Comment by Guy Newey, CEO, at Energy Systems Catapult.

For aficionados of planning-based acronyms in the energy sector, these are halcyon days. Hot on the heels of the CSNP and HND came the SSEP (recommended by the ENC). Then Ofgem (which is, I guess, a kind of quasi-acronym) mandated NESO to deliver RESPs. “But” I hear the masses cry out. “What about LAEPs? How do they fit in?” Good question. I’ll explain.

First, let’s take a step back. Many of us agree there has been a lack of strategic planning in the energy sector for the best part of 30 years. Not really a problem post-privatisation when you were largely sweating the network and generation assets that were built in a previous generation. But we are not in that period anymore, nor have we been for about a decade. A combination of the demands of the energy transition and the realities of upgrading a creaking energy infrastructure mean we are in a build phase (and that is before you factor in the potential of new digital infrastructure).

And we are building towards a much more complex system, with millions of actors – from giant offshore wind farms and nuclear power stations to someone charging up their EV at home. We need to have a better idea of where we are going, which is why better strategic planning is needed (we also need much better market signals that reflect the physics of this new system, of course, but that is another urgent debate).

Look at it from the other end of the telescope. I am, say, Coventry and I want to think about how I decarbonise. Which buildings should I insulate to provide the most system value? Where could I install heat networks? What bits of the local grid need upgrading so all those Teslas and Leafs and Ioniqs don’t overwhelm the local substation? Where are the pockets of fuel poverty that I need to address? At the moment, we mandate local strategic planning for transport and other areas of important economic activity, but we don’t do so for energy. We have 80 percent of local authorities declaring some form of a climate emergency, but only 30 percent having developed or developing something looking like a robust plan.

That is why we at the Catapult pioneered the development of Local Area Energy Planning six years ago, to help different places answer these questions. It is an approach – based on robust data, modelling scenarios, and, crucially, local engagement – that recognises the uniqueness of local areas. From dense urban centres with aging infrastructure like Greater Manchester to rural areas with abundant renewable energy potential like Ceredigion in mid Wales, a one-size-fits-all approach simply won’t work. LAEPs ensures that local characteristics – be it geography, the state of energy networks, or public sentiment – are at the heart of decision-making.

So, what have we learned and what needs to improve?

First, we have learned that detailed whole-system planning leads to investment. Greater Manchester, which is a pioneer in this area and completed a suite of 10 LAEPs in 2022, is already rolling out solar farms where they add the most system value. The local DNO Electricity North West is using the LAEPs we helped deliver to make the case for urgent infrastructure upgrades. York and North Yorkshire predicts if the area implements its LAEP it will save £280 million in energy infrastructure savings. In Lancaster, we have identified the areas of the ancient city which would be transformed with a heat network. We know that GB Energy and the reformed National Wealth Fund are desperate for projects to support. LAEPs can provide that healthy pipeline of low regret, scaled projects to turn into detailed feasibility studies and confirm finance.

Second, it has confirmed that many local authorities, though not all, are struggling with capacity and capability. To help solve that we built, with support of Innovate UK and DESNZ, Net Zero Go, which is a one-stop shop with oodles of free-to-access material for local authority officers to get guidance and training on developing and delivering projects. It is also a place where you can go to ask questions and get advice from people who have done the hard years developing and delivering projects.

We also have learned that getting robust energy system data is not easy and can be expensive. That is why we have launched our Net Zero Data platform, where local authorities and those working with them can, for a very reasonable price, buy (and then plug that data into innovative visualisation platforms like SSEN’s LENZA tool or UKPN’s Your local Net Zero Hub both powered by Advanced Infrastructure’s tool) or ArcGIS.

And we also learned that LAEPS were too expensive for some Local Authorities and devolved Governments struggling with tight budgets, partly because the scenario modelling was so innovative. So, we have worked out a way to slash that cost (which we will be talking about publicly soon).

But aren’t RESPs (Regional Energy Strategic Plans) going to do all of this for the 11 regions? Why do we also need an additional LAEP?

First of all, it is essential that RESPs and the tRESPS (I told you it was an energy acronym Golden Age) are built on robust, granular, high-quality data, which is too often lacking. LAEPs should play a critical role as a robust form of local evidence, that will act as building blocks to develop RESPs, which are much more focused on enabling network infrastructure investment, including that ahead of need, at regional-level granularity.

But RESPS are not designed to solve the problem of helping a city like Coventry identify where it needs to build a heat network, locate EV charging infrastructure or upgrade some poor-quality housing stock within the city limits. And crucially, they will not help build the local consent for the significant changes that are needed, consent that only comes through deliberative local engagement as we have seen delivered in places as diverse as Oldham and Bridgend.

That ability to ‘zoom in and zoom out’ on where investment is needed (and not needed) will be fundamental to our ability to transition to Net Zero smoothly. And handily we have already tested this approach in Wales, which has developed 22 LAEPs and is combining them into a single National plan (which aligns pretty closely with one of the proposed RESP zones).

In an ideal world, RESPs would be underpinned by creation of robust, standardised local pathway data across the whole of Britain which can be used in Local Area Energy Planning (we are already doing LAEPs in Northern Ireland, but it is a separate energy system). There is a real opportunity for RESPs to support creation of this initial LAEP scenario modelling for every local area in this consistent way. As well as making life easier to create a RESP, this would add real value for local areas. Central government or combined or local authorities would need to pay a vastly reduced top-up to deliver a full set of LAEPs, utilising this data, that reflects their local conditions to help them understand what is needed, how many, when and where.

We sometimes hear the view that coarse or siloed modelling is sufficient and will enable action at local level. But we know from our significant experience that is often not the case. We’ve seen examples where desktop, high-level modelling has created recommendations for solar in marshlands, renewable generation in green belt land or oversized heat pumps. This can alienate local stakeholders and requires re-doing, adding extra costs. It can also fail to capture the scale of the opportunity.

Local authorities up and down the UK tell us what is needed is a consistent framework for how they can plan their own routes to Net Zero. This can only be done through adopting one approach, mandating it and supporting its roll out. Wales has done it, and they have a national view based on every one of its 22 Local authorities feeding in – so why wouldn’t we do that for the whole UK? 135 councils are doing a LAEP or have one – others are in danger of being left behind.

Money is tight and I know the case needs to be made for best use of taxpayers’ funds – but currently we have a patchwork approach across the UK. Successful areas like the GMCA, York and North Yorkshire and others are leaping ahead – they have data-led plans based on evidence that is already de-risking investment. We now need to create the same consistent picture across the UK. Only then will the glut of acronyms lead to a glut in investment.