As the UK moves to a more strategically planned energy system, the question of what is ‘needed’ to deliver a net zero power system is a key focus. Here, Fraser Stewart argues that local and community energy should be included in that definition.
Clean Power 2030 is the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s (DESNZ) flagship plan to deliver the government’s manifesto commitment to decarbonise the power system before the decade’s end. The National Energy System Operator (NESO) will provide advice this month on what is ‘needed’ to achieve a clean power system – i.e. which technologies, how much and where.
So far, however, there has been little mention of how the government’s other manifesto promise of a Local Power Plan will fit with Clean Power 2030.
The value of ‘local’
Labour’s ambitious plans for local and community-owned energy were restated in the GB Energy founding statement, which sets out a commitment to delivering 8 GW of generation owned and led by community organisations, local authorities and other public bodies.
Local and community energy provides extensive benefits above and beyond typical commercial developments. Such projects deliver unique social and economic value through community investment, democratic participation, local climate outreach and targeted retrofit and fuel poverty programmes. Importantly, they are also a prime opportunity to engage communities in the UK’s net zero effort by giving local people a direct stake and benefit in the transition.
This is a welcome development, but not without potential challenges where Clean Power 2030 is concerned.
What is ‘needed’ for Clean Power 2030?
The area where the rubber really meets the road is where Clean Power 2030 shapes the queue of projects seeking a grid connection.
Ofgem and NESO have proposed prioritising projects that are ready and ‘needed’ to deliver Clean Power 2030 for a grid connection. However, if ‘needed’ is defined bluntly in terms of how much of which technology and where, this will naturally favour larger commercial projects that can make up a more substantial chunk of the Clean Power 2030 quota.
New local and community projects are unlikely to be able to compete with bigger developers for a connection under this definition, which therefore risks undermining the 8 GW local and community commitment – and leaving a lot of value for communities on the table.
Prioritising local and community energy in the connections queue
To reconcile this, local and community projects need to be better enabled and prioritised within the connections process.
This 8 GW of promised local and community energy is a small portion of the overall capacity needed to deliver Clean Power by 2030, so the impact on other projects in the connections queue would be small. Because local and community projects are smaller-scale and do not require the same level of network upgrades to deliver, there is also an argument that these can get online quicker.
To this end, we propose there should be a ringfenced, expedited capacity allocation for local and community energy (including projects with shared ownership arrangements) within the connections queue, covering the 8 GW set out in the GB Energy founding statement. This should also be accompanied by raising the threshold at which projects trigger transmission network impact reviews from 1 MW to 5 MW, helping to streamline the connections process for local and community-owned projects.
Defining ‘local power’
One potential challenge is defining local or community energy within the Clean Power Plan and relevant policy, regulatory and system processes.
Regen’s response to the Barriers to Community Energy call for evidence in June this year proposed that local and community energy should be defined as clean energy projects owned by community energy organisations (such as cooperatives, community benefits societies and community interest companies), local authorities, and/or other public bodies. This may also include shared ownership arrangements between commercial developers, community energy organisations and/or local authorities.
Communities for Renewables’ response to the same call for evidence outlines further criteria for the community energy side in particular, including ensuring that relevant community organisations are governed by a board of local volunteers and set up to support a local community purpose.
Including local and community energy in the Clean Power 2030 definition of ‘needed’ can help realise Labour’s 8 GW commitment and unlock the unique additional value that these projects have to offer, increasing opportunities for local places to reap the benefits of clean energy projects and deliver a just transition that suits their needs.