Utility Week

18 | JUNE 2023 | UTILITY WEEK Networks Analysis Making the connection The backlog of projects wating to connect to the transmission grid has sparked fears over the impact on net zero. James Wallin examines how the industry is responding. I ncreasing concern about the slow pace of projects seeking to connect to Great Britain's electricity transmission network has le sector experts scrabbling for suitable metaphors. A popular one in recent weeks has been the irritation at turning up to a restaurant to nd all the tables have been booked by parties that have failed to turn up but their reservations have been honoured regardless. Ofgem chief executive Jonathan Brearley instead referenced standing at a bus stop behind a queue of people who have been given a ticket but show no desire to either pay, get on board or stand out of the way. Neither quite captures the scale of the challenge if the ever-lengthening queue to connect to the grid isn't unblocked soon. A er all, there are other restaurants and mul- tiple ways of getting from A to B. But, if the electricity network cannot accommodate the rapid build-out of renewable power then the timetable out to 2050 is in serious jeopardy – with inevitable, irreversible, consequences. For Utility Week readers the situation needs little introduction. Over the years we have referenced concerns about projects waiting 10, on some cases 20, years in the queue to connect. National Grid Electricity System Operator (ESO) launched a probe into the issue last year, resulting in some tempo- rary changes to the way the queue is man- aged and a ve-point plan for further action. However, wider scrutiny has given the issue greater prominence, with politicians suddenly taking interest in a potential bar- rier to decarbonisation. In response, the sec- tor has fast-tracked a number of initiatives aimed at unblocking the backlog. Brearley used his keynote presentation at Utility Week Live in May to announce that the regulator is pushing an "invest and connect" approach, including the introduc- tion of "controlled access" to the queue and eventually even a fully centralised planning model. He stressed the need for an end to the "blame game" between industry, generators, networks and government in favour of "joint responsibility for getting the connections regime sorted once and for all". He said: "Polite queuing may be in the very best of British traditions – but the rst- come, rst-served connections regime is not t for purpose if we are to end fossil fuel power within 12 years. "It is unacceptable that energy projects are blocking great low-carbon schemes from plugging into the transmission network – with connection times of a decade or more. "Ambitious targets are empty words if we can't get this right. It's like promising every- one an electric car today but stopping them driving it until 2033." His speech came on the day the ESO revealed the level of interest for its queue amnesty, which closed in April. This saw 8GW of projects express an interest in with- drawing from the queue. Put in the context of the 280GW of projects seeking to connect as of end of April, Brearley said it was clearly a "small step" but an important one. Ofgem's policy paper on this issue sets out four illustrative stages of connections reform, beginning with the plans being put in place by industry. A more "fundamental change" would be the introduction of con- trolled access to the queue – either through application windows or with the introduc- tion of stricter quali cation gates. The paper says the applications within these windows could be managed in diš er- ent ways, "from rst-come- rst-served to other approaches to prioritisation (includ- ing scope for customers to play a greater role) with potential trading or auction-like mechanisms". The idea of strictly planned and coordi- nated connections takes the model one step further by imagining speci c connection types or capacities incentivised or procured in certain areas to support system needs. The policy paper acknowledges that this longer- term approach is "highly uncertain and would strongly depend on wider and as yet uncertain reforms to the energy market and future system planning". Days before Ofgem's policy paper was released, National Grid also published a report, in which it proposed that projects bid- ding for transmission connections should be subject to tighter thresholds, while also call- ing for a spatial plan to be drawn up to map the UK's low-carbon energy infrastructure. Speaking to Utility Week in mid-May, National Grid's chief nancial ož cer, Andy Agg, said there had been a "huge ramp up" in the pipeline of renewable energy projects, which is now "multiple times" what will be needed to meet the government's net-zero targets. Agg said one of the "biggest drag factors" for transmission construction was the length of time it takes to get planning consent: "It can be up to seven years for some of these major projects. The government recognises that; Ofgem recognises that; they've been very public about that." He said: "There's been announcements about looking at the policy statement but I think it's fair to say we've seen some pro- gress but our view is it needs to go further if we're really going to be able hit some of the stretching ambitions that we've all got." Regulatory air cover Alongside the ESO's plan is a move by the Energy Networks Association to do its bit for accelerating progress. Its three-point plan includes promoting certain shovel-ready pro- jects above those that have had contracts for longer but are not ready to connect. However, the organisation's chief execu- tive Lawrence Slade told Utility Week that Ofgem will need to support the networks in dealing with disgruntled developers being kicked out of the queue. He accepted that a "fundamental change" to the way connections are managed was required but stressed the need for "the regu- latory regime to change to keep up". He said: "We have to make sure we're all on the same page in terms of streamlining this process and getting it moving. But you have to accept that if you're moving some people out of the queue or pausing them and you're moving other people up the queue, some people will be very happy some peo- ple, frankly, won't. "So, we need to have that regulatory air

• Cover