The UK’s Net Zero Disaster Is ‘Climate Virtue’ Wrapped In ‘Economic Self-Harm’

Economic self-harm disguised as climate virtue is how I would characterise the UK’s energy policy. It is now well established that we have the highest industrial electricity prices in the developed world and the fourth highest domestic prices. [emphasis, links added]

This hurts households with crippling bills. It damages the industry by driving factories offshore. And it harms the planet, because deindustrialization pushes production to countries with dirtier energy, and we incur additional emissions when they ship goods to Britain that were previously made here.

And for what? The UK accounts for less than one percent of global emissions. Exporting jobs and importing emissions helps no one.

In fact, it makes everything worse – the huge sacrifices we are making in the name of net zero actually increase global emissions, even if domestic emissions appear lower.

So why are our energy costs so high? Energy Secretary Ed Miliband blames everything on “high international gas prices” and “dictators”. He says we must move faster to renewables to lower bills. But does this stack up?

Firstly, on oil and gas, the United States, which leans on its abundant fossil fuels, has consistently cheaper energy than Europe.

Its industrial electricity prices are four times cheaper than in the UK, and its industrial gas prices are more than four and a half times cheaper. Domestic electricity prices in the US are almost three times cheaper than in the UK, and its domestic gas prices are two and a half times cheaper.

Then, on renewables, countries with high levels of wind and solar generation typically have the highest electricity prices. Those with little or no wind and solar have low electricity prices.

None of this supports Miliband’s arguments that the UK’s energy is expensive because of gas or that bills will come down with more renewables.

In fact, the opposite appears to be true, which is worrying since Miliband wants to commit to new 20-year subsidies for wind that are expected to be much higher than last year’s subsidies, which were themselves higher than the cost of generating electricity with gas (and that’s after adding carbon taxes onto gas prices).

So why does Ed Miliband refuse to act? Why does he insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that we must stop producing our own oil and gas and rely instead on wind and sun for our energy?

Even Dale Vince, the eco-tycoon who built his fortune on subsidies for “green” power (although he likes to claim they are not subsidies because they are paid by consumers and not the state), now admits it’s madness not to exploit the North Sea.

The claim that renewables are “cheap” is one of the biggest lies in modern politics…

These views are echoed by Greg Jackson, chief executive of Octopus Energy and now a government adviser, who has said that using gas from the North Sea is cleaner than relying on imported liquefied natural gas from places like the USA or Qatar.

He acknowledges that global prices set the cost, so UK gas might not be much cheaper, but there are environmental gains and less backlash from climate policy.

In fact, maximizing production from the North Sea would bring much-needed revenues to the Treasury, at a time when there is a large black hole to fill in the Budget.

The claim that renewables are “cheap” is one of the biggest lies in modern politics: yes, the wind and sun are free, but the machines to capture them are not.

Nor are the backup systems, the land, or the vast new grid infrastructure required to cope with their intermittency and low energy density.

The result has been an enormous wealth transfer, as subsidies flow from the poorest households to the richest landowners and developers.

Top image via Alert View/YouTube screencap

Read rest at The Telegraph