1. Nuclear procurement. If nuclear power is vital to the future energy mix, why oh why has it been left to the board of a state-owned French energy company and the vagaries of the Chinese economy to decide whether it goes ahead or not? News this week that the wobbles at Hinkley are casting doubt over the rest of the new nuclear fleet come as little surprise (news, p4&5). The government (for which, read the public) will be footing the hefty bill for new nuclear, so surely they should have some control over whether or not it gets built?
2. Carbon capture and storage. This technology really is vital to the future energy mix, so the Treasury’s eleventh-hour decision to scrap the £1 billion funding for a development plant is bizarre, to say the least. The industry has been left speechless, and news this week that Labour has called on the National Audit Office to investigate (news p9, smacks, sadly, of shutting the stable door long after the horse has bolted.
3. Energy storage. It is – you guessed it – vital to the future energy mix. Yet thanks to a series of bureaucratic “mistakes”, it is classified, licensed and taxed in ways that put it at an immediate disadvantage to other technologies and raise serious barriers to those seeking to develop it (p10). Why?
4. Diesel generation in the capacity market. The capacity market is designed to facilitate the transition to sustainable sources of power, so critics are justified in their amazement that it just handed £176 million of public subsidies to one of the dirtiest forms of generation there is (p11). There are relatively simple ways to end the advantage diesel generation inappropriately enjoys in the capacity auction – though the government has yet to signal any intent to do so.
5. Investment in district heat. Yep, it’s vital to the future energy mix and, right now, it’s at a distinct disadvantage when it vies for investment, thanks to the lack of a clear regulatory framework (news, p13). The UK needs a new heat policy that recognises the need for blended systems and turns away from the one-size-fits-all focus on electrifying heat that has been shown to be unfit for purpose.