Research, analysis, and policy critique
- Details
- Written by: J C Burke
- Category: ENERGY POLICY
- Hits: 309
Why Decentralised Generation and Heat Networks Offer Liberation
Medieval England had serfs—workers tied to the land, forced to provide a portion of their harvest to feudal lords, with no choice and no escape. Their children inherited the same bondage. The system enriched lords while keeping serfs in perpetual dependency.
Modern Britain has Energy Serfdom—consumers tied to the grid, forced to provide a portion of their wages to subsidize wind farm operators, with no choice and no escape. Their children inherit the same debt. The system guarantees profits for energy companies while keeping consumers in perpetual dependency. The parallels are not metaphorical—they are structural, precise, and damning.
This article documents the evidence for Energy Serfdom, identifies its enforcers (particularly the Labour government), and presents the path to liberation: decentralised Combined Heat and Power with local heat networks. Serfdom ended when people claimed the right to work land independently.
Energy Serfdom will end when communities claim the right to generate energy independently.
The Anatomy of Energy Serfdom
Medieval serfdom had defining characteristics. Energy Serfdom mirrors them with disturbing precision:
1. Tied to the Domain
Serfs could not leave the manor without the lord's permission. Energy consumers cannot escape the grid. Every household and business must participate. Geographic monopoly ensures captivity. Even those who want energy independence face:
- Details
- Written by: J C Burke
- Category: ENERGY POLICY
- Hits: 83
"This press release yesterday [14th January 2026] is misleading and will cost all energy users dearly. Are the government and the DESNZ misleading the cost comparison by claiming the gas CCGT generation is more expensive that wind (plus it’s necessary additional grid infrastructure)? https://www.gov.uk/government/news/record-breaking-auction-for-offshore-wind-secured-to-take-back-control-of-britains-energy
"Please reference our many previous interactions regarding energy efficiency, local CHP and CCHP plus heat networks"
We are being misled!
We make no bones about using AI to assist us with this analysis - as we just do not have the staffing levels of DESNZ to 'compete' any other way!!
AI Analysis:-
I'll search for information about this auction and then look at our previous discussions about energy efficiency and CHP systems.
Based on our extensive previous discussions about CHP, CCHP (combined cooling, heat and power), heat networks, and energy efficiency, you're absolutely right to be concerned about the cost comparison in this press release. Let me break down the key misleading elements:
The Core Deception: What's Included and Excluded
The government claims:
- Offshore wind: £90.91/MWh (average fixed bottom)
- New gas CCGT: £147/MWh
- Therefore wind is "40% cheaper"
What this comparison hides:
1. System Integration Costs Not Included for Wind
From our previous discussions, wind requires:
- Massive grid expansion: £315bn in transmission infrastructure (per NESO scenarios) to connect remote offshore wind
- Backup capacity: Gas plants must remain operational for when wind doesn't blow, but those costs aren't attributed to wind
- Balancing costs: Grid frequency and voltage control when intermittent sources dominate
- Storage requirements: Currently minimal but essential for reliability
- Capacity payments: To keep gas plants available when needed
2. The CHP Alternative Completely Ignored
As we've discussed extensively:
- Gas CHP achieves 80-90% efficiency vs ~50% for grid electricity generation
- Denmark demonstrates CHP with district heating serves >60% of buildings efficiently
- Local generation eliminates transmission losses and grid upgrade costs
- Existing gas infrastructure (~280,000km of pipes) already reaches every building
- Bio-methane compatibility makes CHP genuinely renewable without infrastructure replacement
- Details
- Written by: J C Burke
- Category: ENERGY POLICY
- Hits: 153
Summary: "Electrification - Can the Grid Cope?"
SOURCE DOCUMENT: Watt-Logic - @KathrynPorter26 (on X/Twitter
Our Summary: so close to our own conclusions over the last few years - a great warning - but who is listening???
Core Thesis: The UK's aggressive electrification plans for heating, transport, and industry are fundamentally unrealistic and risk causing grid failures before 2030. The nation faces a dangerous mismatch between ambitious targets and practical delivery capabilities.
Key Findings:
Demand Projections:
- Electrification could add 7-10 GW by 2030
- AI data centres add another 6 GW
- Total: up to 15 GW of new demand by 2030
- Yet existing demand may require rationing even without this growth
The Triple Crisis:
- Supply Crisis: Ageing gas and nuclear plants retiring faster than firm replacement capacity can be built. Wind/solar cannot provide dispatchable power needed for reliability.
- Deployment Stalling: Heat pumps, EVs, and industrial fuel-switching are all falling behind targets despite government pressure.
- Infrastructure Crisis: Gas network deterioration threatens backup power supplies. Distribution grids can't handle local electrification loads.
Reality Check on Targets:
- Details
- Written by: J C Burke
- Category: ENERGY POLICY
- Hits: 117
Based on the NESO report released yesterday (26th November 2025 - hidden behind the Budget fiasco??) and the broader context, here's an analysis of its significance in relation to field closures and taxation: We asked "is it dogma driving policy?"
Preamble:
"We are all missing the fundamental point: We're wasting 40-60% of energy through inefficiency."
Our call for "Real Conservation of Energy" isn't just environmentally sound or economically sensible - given abiotic regeneration possibility and NESO's warnings, it's the only rational policy that doesn't gamble with energy security while potentially destroying a misunderstood renewable resource.
The NESO Report's Key Findings
NESO warns that UK gas availability is projected to fall by 78% by 2035 compared to current levels, dropping from 24.5 billion cubic metres this year to just 5.4 billion cubic metres by 2035. The report identifies emerging risks to gas supply security when testing against one-in-20-year peak demand scenarios for 2030/31 to 2035/36, particularly if the system loses major infrastructure or if decarbonization progress is slower than planned.
The Taxation Context
The timing of this warning is particularly significant given the government's recent tax changes. The Energy Profits Levy was increased from 35% to 38% effective November 1, 2024, bringing the total headline tax rate on upstream oil and gas to 78%, and was extended to March 2030. Critically, the 29% investment allowance was removed, though the decarbonization allowance remains.
The Connection Between Taxation and Declining Production
The industry argues there's a direct link between the tax regime and accelerating decline:
- No new exploration wells have been drilled in 2025, and domestic oil and gas production has fallen by 40% in the last five years and is on course to halve again by 2030
- Industry modeling shows that without fiscal reform, oil and gas production will fall by approximately 40% from 2025 levels within the next five years
- The Energy Profits Levy has resulted in an increase in decisions to cease production, leading to higher decommissioning costs in the short term
The Decommissioning Acceleration
Annual decommissioning expenditure in the UK Continental Shelf surpassed £2 billion for the first time in 2024, accounting for 15% of total oil and gas expenditure, with projections indicating this share may double and exceed 30% by the end of the decade. This represents a tipping point where companies are spending more on shutting down fields than developing new production.
- Details
- Written by: John C Burke plus AI Claude research
- Category: ENERGY POLICY
- Hits: 182
UK Energy Security Through Distributed Combined Heat and Power
A Policy Paper for Resilient, Efficient Energy Infrastructure
Executive Summary
The April 2025 Iberian Peninsula blackout demonstrated that increasing grid complexity—driven by high renewable penetration and distributed generation—creates systemic vulnerabilities that threaten energy security. This paper proposes a fundamental paradigm shift in UK energy policy: repositioning Combined Heat and Power (CHP) and tri-generation systems as primary energy infrastructure for critical and commercial facilities, with the electricity grid serving as a balancing and coordination network rather than the sole supply backbone.
This approach simultaneously addresses energy security, system resilience, efficiency, and decarbonization objectives while reducing—rather than increasing—grid coordination complexity.
1. The Problem: Grid Complexity as Systemic Risk
1.1 Lessons from the Iberian Blackout
On 28 April 2025, Spain and Portugal experienced a total electricity system collapse affecting nearly 60 million people. Official investigations identified the root causes as:
- Outdated voltage control regulations unsuited to distributed renewable generation
- Inadequate reactive power management across thousands of generation points
- Cascading failures when conventional generators with voltage control responsibilities failed
- Grid isolation (only 2% interconnection with EU) limiting external stabilization
Key Finding: The incident was not caused by renewables themselves, but by the exponential increase in coordination complexity when managing thousands of distributed generation sources through centralized control systems.