{"id":375489,"date":"2025-04-17T10:42:53","date_gmt":"2025-04-17T08:42:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=375489"},"modified":"2025-04-17T10:42:55","modified_gmt":"2025-04-17T08:42:55","slug":"no-bbc-electricity-is-not-expensive-because-of-gas-but-because-of-renewables-subsidies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=375489","title":{"rendered":"No, BBC, Electricity is Not Expensive Because of Gas But Because of Renewables Subsidies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From The Daily Sceptic<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0David Turver<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Daily Sceptic<\/em><\/a> ran a story yesterday about an interview that took place on BBC World At One<\/em> on Monday April 14th. Sarah Montague interviewed Adam Berman<\/a> who is the Director of Policy and Advocacy at Energy UK. The full interview can be found here<\/a> (from 18:45). Unfortunately, the Daily Sceptic<\/em> article failed to recognise that the arguments made by Mr Berman misrepresent the situation and amount to misinformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The gist of Berman\u2019s argument was that gas sets the wholesale price of electricity most of the time and the marginal costs of gas-fired electricity are higher than those of wind power. If we could just get rid of all that pesky gas and move quickly to almost all intermittent renewables then bills would be lower.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As with most misinformation, Berman\u2019s argument starts with a grain of truth. Yes, gas does set the wholesale price most of the time and yes, the marginal costs of gas-fired generation are higher than most windfarms. However, this start point has to be a contender for Most Irrelevant Fact of the Year. We have covered before<\/a> that measured over a long time period<\/em>, renewables have been a bigger driver of electricity bills than the rise in gas prices at the end of 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Towards the end of the interview, Berman acknowledges that wholesale prices are not the only driver of high energy bills. He mentions the cost of pipes and wires and other policy costs, but manages to completely avoid discussing the elephants in the room, namely renewables subsidies and the extra costs we must pay to make intermittent renewables work. Roughly speaking, these amount to around \u00a315 billion a year once balancing and backup is included, or more than \u00a3500 on every household\u2019s electricity bill. Once these costs are included (as they certainly should be), renewable sources of electricity are much more expensive than gas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cost of Renewables Subsidies<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

There are three subsidy schemes supporting renewables. The first is Renewables Obligations (RO). Renewables generators are awarded certificates for each unit of electricity generated in addition to the market price they receive for their output. Accordingly, electricity from these generators will always be more expensive than market rates, often set by gas. Even though this scheme is closed to new participants, the OBR (see the October 2024 detailed forecast tables: receipts)<\/a> shows us the RO scheme cost \u00a37.6 billion in 2023-24 and the cost is forecast to rise to \u00a38.5 billion in 2026-27. Yesterday, the electricity spot price<\/a> was \u00a373.25 per MWh, mostly set by gas including the carbon tax. ROC-funded offshore wind farms get about 1.9 certificates per MWh, onshore one certificate and solar gets about 1.4. In the current financial year, the buy-out value<\/a> of each certificate is set at \u00a367.06. Working through the arithmetic, this puts the current cost of ROC-funded offshore wind at \u00a3200 per MWh, onshore \u00a3140 per MWh and solar \u00a3169 per MWh, all much more expensive than gas-fired electricity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second scheme is Feed-in-Tariffs (FiT), paid mostly to small solar installations. FiT generators are paid a fixed amount to generate electricity plus a smaller amount for the power they export (or are deemed to export) to the grid. Again, this scheme is closed to new entrants. However, analysis of Ofgem\u2019s latest report into the FiT scheme<\/a> shows it cost nearly \u00a31.9 billion in 2023-24, or around \u00a3221 per MWh which is over three times higher than market rates today. These prices are index-linked, so current prices will be higher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, we have the Contract for Difference (CfD) scheme used for the now annual renewables auctions. Here, generators receive a fixed amount for the power they generate. They receive the market value for their power and are then paid a top-up to the strike price of their contract. If market prices are above the strike price, they must pay back the difference.\u00a0Analysis of data<\/a>\u00a0published by the\u00a0Low Carbon Contract Company<\/a>\u00a0shows the CfD scheme cost a record \u00a32.24 billion in subsidies during financial year 2024-25. Even though CfD generators paid back a net amount of about \u00a3346 million during the energy crisis of 2022, the total cost of CfD subsidies recently broke the \u00a310 billion barrier. During 2024, CfD-funded offshore wind generators cost about \u00a3153 per MWh and received more than half their revenue from subsidies. Onshore wind cost \u00a3112 per MWh and solar \u00a3110 per MWh. These prices were recently indexed upwards for the new financial year and so the average will rise again, except for solar where new, lower priced generators will bring down the average for that technology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The total cost of these subsidy schemes amounts to nearly \u00a312 billion per year or the equivalent of over \u00a3420 per household per year and as we have seen we can expect these costs to continue to rise, putting upward pressure on bills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Extra Costs of Renewables<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

However, subsidies do not represent the full cost of renewables. First, because wind and solar are intermittent their output can fluctuate significantly so that sometimes they produce less than expected and at other times can produce more than demand or more than the grid can handle. Therefore, the grid needs to be balanced, usually using gas-fired generators. NESO produce Monthly Balancing Services Summary reports and the data for 2023-24<\/a> show the cost of this service was \u00a32.54 billion. In addition, we pay for backup through the capacity market and the OBR<\/a> shows this cost us \u00a31 billion in 2023-24 and the costs are forecast to rise to \u00a34bn per year in 2027-28. Even if balancing costs remain constant, we can expect the total costs of balancing and backup to rise by \u00a33 billion by 2027-28 or the equivalent of over \u00a3100 per household.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wind and solar farms tend to be sited away from the source of demand, so we need to spend even more money to expand the electricity network to connect them to the grid. NESO has announced \u00a354 billion<\/a> of spending on grid infrastructure to 2030 and a further \u00a358 billion<\/a> to 2035, making a total spend of \u00a3112 billion. If we assume an 8% cost of capital and 2% operations and maintenance costs, the annual costs on energy bills will amount to about \u00a311 billion once the investment is complete, or the equivalent of another \u00a3385 per household.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, these announcements were made before the Clean Power 2030 (CP2030) plan was announced. NESO estimated<\/a> this would cost \u00a344-48 billion per year to the end of 2030, or a total of \u00a3264-290 billion over the six-year period. According to the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES)<\/a> we used 205.7 TWh of gas to produce 101.7 TWh of electricity in 2023. Using the current price of gas<\/a> of 83.7p per therm (or \u00a328.57 per MWh), this gas would have cost us \u00a35.9 billion. The CP2030 plan would eliminate much of this gas, giving a saving of around \u00a35 billion per year. However, assuming a cost of capital of 8% and operations and maintenance costs of 2% for CP2030, would give an ongoing cost of \u00a326-29 billion per year or more than five times the projected savings on gas. Adopting the CP2030 plan will likely increase our energy bills by \u00a3900-1,000 per household. Additional costs are in the pipeline from subsidies for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and green hydrogen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taxes on Gas-Fired Electricity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Energy bills are also increased by the taxes placed on gas-fired electricity generation which is subject to the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). The UK ETS Authority<\/a> has set the carbon price for 2025 at \u00a341.84 per tonne of carbon dioxide. Actual carbon prices vary somewhat, but this price can be used to estimate the extra costs of gas-fired generation. Modern gas turbines emit around 350kgCO2<\/sub> per MWh<\/a> of generation, so gas-fired generation attracts a carbon tax of about \u00a314.60 per MWh, or about 20% of today\u2019s electricity spot price. The CP2030 plan anticipates carbon prices rising substantially to around \u00a3147 per tonne, adding further upward pressure on energy bills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

By ignoring the giant bull elephants in the room representing renewables subsidies and the extra costs of grid balancing, backup and expansion of the network, Berman was allowed to paint a false picture of the drivers of high energy bills. The truth is that renewables are the major force driving bills higher and if Miliband gets his way with CP2030, then our bills will rise higher still.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps we should take Adam Berman at his word and offer to pay renewables generators just the market value of their output, which on summer days can often be negative. I don\u2019t think we will see many takers. Remember, if something needs a subsidy, it\u2019s more expensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have tried before to complain to the BBC, but the response has been along the lines of our editorial staff know more about this than the great unwashed, so we are not going to change our article or editorial stance. Others might want to see if this analysis can penetrate the citadel and force a correction, or at least a right of reply on World At One<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

David Turver writes the <\/em>Eigen Values<\/a> Substack, where this article first appeared<\/a>.<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stop Press<\/strong>: Paul Homewood has made the same points<\/a> in his latest article. Branding Berman\u2019s argument \u201cgrossly dishonest\u201d, he writes: \u201cYes, of course, gas does tend to set the market price, but on top of that price renewables receive massive subsidies, which get added on to bills. These subsidies have to be paid because renewables are intrinsically much dearer than gas power, not the reverse.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The\u00a0Daily Sceptic\u00a0ran a story yesterday about an interview that took place on BBC\u00a0World At One\u00a0on Monday April 14th. Sarah Montague interviewed\u00a0Adam Berman\u00a0who is the Director of Policy and Advocacy at Energy UK. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":375493,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818389,691834578,691819691,691819180,691819239,691820528,691818154,691819094],"class_list":{"0":"post-375489","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-bbc","9":"tag-contract-for-difference-cfd","10":"tag-electricity-prices","11":"tag-energy-costs","12":"tag-green-subsidies","13":"tag-misinformation","14":"tag-net-zero","15":"tag-renewable-green-energy","17":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0The-Significance-of-a-Charge-Controller-Solar-in-Your-System-120751107.jpg?fit=1344%2C768&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1zGh","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":375444,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=375444","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":0},"title":"BBC Ignore the Renewable Elephant in the\u00a0Room","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"17\/04\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Even by BBC standards, this interview between the BBC\u2019s Sarah Montague and Adam Berman from Energy UK, who are little more than a trade body for renewables, takes some beating.","rel":"","context":"In \"BBC\"","block_context":{"text":"BBC","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=bbc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0getty_182657409_970741970450051_59650.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0getty_182657409_970741970450051_59650.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0getty_182657409_970741970450051_59650.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0getty_182657409_970741970450051_59650.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0getty_182657409_970741970450051_59650.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":347921,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=347921","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":1},"title":"The Energy Crisis Commission is Just Another Green Blob Front \u2013 The Daily\u00a0Sceptic","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"20\/10\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Amongst Ben\u2019s revelations is that this so-called independent commission has been using the ECIU as its secretariat \u2013 in layman\u2019s terms, that means writing the report. The ECIU, of course, are the Net Zero lobby group, originally founded by the BBC\u2019s Richard Black, who have been regularly spewing misinformation for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Committee on Climate Change\"","block_context":{"text":"Committee on Climate Change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=committee-on-climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/OIG-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/OIG-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/OIG-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/OIG-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":428311,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=428311","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":2},"title":"Government Claims Cost of Electricity is Falling. It\u2019s Not","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"27\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The BBC is being particularly dishonest when it says \u201cprices are still about a third higher than before the war in Ukraine\u201d. The clear intention is to portray the Ukraine war as still keeping gas prices elevated.","rel":"","context":"In \"electricity prices\"","block_context":{"text":"electricity prices","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=electricity-prices"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Government-Claims-Cost-of-Electricity-is-Falling.-Its-Not3.png?fit=670%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Government-Claims-Cost-of-Electricity-is-Falling.-Its-Not3.png?fit=670%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Government-Claims-Cost-of-Electricity-is-Falling.-Its-Not3.png?fit=670%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254624,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=254624","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":3},"title":"Giant solar array set to go up in rural Virginia county","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"25\/04\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Taking advantage of generous federal subsidies for renewable energy, local developer Hexagon Energy is pouring $220 million into the project, which will feature over 400,000 solar panels on a 2,300-acre parcel of land. The site is located about 120 miles southwest of the source of the subsidies: Washington, D.C.","rel":"","context":"In \"Central Virginia\"","block_context":{"text":"Central Virginia","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=central-virginia"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00White-House-Solar-Louisa-County-Photo-2-1024x651-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C651&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00White-House-Solar-Louisa-County-Photo-2-1024x651-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C651&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00White-House-Solar-Louisa-County-Photo-2-1024x651-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C651&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/00White-House-Solar-Louisa-County-Photo-2-1024x651-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C651&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":385869,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=385869","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":4},"title":"BBC Still Ignore The\u00a0Elephant","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/06\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Berman claimed that the principal reason was the high price of gas, exacerbated by the energy market mechanism which normally sets the wholesale price on the price of gas power. This supposedly stops consumers from benefitting from what he calls cheaper renewable energy. His claims went unchallenged by Montague.","rel":"","context":"In \"Adam Berman\"","block_context":{"text":"Adam Berman","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=adam-berman"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-26.-Mai-2025-10_22_01-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-26.-Mai-2025-10_22_01-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-26.-Mai-2025-10_22_01-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-26.-Mai-2025-10_22_01-1.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":266162,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=266162","url_meta":{"origin":375489,"position":5},"title":"Oil Giant Shell Warns Cutting Production \u201cDangerous and Irresponsible\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Cutting oil and gas production would be \u201cdangerous and irresponsible\u201d, the boss of energy giant Shell has\u00a0told the BBC.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-238.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-238.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-238.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-238.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375489","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=375489"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375489\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":375495,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375489\/revisions\/375495"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/375493"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=375489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=375489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=375489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}