How resilient is our energy system? Reflections on the findings of a report by the National Preparedness Commission

The National Preparedness Commission is an independent and non-political body, seeking to promote policies and actions to help the UK be capable of avoiding, responding to and recovering from major shocks and challenges, whatever the initial cause.  Its recent report “Assessing Energy Resilience in the UK 2050” was prepared by an international management consultancy firm, Baringa, that has a credible reputation.

Set alongside all the other infrastructure challenges this country faces, it makes worrying reading. Ageing infrastructure and bottlenecks in grid connectivity are key concerns, along with a chronic shortage of skilled labour. The risks from many sources need to be assessed together because they are interconnected and cascading –a power cut can affect water supply and processing of sewage, with associated risks and challenges to the population – yet governance and responsibility in the energy sector is fragmented between government, energy producers, retail supplies, Ofgem, and NESO, making it more complex to ensure system resilience.  Cybersecurity in the UK energy industry is particularly poor, especially in the wind sector, with only 1% of sites having measures in place.

The growth of renewable energy relies on scarce mineral resources for which global competition is fierce. Even if energy efficiency increases, demand will rise in unpredictable ways, due to EV charging, growth of AI and other internet uses.

To make the energy system resilient requires identifying all potential risks and their impacts, maintaining flexibility and redundancy in the system, and ensuring a wide range of stakeholders are involved in decision making.

Demand reduction is discussed only briefly – and the possibility and impacts of the need for rationing is not broached at all.  In terms of the changing climate, the main issues raised are flooding of infrastructure and higher temperatures. While uncertainty surrounds the likelihood and timing of a significant slowdown in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, this is a risk that surely should be considered in its potential impact, certainly in a report looking towards 2050. Periods of freezing weather would lead to ice collecting on overhead cables, bringing them down; there would be high demand for electricity during the longer spells of cold weather, which has not been taken into account as a possible scenario.

The report’s key conclusion is that without a comprehensive approach to assessing energy resilience we can’t be certain of the extent of the risks we face and the costs to all consumers of lost supply. What is clear from this report is that there are major gaps in the country’s resilience, and we all need to take action to build our own resilience within our communities – a key focus of the Climate Majority’s recently launched campaign, SAFER (https://climatemajorityproject.com/safer-2/).

The NPC’s report’s recommendation is for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to take responsibility for developing a framework for energy resilience and stress testing it for short term shocks. Will this be a priority action for the government, before we experience the impacts of the lack of resilience in the energy supply system?