Committee publication · Correspondence · 19 March 2025
Letter from Andrew Montford, Net Zero Watch, regarding oral evidence presented to the Committee as part of its inquiry into GB Energy and the net zero transition inquiry, dated 6 March 2025
Summary
Andrew Montford, director of Net Zero Watch, writes to the Scottish Affairs Committee alleging that Emma Pinchbeck, CEO of the Climate Change Committee, misled the committee during oral evidence on GB Energy. Montford challenges her claim that renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels, citing capital costs, capacity factors, maintenance expenses, and subsidy payments to argue that offshore wind is significantly more expensive per kilowatt-hour delivered than gas.
Key findings
- Montford asserts offshore windfarms cost approximately £2.5m per megawatt compared to £0.5m for gas-fired stations, making renewables five times more expensive per unit capacity.
- Accounting for capacity factors (renewables deliver ~40% of capacity), offshore wind is claimed to be more than ten times as expensive as gas in capital cost per kilowatt-hour delivered.
- Maintenance costs for offshore wind are estimated at £200,000 per megawatt—four times higher than gas-fired stations, translating to tenfold higher per-kilowatt-hour costs.
- Analysis of Contracts for Difference subsidy scheme payments shows net outflows of over £150 million for February despite high gas prices, suggesting renewables remain subsidy-dependent.
- Net Zero Watch's recent system costing by Professor Gordon Hughes estimates the renewables-based 2030 electricity system would cost households at least £900 extra per year.
Tone
AdversarialTopics
energy-policyrenewablesnet-zero-transitionpublic-finance
Key actors
Andrew Montford, Emma Pinchbeck, Climate Change Committee, Net Zero Watch, Scottish Affairs Committee, Ed Miliband, Gordon Hughes
Notable line
“… far from the build cost being lower, offshore windfarms are around five times as expensive as gas per unit capacity.”
Key Quotes
“…because of the overall efficiencies of renewables and their cost to build versus fossil plant, [that] they are a cheaper technology and the economy overall benefits.”
“In other words, in terms of the build cost (or indeed of the maintenance cost), renewables cannot correctly be described as 'a cheaper technology'.”
“The only saving from running renewables is on fuel cost.”
Source · parliament.uk record ↗