Skip to main content

UK Renewables at 50% - but skills gap may slow progress

Renewable’s generation share reached 50.8% of UK electricity in the period Dec-Feb., a 12% rise, mostly due to wind, with offshore wind plants, now at 15GW, supplying 47TWh, the equivalent of half the power used by UK households last year. It is also creating a lot jobs, with, it is claimed, 70,000 new offshore-wind jobs needing to be filled by 2030, according to the Offshore Wind Industry Council. 

However, a green skills gap is said to be opening up for green energy generally, with the industry suggesting that there was a gap of around 200,000 workers, challenging its ability to meet net zero targets. Energy Live News said that the problem was that, as well as competing with each other for talent, the various renewables industry projects were competing with other sectors for the same highly sought-after skills. Clearly something has to be done: ‘Without an upskilled workforce, there will be no energy transition. The increasing ambitions mean that demand for workers is rising faster in the renewable sector than in other industries, giving the energy sector both an incredible opportunity and a growing challenge.’

Certainly ambitions are growing.  RenewableUK, the Offshore Wind Industry Council and The Crown Estate have produced an Industrial Growth Plan (IGP) for offshore wind, outlining strategies to triple offshore wind manufacturing capacity over the next decade. The IGP forecasts a surge in employment to over 100,000 in all by 2030, with investments in new offshore wind projects likely to create an economic opportunity worth up to £92 bn by 2040. They say that key to the IGP’s success is its aim to accelerate offshore wind deployment in alignment with the UK net zero targets, so that it expands by 5-6GW p.a.. The IGP focuses on 5 key areas of technology, including offshore wind blades, turbine towers, foundations, cables and other essential components and services. 

Pushing the growth agenda hard in a new Manifesto, with the general election clearly in mind, Renewable UK (RUK) says that more voters want the next government to prioritise green jobs than any other sector of the economy to drive growth. So RUK wants a ‘clear and coordinated plan for delivering our pipeline of renewable energy projects’, and says ‘this requires producing an Allocation Round Roadmap which sets out how much renewables should be invested in annually to hit targets, better cross-government coordination to deliver them and strong partnerships across the devolved nations’.

It also call for ‘an attractive business environment focused on mobilising private investment, with a modernised Contracts for Difference scheme that enables consistent volumes of renewables to be deployed year on year and an evolutionary reform of electricity market arrangements, which addresses inefficiencies in the current system without significantly increasing the cost of capital’. 

RUK also wants ‘efficient frameworks that accelerate deployment of net zero infrastructure. Renewable energy and grid need to be build in parallel, guided by a Strategic Spatial Energy Plan, with clear and predictable frameworks for addressing environmental and community impacts.’ It adds ‘Unblocking the deployment of onshore wind in England will be the first step towards ensuring our planning system is fit for purpose.’ A familiar plea.

In addition it wants ‘scaled-up supply chains and skills capabilities that match our ambitious targets’ as mapped out in  the Industrial Growth Plan which it claims ‘provides the clearest assessment to date of how the UK can triple its renewable energy manufacturing capacity in the next decade, through strategic investment in a globally competitive supply chain’. It says that  to achieve this vision there will be a need for be support for ‘investment in key infrastructure such as ports, and a more concerted, cross-sectoral effort to cultivate a robust skills base across the country’. 

Finally it calls for ‘a secure energy system through forward planning and investment,’ adding that ‘this will require frameworks that enable greater levels of private investment to flow into technologies like green hydrogen and long duration energy storage and the removal of barriers to the development of flexibility solutions such as energy parks, to ensure our future energy system is efficient, cheaper and secure’.

To back all this up it offers proposals for action in the first 100 days and first 100 weeks of the new programme, including calls to ‘extend the strategic, plan-led approach to meeting 2030 offshore wind and hydrogen targets by putting in place technology targets for 2035 and 2040’ and for creating targets for onshore wind, tidal, long duration energy storage and floating offshore wind, as well as upgrading the CfD system. 

Powerful stuff...although there may be political battles ahead, for example with planning and policy conflicts between offshore wind projects and oil and gas exploration.  There are also supply chain constraints emerging which may slow offshore wind, for example in terms of component & equipment shortages  And the skills issue won’t go away- indeed the Public Accounts Committee sees it a major problem most new infrastructure developments. 

However, looking on the positive side, there are some big new offshore wind projects going ahead, with development consent being granted for the Sheringham Shoal & Dudgeon wind farm extension projects off Norfolk, doubling their capacity. More floating offshore wind projects are also going ahead- and costs for that approach seem to be falling, with a recent auction in France leading to a contract at €86/MWh. For comparison, EDF's part-build nuclear plant at Hinkley could get well over €110/MWh (its strike price is inflation index linked) when (and if) it starts up. 

So offshore wind is continuing to do well. And maybe soon we may also see on-shore wind allowed back in play fully! At present in the UK, given the Tory planning policy blocks,  it’s stuck at 15GW, but, although capacity factors are mostly lower than for offshore sites, it can be easier and cheaper to deploy turbines on land. That’s also true for PV solar, which has just surpassed 15.8GW, with cheap battery storage also helping to compensate for its low capacity factors, although Energy Minister Claire Coutinho recently (re) expressed Tory concerns about the land use/farming impact of some solar farms. Unsurprisingly, the Renewable Energy Association didn’t agree. Obviously we should protect prime farm land and opt for brown field and roof top sites where possible, but it’s worth noting that golf courses do take up a lot more room than current and planned solar farms.

Well we will have to see what the election battle now throws up on issue like this and on green policy generally: there is certainly plenty of room for disagreement and provocative views – if not on the siting of solar and wind farms, then on paying for them and other green projects.    


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Global Energy Outlooks - BP v Jacobson

The share of renewables in global primary energy may increase ‘from around 10% in 2019 to between 35-65% by 2050, driven by the improved cost competitiveness of renewables, together with the increasing prevalence of policies encouraging a shift to low-carbon energy’. So says BP in its latest Global Energy Outlook . It does see wind and solar accounting ‘for all or most of the growth in power generation’, but even at the top of the range quoted, it still falls a lot short of the renewable ‘100% of total energy’ scenarios that have been produced by some academics in recent years.  To fill the gap to zero net carbon, BP sees wide-scale use being made use of carbon capture technology, as well as some nuclear power. And it says ‘Natural declines in existing production sources mean there needs to be continuing upstream investment in oil and natural gas over the next 30 years’. You won’t find much support for these fossil and nuclear options in the scenarios produced by Stanford Universi...

Renewables beat nuclear - even with full balancing included

A new Danish study comparing nuclear and renewable energy systems (RES) concludes that, although nuclear systems require less flexibility capacity than renewable-only systems, a renewable energy system is cheaper than a nuclear based system, even with full backup: it says ‘lower flexibility costs do not offset the high investment costs in nuclear energy’.  It’s based on a zero-carbon 2045 smart energy scenario for Denmark, although it says its conclusions are valid elsewhere given suitable adjustments for local conditions. ‘The high investment costs in nuclear power alongside cost for fuel and operation and maintenance more than tip the scale in favour of the Only Renewables scenario. The costs of investing in and operating the nuclear power plants are simply too high compared to Only Renewables scenario, even though more investment must be put into flexibility measures in the latter’.  In the Danish case, it says that ‘the scenario with high nuclear implementation is 1.2 bil...

The IEA set out a way ahead

The International Energy Agency's new Global Energy Roadmap sets a pathway to net zero carbon by 2050, with, by 2040, the global electricity sector reaching net-zero emissions. It wants no investment in new fossil fuel supply projects, and no further final investment decisions for new unabated coal plants. And by 2035, it calls for no sales of new internal combustion engine passenger cars. Instead it looks to ‘the immediate and massive deployment of all available clean and efficient energy technologies, combined with a major global push to accelerate innovation’.  The pathway calls for annual additions of solar PV to reach 630 GW by 2030, and those of wind power to reach 390 GW. All in, this is four times the record level set in 2020. By 2050 it wants about 24,000 GW of wind and solar to be in place. A major push to increase energy efficiency is also seen as essential, with the global rate of energy efficiency improvements averaging 4% a year through 2030, about three times the av...