Britain’s Surging Reliance on Gas Deals Fresh Blow to Miliband Net Zero Hopes
Britain’s reliance on fossil fuels has increased for the first time in four years, dealing a major blow to Ed Miliband’s Net Zero hopes of decarbonising the grid by 2030. The Telegraph has more.
Gas-fired power plants generated 26.8% of power in 2025, a rise of 1.1% from the year prior, according to new figures from the Government’s National Energy System Operator (Neso).
This stemmed largely from reduced nuclear output across Britain, as the country’s nine remaining reactors were hit by technical faults and unplanned blackouts.
The latest figures also revealed that the UK relied on imports for up to 14% of its electricity last year, with London and the South East frequently powered by energy from France.
Increased reliance on fossil fuels and continued imports from overseas will raise fresh scrutiny over the Energy Secretary’s goal of attaining clean power by 2030.
To achieve this, Mr Miliband has vowed to spend billions of pounds on intermittent renewables such as wind and solar farms, with the cost of this expansion set to be passed through to households and businesses.
Claire Coutinho, the Shadow Energy Secretary, has accused Mr Miliband of needlessly driving up bills and putting the country’s energy security at risk.
She said: “What this data shows is that we need reliable, 24/7 power for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine – and that means more nuclear and more gas.
“Ed Miliband’s plan to build more wind and solar farms than ever before will do nothing to power our economy on a cold, windless, cloudy day.
“His ideological approach to energy policy means British families are going to continue to see their bills rise, jobs lost overseas, and the risk of blackouts increase.”
The Energy Department hit back by blaming the previous government for “years of dither and delay on new nuclear”, with a spokesman claiming that this left the country reliant on power plants dating back to the 1960s.
Total nuclear output fell from 13.7% of UK generation in 2024 to 11.8% last year, the latest Neso figures show, with a string of plant failures to blame.
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.
Miliband will just spin this as a justification for more wind, solar and battery storage, to “make us less reliant on imports”. Nothing will convince him to change tack and open his eyes to reality.
Anyone who believes in a very primitive, almost 200 year old economic model is clearly a deranged imbecile. So expect to be abused, cancelled, shut down, vilified as a heretic or be labelled by whatever is fashionable on the day. To think this total crackpot could become pm when the present nutter is kicked out.
My understanding is that he’s got his eyes on the Treasury? I think that’s even worse.
He’s a psychopath. Nothing can “open his eyes”. He should be in secure accommodation for the criminally insane.
The fluctuation couldn’t have anything to do with relying on weather to generate electricity, could it?
Don’t forget, we control the weather, LadbrokeGrove.
Today’s electricity generation sources with another winter blast on its way.
Just how many more windmills and solar farms will be needed to replace ccgt (i.e. gas)?
I love gridwatch. It sums up how extraordinarily vulnerable we are.
It’s not “surging” because it’s already total, and 26.8% isn’t an especially relevant measure. We are 100% reliant on gas to avoid blackouts. Reducing the gas CAPACITY (not how much we use, but how much we CAN use) is not currently possible without power cuts – unless we can guarantee higher inputs from interconnectors, which is the opposite of energy security. Unless I am missing something?
And you just need one of those big interconnectors to trip, at the wrong time… and down it all goes
Just over 8% coming from France right now.
And what happens if it gets very cold over there and all the other interconnector dependent Countries need more?
Or for France to decide to supply Germany in preference to UK.
Or be sabotaged as happened in Berlin recently following an arson attack. Thousands left shivering in the dark whilst some retarded leftie group claimed “credit”
Not missing anything. Good point. Amid the lies, the truth is gas use declines – not capacity – because gas powered generation must leave the grid to let wind/solar join when conditions are right.
There is 38GW installed gas capacity. UK average power requirement is 39GW so it could provide almost all we require, with current nuclear, some imported via Euroconnector, and the Californian forest burner at Drax, so if wind/solar were switched off it would make no difference.
On the other hand there is 32GW of installed wind, and 20GW of installed solar, so together we shouldn’t need gas, but these two combined only supply about 35% of our requirement.
And what that shows is that installing more and more wind and solar will at best only marginally increase what they can actually supply.
Government admits, 32 – 35GW of gas capacity will be needed for the next couple of decades at least.
As you say, gas is not being replaced, just parallel, unreliable generation added at huge cost to the consumer.
The only way to get rid of gas or other “non clean” sources is to create enough storage (battery, pumped, whatever) to last for the longest ever period of low wind and sun. What could go wrong?
A couple of years ago I read about some calculations that had been done to see how much battery storage Germany would need to provide security over a prolonged (10-14 days) period of windless and sunless weather. I can’t remember the figures exactly, but I do remember that they would need the entire world’s battery manufacturing capacity for years and years. And that’s just for one country.
Not sure how long those batteries would last before they need replacement.
Yes, I read something similar about the USA. It’s pie in the sky.
Being a thorough sort, I’ve just done the numbers on what our home would need to just carry on as normal for a 5 day outage. Its about 50kw for me, Mrs and kitty. What would that cost me in Tesla batteries..? Over £30,000. As most of the stuff we would use the electricity (tv, internet etc) for wouldn’t be working anyway, then its a moot point really.
I do have mini-preppers kit. A camping stove and butane so we could cook a meal twice a day for 14 days, Bottled water, canned and dry goods for 14 days, spare duvets, etc, led lamps with lots of AA batteries, battery radio. At a cost under £150 all in. We are also keeping the cars at least half full of fuel. I may not even need to go and loot Tesco’s.! If we don’t need it, great, but what happens when the lights go out and nothing works. Ways and means.
…so far.
They tell us The Climate™ is changing. I trust they’ve accurately modeled how long the longest period of low wind and sun will be in the changed climate?
Indeed. The risk is substantial. Madness not to have an on-demand generation capacity that won’t run out.
It’s 2 weeks in mid winter.From records.
Well let’s hope that nothing happens to make it 15 days straight or we’ll be in real trouble.
2 weeks at 39GW = 13,104 GWh. I think we’ll need another pack of AAAs just in case.
Gas generation will inevitably decline if new plants are not authorised and built. The aging gas capacity will be ever more at risk of sudden unplanned failure with serious consequences for the grid and for peoples’ lives.
None are currently being built or refurbished. Nobody will risk their capital in enterprises for which Government’s stated policy is to put them out of business over the next 20 years.
So, as I write, over 50% is gas generated and 15% imported. I’m sad, I know, but I am fixated on the graphs and pie charts on the subject but on the site I use, energy dashboard, it doesn’t break down how the imported stuff is generated, so it could be actually filthy brown coal from Germany, sold into the European market and then sold on to us by the French, Dutch and others. In fact, anything from continental Europe must allow for the coal element, because it’s just a big pot of electricity moving around, with no distinction, but Milibrain never admits to this.
I have just blown my mind, following my comment about Germany and have found the electricitymaps app, which shows the whole world method of production and who is trading with who. Awesome.
https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_minutes
GeekTastic!!! Love it!
That’s a great find – interesting to look at the delivering vs installed capacity for UK renewables… plus how much France is providing, mainly from nuclear I’d assume
Every time I have looked, almost all of France’s requirement is coming from nuclear, which is why they are able to sell to other countries what they generate from other sources.
The over 30 GigaWatts of wind turbines that have been installed at enormous expense are currently generating less than 1.7 GW.
When will these idiots realise that the gris control room cannot turn up the wind.
I fear the response instead will be to make us consume less, through “load shedding” schemes, both voluntary and involuntary.
We currently have 7.3% of demand satisfied by solar + wind. So if we had already doubled their capacity, at absolutely gigantic expense, then they would satisfy only 14.6%
“The Energy Department hit back by blaming the previous government for “years of dither and delay on new nuclear”… No. Hinkley Point C has been subject to delays amid rising costs causing funding disagreement within the consortium – Chinese and EDF – building it, because the Conservative Government quite rightly refused to use taxpayers money to subsidise thus private venture. of course as far as Labour is concerned our money belongs to it, not us, to pizz-away as they desire. Part of the delay and rising costs are down to environmental nonsense about danger to fish from cooling water intakes. The original projected cost has doubled, the dates for completion have slipped, 2019, 2022, 2025, now (maybe) 2029/30. Additionally the Government (Conservatives) agreed a guaranteed above market wholesale price of £128 per MWh, inflation-linked for the operational lifetime. This makes it just as expensive as wind and solar. The reality: nuclear power stations are too risky for private investors because of enormous construction and end of life decommissioning costs, considering likely revenue, and thus return on investment, in a competitive free market. This is why Governments get involved either in dishing out taxpayer subsidies, or guaranteeing above market prices… or… Read more »
And, ironically, coal is literally free, in the ground… just like the wind.
All you have to do is ‘capture’ it which is, of course, where the costs come in… also, just like the wind.
Where can one find out about end of life decommissioning costs for solar and wind? Both temporary structures as far as planning is concerned apparently.
Further where is information about decommissioning costs of HS2? It would be good to find out.
It was the Blair Brown government that decided to abandon all nuclear. Under Mrs T the Sizewell Pressurised Water Reactor was built on cost and time. It was very successful produces low cost electricity and will be the only station left by 2030. We could have built 10 and been secure like the French.
Reality explained.
https://x.com/marcnixon24/status/2008972042167894140?s=58
Who else might it be passed through to in the end? The only question is how many hands does the money pass through – with each taking a cut – before it gets spent on building wind and solar farms or pylons and substations? If we pay through our energy bills, the reseller takes a cut, if we pay through general taxation the civil service takes a bigger cut (those reports and analyses don’t write themselves you know).
My old dad used to say “never put good money after bad”——Everything Green is BAD MONEY.———- As it continues to fail and cost more and more and more, all paid for via our bills so that we now have the highest electricity prices in the world, the Miliband’s of this world chuck more and more and more of our money at it. —-Ideology FIRST, and economics and practical considerations LAST.
Here is the USA Energy Secretary, who knows his stuff and talks sense. Worth a 3 min watch: Marc Nixon on X: “The U.S. Energy Secretary just obliterated Net Zero ideology in 60 seconds. Oil, gas, and coal power EVERYTHING including green energy. This is what adults sound like. Liberals are not ready for this conversation. https://t.co/c6J4x7k7Nk” / X
All true – and sadly, none of what Nixon says is new news. The counter narrative to renewables is well established and proven, almost to the point of being boring!
But getting Miliband to change is another matter. I wonder, would Mossad help us too if enough people rose up in revolt…