Co-operative Energy to sell nuclear + renewables green electricity

Co-operative Energy will sell nuclear electricity as part of its newly-launched green energy tariff, this blog can exclusively reveal today. Unlike existing UK green tariffs, Co-operative Energy – which is launching today at the Royal Institute of British Architects in London – will not discriminate between sources of low-carbon power. Instead, it will offer customers electricity which is guaranteed to be below half the national average carbon emissions per kilowatt hour.

The new scheme differs radically from existing UK green tariffs, such as those offered by Good Energy and Ecotricity, which have been criticised for selling electricity at a hefty premium to customers on the promise that they are helping tackle climate change – whilst actually bringing little if any additional renewable power onto the energy market. [Update: Ecotricity disagrees with this interpretation – see comments below.] Good Energy, for example, offers a ‘100% renewable’ tariff, suggesting that customer demand will help bring more renewables online. But in reality, the existing subsidies and incentives – such as the government-mandated ‘Renewables Obligation Certificate‘ (or ROC) are already more than sufficient to make onshore wind profitable: the major hold-up is getting new wind farms through planning, not a lack of financing.

Co-operative Energy claims to differentiate itself by aiming the change the fuel mix of its portion of UK electricity generation – in essence by buying more renewables, gas and nuclear, and in the process keeping coal stations shut down for longer, and eventually taken offline. Here is an indicative fuel mix from the website:

The website states:

We may also source from nuclear power stations if necessary. That might seem like a controversial choice, because the safety of nuclear power and disposal of radioactive waste remain a concern for many, but nuclear energy is predictable and most importantly, low carbon.Our view is that we need a range of solutions and technologies to reduce our carbon emissions and increase our energy security. There is no single solution.

The scheme is especially notable because the Co-operative Group overall does not seem to consider nuclear energy to acceptable under its much-vaunted ‘ethical’ policy. Its Co-operative Investments banking arm states:

Our sustainable funds don’t invest in companies that are involved in mining, armaments, nuclear power generation, tobacco production or pornography, amongst other criteria.

This suggests the intriguing possibility that the Co-operative Group will have to disinvest from its own energy business, in order to maintain its own internal ‘ethical’ status. Or, more sensibly, it could rescind its anti-nuclear policy and limit its opposition to more obvious bads like weapons, cigarettes and porn.

The new scheme highlights the fact that the existing independent green tariffs have rather boxed themselves into a corner by stating they will only buy renewable power. Good Energy and Ecotricity, for example, are niche market providers that sell ‘green’ power to their customers generally at rates above those offered by other providers – and their customer base has not grown much in the past few years. With onshore wind stalling because of community-based objections across the country, their only additional renewables options are micro-level sources like solar PV and small hydro schemes.

Few of these have been built recently: one Good Energy hydro source dates back decades. Its customers may feel that they are buying green electricity, but that is only because everyone else is getting slightly browner electricity: overall the net difference to the UK’s emissions is probably zero. There is a Green Energy Supply certification scheme in existence, but its stamp of approval does not require a huge amount in terms of ‘additionality’, as its website admits:

Examples of measures that could be considered to be additional include a contribution towards offset activities, green funds, installation of energy efficiency technologies, or research and development into emerging renewable technologies.

In terms of making a big difference in the UK’s fuel mix, however, the only additional renewable source that really counts over the next few years is offshore wind. And offshore wind is a game for the big boys: capital investments come in the billions, and wind farm outputs in the several gigawatts.

Whether the Co-operative Energy initiative can help speed up this transition depends on how far its own customer base can grow. If it is able to challenge the ‘big six’ on price at the same time as demanding a lower-carbon supply in the power it buys, it could make a net difference overall by buying gas and nuclear on the margin instead of coal, assuming that all renewable power would have been sold anyway. The carbon content of power sold by the big six already varies radically, as the chart below indicates:

This information comes from the fuel mix disclosure that each generator must legally pass on to the energy regulator Ofgem. For Co-operative Energy, the company will have to take great care to keep its supply chain transparent, and to ensure that it can keep to the the yellow bar on the right hand side of the chart above. It is not alone in this challenge – Centrica, for example, had to explain at the end of last year why the carbon intensity of its power had gone up thanks to EDF’s purchase of nuclear generator British Energy.

The most important thing of all is that the carbon intensity of the UK’s power sector continues to decline along the lines proposed in the latest Climate Change Committee report, which I blogged about yesterday. But also surely crucial is that electricity customers get a fair deal and do not feel ripped off by being sold existing energy subsidies repackaged as ‘green power’ at a hefty premium.


  1. Mike Cheshire

    Hi Mark,

    A customer’s just alerted us to your blog, so I thought we should clear up a few things about us:

    “…Good Energy and Ecotricity, which have been criticised for selling electricity … whilst actually bringing little if any additional renewable power onto the energy market.”

    – Actually, building more new sources of green energy is exactly why we exist, what we’re about and is what makes us unique. From building our first windmill 15 years ago, we now have 52 – all owned by us and built using the money from our customers’ bills.

    In the last seven years, we’ve spent 71p in the pound from our customers’ bills building more new sources – that’s more than ten times’ any other energy supplier. For more, see

    “Good Energy and Ecotricity, for example, are niche market providers that sell ‘green’ power to their customers generally at rates above those offered by other providers – and their customer base has not grown much in the past few years. ”

    – We have a Price Pledge that promises to match the standard price of your regional supplier for electricity, and British Gas’s standard tariff for gas. So for those who have never switched (still almost half of UK households), we won’t cost a penny more.

    – Out customer base has seen its largest ever growth this year, due in no small part to our launch of Green Gas and a true Eco dual-Fuel tariff – we now have around 50,000 customers.

    So it would be good to clear this up in your post – not all energy companies are created equal! 🙂

    Mike Cheshire

  2. Elisa Trimble

    “nuclear energy is predictable”
    good god, what planet does this person live on? has he not been reading the news from Japan? 62% of their nukes are now offline.

  3. SayNo2BS

    “Our sustainable funds don’t invest in companies that are involved in … nuclear power generation”

    The Co-op are just not saying the truth.

    They clearly indicate on the page linked above that they invest in Scottish and Southern Energy a company that participates in a consortium with GDF Suez and Iberdrola to build a new nuclear power station at Sellafield

    They also shamelessly invest in nuclear engineering companies like Nuclear Engineering Services Ltd (NESL)

  4. Ian

    Where can I get a nuclear only tariff?

  5. Daniel

    Hi Jonny, interesting quioetsn and dilemma.From a methane point of view I understand that 95% (or so) of the methane emissions of slurry occur during storage on farms, as opposed to spreading on the land when it’s out in the air it doesn’t make methane it’s only when air is excluded that that happens. I thought that was interesting to know.Could we and if so should we utilise farm slurry is how I see your quioetsn.First could we’ It takes a great deal of waste to feed an AD plant big enough to make enough gas to be worth scrubbing up and grid injecting. For example the scheme we’re working up for Stroud would take all the food waste in the whole of Gloucestershire and more. The amount of slurry on a farm, even a large farm is not going to be sufficient I think, for an AD plant with gas injection (as a rule). Add to that the fact that many or most farms are quite remote from the gas grid. It looks unlikely.Farms can harness their BS and other stuff and (mini) AD it for use of the gas on the farm though that’s a neat and pretty economic way to go.Coming to the should we’ I get what you’re saying, maybe we have the opportunity at ecotricity to tackle a problem, even though we oppose the roots of the problem should we not intervene? I think not. The problem is agri farming, it’s an offence against nature even before you factor in climate change it’s bad practice and it has to stop. it will stop in time of that I’m sure. Even if we could use slurry for our green gas (which doesn’t look so likely) we wouldn’t. Farming could and should clean it’s own act up first thing would be to stop storing the stuff anaerobically that might be an easy enough step to take and would deal with the methane problem, without vegan intervention :).Cheers.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *