Photo credit: www.bbc.com
New Report Recommends Overhead Pylons for Electricity Transmission
An independent report has determined that using pylons for electricity transmission is significantly more cost-effective than burying cables underground or deploying them out at sea. This conclusion, presented by the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), arrives as National Grid prepares to seek planning approval for over 100 miles (approximately 160 km) of new overhead lines linking Norwich and Tilbury in Essex.
Energy Minister Michael Shanks expressed that the findings underscore that “pylons are the best option for taxpayers.” However, criticism has emerged from campaigners who labeled the report as “half-baked,” alleging that the government remains short-sighted regarding the positives of underground transmission.
This widely anticipated report aims to settle the ongoing debate about how to effectively transport power from new offshore wind farms in the North Sea. It revealed that underground cabling costs, on average, about four and a half times more than overhead lines, while offshore options could be as much as 11 times pricier. A typical overhead line, spanning nine miles (15 km) and capable of carrying 5,000 MW, is projected to cost nearly £40 million, compared to around £330 million for its underground counterpart—soaring to as high as £820 million if tunneling is required.
Assessing ‘Visual Impact’
The newly proposed power lines are intended to facilitate the distribution of electricity generated by offshore wind farms. Yet, the IET report also highlighted the necessity of balancing financial considerations with “non-cost factors,” such as visual and environmental effects; it noted that underground cables typically offer a reduced visual footprint compared to overhead infrastructure.
Co-author David Reid remarked, “This report provides valuable insights into the different technology options available and their relative merits. It will be an essential tool for stakeholders as they work to accelerate the necessary infrastructure development for the UK to meet its net-zero targets.”
Despite these points, government officials are leaning heavily on the financial aspects laid out in the report. Shanks stated, “It indicates that pylons are the most practical choice for bill payers, as underground cables incur significantly higher installation and maintenance costs.” To mitigate the impact on communities along the proposed routes, he suggested that households near the new pylons could receive £2,500 off their energy bills over a decade.
Community Concerns
Rosie Pearson, a member of the Essex Suffolk Norfolk Pylons Group, criticized the report as “half-baked,” arguing that it fails to adequately explore the enhancement of the current grid prior to constructing new pylons, a strategy successfully implemented in the United States. She condemned the government’s unwillingness to adopt modern undergrounding methods used in countries like Belgium, which are both less costly and environmentally considerate.
Referring to the compensation offer for those living near the proposed pylon route, Pearson described it as “derisory.” In response to the report, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero clarified that it did not commission the study; the engineering consultancy firm carried it out independently. The department acknowledged the report as a “comprehensive” examination of the issue, intending to inform planning applications for the Norwich to Tilbury route and similar discussions nationwide.
While government officials are eager to progress, local activists in East England have pledged to continue their opposition.
Source
www.bbc.com