March 12, 2024

expert reaction to anticipated Clare Coutinho speech on new gas power plants

Scientists react to upcoming Clare Coutinho speech on new gas power plants.

Dr Simon Harrison FREng, Group Head of Strategy at Mott MacDonald and Co-Chair of the National Engineering Policy Centre working group on Delivery of rapid electricity system decarbonisation, said:

“The government’s plan to build new, gas-fired power stations acknowledges that back up supply through gas can play a part in the economic solution to achieving secure energy supplies on the road to decarbonisation, when it is combined with carbon capture, hydrogen or bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). But for the UK to meet its 2050 net zero target we should continue at pace with the construction of planned levels of zero carbon generation, networks and short duration storage, reducing demand where possible, and providing the digital capabilities to unlock flexibility.”

Professor Nilay Shah CBE FREng, Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering and Vice-Chair of the National Engineering Policy Centre’s net zero working group, said:

“In principle a net zero energy system requires low carbon flexible generation, to cover periods of low generation from intermittent renewables. Integration of combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) generation with carbon capture and storage (CCS) into the system is a way to ensure high penetration of renewables while ensuring energy security and affordability. The number and location of such generation units should form part of the strategic spatial plan and should be considered in parallel with long-duration electricity storage such as batteries, pumped-storage, and hydrogen. It will be important though to ensure that carbon capture is fitted as soon as is practicable.

“There is no time to spare in applying all the available low carbon technologies at our disposal to meet our legally binding emission reduction targets and it is vital that government provides policy stability that transcends electoral cycles and administrations to enable business to plan with confidence and invest in generation equipment that will enable us to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050.”

Dr Callum MacIver, Research Fellow, University of Strathclyde, said:

“The government is right to emphasise the need to keep the lights on as we transition to a decarbonised power system driven by renewables. It is widely acknowledged that, at least in the short to medium term, retaining a reasonable capacity of unabated gas plant on the system  is a sensible risk management measure. Work done for the CCC suggests that might mean in 2035 unabated gas is needed to cover the final 2-3% of electricity production that is most costly to decarbonise.

“We must guard against ‘baking in’ a delay to our decarbonisation process. If we do build new unabated gas plant it is essential that we don’t waste money by building too much and that it is genuinely ‘hydrogen ready’ or ‘CCS ready’ with a clear pathway to actually using low carbon hydrogen or CCS.

“We mustn’t get to a place where 2% unabated gas utilisation becomes 5%, or 10%, or 25% in 2030 or 2035 because you haven’t got round to doing CCS or creating a market and the infrastructure for low carbon hydrogen. It’s especially important that we develop green hydrogen from electrolysis that allows us to make full use of electricity from renewables and reduce our dependency on imports of natural gas.”

Dr Iain Staffell, Senior Lecturer in Sustainable Energy, Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, said:

“This is a risky move for the government.  We are only just starting to recover from two years of sky-high energy prices which punished national and household budgets alike, and was largely driven by natural gas. 

“Plans to build more gas-fired power stations will keep us exposed to the geopolitical and economic risks of importing foreign fuels to power our country. 

“There’s also the risk that new gas power stations become a very costly white elephant – they are built to last for thirty years or more, but what if we have no need for them beyond the next decade as better solutions are built? 

“Then of course there is the climate aspect: this move locks us into burning more gas over the coming decades, and while it may not substantially increase emissions if they only run infrequently for backup, it is sending the wrong kind of messages to nations that the UK is trying to persuade to follow its climate leadership.

“On the other hand, we cannot rely on wind and solar power to supply electricity all the time, and any misstep which leaves us short on generating capacity could cause a major blackout with far-reaching consequences. 

“Building more gas power stations is the backwards-looking option though: there are many tried and tested technologies for bringing more flexibility into our power system: building more links to neighbouring countries (such as the recent Viking Link), building more energy storage such as batteries, advanced hydro power or green hydrogen, or making the ways we use electricity smarter, such as allowing electric vehicles to charge up when the wind is blowing, and get paid to send power back when it is not. 

“These solutions are all low carbon and improve our energy security, so it is surprising that the government does not place greater emphasis on them.”

Stephanie Baxter, Head of Policy at the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), said:

“Renewable energy opportunities are the quickest to put in place in terms of securing our own energy system and this is vital for net zero, however, projections show that the amount required to meet future demand will be significantly higher than current capacity. Even for the most modest demands considered, the new sustainable resources required for heat, transport and industry are significant multiples of current capability.

“The transition to net zero must be driven by an effective strategic planning process to ensure efficient and timely delivery, with consistent direction, clear investment signals, appropriate incentives, and active skills development. This highlights the fundamental need for new whole-system coordination and accountability mechanisms that are not currently a feature of the energy sector. An adaptable and modern energy infrastructure is critical to achieving a broad mix of energy capacity and security.”

Dr Robert Sansom, Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) energy expert, said:

“It seems generally accepted that a further tranche of gas turbines is needed to support the transition to net zero, but we would need to see considerations in terms of their future integration within a carbon capture and storage system if the plant is to operate directly on natural gas.

“It is also possible that the plant could operate directly on hydrogen with no greenhouse gas emissions. However, if the hydrogen is produced from natural gas, then we would expect that the manufacturing process itself would incorporate carbon capture.”

“Gas turbine manufacturers are developing plants that can operate on 100% hydrogen and anticipate that this can be achieved within the next few years. The alternative is to operate on natural gas and then capture the carbon from the exhaust using post combustion capture technology.  This is likely to be more expensive, but it also requires additional infrastructure for connection to the carbon capture system for storage in underground facilities.”  

Dr Jasmin Cooper, Research Associate at the Sustainable Gas Institute (SGI), Imperial College London, said:

“Gas has played an important role in ensuring the UK is able to meet its electricity demands. There are benefits to gas which other electricity sources do not have: it is flexible in the amount of electricity it can generate (making it suitable for baseload demand and peak time demand), power plants can be built pretty much anywhere provided a source of gas is available, and power plants can be mothballed (turned off and kept idle until needed).

“Despite this, the UK is a net importer of gas and with the ongoing war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East, there is uncertainty on whether future production of gas can meet demand and whether the price of gas will remain at a level which does not further negatively impact UK citizens’ ability to pay their energy bills.

“While the new plan sets out to build net-zero-ready gas power plants by building plants which are able to convert to carbon capture and hydrogen to power, these may not be align with net-zero by 2050 targets. This is because carbon capture does not capture all the CO2 produced by facilities, and hydrogen can still have a carbon footprint from the process used to make it.

“Another issue is whether the cost to build the new power plants is worth it, as the power plants are not intended to be used as frequently as existing power plants.”

Dr Neil Jennings, researcher at the Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the Environment at Imperial College London, said:

“If the government are really serious about improving energy security and lowering bills, there needs to be much more focus on improving the energy efficiency of buildings across the country, so there is less demand for energy in the first place.

“The installation of energy efficiency measures in UK homes is over 95% down compared to 2012 thanks to some poor policy decisions.

“The Government should be doing much more to reverse this decline so more people can live in a home they can afford to heat.”

Prof Jon Gibbins, Professor of Power Plant Engineering and Carbon Capture, University of Sheffield, said:

“Fossil fuel power plants are essential to meet both the statistically-assessable risks to supply from weather variations and the less predictable, but probably much higher impact, risks from deliberate interventions to restrict supplies. But this fossil fuel use, outside of real force majeure emergencies, can be made to have net zero emissions by CO2 capture at the point of use, by conversion of the fuels to hydrogen before use and, although not yet widely discussed, by indirect capture of any emitted CO2 from the air, all with permanent geological storage of the CO2. The last option, using Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) or Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) is very flexible and can cope well with intermittent and dispersed fossil fuel use, such as the peaking power plants. It can also be used to compensate for upstream emissions of other greenhouse gases and the technologies can be usefully integrated with the wider electricity and energy systems.

“Providing a secure electricity supply, and one that also delivers the net zero CO2 emissions required for the UK to play its part in global climate change mitigation, demands long term and system-level thinking. The required infrastructure takes decades to put in place and even the most urgent replacements of damaged key components can take many months or years if the required equipment and trained people are not in place. The UK, and all of Western Europe, needs to look hard at what is really required and make a rigorous plan for how to deliver it – with some additional scope to cope with the inevitable problems and delays that will occur – and not rule out any satisfactory options on ideological grounds.”

Dr Iain Soutar, Senior Lecturer, University of Exeter, said:

“Investing in new gas power stations is a backwards step, away from a more secure and low carbon energy system.

“Continuing to rely on gas for electricity will mean prolonging our exposure to a volatile international market – and therefore high energy costs for consumers. The announcement is also at odds with the government’s own plans to decarbonise electricity supply by 2035. The UK energy system is in desperate need of investment, but this is a step in the wrong direction.”

Prof Stuart Haszeldine, Professor of Carbon Capture and Storage, University of Edinburgh, said:

“The UK has a commitment to zero carbon electricity by 2035 – that will now fail.

“This policy will build more CO2 emitters, whilst the UK is investing tens of billions of pounds in building and operating CO2 storage.

“It is crazy to build a new generation of gas-fuelled power plants, with no pipeline or shipping connections linking to CO2 storage. This is not just giving up global leadership, this is the UK going backwards to a position of leading to make climate change happen.

“Rather than increasing UK energy security by decreasing imports of methane gas LNG, these proposals will maintain UK gas imports to mid-century and beyond, keeping consumers exposed to international prices which the UK cannot control. The UK has the least gas storage of any large European economy, this proposed policy means big profits for oil and gas importers and tax take for the Treasury, but continuing big bills for users of electricity or heat.”

Prof Jim Watson, Professor of Energy Policy and Director, UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, University College London (UCL), said:

“It is essential that we shift our electricity system away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible – to reduce emissions, improve energy security and reduce consumer bills. Whilst gas-fired power plays an important role today, their share of electricity generation will decline as renewables continue to expand rapidly. Building new power plants fuelled by ’natural gas’ is the wrong approach to balancing supply and demand in a decarbonised power sector. The UK already has a large number of such plants. Instead, the focus should be on retrofitting some of the newer plants to run green hydrogen (produced by renewables), or fitting them with carbon capture and storage technologies. Both options are technically possible now. Requiring new gas plants to be ’net-zero ready’ as the government proposes is meaningless. If new plants are to be built, there should be a clear obligation for them to have low or zero emissions from day 1 of operation.”

Dr Sam Hampton, Environmental geographer, Environmental Change Institute (ECI), University of Oxford, said:

“Building new fossil-fuelled power stations in the UK will make it harder to meet our climate goals. The government is already committed to having a zero-emission electricity grid by 2035, and yet new power stations have a typical lifespan of more than 20 years. Declaring these that these will be ‘capture ready’ just means the government is crossing its fingers that carbon capture technology will come to save us. But the reality is that it remains a distant illusion.”

Prof Sam Fankhauser, Professor of Climate Economics and Policy at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, said:

“Good news and bad news from the Governments. The plans for zonal energy pricing will reward communities for hosting cheap renewable projects. But new gas-fired power will have to be more than just capture-ready.  There will have to be a firm obligation for any CO2 to be captured and stored safely underground.  Only that is consistent with the UK’s statutory net zero targets.”

Prof Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon Chair in Geoenergy, Carbon Capture & Storage, Durham University, said:

“For the government to claim adding new gas fired power plants is adding to energy security is an oxymoron.  To add that such power plants will be CO2 capture ready and hence in line with the commitment to deliver net zero is stretching credibility to breaking point.  On security, the UK can supply less than half its gas demand.  The rest is imported and because the gas market is regional rather than global, we are under similar constraints of gas supply as much of Europe.  No matter that not a single molecule of gas does not pass from Moscow to Manchester we are bound to Europe.  No cheap US gas for us.  US, Qatari and other LNG we may import but it will only be the top up to our needs, expensive and as far as carbon footprint goes a backwards step.  The dash for gas in the 1990s depleted our gas fields and gas for power is profligate with half the energy in the gas molecules emitted wastefully as heat at the power station.  We will continue to use gas but capture ready (for CO2) is not good enough.  These power stations need to have capture of CO2 fully installed and operating.

“The real answer though is to improve our energy security by using less, wasting less and saving more.  This will also help us meet net zero.  Invest not in gas but heat (geothermal, waste heat and solar thermal) – go local as heat must, build to a standard that minimises home heating requirements and do it now.  This will address about 1/3 of our energy needs and a similar proportion of our emitted greenhouse gases.”

Prof Myles Allen FRS, Professor of Geosystem Science, University of Oxford, said:

“Last year, Saudi Arabia announced no new gas fired power stations would be built without carbon capture and storage, and the first tenders are already in progress. So, by announcing Britain’s new gas plants will only be “capture ready”, when we have some of the best carbon storage capacity in the world and a nascent industry begging for a clear path forward, the government has positioned us behind Saudi Arabia in the race to net zero. We don’t want to be just “former climate champions” — some of us want the U.K. to be a future champion as well.”

Declared interests

Prof Myles Allen: No conflicts.

Dr Sam Hampton: No conflicts.

Prof Sam Fankhauser: No conflict.

Prof Jon Gluyas: I have no conflicting interests. 

Dr Iain Soutar: No conflicts.

Prof Stuart Haszeldine: no commercial conflicts of interest. Research is funded by UKRI government research councils

Dr Jasmin Cooper: No conflicts of interest to declare.

Dr Neil Jennings: No COI.

Dr Robert Sansom: No conflicts.

Stephanie Baxter: No conflicts

Dr Iain Staffell: Wrote a recent book on Monetizing Energy Storage which goes into some detail on the different options for balancing out renewables. Provide consultancy services to Drax Group (www.electricinsights.co.uk). Provide consultancy services to EDF, SSE, OVO Energy, Octopus, National Grid. I have not spoken with any of these companies about this story or my response, and I believe they all have a sufficiently diverse portfolio of generation that this doesn’t particularly favour them over other utilities.

Dr Simon Harrison: Mott MacDonald works in almost all engineering areas of the GB power system.

For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.