There's a badly written piece on Energy Minister Charles Hendry in the Telegraph - but it does contain some interesting pointers. He is obviously keen to see strong investment in nuclear capacity and "sees it as his job to remove barriers to investment". This doesn't yet amount to direct subsidies, that would rock the coalition boat too much, but there's obviously a certain amount of scratching around for wriggle room - somehow increasing the cost of carbon to benefit all non-carbon generators (watch for rising energy bills). Don't get me wrong - I think there's a need for nuclear and C-pricing is one way of helping that happen - but why can't we be upfront with the debate? Incidentally, he's reported as saying there's a prospect for Magnox fleet life extension. I think that's sloppy reporting - aren't only Oldbury and Wylfa are still operating/ Presumably the comment was about the AGRs?
There's also mention of relooking at FITs and the RHI. The legislation has reviews of the former built in - so no surprise in comments about that. And the RHI looks expensive so expect that to be watered down if and when it comes forward.
No mention at all about the demand side (surprised?). Makes one wonder how joined up they are in DECC.
All-in-all I'm not convinced that there's a coherent approach to meeting electricity demand - and 2015 is getting awfully close.
No comments:
Post a Comment