Norway’s Threat to Cut Off the UK Leaves Labour’s Net Zero Plans in Tatters
As Norway threatens to cut off the UK from electricity at times of low wind speeds, it’s a sign of a growing energy nationalism globally that leaves Labour’s short-sighted Net Zero plans in tatters, says Andy Mayer in the Telegraph. Here’s an excerpt.
Norway’s Government, whose coalition ended this week, is not the first to collapse over bad energy policies linked to mad climate politics. … It may, however, be even more consequential for the UK.
The politics of the collapse are quite dull, but echo growing global alarm over high prices linked to the high cost of a low-carbon transition.The populist Eurosceptic Centre Party (and others on the Right) object to Norwegians paying more for their domestic power due to demand for their hydropower reserves abroad. They particularly object to EU Directives that would undermine their domestic sovereignty to withhold those reserves for their own use, or to shield them from an energy crisis. They take issue with the poor energy decisions made by their neighbours (especially Germany) which have inflamed the problem.
This leaves the pro-green, pro-EU Norwegian Labour party solely in charge, but with no working majority and a General Election no later than September, which on current polls is likely to favour a nationalist populist coalition.
The problem for the UK is this: our Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband has committed us to a target of decarbonising the power grid by 2030. It’s highly doubtful nuclear can be built that quickly, so this will rest largely on renewable power, meaning mostly offshore wind and a lot of pylons. He has done so while continuing the Tory ban on domestic fracking, extending it to new North Sea projects, and removing legal protections for those with prior approvals like Rosebank.
This simultaneously undermines the UK’s energy security – the wind doesn’t always blow – and makes any crisis solution dependent on increasing imports. The only viable solution to renewable intermittency today is putting gas turbines on standby, then firing them up at vast cost when needed using imported gas, over half of which is typically from Norway via a pipe. The Norway electricity interconnector (NSL) is less significant, with capacity to power 1.4 million homes, but would be entirely useless if the Norwegians made it one-way at exactly the times of pan-European low wind where it would be most needed. And it is that initially that is threatened, not the gas pipe.But this misses the key point about rising populism. Energy nationalism is rooted in high prices, not types of technology. Exactly the same rules of supply and demand apply to Norway’s North Sea wealth if exported as to their power system. Our second-best alternative to Norway is shipped LNG exports from the US, vital during the 2022 crisis. However, the Trump agenda reasonably prioritises the needs of US manufacturing for cheap fracked gas over British pensioners.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
As the Chuckle Brothers would say, ‘Oh dear Oh dear’.
It pains to state but maybe we will have to “suck it up” until this hideous government is forced to backtrack somewhat on the WEF agenda. A red flag event seems inevitable if power goes off – got to keep the plebs distracted.
You can’t use logic to convince someone who holds illogical views. The rocks of reality are on the port side for all to see, but they wont steer to starboard…
You can’t take on an idiot as they will simply beat you with their experience.
Unfortunately they do not care how much of our money they throw at the problem to stop the lights going off.
That actually is the aim – to impoverish the people of this country utterly.
But remember though that they are all in on the eco scam. The Tories just planned to do all of this crap 5 years later than Labour in 2035, but it is still a SCAM. The scam is driven by the Central Banks, the UN and WEF. The Politicians go along with this fraud and do as they are told because the Private Bankers have control over all debt and money creation that Governments rely on.
Nearer and nearer draws the tide ….
No, tidal energy is not the answer 😉
It surprises me when some demented fool still believes that tidal energy is some sort of utopia. If it was so good where are all the tidal plants? I only know of Rance in France and that was so good it is their only one
Apologies the hymn I hoped to have quoted is actually
Nearer and nearer draws the time (not tide)
My bad, as you say tidal energy not the answer.
I assumed you were making a reference to King Canute (Knut) and his demonstration that even Kings cannot stop the waves.
“…it’s a sign of a growing energy nationalism globally”
It is not energy nationalism. It is a nation being energy sufficient, which in the case of the left, they are doing everything they can to make sure the UK is energy poor.
Outrageous – a government elected to serve the interests of the people in the country that voted for them, er, serving the interests of the people in that country….maybe it will catch on.
As I keep repeating tof, it’s treason plain and simple.
I don’t think they ‘threatened’ anything. They just observed that if energy is in short supply in Norway they won’t export it.
Exactly – just think what position we’d be in now if we’d pushed the button in the 80’s / 90’s on 10-15 large nuclear plants – we’d likely be a net exporter of power, earning income from Europe… however with our suicidal short termism, it was not to be
The “plans” (really just a lot of theatrical statements) were in tatters from the start.
Plans provided by Baldrick Planning Consultancy.
It’s possible there are “plans” somewhere – wads of waffle with dodgy figures produced to order by hapless civil servants – but I strongly doubt they get read properly by senior politicians, or thought through. It all seems like theatre to me. Maybe their capacity for self-delusion is so immense that they actually think they know what they are doing, or maybe they are just lying. But I doubt the starting point is any kind of evidence based evaluation of the situation and an objective consideration of the options – I’m sure they already know the answer and as with “covid” we have “policy based evidence making”.
Electricity interconnectors should not count as firm capacity, but that is what National Grid (and now NESO) do, all part of the gravy train of forcing bill payers to fund a pointless replacement of what works with what sometimes works.
I fear that a “system black” is the only thing that MIGHT stop the insanity, but the responses have already been written: clearly we need more wind/solar/batteries.
People will die during a system black, imagine the London Riots (crime spree), but much worse.
It doesn’t take a ‘system black’ (I’d never heard the term before but the context seems clear) to kill people. People will die if energy gets too expensive and they’re too fearful of running up a bill to warm their homes.
The issue with a System Black is that nobody knows how long it will take to restart it given that make a mistake and you are back to zero. I envisage every substation having to be isolated and then added slowly one by one. And how you achieve this with no communications system I know not.
Lots of engineers, with lots of walkie talkie radios or Sat phones, and lots and lots of time is likely the main plan – the unknown time to complete is the major risk + access to vehicle fuel etc. let’s hope all the local DNOs (district network operators) haven’t replaced all the vehicles with EVs….
What’s the betting on that……😳
Around here they tend to get around in 4x4s due to rural nature etc – let’s hope it’s only the marketing people who’ve been forced to EVs
I wonder at what point someone has to make the call to start to close down power as in rolling blackouts?
There must be a process but I wonder – would ot be the NESO chief or ‘Minister’ who makes the call?
I can’t wait to see it unfold & have candles & camping stove all ready…..
These things are already planned and in place – there are literally seconds to take action, no time to consult anyone
If the elderly succumb to greater levels of cold-related or cold-exacerbated illnesses (like influenza or pneumonia) due to being in a home they can’t afford to heat, they’ll likely just come at them more mRNA non-vaccines.
Another step nearer to the energy brink.
“Against stupidity we are defenceless… The stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental.”
Dietrich Boenhoeffer (1906 – 1945)
Didn’t he also say that stupids will even act to their own detriment so self-preservation isn’t an incentive and can’t be used to persuade them to change? In fact they are not motivated by personal gain, so reward is not achieving some goal, there’s no pay-off, their stupidity is its own reward.
Did I see a prediction of large snow falls for a week mid February to cover the majority of England and Scotland, that will be interesting won’t it? with no wind or sun and the lack of winter fuel payments, but then there will be power outages anyway, this Governments fixation on reducing the population through the Government sponsored killing bill, the impoverishment of low income pensioners, and the denial of heat and light should produce a bumper crop of deaths for them by end of February.
And when it gets cold windmills have to draw power from the grid to heat the blades to stop ice forming, the weight of which otherwise causes the blades to drop off.
I’ve just checked out gridwatch – demand is 37.25GW – right now 43.65% from gas turbines, 11:46% nuclear, today it’s windy somewhere (not here in East Yorkshire) 24.54%, 2.34% solar with biomass giving us 6.93% Norway ICT at full capacity providing 1.40GW (balancing UK wind power to Norwegian hydropower which I don’t fully understand) – the rest from a variety of sources including 1.5GW from the French ICTs. We are very vulnerable. And going to get worse.
Norway ICT at full capacity providing 1.40GW (balancing UK wind power to Norwegian hydropower which I don’t fully understand)
This comment is the most pertinent to the story.
Without the Norwegian power supply to balance the load the grid becomes destabilised.
The variability of supply of electricity from the wind turbines has to be balanced or otherwise either your supply will go up and down in power or go off completely.
Am I right?
Yes, you’re right. The key is grid frequency 50Hz (+/- 1%) when the UK load increases the frequency goes down, additional power has to be added to maintain frequency otherwise lots and lots of things stop working, or will trip out; electric motors run slowly or trip, clocks (think network timing signal), sub-stations, and a multitude of other systems that demand constant frequency.
Thankyou both for explanation. Absolutely clear. Physics I struggled with. Chemistry & biology I can do….😁
All things being equal, electricity moves at the speed of light so time to respond is incredibly tight – transformers and other devices on the network give a bit of delay, but it’s still seconds… amazing power grids stay up at all to be honest, and the UK one has an amazing reliability to date… can we keep that is the question
As in certain exam questions, I would love it if Milliband would show his workings, especially of what he plans to fill the inevitable shortfalls with.
You think he’s got workings?! I feel you may be overestimating the man… he’s a religious nut
His question to NESO on how will they deliver on 2030 tells you the man has not the faintest idea. That NESO don’t either is cause for concern.
NESO have to tread a very fine line – they can’t call him out for being the village idiot he is, but they also have to keep the lights on. Must be a nightmare to be frank
“It’s highly doubtful nuclear can be built that quickly…” I award you first prize in understatement of the decade. Hinkley Point C – approval given 2012, work, started 2015 to open in 2019 delayed until 2025ish, delayed until 2030ish, delayed again due to danger to fish being sucked into its cooler intakes. Cost estimated at £41 billion – only about double initial estimates. Origibal consumer price £24 per MWh, now guaranteed inflation-linked £128 per MWh. Hinkley is a joint venture – EDF (Franch taxpayers’ money) and awash with Western money China. But even China refused to meet increased costs so EDF, now once more State-owned had to raid French taxpayers’ piggy-banks. EDF has been taken back into State ownership because it could not raise the capital to replace France’s aging reactor fleet of 59, which it owns. So the taxpayer will pay. Why do people still think nuclear is “the answer” when its output is indistinguishable from the astronomical consumer prices of “free” wind and solar? And leaving aside the actual price of electricity produced, the enormous costs put off sane investors. The solution is a mix of about 60% coal with 40% gas – more or less what we… Read more »
What do you mean by ‘indistinguishable’? One of the key differences is if you ask a nuclear station to output power, it usually does exactly what is required – renewables much,
much less likely. I agree the costs of building HPC are mad, however working with the UK planning system, which is mad in itself, + massive inflation due to money printing over the period involved, it’s hardly surprising the figures are eye watering.
Thinking back to when the Magnox fleet of stations were created, it’s a miracle we actually got them when we did – however this was before planning became a nightmare and H&S got out of hand + we had a rather pressing need for some ingredients for bomb making that we’re side effects, I’m sure that helped oil the wheels
As Purpleone explains below the high cost of UK nuclear plant this century is down to political choices over regulations. It could be half the price.
one huge benefit of nuclear is the low running costs. Once built snd energised it runs at very low marginal costs so it is genuinely an investment in good times (remember them) which can carry us over more difficult ones (poor economy, long cold spells).
Nukes are also safe from overseas blackmail, as would be fracked gas and as was coal.
Another angle of course is the adhoc nature of the current plans – if we were to commit to build 10-15 over the coming years, to a common design, we’d benefit from
economies of scale etc far more. interestingly I know some people who were involved in UK civil nuclear during the magnox programme, and although this standardisation was an intent, in reality each station was different, some more than others, as design improvements were made
to increase power and reliability / safety. It was a fascinating time, and in my opinion, a very successful programme.
When it comes to EDF plants it is relevant to know that of the other two completed plants, both were TWELVE years late and FIVE times over budget.
Indeed they do seem to have a lot of challenges at EDF
”Our second-best alternative to Norway is shipped LNG exports from the US…”
Not if there are no gas power stations to burn it. The plan is to shut them down by 2030. But even if not, most are now nearing end of working life and need replacing. Nobody is going to invest in new power plant to sit idle for periods as back-up not making enough money to be profitable.
In parallel with this lunacy, use of gas for heating and in industry must be switched to electricity, so LNG imports will be of little use – no power stations to use it, we can’t burn it to keep warm and cook.
Yet the supposed accelerated wind/solar programme is only to,replace what currently comes from remaining nuclear and gas, not to provide more. 87% of our energy is from fossil fuels which “must” be transitioned to all electric.
There just won’t be enough spare capacity in Europe – supposedly making the same transition – to make up for the shortfall via interconnectors.
And as for enormous storage batteries the size of Yorkshire – Beam me up Scottie.
The issue isn’t the success or failure of the project of course it could never work and there was never a logical reason to strive for it. The salient point is the torture that we will have to endure as it goes through its slow motion failure whilst a perfectly calibrated wealth extraction mechanism sucks us dry of any pennies we might have left. It is already happening just look at a graph of energy prices in each country in Europe. It might be a bit of a shocker.
The tried and tested nuclear stations from the 50s and 60s were built very quickly. Why are we not doing like for like replacements.
Those designs are obsolete, and of much, much lower power than a modern design would be. There is more design thought around decommissioning for example in newer designs, whereas that original generation were more of a ‘just get it built’ approach. They were also optimised to make material for the UK atomic weapons programme as a ‘side-effect’ – not something so critical now.
Other main difference between then and now is the original fleet were government built, owned and operated – personally I think this is a sensible approach for energy provision and distribution, however we’ve gone so far down the free market route it’s unlikely we’d go back I’d say.
We used to be self sufficient in electricity. When did this change and why, is it all down to net zero.
I would like to congratulate all the writers of the comments above, so sane, informed and intelligent. Thank you.
It changed due to the EU directive that everyone closes coal-fired power stations. We (UK) did it with zeal whilst others didn’t, indeed, Germany are currently building 6 new coal-fired stations while we have ministers ‘celebrating’ the closure of our last station at Radcliffe on Soar.
Deregulation and carve up of the market, closure of the CEGB etc also a key factor before anyone mentioned CO2 (basically how can we sell off the industry and extract every last penny from it, to hell with a joined up approach or long term security – give us the cash to splash elsewhere!). Back to UK short termism again I’m afraid, same with oil and gas. Norway spent half and invested half their ‘windfall’ – now they have one of the worlds largest sovereign wealth funds and can almost live of the income from it… forethought and planning. Of course they have a much smaller population, but you get the idea.
As our wonderful President says, “net zero” is a scam. Wake up Britain, your leaders appear to be misleading the country and all the people who live in it. The big question is, why?
Oh ye of little faith, it’s all part of Millibrains drive for energy security that he has promised. And the £300 cut in our electricity bills!
Apart from the couple of storms this January, we have been almost becalmed here less than 8 miles from Whitelee, one of the biggest onshore wind farms in the UK. Windpower is completely unreliable..wish Ed would wake up.
Energy is life