Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy

Lord Bishop of Norwich Excerpts

Wednesday 9th July 2025 Grand Committee

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his introduction, as there are many things within these documents to praise. They set out a positive direction for future energy infrastructure, which broadly aligns with clean power by 2030 and net zero by 2050. Although I—and, I am sure, many others—welcome a whole-system approach to energy infrastructure planning, delivery has remained fragmented. Let us hope, to coin a phrase, that the wind might now change.

I have just come from the mass climate lobby outside, in Parliament Square. I am not usually someone who joins such events but, for me, it is vital for us to hear the Climate Coalition and the great many people who are raising this issue of climate change and nature loss, because it seems to be slipping down political agendas. Some of the coalition’s aims are to cut bills, back UK jobs and secure a greener, fairer future for all. Another is to restore nature to create a safer and healthier future. With these aims still fresh in my mind from the crowd outside, my remarks will address three areas: first, the cost of connection and district heating networks, especially for those organisations that create the warp and weft of community life; secondly, the capacity of the grid to receive the quantity of renewable energy that we need produced; and, thirdly, mitigating the impact of infrastructure projects on people, nature and landscapes.

Any approach to electricity network infrastructure must include the entire community that is affected or may be able to be a producer of energy. That includes our businesses, places of worship, community centres, sports clubs, town halls, schools and homes. Frustratingly, though, the cost of upgrading the connection to a low-voltage cable can be a huge barrier. One church in the diocese that I serve—St Margaret’s in Lowestoft—has been quoted £100,000 to upgrade its connection and move away from fossil fuel heating. Another, St Mary’s Church in King’s Lynn, has been given two quotes by Eastern Power Networks: one at £90,000, the other at £130,000.

Our churches and other community assets that need upgrades, particularly in rural areas, are also part of wider communities and villages that also need upgrading. Many of our churches are blessed with large south-facing roofs, which are ideal for generating electricity, as is now happening on the roof of King’s College Chapel in Cambridge and in many other places. If churches could have easier and cheaper ways to connect on to the grid, alongside other community buildings, they could not only move away from fossil fuels but become generators of solar energy and provide this to their local communities.

I was pleased to see local energy generation included in the Great British Energy Act and hope that this can be built upon, but I fear that the costs will not make it possible in many places. Can the Minister say what support His Majesty’s Government might make available, or how they might put pressure on companies providing the connections, so that community organisations that wish to change from oil and gas to renewable electricity, or feed into the grid, are not prohibited from doing so by the exorbitant cost? I was also pleased to see mention of heat networks in EN-1, although I again see cost as being a large barrier to those who wish to join a network. This needs to be tackled.

To come closer to this place, Project SWAN is a London district heating network that aims to provide sustainable heating from renewable energy sources—such as waste heat from the Thames and the London Underground—to Church House Westminster, Westminster Abbey and government offices in Great Smith Street. It seems, however, that the costs for Church House alone have rocketed from initial estimates of £2 million back in February to £3.5 million now, so the project becomes no longer affordable. Meanwhile, other organisations within the catchment area are pulling out. If we wish for district heat networks to play a larger part in our energy infrastructure, how does the Minister suggest a funding package or mechanism could be put in place to enable these to be more affordable for a range of partners?

My second point is about the grid in the east of England not being capable of handling the quantities of electricity we hope can be generated offshore. There is a risk that renewable energy production will stall due to the lack of grid capacity. We have a situation in which grid infrastructure is still being developed reactively, based on project applications rather than a longer-term systems need. I hope the Minister will agree that we need to move to a “build ahead of need” model. Is any consideration being given to embedding legal obligations for delivery bodies and regulators to plan infrastructure based on forecasted clean energy demand? Of course, we also need solar as standard on new-build houses and to use the enormous acreage on warehouses and industrial units to generate more electricity. We are missing a trick by not encouraging as much energy production as can be achieved as near as possible to its use.

In making my third point, I acknowledge the impact that this infrastructure development can have on local communities and nature, particularly during the building phase. In north Norfolk, linear swathes of land are being cleared for three underground cabling routes, each the width of a three-lane motorway. Two are north-south, connecting Weybourne and Norwich, and the third is east-west from Happisburgh to Necton, connecting Norfolk’s offshore wind turbines. I was pleased to see EN-5 mention how, in establishing these linear connections, there needs to be a greater sense of care around reconnecting important habitats, green corridors and biodiversity stepping stones, not only for nature but for people in reinstating public footpaths, cycleways and ways to get people to connect with and be outdoors in nature. That is to be welcomed, but how will it happen in reality? In putting in this linear cabling, ancient hedgerows often have to be removed. How can it be done in such a way to restore some of the habitats that are being removed?

The noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, mentioned pylons. National Grid has plans for a pylon route which will march across 180 kilometres from Norwich to Tilbury, with only part of it underground when it crosses the Dedham Vale area of outstanding natural beauty. I urge that cabling of the section crossing the Waveney Valley should also be undertaken. However, if underground cabling was used for any new national grid transmission lines as default, this would help to ensure fewer harmful long-term impacts for residents, for the environment, for settings of heritage assets, for tranquillity and for the countryside. Would the Minister agree that, to have an effective long-term strategy for the power network, it is essential that these 1960s lowest-cost solutions are no longer the default setting?

Overall, these national policy statements are part of facing the challenge of climate change and providing clear direction for planners and developers working on electricity network infrastructure. This needs to be achieved in such a way that people, place, nature and landscape can be protected and thrive as we make the vital transition to non-carbon burning energy sources a success.