[benj111]

>and with natural gas now extremely expensive due to the Ukraine war, the UK has been forced to rely on hideously expensive offshore wind power

But the wind is cheaper than gas. Yes you could argue that if we had stuck with coal that would have been cheaper than gas or wind, but the long term threat and the long term most expensive option is clear. Wind and solar gives energy independence, so we aren't reliant on a market that could be turned upside down by one country invading another.

[mytailorisrich]

Even the popular claim that "natural has is extremely expensive due to the Ukraine war" is misleading. In the UK and Europe high prices are by and large the result of policy and in fact high prices is exactly the aim.

[brooksyd2]

I'm not sure that is true. The reason prices are high in the UK is that the government guarantees specific strike prices to investors to bring investment into new renewable infrastructure. So if someone builds a new offshore windfarm, they are guaranteed a certain return. The underlying strike price is calculated from the cost of natural gas, and therefore the price is being effected by various things, such as the US-Iran war. It is not designed to be a high price, it is just how the government has chosen to attract investment, specifically keeping the underlying price linked to gas.

[tonyedgecombe]

Companies do bid against that strike price and if it is too low then they don't bid.

[ahartmetz]

In Germany: 0.06 € / kWh was policy, 0.14 € / kWh was mainly Ukraine war. It's currently at about 0.10 € (policy + Ukraine war + Iran war). Taxes are fairly low: 0.0055 € / kWh and the usual 19% VAT.

[mytailorisrich]

It is policy to ban shale gas and more North Sea gas. In Germany it is also policy to exit nuclear, like it was policy to depend on Russia. VAT is policy. The Ukraine War is a convenient way to deflect from all the policy choices made over the last 20+ years, while still achieving the aim of high prices.

[ahartmetz]

No, the goal of German policy isn't to kill its energy-intensive industry. Like in all countries, the conservative party, biggest member of the governing coalition, has strong ties to the local industry, and the social democrats have no interest in the loss of jobs. "The aim of high prices" is conspirationalist nonsense.

The aim of Nordstream (however misguided that turned out) was low prices.

Minor point: companies get the VAT back or don't pay it in the first place.

[mytailorisrich]

However you look at it they don't want fossil fuels to be cheap, as demonstrated by all the policies I mentioned. So the aim is indeed high prices (because this makes other energy sources more attractive) within the constraints of public opinion and the economy Although the economy is suffering because this is all not well thought-out.

Again, saying it is politically suicide so they don't (mostly, Greens are open about it) but actions speak louder than words.

[ahartmetz]

So what is the hidden agenda then, and by which actions did the government raise prices to 14 cents during the Ukraine war and 10 cents now? Why did they run a crash program to build LNG terminals, which lowered prices?

By all indications, "5-6 cents high" was politically desired, "10-14 cents high" isn't.