@sheriff-fatman, I don't mind Dale's criticism but I feel that he and his company are focussing on the wrong elements of heat pump failures which is why I recorded and published this last week:

@editor I'd missed that, and it's a very good response to Vince's points raised.

I agree in particular that there's far more complexity than the simple 'SCoP of 4 needed', particularly as my installation contradicts this. 

I'll probably be looking at a verifiable SCoP of a little over 3 on an annual basis on my installation on my sub £3k installation (after grants) but it's delivered energy cost savings of 40-50% so far compared to last year's equivalent gas heating costs.  It's a largely tariff related saving via having access to Octopus Intelligent Go rates alongside solar and battery storage, so the scale of savings may change going forward, but I'm sure there will always be some form of time use tariff available where I'll be able to run it cheaper than gas.

UK Power Networks, who have the Distribution Licences to run the grid in London & SE England, are being taken over by the French Utility Company, Engie.

UKPN has been under increased scrutiny due to it being owned by the Chinese CK Group.

Posted by: @transparent

↑

Posted by: @editor

↑

Maybe DNOs have quietly decided to up their game.

I think their response is genuine, and becoming increasingly common amongst DNOs...
... with the possible exception of UKPN in SE England.

So French utility Engie is set to acquire UK Power Networks . They state it is "best in class", as they have been ranked as such by the regulator. 

Forbes says billionaire Li Ka-Shing's CK Group is selling. 

Engie used to be focused on selling gas in France. 

This just posted by Byline Times:

https://eastangliabylines.co.uk/energy/do-you-really-need-a-heat-pump/

Why Britain Needs an Energy-Strategy Reset

https://institute.global/insights/climate-and-energy/why-britain-needs-an-energy-strategy-reset

So Tony and Larry, and their backers the UAE and Saudi Arabia think we should drill more and renewable less....so predicable. Sorry Mars, forum rules not withstanding, this is too close to overtly political not to comment. 

@abernyte I think that’s fair comment… let’s just keep things civil and not get politically riled up.

@jeff hefty read… exhausted now, but will admit I skimmed a lot it.

I think the core frustration the report taps into is real for anyone who’s ever sat down with a heat pump quote or solar payback calculator… electricity bills are still high enough to make the next step feel like a gamble, even when renewables are supposed to be the cheap, home-grown answer.

The vicious circle, high prices, slower adoption, fixed costs spread thinner, even higher prices, is exactly what holds people back, and the report is probably right to call it out. Switching the big goal to “Cheaper Power 2030” sounds sensible on the surface… be stricter on contract prices, build the grid smarter, get locational pricing working and don’t lock in expensive deals just to hit gigawatt targets.

But here’s where it gets a bit eye-roll worthy for me. Tony Blair himself hasn’t been in power since 2007, yet here we are in 2026 with his institute still dropping ‘heavyweight’ papers that sound like they’re briefing ministers. Is this genuinely independent analysis or is it shaped by the same big energy lobbying interests that have always preferred managed decline over rapid disruption?

Posted by: @editor

↑

But here’s where it gets a bit eye-roll worthy for me. Tony Blair himself hasn’t been in power since 2007, yet here we are in 2026 with his institute still dropping ‘heavyweight’ papers that sound like they’re briefing ministers. Is this genuinely independent analysis or is it shaped by the same big energy lobbying interests that have always preferred managed decline over rapid disruption?

I think we know the answer to the question posed.  As to the dates,  I am frankly tierd of people who are not in power claiming that there is a simple and quick 'fix' to whatever problem the choose to spotlight if the government would just stop doing it wrong.  If there were one of our governments would have found it.  The world is massively more complex than the quick fix merchants would have us believe, as recent events testify. It's easy to sit on the sidelines carping on, much more difficult to navigate the complex landscape over which we have only partial control.

So far as I can see the UK destination is now binary and will be determined by the electorate in about three years time.  Either we will, one way or another, move relentlessly towards renewables and substantial energy independence, or we will, in the interests of short term expediency, become ever more dependent on the whims of foreign powers that are either despot or hostile or both.  It's as simple as that.  

@jamespa, what frustrates me most about politics, not just here but globally, is that when we vote, we don't get to pick a la carte. You vote for a party or a president (depending on where you are in the world), and you get the whole bouquet... the environmental protections might come bundled with economic policies you hate or the "stronger for the country" measures arrive with little or no regard for the planet. There's no menu where you can tick "good climate action + sensible economics + no nonsense" and leave the rest behind. You take the package deal or you don't.

And running through every single one of those packages is the same overriding force, money and economies. It rules the world. It always has, and it always will. What's right for the long term (cleaner air, stable climate, energy we control) gets subordinated to what keeps growth ticking, jobs safe, taxes manageable and voters happy in the next election cycle.

The common denominator isn't ideology or even competence... it's cash flow and short-term pain thresholds. Everything else (renewables push, North Sea 'pragmatism', grid reform, etc.) gets filtered through that lens first.

So yeah, the binary choice you describe feels depressingly accurate. In three years' time, the UK electorate will either lock in a path toward real renewables scale-up and independence (with all the messy trade-offs that entails) or we'll drift back toward short-term expediency and let foreign whims dictate more of our bills and security. Let's hope there's a more stable entity in power across the Atlantic by then too. 

That said, I can't help thinking the household-level stuff we talk about here on the forums (solar, batteries, heat pumps, etc.) remains one of the few things we do have direct control over. It's not going to rewrite global energy policy, but it does carve out a bit of personal independence from the mess. 

Posted by: @editor

↑

when we vote, we don't get to pick a la carte. You vote for a party [...] and you get the whole bouquet.

Which is why we shouldn't wait until an election to influence the available choices.

There's nothing to prevent us communicating with councillors and MPs now and briefing them on relevant issues in the news. That's especially welcomed if the Elected Representative is currently in opposition. They are usually delighted to receive a 'briefing' which allows them to challenge a (poor) policy or strategy which has just been announced.

Poor decisions get implemented because there's a lack of well-reasoned argument put forward by the Opposition.