Britain's Energy Crisis: A Cautionary Tale of Misguided Policies and Imported Power

[Social Media]

 

As global leaders gather for COP29 in Azerbaijan, Britain’s energy policies serve as a troubling example of what not to do. Despite the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband’s claim that the world increasingly looks to Britain as a model, this observation may stem more from bewilderment than admiration. Britain's energy policies over the last few decades have led to exorbitant industrial energy prices, reliance on imported power, and the erosion of its manufacturing base. This scenario paints a stark picture of what can happen when policies aimed at environmental goals are poorly executed, with significant impacts on both consumers and industries.

 

One of the clearest indicators of Britain’s energy policy failure is the country’s growing reliance on importing electricity from Europe. This dependence results in job losses, diminished energy security, and a transfer of technical expertise to competing nations. As older power plants on the continent shut down, the UK may find itself vulnerable, increasingly dependent on international energy supplies that may not always be available. Data shows that net imports of electricity for Britain reached 26.3 terawatt hours (TWh) from January to September, setting a new record. Imports now cost the country £250 million a month and account for approximately 20 percent of its total electricity supply—a share that could grow to one-third by 2030.

 

British ministers often tout the reduction of domestic emissions as evidence of progress, yet they omit the emissions tied to the electricity Britain now imports. Since these emissions occur overseas, they do not appear in the UK’s statistics. In essence, Britain is offshoring its emissions while simultaneously sacrificing energy independence and jobs.

 

The roots of these policy failures span decades and administrations, with repercussions that have affected the country’s competitiveness and overall economic well-being. Industrial energy prices in Britain have more than tripled since 2004, even before the recent energy crisis prompted by the war in Ukraine. Since 2019, electricity prices have doubled, driving many manufacturers to relocate in search of lower costs. Over 200,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2010, and manufacturing’s contribution to GDP has halved since the 1990s. Successive British governments, from Tony Blair’s to Theresa May’s, followed EU directives to close coal and oil-fired plants without replacing them with sufficient, reliable alternatives. These closures were driven by the need to reduce emissions but were implemented without viable backup, relying instead on intermittent wind and solar sources.

 

Britain’s electricity generation capacity has been in decline since the 1990s, marking the end of an era when it last enjoyed a power surplus. Today, per capita electricity generation in Britain is only two-thirds of France’s output and barely over a third of what is generated in the U.S. While French businesses enjoy energy costs 60 percent lower than their British counterparts, UK firms pay almost four times as much per unit of power as American companies, and households pay three times as much.

 

To address the crisis, the UK must reduce its reliance on foreign power and prioritize building reliable, home-grown energy sources. This includes expediting the construction of new nuclear plants, a sector that Britain once led globally. France, in contrast, has consistently invested in its nuclear infrastructure, generating 70 percent of its power from nuclear plants and keeping energy costs manageable. Meanwhile, Britain’s last nuclear plant, Sizewell B, was completed in 1995. Hinkley Point C, expected to start generating electricity over 30 years later, marks a painfully slow return to nuclear development.

 

The UK’s slow progress in energy infrastructure is hampered further by extensive bureaucracy. Environmental regulations and layers of red tape discourage private developers from investing in new power plants, particularly small modular reactors (SMRs) that could provide more localized and flexible generation.

 

Ultimately, Britain’s approach to energy policy has come at a high cost for households, industry, and the economy at large. This winter, the UK will rely heavily on imported power to maintain supply, with energy security reduced to a question of whether foreign suppliers can meet demand. Although British officials speak about energy security, the reality is one of increasing dependence and reactive measures. Ministers are unable to offer any clear answer on when energy costs will fall, a critical question given that Britain’s economic growth and productivity rely heavily on affordable energy. Without competitive energy prices, the UK risks further stagnation, with reduced funding for key public services and investments.

 

In the end, while Britain’s energy policies might be a valuable lesson for other nations, the cost is being paid by British households and industries. At COP29, Miliband may indeed be doing the world a “favor” by demonstrating what not to do, but this comes at a substantial cost to the UK itself.

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-15

 

 

 

[James105]

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

As global leaders gather for COP29 in Azerbaijan,

 

Only moronic leaders actually went, leaders that care about protecting their industries and want growth for their countries did not.  Azerbajan (the hosts) took the opportunity to try and sell their oil and gas to countries like the UK who now are dependent on importing this at a high price after destroying its energy industry.   Here is what we could have had:

 

 

[nauseus]

 The world increasingly looks to Britain as a model of how to screw itself in the name of faux greenery. An expensive fudge that ensures everyone pays the max for a far less less secure power supply.

 

Great to see the EU getting a credit too. Idiots.

Edited yesterday at 04:42 AM by nauseus

[RayC]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 The world increasingly looks to Britain as a model of how to screw itself in the name of faux greenery. An expensive fudge that ensures everyone pays the max for a far less less secure power supply.

 

Great to see the EU getting a credit too. Idiots.

 

And yet by following the same EU directives and regulations as the UK, the French energy sector has thrived. Very strange.

[nauseus]

35 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

And yet by following the same EU directives and regulations as the UK, the French energy sector has thrived. Very strange.

 

Ain't that strange? Mind you, France has always done well out of it.

[Snackbar]

UK government clown show embarrassing 

[Thingamabob]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

And yet by following the same EU directives and regulations as the UK, the French energy sector has thrived. Very strange.

Not strange at all. The French have invested heavily in nuclear power stations. The UK, on the other hand, has neither invested significantly in nuclear, nor fully exploited it's own plentiful natural fuel resources. 

[RayC]

3 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Not strange at all. The French have invested heavily in nuclear power stations. The UK, on the other hand, has neither invested significantly in nuclear, nor fully exploited it's own plentiful natural fuel resources. 

 

Agreed but the post to which I replied seemed to imply that EU regulation was a barrier to member states' having an efficient energy industry. The French experience suggests otherwise.

[James105]

41 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Agreed but the post to which I replied seemed to imply that EU regulation was a barrier to member states' having an efficient energy industry. The French experience suggests otherwise.

 

The EU merely forced the UK to close coal and oil powered plants.  They didn't stop the UK from building nuclear plants.  That honour goes to EU super fan Nick Clegg of the coalition government of 2010-2015, who in his unparalleled wisdom blocked this and said "By the most optimistic scenarios from the government itself, there’s no way they are going to have new nuclear come on stream until 2021, 2022. So it’s just not even an answer".   

 

Labour also didn't build any from 1997 to 2010 either.   

[Chomper Higgot]

The UK’s electrical power problems started with the dismantling of the CEGB.

 

Privatizing and fragmenting the nation’s integrated power infrastructure.

 

Utter madness.

[Nick Carter icp]

8 hours ago, RayC said:

 

And yet by following the same EU directives and regulations as the UK, the French energy sector has thrived. Very strange.

 

   Although the French energy company the EDL , did make a 20 Billion loss last year

[Patong2021]

8 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Ain't that strange? Mind you, France has always done well out of it.

 

Not strange.  The French sector has benefited from a shared common goal between industry, public, labour, and government. Also better managed and more focused. 

[nauseus]

36 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Not strange.  The French sector has benefited from a shared common goal between industry, public, labour, and government. Also better managed and more focused. 

 

More like a founding and preferred position within the EU.

[RayC]

16 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Although the French energy company the EDL , did make a 20 Billion loss last year

 

That was in 2022. EDF returned €10bn profit in 2023.

[RayC]

15 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

More like a founding and preferred position within the EU.

 

How so?

[3NUMBAS]

Wind power not reliable so farms can be quiet ,so power is imported from France to fill gaps..nuclear builds trundle on in Somerset 

[Nick Carter icp]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

That was in 2022. EDF returned €10bn profit in 2023.

 

   Last full year was 2023

Edited 7 hours ago by Nick Carter icp

[RayC]

22 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Last full year was 2022

 

No it wasn't 

https://markets.ft.com/data/announce/detail?dockey=1330-1000914114en-7T4PD6PCHCKR3ERM89GBSJ3P0O#:~:text=In 2023 EDF was the,down by 26% from 2022.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

How so?

 

Apart from huge rebates via the CAP and other policies, France was always the main beneficiary of the EU contribution system

 

Then in 2014 France, with Germany, wanted to get even more out of the UK and even Holland.

 

Ta ta.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-29751124

[RayC]

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Apart from huge rebates via the CAP and other policies, France was always the main beneficiary of the EU contribution system

 

Then in 2014 France, with Germany, wanted to get even more out of the UK and even Holland.

 

Ta ta.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-29751124

 

Your first paragraph is simply untrue. France has been a net financial contributor to the EU budget - often contributing more than the UK - for all of this century.

 

Your second paragraph: And ...?

 

Bye.

 

[Nick Carter icp]

10 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Your first paragraph is simply untrue. France has been a net financial contributor to the EU budget - often contributing more than the UK - for all of this century.

 

Your second paragraph: And ...?

 

Bye.

 

 

   With the amount of money uk householders gave the EDF , France could well afford to pay more to the E.U 

[RayC]

23 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   With the amount of money uk householders gave the EDF , France could well afford to pay more to the E.U 

 

UK householders do not give EDF money, they purchase electricity - the price of which is regulated  - from them.