82 Rocío Alvarez-Tinoco et al.
nature of social opposition to renewables makes this a limited risk in terms of
its overall effects on the renewables sector.
Technological gaps and lack of innovation
UK leadership in offshore wind technologies is becoming more visible
(Colmenar- Santos et al., 2016). However, at the same time the UK lacks expertise and technological ownership with respect to most other renewables. As a
consequence, such renewables’ implementation continues to rely on technology
imports, leaving a possible energy security issue. While stakeholders agreed in
affirming that an adequate policy to favour deployment of the technologies and
skills may contribute to reduce the likelihood of this risk, they also affirmed
how, in the case of inaction, the effects may be significant. Several stakeholders
affirmed that inaction would lead to a significant loss of competitiveness for the
UK in the renewables sector, affecting UK prospects in terms of sector- based
economic growth. The issue of ensuring that there is cost- effective bulk storage
for intermittent renewables at high levels of system penetration remains a
serious risk, even though several different strategies (including demand
response) are available (Grünewald et al., 2011). Better interconnectors would
help but they are themselves dependent on a surplus availability of power in
other countries. As in the case of ‘new nuclear’, stakeholders identified the lack
of skills of sector regulators as a key risk for renewables implementation.
Uncertainties associated with the two pathways
While risks are defined in relatively specific ways as potential threats to decarbonisation pathways, uncertainties are more general but potentially relevant
unknowns, the effects of which could either be positive or negative. Four main
types of uncertainty emerge, three of them typically affecting decarbonisation
pathways anywhere in the world and one specifically affecting the UK. We
identified two traditional drivers (carbon market price volatility and technological innovation) and two recent drivers (the Paris Agreement on climate
change and Brexit), all four affecting both pathways. Except for the Paris Agreement, generally seen by stakeholders as a driver for reducing uncertainty, the
other drivers were seen as sources of significant uncertainty for UK electricity
generation. This section describes how each of these drivers leads to uncertainty
for both the ‘new nuclear’ and the ‘no new nuclear’ pathways.
With a long history of uneven fluctuations, electricity prices represent a
significant source of uncertainty for investors and other stakeholders engaged in
the implementation of both new nuclear and renewable electricity. Price fluctuations, or expectations of fluctuations, affect long- term investments in the
sector. Yet rapid variations in electricity prices linked to shifts in competing
resource prices (i.e. for fossil fuels) may lead to significant uncertainty in the
medium and short term. Public intervention and long- term contracts with fixed
electricity prices can compensate for such uncertainties but require significant
nature of social opposition to renewables makes this a limited risk in terms of
its overall effects on the renewables sector.
Technological gaps and lack of innovation
UK leadership in offshore wind technologies is becoming more visible
(Colmenar- Santos et al., 2016). However, at the same time the UK lacks expertise and technological ownership with respect to most other renewables. As a
consequence, such renewables’ implementation continues to rely on technology
imports, leaving a possible energy security issue. While stakeholders agreed in
affirming that an adequate policy to favour deployment of the technologies and
skills may contribute to reduce the likelihood of this risk, they also affirmed
how, in the case of inaction, the effects may be significant. Several stakeholders
affirmed that inaction would lead to a significant loss of competitiveness for the
UK in the renewables sector, affecting UK prospects in terms of sector- based
economic growth. The issue of ensuring that there is cost- effective bulk storage
for intermittent renewables at high levels of system penetration remains a
serious risk, even though several different strategies (including demand
response) are available (Grünewald et al., 2011). Better interconnectors would
help but they are themselves dependent on a surplus availability of power in
other countries. As in the case of ‘new nuclear’, stakeholders identified the lack
of skills of sector regulators as a key risk for renewables implementation.
Uncertainties associated with the two pathways
While risks are defined in relatively specific ways as potential threats to decarbonisation pathways, uncertainties are more general but potentially relevant
unknowns, the effects of which could either be positive or negative. Four main
types of uncertainty emerge, three of them typically affecting decarbonisation
pathways anywhere in the world and one specifically affecting the UK. We
identified two traditional drivers (carbon market price volatility and technological innovation) and two recent drivers (the Paris Agreement on climate
change and Brexit), all four affecting both pathways. Except for the Paris Agreement, generally seen by stakeholders as a driver for reducing uncertainty, the
other drivers were seen as sources of significant uncertainty for UK electricity
generation. This section describes how each of these drivers leads to uncertainty
for both the ‘new nuclear’ and the ‘no new nuclear’ pathways.
With a long history of uneven fluctuations, electricity prices represent a
significant source of uncertainty for investors and other stakeholders engaged in
the implementation of both new nuclear and renewable electricity. Price fluctuations, or expectations of fluctuations, affect long- term investments in the
sector. Yet rapid variations in electricity prices linked to shifts in competing
resource prices (i.e. for fossil fuels) may lead to significant uncertainty in the
medium and short term. Public intervention and long- term contracts with fixed
electricity prices can compensate for such uncertainties but require significant