Energy industry leaders have warned the UK could fall behind a key target for new offshore wind power ahead of the results of a government auction that is widely expected to flop.
Multiple industry sources have told Sky News the auction, the results of which are expected to be announced on Friday, has received little or no interest.
Insiders say the process has struggled to attract bidders because the government has set the maximum price generators can receive as too low, failing to reflect the rising costs of manufacturing and installing turbines.
The industry has been hit by inflation that has seen the price of steel rise by 40%, supply chain pressures and increases in the cost of financing.
Several companies, including the UK’s largest renewables generator SSE, have ruled themselves out of the auction, with one source saying the number of potential bidders was “between two and zero, with expectations at the lower end of that range”.
The renewables auction is an annual process in which the government attempts to incentivise private sector investment in a range of power sources through a mechanism known as “contracts for difference” (CfDs).
Image: SSE is among major players to have boycotted the auction
The auction works in reverse, with the government setting a maximum reference price, effectively a cap on what consumers can be charged, and in normal circumstances generators bid below that to provide power over a 15-year contract.
More on Renewable Energy
Related Topics:
Under the CfD, generators are guaranteed a price for the power they produce, with the government making up the difference if wholesale prices fall below that price.
When wholesale prices are higher, as they have largely been since the Ukraine war began, generators pay the difference above the guaranteed price back to the Treasury.
‘The sums didn’t add up’
In theory this delivers value to consumers and suppliers but the chief executive of SSE, Alistair Phillips-Davies, told Sky News the price cap in this auction of £44MW/h, only a little above last year’s price, meant it was not viable.
“For the project we had, which is a little smaller than some and in deeper waters further north in the UK, we just wouldn’t have been able to even get a bid in at that cap price,” he said.
“The sums didn’t add up, we wouldn’t have been able to make an economic bid at that level. We’d have been struggling with write-offs, and we’ve seen some competitors in the sector have unfortunately suffered in recent weeks.”
Mr Phillips-Davies said the government needed to act now to ease market conditions for the renewables sector to ensure next year’s auction generated capacity.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:20
‘Who wants to open their curtains to a wind turbine?’
He suggested additional taxes on renewables profits be withdrawn in 2024 rather than 2028, bringing the UK in line with Europe, extending capital allowances to compete with the US subsidy regime the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), as well as ensuring a more realistic price cap in the next auction round.
He pointed to a recent auction in Ireland, operating under a different structure, that set a price of €150 MW/h.
He said: “I think people will need to look at the cap, while being sensitive to what consumers should be paying, and what we’ve got to do is be ambitious next year.
“We’ve got to be thoughtful about what we do and make sure that the next auction is constructed not only to get people to win an auction, but to actually build a piece of kit.”
This auction round, technically known as Allocation Round 5 (AR5) is expected to attract bids for solar and onshore wind capacity, but failure to secure significant new offshore wind capacity would be a blow to the government’s target of reaching 50GW by 2030.
‘Fingers in their ears’
It will also intensify the increasingly sharp debate over the true cost of achieving net zero to consumers and the public purse, as the energy transition moves from abstract policy theory to practical delivery.
Insiders say officials were repeatedly warned by industry that the auction would fail unless the price was increased.
Shadow energy secretary Ed Miliband said this week ministers “had put their fingers in their ears.”
The UK currently has 14GW of functioning offshore wind capacity, placing huge pressure on the next two annual auctions to fill the gap.
Offshore wind is the backbone of the UK’s renewable energy supply, providing 40% of electricity last year, and the target is a crucial plank in the wider goal of reaching net-zero by 2050.
Previous auctions have been successful in increasing offshore wind capacity, with last year’s round attracting 7GW of capacity from five operators.
One of those projects, run by Swedish state-owned power company Vattenfall, has already been mothballed however because of rising costs hitting the industry.
‘Very difficult market’ for offshore wind developers
Lisa Christie, UK country manager for Vattenfall, told Sky News the investment model no longer matched economic reality.
“The economics at the moment simply don’t stack up,” she said.
“There’s a number of reasons for that. It’s the war in Ukraine, we’ve seen rises in inflation, we’ve seen rises in the cost of capital, obviously rises in commodity costs.
“You put all of that together. And it’s just a very, very difficult market environment for offshore wind developers right now.
“I think we’re at a very difficult point. And we have a lot of offshore wind farms, including Vattenfall, that haven’t been able to take fields where perhaps you wouldn’t have expected them to do.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:46
Wind turbine catches fire off Norfolk coast
“So there is a challenge in the industry, I don’t think is insurmountable and there is still time for the government to turn this around.
“So what we’re really looking for is to put the CfDs back onto a financially sustainable footing and then we can reap the benefits that increased offshore wind deployment bring.”
Concerns UK will lose offshore wind superiority
Major suppliers to the industry are also concerned that any political drift in the build up to the election could see the UK lose its pre-eminence in offshore wind.
Laura Fleming, the UK managing director of Hitachi, which produces high-voltage direct cables that bring power onshore, said the UK needs to compete with more generous subsidy regimes around the world.
“The investment climate in the UK needs to send a clear signal that we are open for business, and compared to the IRA in the US, and the new green deal in Europe, we need to ensure that we still stand out.”
The renewables industry insists that even at a higher price in this auction, wind power would still be substantially cheaper than fossil fuel alternatives. At their peak last year wholesale gas prices were up to nine-times higher than offshore wind strike prices.
Renewables generated under CfDs can also return money to the taxpayer. Since the invasion of Ukraine forced up electricity prices many wind farms operating under CfDs have been paying back millions of pounds to the Treasury.
Mr Phillips-Davies said: “We’ve got to remember at the moment offshore wind is looking a bargain compared to wholesale energy prices. It’s half the price or less of where the current market is, so we need to be building more.”
Tesla’s board has signed off a $29bn (£21.8bn) share award to Elon Musk after a court blocked an earlier package worth almost double that sum.
The new award, which amounts to 96 million new shares, is not just about keeping the electric vehicle (EV) firm’s founder in the driving seat as chief executive.
The new stock will also bolster his voting power from a current level of 13%.
He and other shareholders have long argued that boosting his interest in the company is key to maintaining his focus after a foray into the trappings of political power at Donald Trump‘s side – a relationship that has now turned sour.
Musk is angry at the president’s tax cut and spending plans, known as the big beautiful bill. Tesla has also suffered a sales backlash as a result of Musk’s past association with Mr Trump and role in cutting federal government spending.
Image: Tesla’s Elon Musk is seen on stage during an event in Shanghai Pic: Reuters
The company is currently focused on the roll out of a new cheaper model in a bid to boost flagging sales and challenge steep competition, particularly from China.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
The headwinds have been made stronger as the Trump administration has cut support for EVs, with Musk admitting last month that it could lead to a “few rough quarters” for the company.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:31
Could Trump cost Tesla billions?
Tesla is currently running trials of its self-driving software and revenues are not set to reflect the anticipated rollout until late next year.
Musk had been in line for a share award worth over $50bn back in 2018 – the biggest compensation package ever seen globally.
But the board’s decision was voided by a judge in Delaware following a protracted legal fight. There is still a continuing appeal process.
Earlier this year, Tesla said its board had formed a special committee to consider some compensation matters involving Musk, without disclosing details.
The special committee said in the filing on Monday: “While we recognize Elon’s business ventures, interests and other potential demands on his time and attention are extensive and wide-ranging… we are confident that this award will incentivize Elon to remain at Tesla”.
It added that if the Delaware courts fully reinstate the 2018 “performance award”, the new interim grant would either be forfeited or offset to ensure no “double dip”.
The new compensation package is subject to shareholder approval.
Banks will still most likely have to fork out over discretionary commissions – a type of commission for dealers that was linked to how high an interest rate they could get from customers.
The FCA, which banned the practice in 2021, is currently consulting on a redress scheme but the final bill is unlikely to exceed £18bn. Overall, the result has been better than expected for the banks.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:12
Car finance ruling explained
Lloyds, which owns the country’s largest car finance provider Black Horse, had set aside £1.2bn to cover compensation payouts.
Following the judgment, the bank said it “currently believes that if there is any change to the provision, it is unlikely to be material in the context of the group”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:58
‘Don’t use a claims management firm’
The judgment released some of the anxiety that has been weighing over the Bank’s share price.
Jonathan Pierce, banking analyst at Jefferies, said the FCA’s prediction was “consistent with our estimates, and most importantly, we think it largely de-risks Lloyds’ shares from the ‘motor issue'”.
Bank stocks have responded robustly to each twist and turn in this tale, sinking after the Court of Appeal turned against them and jumping (as much as 8% in the case of Close Brothers) when the Supreme Court allowed the appeal hearing.
Concerns about this volatility motivated the Supreme Court to deliver its judgment late in the afternoon so that traders would have time to absorb the news.
Thousands of motorists who bought cars on finance before 2021 could be set for payouts as the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has said it will consult on a compensation scheme.
In a statement released on Sunday, the FCA said its review of the past use of motor finance “has shown that many firms were not complying with the law or our disclosure rules that were in force when they sold loans to consumers”.
“Where consumers have lost out, they should be appropriately compensated in an orderly, consistent and efficient way,” the statement continued.
The FCA said it estimates the cost of any scheme, including compensation and administrative costs, to be no lower than £9bn – adding that a total cost of £13.5bn is “more plausible”.
It is unclear how many people could be eligible for a pay-out. The authority estimates most individuals will probably receive less than £950 in compensation.
The consultation will be published by early October and any scheme will be finalised in time for people to start receiving compensation next year.
What motorists should do next
The FCA says you may be affected if you bought a car under a finance scheme, including hire purchase agreements, before 28 January 2021.
Anyone who has already complained does not need to do anything.
The authority added: “Consumers concerned that they were not told about commission, and who think they may have paid too much for the finance, should complain now.”
Its website advises drivers to complain to their finance provider first.
If you’re unhappy with the response, you can then contact the Financial Ombudsman.
The FCA has said any compensation scheme will be easy to participate in, without drivers needing to use a claims management company or law firm.
It has warned motorists that doing so could end up costing you 30% of any compensation in fees.
The announcement comes after the Supreme Court ruled on a separate, but similar, case on Friday.
The court overturned a ruling that would have meant millions of motorists could have been due compensation over “secret” commission payments made to car dealers as part of finance arrangements.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
Car finance scandal explained
The FCA’s case concerns discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs) – a practice banned in 2021.
Under these arrangements, brokers and dealers increased the amount of interest they earned without telling buyers and received more commission for it. This is said to have then incentivised sellers to maximise interest rates.
In light of the Supreme Court’s judgment, any compensation scheme could also cover non-discretionary commission arrangements, the FCA has said. These arrangements are ones where the buyer’s interest rate did not impact the dealer’s commission.
This is because part of the court’s ruling “makes clear that non-disclosure of other facts relating to the commission can make the relationship [between a salesperson and buyer] unfair,” it said.
It was previously estimated that about 40% of car finance deals included DCAs while 99% involved a commission payment to a broker.
Nikhil Rathi, chief executive of the FCA, said: “It is clear that some firms have broken the law and our rules. It’s fair for their customers to be compensated.
“We also want to ensure that the market, relied on by millions each year, can continue to work well and consumers can get a fair deal.”