top of page
  • hammaad saghir

OBR: Reaching Net Zero Carbon Emissions is More Cost-Effective than Continuing to Rely on Gas




According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK faces substantial fiscal and economic risk due to its continued dependence on fossil fuels for electricity and heating.

Utilizing fossil gas in the UK for power and heating in the future could add hundreds of billions of pounds to public debt by 2050, with costs that are more than twofold the public investment necessary to reduce gas use and construct a zero carbon emissions economy by 2050.


Yesterday, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) released a new evaluation of the impact of the UK's utilization of costly and unstable fossil fuels for electricity production and heating buildings on the public finances and the economy. This marks the end of the analysis.


The non-departmental public body, which receives funding from the Treasury to generate independent financial forecasts and investigate public finances, announced that the UK remains "one of the most gas-reliant economies in Europe" and thus, households and businesses are extremely vulnerable to price rises in the global fossil fuel market.


The war in Ukraine caused a drastic increase in global fossil gas prices last summer, reaching 13 times its historical average. This skyrocketed inflation and the cost of living, leading to the government providing billions in energy bill support for households and businesses. Estimates show that prices will return to pre-2021 levels in the late 2030s due to the UK's reliance on imported gas.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has concluded that the UK is confronted with an extensive expenditure to transition to net zero in the energy sector, replacing gas-fired power stations and gas-fuelled heating systems with low-carbon and clean alternatives.

The agency warned that future rises in global gas prices in the coming decades, caused by increasing carbon costs and geopolitical issues, pose a major fiscal risk. This risk is due to the reduction in total demand, the decline of potential output, and the pressure it would put on governments to protect citizens and businesses from the full financial repercussions.


An assessment has been conducted of the potential impacts if the UK were to confront a gas price surge equal to the one encountered in the previous year from now until 2050. The study reveals that, in the event of continued reliance on gas like the present, it would be equivalent in cost to "achieving net zero emissions" by the end of the period.

The OBR has estimated that if government intervention is taken into account to help households and businesses cope with energy price spikes - as it was in 2020 - these could take up two to three per cent of the country's GDP annually. This means the expenditure on gas would be greater than the cost of transitioning to a zero-emission energy system.

The analysis states that accounting for the extra debt and interest and its consequences on the economy, yearly gas price hikes would bring the public debt up to 13 per cent of the GDP by 2050-51. This figure is approximately twice the total cost of public investment to achieve net zero by the same time, which is six per cent of GDP.


The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has highlighted the advantages of hastening the process of decarbonising the UK's power and heating systems, indicating that the high gas price only increases the appeal of investing in renewable energy, electric heating, and energy conservation practices.


The additional remark was that "fuel costs increasing could also turn out to be a financial advantage as it would reinforce the market motivations to transfer to renewable energy sources, which have become more economical, and in turn, diminish the need for government assistance to finance the shift to net zero".


The administration has been criticised for its lack of definite strategies and more persuasive motivations to acquire more investment for raising renewable energy output, installing heat pumps throughout the country, and increasing the energy efficiency of dwellings and other buildings. All these actions are essential for limiting carbon emissions, fortifying energy security, and decreasing reliance on costly fossil fuels.


The Office for Budget Responsibility reported that public expenditure on energy efficiency and electric heating had been lower than anticipated for the past two years. Moreover, private investment in clean energy was insufficient, mostly due to demanding planning laws.


The report concluded that the United Kingdom was still in danger of continuing reliance on gas, which carried "a fiscal risk" that could have a far-reaching effect on the country's economy and public finances.


The UK was cautioned that if it does not accelerate the process of decarbonizing electricity and heating now, it could drive up the expense of achieving net zero emissions in the future.


The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) noted that a large amount of capital must be invested in the energy industry in the next decade to achieve net zero. Although they thought the private sector would take on most of the cost, investors have yet to show much enthusiasm for renewable energy in the UK, exposing the public finances to danger.


The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has recently built upon a prior assessment which projected the pros and cons of the UK's aim to reach a net zero emissions target by 2050. In 2021, they created a report estimating that the net cost of becoming net zero will be £321bn over the next 30 years. They also warned that the price will rise if the energy transition is delayed. The OBR further calculated that not pursuing decarbonisation would be even more expensive for the public finances and the UK economy, predicting that unaddressed climate change could lead to public debt reaching 290% of GDP.

The UK administration was considering asking for feedback on the Office for Budget Responsibility's most recent examination results.

Government officials have expressed their dedication to hastening the conversion to green energy and fulfilling their legally-binding emissions goals in the UK. As the USA and EU have made pledges regarding climate policy, the government has been under mounting pressure to formulate an effective net zero policy.


In December, the Climate Change Committee reported that the UK is losing its status as a leader in environmental action. It has become less capable of achieving its legally-binding emissions targets for the 2030s than it was the preceding year, largely because of the lack of policy implementation.

Evans, the leader of climate issues at Greenpeace UK, highlighted that the OBR's analysis confirms what has been known for a long time: not attaining net zero will have both economic and social repercussions and damaging environmental effects.


The woman declared that the administration is experiencing one failure after another regarding economics and environmentalism. She noted that we are falling behind in the international competition for green technology compared to the EU, China, and the US, and she finds our performance in batteries, green steel, and onshore renewables to be disconcerting.

Politicians from both major parties in Britain keep asking the same queries regarding if we can pay for green investments when the reality is that we cannot afford not to do it as it is beneficial for the economy.


This week, RMI, an American think tank, released a significant report outlining the dramatic decline in renewables costs and the remarkable rate of clean tech deployment. This has made it possible for the global power system to be on course for attaining net zero objectives, and this will lead to a decrease in demand for fossil fuels from the late 2020s onward.


Grant Shapps, Secretary for Energy Security and Net Zero has recently indicated that the government may not go ahead with plans to construct a hydrogen gas system in Britain. He believes other green heating solutions are likely to be more efficient.


Before current advancements, people assumed that a gas-boiler-like device would be enough to process hydrogen, he informed an event in Westminster. Yet, it became clear that many of the pipes would need changing to make it work, and the production of clean hydrogen is necessary for the entire system to be successful.


Despite this, he was steadfast in his commitment that the government would remain devoted to the progression of hydrogen utilization for different applications, including energy storage and industrial processes with low carbon output.


This week, the government put aside plans for a hydrogen-powered 'village' in Cheshire due to a lot of resistance from local inhabitants. Just one other project in Teesside is in the running for government finance.


Commentaires


bottom of page