Factcheck: Conservative Report on Cheap Power Flawed
A report by the Conservative party claiming that cheap power would lead to lower emissions has been found to be flawed, with experts identifying 10 key errors in the report's assumptions and conclusions.
The Conservative party's report on cheap power has been widely criticized by experts, who argue that the report's conclusions are based on flawed assumptions and questionable modelling. The report, which was published by the centre-right thinktank Onward, claims that the UK could save over £320bn by scrapping net-zero policies and relying on gas and nuclear power instead of renewables.
However, experts have identified 10 key flaws in the report, including the assumption that gas prices will remain low and stable, despite recent spikes in energy prices due to global conflicts. The report also assumes that nuclear power will be cheap to build and deliver, despite the high costs and delivery challenges associated with nuclear projects.
## The plan would increase UK emissions
The report's alternative scenario, which assumes the UK's 2050 economy-wide net-zero target is abandoned, results in an extra 524m tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions between 2030 and 2050. This is equivalent to the annual emissions of South Africa. The report's authors claim that this approach would make electrification more attractive and lead to lower emissions, but experts argue that the opposite is true.
The report's modelling is based on a series of questionable assumptions, including the idea that gas prices will be low and stable, and that nuclear power will be cheap to build and deliver. However, experts argue that these assumptions are not credible, and that the report's conclusions would be flipped on their head if more realistic assumptions were used.
## The plan would slow electrification
The report's alternative scenario also results in slower electrification of heat and transport, despite the claim that cheap power would lead to increased uptake of electric vehicles and heat pumps. The report assumes that the removal of supportive government subsidies and mandates, such as the boiler upgrade scheme and the 2030 ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars, would not affect the uptake of electric vehicles and heat pumps.
However, experts argue that this assumption is not credible, and that the removal of these subsidies and mandates would actually slow the uptake of electric vehicles and heat pumps. The report also assumes that the cost of electricity would fall significantly, making it more attractive for consumers to switch to electric vehicles and heat pumps. However, experts argue that this assumption is not supported by the evidence, and that the cost of electricity would not fall as much as the report claims.
## Gas prices are unlikely to remain low and stable
The report's assumption that gas prices will remain low and stable is also questionable, given the recent spikes in energy prices due to global conflicts. The report assumes that gas prices will drop to pre-conflict levels and remain that way for the next two decades, despite the fact that gas is the main driver of high electricity prices in the UK.
Experts argue that this assumption is not credible, and that gas prices are likely to remain volatile in the future. The report's authors claim that the UK's high spark gap, which refers to the electricity-to-gas price ratio, makes switching from gas boilers to heat pumps less appealing for consumers. However, experts argue that this gap would not substantially change in the proposed alternative scenario, and that the report's analysis does not indicate that the gas-electricity price ratio would fall significantly.
| Scenario | Emissions (MtCO2) | Electrification | Gas Prices | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Business-as-usual | | Higher | Higher | | Alternative policy pathway | 524m | Lower | Lower | | Net-zero scenario | | Higher | Higher |
The table above shows the different scenarios and their corresponding emissions, electrification, and gas prices. The business-as-usual scenario assumes that the UK's current net-zero policies remain in place, while the alternative policy pathway assumes that these policies are scrapped. The net-zero scenario assumes that the UK meets its 2050 economy-wide net-zero target.
Overall, the report's flaws and questionable assumptions undermine the Conservative party's claim that cheap power would lead to lower emissions. Experts argue that the report's conclusions are not supported by the evidence, and that the UK's net-zero policies are necessary to reduce emissions and meet the country's climate targets.
