Shaping the narrative around new energy infrastructure

With billions being spent on infrastructure to enable the energy transition, how we build social licence could make or break delivery, says Aecom’s Europe energy lead Eloise John. Writing for Utility Week, she explores the key problems surrounding planning the UK's net zero infrastructure and how to alleviate them.

The infrastructure needed to deliver the energy transition will impact us all: as taxpayers, as communities affected by construction or as beneficiaries of more affordable bills, increased energy resilience and reduced carbon emissions. But it’s going to take careful planning and communication every step of the way to prevent the infrastructure delivery from being turned into a political football or media hyperbole.

Investors and governments have earmarked billions for plans including carbon capture systems, new wind and solar farms and transmission. Work on delivering this new infrastructure has already started. We know it’s going to be a big election issue with both parties already pledging to make it easier to connect renewable energy projects to the grid. But as things currently stand, one of the main routes to getting spades in the ground is via Development Consent Orders. This contains very specific requirements around consultation and demonstration that feedback has been considered in design.

But we can already see communities voicing concerns about elements such as the visual impact of pylons or wind turbines or the proximity of substations. Given the sheer amount of infrastructure needed, we’re seeing schemes and their impact being debated everywhere from social media and village halls to national press and Parliament. So, how as a sector, can we help shape the narrative to support delivery?

The wider infrastructure sector has been here before, whether it’s 15 minute cities or large linear infrastructure schemes such as road and rail. As much as people want to support the greater good and the national drive to net zero, that’s a lot to ask when it impacts their home or disrupts their lives.

It’s now that industry needs to align on the benefits so that we can drive the wider buy-in and obtain the social licence needed to get schemes going. We need to work as a collective – across governments, clients and contractors – to deliver what we need for a programme which will span decades.

Improving collaboration is an obvious place to start. Yes, it’s a well-trodden message, but bringing together diverse stakeholders early in the design process means that the risk of design changes further down the line is reduced. This is important for the pace of the consenting process as it gives more time to resolve issues and requires fewer elements to form part of an examination process – therefore making it easier for permission to be granted.

Projects should benefit the communities they impact. Does a scheme improve local employment? Can we bring any benefits direct into homes such as a fund to support the installation of home energy efficient measures locally? Industry needs to understand and implement social value from the beginning. I agree with Electricity Networks Commissioner Nick Winser when he says providing a community benefit set per kilometre of overhead line is less costly than using an underground cable and will have a lower environmental impact and this should be part of the plans. This was one of the big topics of discussion at the recent party conferences.

Since the pandemic, public consultation on infrastructure schemes has significantly improved, with increased use of online consultation. Industry should continue this best practice.

Given DCO submissions run into tens of thousands of pages, communications should pull out the evidence base of design and planning decisions. Doing this means that we can avoid contributing to binary arguments – rather than a debate being about if something impacts nature or not, through data and evidence we can talk in a more nuanced way about scenarios and how these change according to design options. It means we can better demonstrate solutions too.

We’re on the cusp of big change in terms of planning and consenting for this infrastructure – whether that’s driven by the current government or a new one. But we don’t know the details of what this change will be and how long it will take. As we wait, we’ll need to crack on with delivery and whatever the final process will look like, the earlier we can build a consensus, the better our chances of a successful outcome.