble friend not agree that it would make more
sense to keep locally the electricity that is generated in the
North Sea and coming onshore in Scotland, the north of England
and Humberside, which have some of the coldest and
poorest-insulated households in the UK?
(Con)
I am not sure I understand the point my noble friend is making.
The reason we have a national grid is to distribute electricity
around the country so that all communities get the chance to
benefit. If you had a much more localised system of grids, it
would be much more inefficient. The whole idea or principle of
the national grid is that the whole country can benefit from all
our renewables infrastructure.
(CB)
My Lords, I declare my interests in this area and very much
welcome the Minister’s original reply. Does he agree with me
that, as well as the expansion of the grid and connections, we
need to look at the demand side and at reducing demand and
increasing energy efficiency? The Government promised several
consultations on this issue in different sectors and on building
standards. Is the Minister confident that the timescales promised
for those consultations will be kept?
(Con)
I agree with the noble Baroness that energy efficiency is really
important. It is much cheaper than building new energy
infrastructure. She will be aware that we are spending £6.5
billion on energy efficiency and clean power over this
Parliament, and we have already managed to secure £6 billion from
the Treasury for 2025-28. We need to take forward all these
measures. There are a number of key consultations coming up that
will make a big difference, not least that on the future homes
standard.
(Lab)
My Lords, today’s announcement is very welcome, but does the
Minister agree with me —I am sure he does—that we are in a
farcical situation where a charging point off the M1 in West
Yorkshire has to rely on diesel-driven generators to supply the
electricity to electric vehicles?
(Con)
If that were the case then, yes, I would agree with the noble
Lord that it is a farcical situation.
(Con)
My Lords, the excellent document Powering Up Britain talks about
a 100% increase in national grid capacity to deliver an
all-electric economy by 2050. National Grid itself talks about a
much larger figure: a 200% or 300% addition in the national grid.
Can the Minister guide us on which he thinks is the most reliable
of those estimates? Can he also tell us how it is all to be
financed and, indeed, how the planning system will be sped up so
that we can achieve anywhere near that by 2050?
(Con)
My noble friend asks good questions. The figures are that peak
demand for electricity is expected to increase from 47 gigawatts
in 2022 to between 90 and 120 gigawatts in 2035, as transport,
heating and industry electrify. We think that this will require
between 260 and 310 gigawatts of generation capacity connected to
the network by 2035. To do all these things, we of course need to
reform the planning system, which we are doing through national
policy statements and through the action plan announced
today.
(Lab)
My Lords, there are considerable problems with capacity issues
within local circuits in the distribution network from the
transmission lines, especially in rural areas. There are reported
delays even to the 132-kilovolt networks, as renewable schemes
are being held in the queue to be connected until 2037. How can
that help to decarbonise the power sector by 2035? I declare an
interest as being involved in such a scheme. Will the plan
published today help to resolve this queue and reappraise the
first-come-first-served basis for supply connections?
(Con)
The noble Lord points to the main problem that we have, which is
that there is a large queue of projects running into many
hundreds of gigawatts. The whole purpose of the action plan is to
look at which of those projects are likely to go ahead and to
prioritise those that are likely to proceed—a lot are in the
queue and probably not likely to proceed—and have the investment
and backing, and will decarbonise and deliver the upgrades as
quickly as possible. I am not familiar with the particular
project that the noble Lord referred to, but if he wants to send
me the details, I will certainly look at it for him.
