As the current energy crisis deepens, the term ‘Energy Security’ is once again in the headlines though a key point is missing in the debate.
101 of Security Studies teaches students that energy is a vital national resource worthy of protection. Currently, Russia is using the withdrawal of its energy resources as a tactic, as it would its military in past conflicts.
The strategic principle behind this is to demoralise the civilian population. So, is it time for the UK to shift the focus from the economics of this crisis onto the physical security of our network because, who and how does the U.K. actually, protect its generation and network?
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Applying a strategic mindset to the current infrastructure setup, it is found to be inherently resilient to outages both planned and unplanned; and, due to the land-based nature of the assets, can be substantially protected against interference by a foreign power.
Difficult to secure
The move towards Gigawatt scale offshore generation could significantly reduce this resilience. Easily implemented security measures are no longer applicable and the undersea cables used are exposed to advancing underwater military technologies. Such cables have been in place for many years now to supply electricity to islands and carry electricity from smaller-scale offshore generation, but these installations are less attractive as targets since the damage done is an economic nuisance at worst.
With its offshore geographical location, this new infrastructure requires careful planning from a security perspective, which is lacking in the current model. A UK-wide maritime monitoring and tracking system needs to be put in place to receive rapid notification and intelligence of cable faults and unexplained reductions in output. It must also have the capability to track movements at sea in areas where the offshore infrastructure is located and investigate suspicious movements. Such a system should be relatively inexpensive to implement, simply requiring the collaboration of existing resources.
The need for cable repair ships
It is also necessary to consider the repair timescales for our marine and undersea infrastructure. Does our current approach give enough consideration to UK-based manufacturing (or at least strategic stockpiling) of suitable replacement cables or repair materials. Do we have a UK-based cable laying and repair ship? Perhaps one lesson of the current energy shortage is that we are too reliant on a global pool of commercial resources over which we have no special priority.
So, what needs to happen, the UK’s power infrastructure requires the level of protection and investment that other UK strategic assets are given. The government and energy companies should immediately address these vulnerabilities before the UK becomes reliant on its offshore assets.
This is an excellent article. Unfortunately the time when the UK would review threats to our security such as those described – and allocate our defence budget accordingly – are long gone. Naysayers would argue that North Sea oil and gas rigs and their pipelines/hubs are similarly vulnerable to enemy attack. Russian naval assets frequently sail close to our – completely unprotected – North Sea infrastructure. But I suspect that the MoD and the defence estabishment have other issues on their minds at the moment. It would help if the next generation HVDC cables are laid in deeper trenches than… Read more »
Re a related topic raised previously w/ no response–has any navy even considered the possibility of a requirement to organize convoys for LNG tankers from NA/ME to European terminals under grey warfare conditions? Presume some plans and doctrine exist somewhere re WW II ops. Obviously dated, but perhaps a starting point.
Daniele could give you up to date RN availability figures but the Navy probably does not have enough escort ships to convoy LNG ships from the Gulf or indeed across the Atlantic. WWII was a long time ago and even then there were insufficient escorts – let alone air defence destroyers
Operation Kipion, which now represents the Royal Navy‘s current security mission in the region now has a wider remit to include the Suez Canal, Strait of Hormuz and piracy in the Indian Ocean. This now consists of a Type 23 frigate and mine countermeasures vessels.
Sorry, didn’t intend to convey that convoy duty should be solely an RN op; intended to state this should be a collective NATO function. Those who would benefit should be obligated to participate.
1SL did make noises along those lines going forward. I guess some of these things, if they exist, are classified.
Securing cables is a worldwide problem not easily overcome.
The big transformers are even harder to source with 12 month plus lead times often quoted. The big insulators are on another critical path.
UK population, whilst happy to use and consume, has a ‘not on my doorstep’ view of infrastructure projects. We could have had much more wind power develop quicker and cheaper on shore backed up by pumped hydro for storage and peak use if attitudes were different. Its taken decades for the tide to turn on nuclear also, largely due to misrepresentation of facts by a handful of naysayers amplified by the media. We’ve long forgotten the concept ‘of he greater good’ not helped by a media who constantly fail to to dig into details or publish real facts. We are… Read more »
Not convinced about the windmills. It takes a large diesel engine to start them, they are very expensive to build, and they need a comprehensive overhaul after 20 years ie a rebuild. And when the wind doesn’t blow….
Absolute rubbish – the latest high-efficiency wind turbines do not need diesel engines to start up, MWh for MWh they are they produce the cheapest electricity available to us at currently 1/5 the cost of combined cycle gas. Even the largest turbines are far cheaper than new nuclear or a new gas fired power station. In 2021 wind and solar produced 27% of our electricity. The largest turbine blade factory in the world has been built on Humberside
Who do you work for – Shell? BP? Conoco? Get real about renewables
But we do need energy storage and frustratingly pumped hydro has been around a long time and as a long term investment far better than lithium batteries. We should also be building onshore its the cheapest and fastest way to provide new energy. Another option is to refurbish older turbines, as you point out the newer tech is more efficient.
Hi Expat, Liquified air is a British invention that has received a grant from the government and significant investment. Highview Power have built a demonstrator near Manchester and are planning a first commercial plant also close to Manchester with a second, larger, commercial plant in Yortkshire. The idea is that they use excess renewable power when the wind blows to liquify air and then warm it up back into a gas to power turbines when the wind drops. I read somewhere that the chap who invented it spent years in his garage until he came up with something that would… Read more »
Sounds good should also provide a low footprint storage that’s has no waste unlike lithium batteries.
Indeed, and thank you for saying so!
To add some balance BP is actually take renewables seriously they do have a significant plan to invest in uk renewables. Both Shell and BP know we’re at the peak of fossil fuel usage.
Plan yes, investment that is tangible and enduring creating jobs, infrastructure and a green economy- no. I will believe it when i see it.
Does this help.
https://renewablesnow.com/news/fugro-awarded-geotechnical-work-for-3-gw-of-uk-offshore-wind-sites-of-bp-enbw-780771/
Or this
https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/lightsource-bp-develop-5mw-solar-farm-on-marginal-farmland
Or this
https://www.bppulse.co.uk/charging-on-the-go
What happens if the wind doesn’t blow man?
For a 450ft turbine requires something like 800 ton concrete to be poured into the base and they last 10-20 years then need replaced. They are sold as environmentally friendly but are anything but.
One only needs look at Viking wind Farm in Shetland under construction they ruin vast areas of natural environment by pouring concrete over vast areas and digging the joint up as opposed to one designated site for a power station ….it’s all smoke and mirrors.
Stakeholder capitalism here to save the planet😎
🏴🇬🇧
Any overhaul is an opportunity to improve the technology in 20 years its likely the latest tech would see a improved generating capacity. So I don’t see that as a negative.
The tide flows c22 hours daily(c an hour slack water at top & bottom of tides), 7 days a week, 305 days a year, yet we leave it completely untapped. Then there’s geothermal, hydro electric & solar. I’d like to se all out power production kept in UK hands rather than us used as a cash cow for other nations.
The sea and tide is a great energy source. Harnessing it and a cost equal to other forms seems to be the major stumbling block. Making a generator device suitable for all sea states is perhaps another challenge.
Hopefully it’s an area that moves forward soon. The uk is surrounded by water so could be a market leader in the area.
I love watching the windmills. Put them anywhere suitable near me. We need to get away from fossil fuel for electricity generation. Obviously you need back ups etc but the main should be coming from other ways than burning gas.
For those who don’t like windmills turn there electric off and see how fast they change there minds 😂😂
You are right in more ways than one. Don’t be shouted down, the ‘Greens’ will wake up one morning and smell the coffee. Fracking is the new game in town …
Now watch them (the ‘Greens’) shout … 🙄🙂
The Ukraine conflict is unusual in that the energy supply network was not among the first targets. I think it fair to assume that the UK, were it to be in a war, would not be granted that luxury. From those wars that did target the grid it seems to me that critical towers, substations/transformers and grids local to power station (not sure of their proper names) were the prime targets and can’t really be protected. Besides which, if it got that far we are on a slippery slope to total annihilation. This kind of asset needs protection from terrorists… Read more »
More random defelction with chuff johnskie boy? Wheres your regular updates on the smooth tactical progress of the great rapist army, as we usually get?
Ukrainian women, old folks and children will be worried, another 300,000 rapists, looters and murders are heading their way. More meat for the Ukrainian meat grinder to chop up. I wonder at what point Putin will have to go full mobilisation in order to try to win his war? I don’t see the 300,000 reserves achieving anything other than prolongation of the war. At what point will the Russian populace call time on his regimen?- they have already suffered by best guesstimates approx 50,000 fatalities and a further circa 45,000 wounded, captured or deserters. Were you aware of those numbers… Read more »
It sounds like the epitaph of the losing ‘Putinistas’ in the Donbas.
Interesting, that is why I’m very much for wind power and solar farms, they are distributed widely, difficult to mission kill and entire solar farm spread over 10 or 20 acres and ditto offshore windturbines. the nexus locations in terms of sub stations and relay points probably do need consideration in terms of national defence. that’s why i think the RAF regiment and RA need dozens and dozens of mobile Land Ceptor, 40mm bofors guns (radar guided) and aster 30/30nt systems. Putin can threaten the UK all he likes, an attack against us will bring a whirlwind response from the… Read more »
Nuclear power shared, as demand requires, between electricity generation and hydrocarbon creation (including just Hydrogen for that matter) would help create a level of carbon-neutral onshore backup to stop the lights going out. Building small modular reactors near airports for the delivery of synthetic aviation fuel is a reasonable first step. A step I think we need to take, whether the nimbys like it or not.
You don’t need to build an SMR anywhere near an airport just the facility that produces the fuel connected to the grid.
True. However, as well as minimizing transmission losses if the two parts are co-sited, I imagine there are uses for the otherwise waste heat in a carbon capture/synthesis process.
Yes the real issue isn’t energy production: it’s energy storage.
Remember that the Royal Navy is developing a new Multi-Role Ocean Surveillance ship. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-royal-navy-surveillance-ship-to-protect-the-uks-critical-underwater-infrastructure
Cancelled in favour of a “capability”, which may or may not have something to do with the Navy.
When did they cancel it? Bloody hell..
That’s my understanding. It was removed from the National Shipbuilding Strategy in the refresh. Hey! Maybe it’ll make a comeback like the interim missile. It wouldn’t surprise me.
I can’t find anything about it being cancelled.
Maybe I’m wrong then. I hope so. As I recall MROSS went into the concept phase this time last year, then this Spring they removed it from the shipbuilding plan, stopped referring to it as a ship, and started talking about a capability.
I just did a bit of a look around. The last reference I can find to it as a ship, was in June, when in the Lords Baroness Goldie referred to boats, Lord West “corrected” her and called it a ship. It might be the minister knew of what she spoke. By last month the Maritime Security Strategy said The new MoD Multi-Role Ocean Surveillance (MROS) programme will play a vital and versatile role in protecting the integrity of the UK’s Maritime zones and critical undersea infrastructure. It will harness remotely piloted capabilities and form a key capability in managing… Read more »
It seems to still appear on the refreshed National Shipbuilding Strategy on page 31. The ship might just be a mother ship for the capability. i.e a submersible and remote operation station that can be removed in an ISO container.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1061201/_CP_605____National_Shipbuilding_Strategy_Refresh.pdf
Yes. it’s still a “capability” as mentioned on page 29, but doesn’t appear on page 20, which is the schedule for building ships.
Nice stuff
Cancelled to make way for the national flagship eg Truss’s holiday yacht.
You don’t need fancy underwater tech to cripple the UK. All these cables connected to the UK make landfall normally on beeches were they are half buried in sand at best. A dozen blokes hitting multiple targets at once is enough to black out large chunks of the UK.
Yep, and where they are is an “open secret” anyone with access to the net can work out quite quickly.
It’s high time the government recognised the need for civil defence, not just for state on state action but terrorism and hacking. What’s needed is a UK department of homeland security to directly manage the safety of all national critical infrastructure not just undersea cables but land based i.e nuclear sites, critical factories, internet 5g etc. They could monitor and inform the government on what’s needed for the future in regards to energy independence and to make sure Russian/Chinese parts are excluded from the nation.
On top of this hopefully a more comprehensive UK GBAD system will give some increased anti-air protection and surveillance for the mainland and UUV, ASW, multi-purpose ships /patrol subs for monitoring ocean cables and coastal sea approaches. I think that its been mentioned as a key role for the T32, whenever that gets off the drawing board.
I agree, however a lot of these monitoring and constabulary roles shouldn’t just fall on the military-time some other agencies stepped up too
“Applying a strategic mindset to the current infrastructure setup, it is found to be inherently resilient to outages both planned and unplanned;”
Given the current energy crisis further explanation of this assertion is definitely needed.
A missile strike on each of our nuclear power staions would cripple us.
Would probably only need to hit one at peak load unless the situation has changed. Years ago the national grid could theoretically be almost entirely shut down. Take out a power station in a geographically isolated position at peak load. Didcot Power used to be such a station, its job being to correct for transmittion loses and keep the local voltage up. If Didcot had gone down at the wrong moment the next nearest station could find itself faced with trying to meet the load. If the load was more than it could cope with the turbines would loose revs… Read more »
Its pretty clear from recent events in the Baltic that not only is OUR energy systems insanely vulnerable, but so is much of Europes. How to mitigate is the hard part, How do we protect pylons, underground / undersea cables and pipelines etc. Thats going to be very difficult. BUT we MUST rebuild the UKs old STRATEGIC RESERVES of Oil, Gas, Fuel, Meat and Grain, at least 3 months worth.