Doug Sheridan Reminds
“ Nevermind that these expenditures are designed to reduce emissions in a country that already enjoys the lowest per-capita carbon footprint of any major Western nation.”
Doug Sheridan Reminds
Per the FT, in its annual the report, the National Infrastructure Commission recommends the UK government rule out supporting hydrogen as an alternative to natural gas-fired heating in homes and instead spend billions a year subsidising the installation of heat pumps.
The rollout of heat pumps in the UK has been sluggish, in part because of the costs of buying and installing the devices, estimated at £7,000 to £10,000 per household or higher. The government has previously said it planned to decide on hydrogen’s role in home heating in 2026, following trials.
A government spokesperson said it would respond to the NIC “in due course” but added it would continue to work with industry to explore the feasibility of hydrogen in heating as it “could play an important role.”
Our Take 1: Wow, if the NIC gets its way, it'll good to be a heat pump in the UK for the next several years. By our math, the Commission is recommending British taxpayers funnel £40 billion into the controversial appliances over the next decade or so. As a percentage of national GDP, this would equate to the US taxpayers spending $350 billion on heat pumps.
Our Take 2: No doubt Europe's heat-pump champions will celebrate this news, the details of which are outlined in the EnergyPoint Research post below. But in reality, being a better alternative than hydrogen for home heating purposes isn't saying much. Hydrogen was most notably championed by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who—by our assessment—knows exactly zero about which forms of energy are the most appropriate and economical in a so-called energy transition. Nevermind that these expenditures are designed to reduce emissions in a country that already enjoys the lowest per-capita carbon footprint of any major Western nation.