Grappling with the grid will get Burnham burned
GB Grid is a case of the right intention in the wrong place, writes energy analyst Taco Engelaar
Burnham’s GB Grid announcement has caused quite the stir.
Listen to this article
Selling it as a pivotal moment for British energy, he boldly claims the new publicly owned energy company will “increase competition, drive down costs, and speed up connections”.
But as rousing as the thought of lowered bills and businesses plugging straight into the grid may be, Burnham must face up to reality: privatisation is not the grid’s biggest problem – and ending it is not the solution.
Grid operators are doing their best to deliver sorely needed change at a time when our energy infrastructure faces more complex challenges than ever before. But they’re hampered by outdated regulatory frameworks and ill-fit policies which slow down innovation and stall infrastructure expansion. Burnham’s sideways step towards nationalisation won’t make the difference he intends; it’s policy change we need.
He’s right that businesses “can’t get going because they can’t get connected.” The UK is battling a connection queue with waits of up to 15 years: Europe’s longest, by some estimates. This is being compounded by high demand for scant resources - talent, skills, materials - which no system can thrive without.
Adding a publicly owned player to the mix is not the answer. That’s like adding another car to a gridlocked motorway. It doesn't matter who's driving; a state-owned vehicle will sit in the same queue as everyone else. GB Grid will face the same challenges as privately owned energy companies, but without the industry knowledge and experience to tackle them.
While some competition within the sector is needed and could genuinely help boost innovation, speed up connections, and lower costs, the government need not become an actor itself. It would do better to support competition by funding other private companies to execute projects, as planned, and instead focus on pushing through regulatory change, funnelling political momentum into policies that will unlock a sustainable future for the grid.
That means continuing work to streamline approvals and ease the connections queue; building a skilled workforce to meet the sector's evolving challenges; and providing funding and support to encourage operators to adopt new technological solutions that can help transform grid management and resilience.
I understand Burnham’s instinct to make a bold statement on energy, but GB Grid is a case of the right intention in the wrong place. In my work with energy utilities at Neara, I’ve seen firsthand the hurdles grid operators face, and where real change can be delivered: in policy, not public ownership.
If Burnham wants to wade in on any utility, he’d do better to focus on his plans for the water sector – an industry whose problems are truly rooted in ownership. One where regional monopolies laden with billions in debt could do with a state-backed competitor.
For the grid, state ownership won’t make a difference. To truly move the dial, the government must work with, not against, private operators to drive the regulatory and policy changes needed to unlock progress and maintain sustainable investment. GB Grid, however well-intentioned, will only distract from the real challenges at hand and push vital progress further down the road.
____________________
Taco Engelaar is Senior Vice President & Managing Director at Neara, a leading Energy and Climate technology company.
LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.
To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk