We have tried for some time to get Cubico to be open and transparent about the extent of public funds that they will receive as a result of securing planning for Scout Moor 2. We began this process in January 2025 when we asked “Will these payments come from the UK government, and will the government use taxpayers’ money?”

The response from Cubico was “No, this is a privately funded scheme. No money will come from the UK government, and no taxpayers’ money is involved.”

We found this surprising given the wealth of renewable support schemes that have been set up to support companies like Cubico, either directly or indirectly.

Therefore, when concerned community members met with Cubico on the 26th February 2025, we were surprised to be told that Cubico would be applying for funding under the Contracts for Difference (CfD). This is an auction based scheme whereby renewable energy suppliers bid to supply energy at a guaranteed price, thereby sheltering them from the normal price fluctuations that occur. This is increasingly necessary for them to have a viable business model as more intermittent, weather dependent wind energy is added to the grid.

After the meeting I followed up with the following questions in an email on the 3rd March 2025:

Many thanks for attending the meeting with us last Wednesday 26th Feb in the Old Library. I raised a point that previous feedback from yourselves suggested that your development would not take advantage of public subsidies (email from REDACTED NAME attached). Clearly as you intend to apply for CfD payments, the wind farm would if successful take advantage of public funding. I therefore suggest that [REDACTED]’s response was highly misleading to say the least and wonder whether you agree?

However, I am not convinced that this is the whole story and I would appreciate your candour with respect to other public support that you might enjoy, both directly and indirectly. I list below the main opportunities that I am aware of for renewable energy companies to benefit from public funding and I would appreciate knowing which ones you plan to take advantage of with respect to the wind farm and/or the BESS:

1) Contracts for Difference – BESS also?

2) Sale of Renewable Energy Certificates to fossil fuel generators being a potentially major source of income for yourselves and an indirect public subsidy.

3) Constraint payments for when there is over capacity in the market

4) Hydrogen subsidy schemes (though I have seen no plans for a hydrogen plant in your proposals)

5) Capacity market payments to mitigate intermittency / lack of renewables. This might be a direct benefit via your BESS or an indirect benefit for the wind farm as its intermittency/lack of wind can be mitigated by paying CCGTs (for example) to be ready at short notice to fill in the gaps.

6) Subsidies to allow making electricity less efficiently, perhaps to support the construction of the BESS, if not its operation?

7) Would the expanded wind farm require increased grid infrastructure, which would be paid for by National Grid?

8) Others? There are several other schemes, such as Feed in Tariffs, though not applicable here as far as I know but do correct me if I am wrong. However, there may be other forms of direct subsidy or support that you are planning on?

Cubico responded to these question on the 6th March 2025:

We believe REDACTED NAME response on 9th January was reasonable, as this scheme will not receive direct public funding, which I understand was the core of the original question. For the avoidance of doubt, we are considering various routes to market, including CfD.

To clarify, CfD is not a direct public subsidy but a government-backed mechanism designed to provide investor certainty by stabilising revenues for low-carbon electricity generators. Payments under CfD are not made from general taxation but are instead funded by a levy on electricity suppliers, which is ultimately passed on to consumers. CfD ensures a stable, pre-agreed price for electricity (the Strike Price), mitigating market volatility rather than providing ongoing financial support. If market prices fall below the Strike Price, generators receive a top-up; if prices rise above it, they must pay back the difference. This mechanism supports long-term investment while ensuring consumers benefit from lower prices when market rates are high.

Regarding the broader list of funding mechanisms, while we appreciate your interest, we don’t believe it is necessary to go into detail at this stage. Our focus remains on securing a well-considered and robust planning permission, and we will continue to engage transparently as the plans progress. Like any developer, we are considering multiple routes to market but will only explore these in detail once we have greater certainty on planning timescales.

Regarding the second paragraph, Cubico is technically correct, and our initial question could have been better worded. However, it is clear from their response that it is the public (as bill payers) who will have to foot the costs. Whether or not bill payers will benefit is highly dependent on what happens to market prices but it should be obvious that we have shouldered the market risk and historically this keeps leading to rising prices as increases in the Energy Price Cap shows. Can you think of another industry where this happens?!

But this is not the whole story by a long shot. In their third paragraph Cubico declined to comment further on the wide variety of other support schemes available at this time. However, if public funding is available, by whatever route, Cubico would of course want to take advantage – after all they are a commercial company seeking to maximise profits. We don’t know how many of the support schemes they might take advantage of ultimately. However, we do know from readily available data that the cost to the public will likely be enormous. Any potential community benefits will pale into insignificance by comparison with more expensive energy bills and rising taxes for direct and indirect support schemes.

For more information on what NetZero is actually costing us please refer to this post describing analysis by the energy analyst David Turver – A Detailed Breakdown of Net Zero Costs – but make sure you are sitting down first!