Scott Milne shares his view on UK scenarios for a low carbon energy system

10th June 2015

ETI Strategy Analyst Scott Milne

There are lots of varying opinions on what the UK’s future energy system may look like with a number of organisations and individuals putting forward their views on what the mix should include if the country is to make the transition to a low carbon economy.

At the ETI we believe there are two vital things to consider. When addressing low carbon transitions - a systems wide approach should be taken as individual technologies and their infrastructure can’t be developed in isolation and any scenarios should be based on the best available evidence.

This is why we developed ESME (Energy System Modelling Environment), our internationally peer reviewed energy system modelling tool, which allows us to understand the most valuable and cost effective combinations of energy technologies.

Our latest work using ESME - “Options, Choices, Actions” has identified two possible scenarios for transitioning to a low carbon energy system called Clockwork and Patchwork which we hope will inform and provoke debate, and progress thinking about how we power the UK and heat our homes in the future.

They are not intended to be predictions or forecasts of the most probable outcomes and we are not saying either is the definitive answer to the question of what should be in the UK’s energy mix, but both are representative of the challenges the UK faces in any move to a low carbon energy system.

Each of the scenarios illustrate key lessons we have learnt at the ETI and give an indication of the technologies most likely to be important in any cost effective low carbon UK energy system design.  In the Clockwork scenario there would be a well-co-ordinated approach to energy planning with a focus on a national co-ordination of supply-side generation and shared infrastructure.

There would be a wide take up of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and nuclear. Realising system-wide benefits, there would be progress of the combination of CCS with bioenergy to exploit carbon offsetting and the creation of negative emissions. This would allow for a phased decarbonisation of the economy starting with the power sector, followed by buildings and finally transport.

Our calculations show that the abatement cost of this scenario, in other words the additional cost of meeting energy demands through a low rather than a high carbon energy system, is around 1.4% of GDP in 2050.

The Patchwork scenario on the other hand describes an energy system developed through a number of district energy strategies operating at a regional level with a mixture of national, regional and local approaches. Renewables would account for most of the electricity generation capacity and decarbonisation of the power sector would be followed pretty much in parallel by decarbonisation of buildings and the transport sector. This is quicker than in the Clockwork scenario. 

The abatement cost would be slightly higher than the Clockwork scenario at around 1.6% of GDP in 2050. Both of these possible scenarios show that the UK can afford a 35 year transition to a low carbon economy between now and 2050 with the cost of transitioning in the range of 1-2% of GDP.
They are both plausible and affordable but require considerable co-ordination and planning as well as consumer and social engagement.

Whether people prefer the vision of Clockwork or Patchwork or elements of each, the important thing is that the country’s energy system works to the benefit of all. To that end, we hope these scenarios will stimulate discussion of our analysis and insights so that we continue to learn together.

CCS and bioenergy are especially valuable and including each of them in a future energy system halves the cost of meeting UK climate change targets.
High levels of renewables in the power sector and large swings in energy demand can be accommodated but this requires a systems level approach to storage technologies including heat, hydrogen and natural gas in addition to electricity.

The next step is for the UK to focus on developing and proving a basket of the most promising supply and demand technology options, including bioenergy, CCS, new nuclear, offshore wind, gaseous systems, more efficient vehicles and improved heat provision in buildings.

Resources should be concentrated on preparing these options for wide scale demonstration, testing and deployment over the next decade to allow choices to be made about energy infrastructure for the long term.

By 2025, choices must be made regarding infrastructure design for the long-term. Closing down our options too soon could prove unnecessarily costly for the UK, but the bigger threat is failing to build up those options at all. That is why it is so important to get it right.

For more information on this subject - please click here.