The national grid, house prices and why pylons can't win

I wrote last year about the financial externalities of the huge expansion of the grid required for energy transition. And here we are. Protestors against new pylons in Scotland say they will cut 30% from house prices along the route. Most previous research suggests they are absolutely right. So here's the question. If a pylon will effectively cost you £70,000 plus, how many hours is it worth you devoting to protesting against that pylon? The answer is a lot. Even with a hit of 10%, based on average UK house prices, the average hit to a house price near a new pylon would be about about £7,800. Value your time at £20 an hour and that makes it worth each potentially affected household spending 390 hours protesting to prevent one being built near them. No wonder it’s so hard to get this stuff through planning.

Here’s Bloomberg on the expansion the grid needs. “The UK will need to build a backbone of pylons after 2030, running down from northeast Scotland through to northwest England, to transport electricity from new offshore wind farms. The spine would run from Peterhead to Merseyside and cost £58 billion ($73.7 billion), according to a report by National Grid Plc’s Electricity System Operator, the body responsible for grid planning. The high-voltage lines would connect up 21 gigawatts of offshore wind that’s in development off the coast of Scotland.”

Sounds good. But if everyone does the house price hit/numbers of hours it is worth protesting sums how likely is it that the new power lines we need at the moment (with transition dependent on far flung renewable energy sources) will ever get built? Roll on SMRs - which can be built where they are actually needed...

PS this is particularly important given that we are beginning to understand how much energy AI is going to need.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-11-22/uk-autumn-statement-will-jeremy-hunt-open-a-pandora-s-box-on-energy-bills?srnd=undefined&leadSource=uverify%20wall