@editor fwiw I admit to straying into politics occasionally for exactly the reasons you state. 

I try, not always successfully,  to speak about the alternative points of view and their consequences for renewables, rather than advocating one particular point of view (although doubtless people can guess what my own point of view is). 

I don't have a problem if people wish to dispute my view of the consequences BTW, that's part of rational and reasoned argument.  Nor do I have a problem if others have a different view to me of which consequences are preferable. 

What causes me a problem personally, is when consequences are ignored or fabricated in order to favour a particular pre-determined, often ideologically driven, conclusion.  Otherwise known as policy based evidence making, this is a guaranteed ultimately to lead to decline.

https://renewableheatinghub.co.uk/carrier-backs-heat-geek-in-major-investment-questions-raised-for-uk-homeowners/

Interesting to see some more details of Reform UK policy as it evolves

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly0j6nnk4zo

- removing the 5% VAT

- Removing the Renewables Obligation from bills and talk of changing or cancelling it.  This is the ROCs Renewable Obligation Certificates which was the subsidy scheme prior to the introduction of CfD. Labour has already tinkered with this. The ROCs will come to a natural end anyway as they are for a fixed period of time. 

- the removal of the Carbon Price Support which is loaded onto the price of electricity generated by fossil fuels. 

@jeff and others. There is some comprehensive analysis (can’t find it this minute) that says that carbon price support is unnecessary now that it has done its job of removing coal from the fuel mix for electricity generation 

https://www.cia.org.uk/energy-and-climate-change/how-the-uks-carbon-price-support-keeps-electricity-prices-high/1380.article#:~:text=This%20increase%20in%20the%20total,EU%20ETS%20and%20the%20CPS.

https://britishprogress.org/briefings/cut-bills-boost-electrification-by-removing-carbon

I was actually surprised it didn’t go in the last budget and yet the Renewables obligation charges did go (mostly).

It’s subtle and complex and doesn’t lend itself to sound-bites, whilst staying factually correct.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

@editor fwiw I admit to straying into politics occasionally for exactly the reasons you state. 

I try, not always successfully,  to speak about the alternative points of view and their consequences for renewables, rather than advocating one particular point of view (although doubtless people can guess what my own point of view is). 

I don't have a problem if people wish to dispute my view of the consequences BTW, that's part of rational and reasoned argument.  Nor do I have a problem if others have a different view to me of which consequences are preferable. 

What causes me a problem personally, is when consequences are ignored or fabricated in order to favour a particular pre-determined, often ideologically driven, conclusion.  Otherwise known as policy based evidence making, this is a guaranteed ultimately to lead to decline.

@jamespa interesting, thanks. 

Any examples of fabrication you have seen recently you could share with us? 

Posted by: @jeff

↑

@jamespa interesting, thanks. 

Any examples of fabrication you have seen recently you could share with us? 

 

Not here I'm pleased to say (as in I haven't seen any significant examples here other than genuine misunderstandings related to heat pumps.)

More widely, where should I start?  Im mostly thinking of media outside forums such as this.  That said I left buildhub because it became an unpleasant ideologocal battle ground in just a few too many discussions. 

Posted by: @judith

↑

@jeff and others. There is some comprehensive analysis (can’t find it this minute) that says that carbon price support is unnecessary now that it has done its job of removing coal from the fuel mix for electricity generation 

https://www.cia.org.uk/energy-and-climate-change/how-the-uks-carbon-price-support-keeps-electricity-prices-high/1380.article#:~:text=This%20increase%20in%20the%20total,EU%20ETS%20and%20the%20CPS.

https://britishprogress.org/briefings/cut-bills-boost-electrification-by-removing-carbon

I was actually surprised it didn’t go in the last budget and yet the Renewables obligation charges did go (mostly).

It’s subtle and complex and doesn’t lend itself to sound-bites, whilst staying factually correct.

I understand it didn't go as it is currently a revenue stream for the government. 

The Carbon Price Support part of our bill goes to the government into the general taxation pot. It isn't ring fenced for anything renewable related, just like VAT on our bills. 

As you say most of the ROCs have moved, 75% of the ROCs have moved to general taxation but only until March 2029 currently. ROCs expire anyway between 2027 and 2037 which will reduce bills. 

I thought this was an interesting article to highlight some of the challenges in the renewable transition, a lot of which have been discussed on the forum before but this is in a single article. 

https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/beyond-the-levelised-cost-of-electricity-why-policymakers-need-better-metrics-for-the-energy-transition/

Lots of  changes announced by the government today including plugging in small scale solar to a 13 amp socket (I have seen this in Europe), new builds to have heat pumps and 60% of roof covered in solar, scheme to reduce curtailment costs. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-make-plug-in-solar-available-within-months

Thanks @jeff  - as always the detail matters.

Reading between the lines, it looks like the Secretary of State has got fed up with the professional trade organisations raising objections, so he's decided to simply make announcements.

Here's the response video from eFIXX, which is a YT magazine programme targeted at qualified electricians.

Whilst I like the sound of Heat Pumps and solar being a requirement for all new-builds, it will be largely ineffective if Developers who are members of the NHBC are still allowed to 'stop the clock' for Building Regs and SAP energy assessments at the point where they pre-register the site.

There are hundreds of sites already registered with NHBC, with no Outline Planning Applications yet written. This registration can be done for a nominal fee, whether or not the land-owner knows about it.

Posted by: @transparent

↑

Reading between the lines, it looks like the Secretary of State has got fed up with the professional trade organisations raising objections, so he's decided to simply make announcements.

The right approach IMHO, assuming he follows through.  'Thrown the industry into chaos?' the video says, and 'caught the industry by surprise'.  I only listened to the first minute and at that point decided that they (the industry) deserve all that is coming to them, assuming it does come.

Posted by: @transparent

↑

Whilst I like the sound of Heat Pumps and solar being a requirement for all new-builds, it will be largely ineffective if Developers who are members of the NHBC are still allowed to 'stop the clock' for Building Regs and SAP energy assessments at the point where they pre-register the site.

There are hundreds of sites already registered with NHBC, with no Outline Planning Applications yet written. This registration can be done for a nominal fee, whether or not the land-owner knows about it.

That is a separate problem, I wonder if its in the Government's sights also.  It might be difficult to make any change retrospective without being sued by builders, although to sue would also expose the scandal, so maybe they might be reluctant and instead will agree a deal with perhaps a 2 year window to get building or lose the benefit, which would also have the advantage of stimulating building!  Now there is a plan.

The stuff about reducing curtailment costs is also interesting, obviously Greg finally got to them!

Doubtless all this will be reported by the dominant media as either a financial disaster or a climbdown, or alternatively not reported at all. 

Posted by: @transparent

↑

Thanks @jeff  - as always the detail matters.

Reading between the lines, it looks like the Secretary of State has got fed up with the professional trade organisations raising objections, so he's decided to simply make announcements.

Here's the response video from eFIXX, which is a YT magazine programme targeted at qualified electricians.

 

Whilst I like the sound of Heat Pumps and solar being a requirement for all new-builds, it will be largely ineffective if Developers who are members of the NHBC are still allowed to 'stop the clock' for Building Regs and SAP energy assessments at the point where they pre-register the site.

There are hundreds of sites already registered with NHBC, with no Outline Planning Applications yet written. This registration can be done for a nominal fee, whether or not the land-owner knows about it.

Equally there have been and continue to be some new homes being built already with heat pumps with no requirement to do it. 

This is at least a step in the right direction. Am sure you and others would like things to move quicker though

It will be interesting to see the percentage of new homes sold with heat pumps in 2028.

I am minded to be glass half full following the announcement.