Great British Grid: a connection date is only the beginning

The announcement of Great British Grid has put Britain’s electricity network firmly in the spotlight, and rightly so

For years, much of the energy conversation has centred on generation: how much wind and solar we can build, how quickly projects can come online and where storage fits. Meanwhile, the less glamorous infrastructure that carries that electricity around the country has been playing catch-up.

The consequences are becoming expensive. The National Audit Office says constraint costs, incurred when the network cannot carry enough electricity from where it is generated to where it is needed, reached £1.9bn in 2025-26 and could rise to £7.8bn by 2030 without concerted action. Ofgem estimates £70bn of transmission investment is required between 2025 and 2031.

Great British Grid aims to bring additional public investment into that picture, alongside private investment and existing network operators. The government also plans to expand self-build connections and accelerate competitive tendering for transmission projects.

All of that is welcome, but once the headlines about investment and faster connections die down, we need to think carefully about how we define success.

Connection is a milestone

The time it takes a project to secure a grid connection matters enormously, but there is an important distinction between having a connection agreement and having an operational project. Someone still has to build it.

A renewable development sits within a much larger physical system — transmission, substations, storage where appropriate, cables and distribution infrastructure all have to come together before power starts flowing. Accelerating one part of that process only gets us so far if another part is not ready.

Perhaps, then, we need to be more ambitious about how we measure progress. A shorter queue and earlier connection offers are good news. The real test is how quickly viable projects are physically built, commissioned and energised. That is where policy meets engineering.

We should not underestimate the build

The scale of grid development planned over the next few years will test Britain’s ability to deliver major infrastructure at pace. The NAO recently described the upgrade timetable as “very challenging”. Of the 80 projects identified by NESO as necessary in its Clean Power advice, 64 are under way, most at an early stage, and many carry risks around their current delivery dates. An announcement cannot make those practicalities disappear.

Turning investment into working infrastructure takes time. Projects have to move through planning and consenting into construction, with equipment and materials procured against demanding programmes and skilled people needed right through to installation, testing and commissioning.

That also means involving the electrical supply chain earlier. On programmes of this scale, procurement cannot be treated as something that begins once designs are fixed and construction is ready to start. Early visibility of specifications, volumes and delivery programmes gives suppliers a better chance to plan capacity and helps projects identify practical issues before they become programme issues.

And the grid isn’t being upgraded against a static backdrop. The demands placed on it are growing, from connecting more renewable generation and electrified transport to supporting industrial automation and digital infrastructure, all of which adds to the scale of what needs to be delivered.

There is an uncomfortable conversation here too. We all want cheaper, cleaner electricity, greater energy security and faster connections, but we are rather less enthusiastic about the new pylons, substations and cable routes that come with them.

Communities rightly expect infrastructure to be delivered responsibly. But there comes a point where wanting major infrastructure faster and more cheaply sits uneasily with adding more complexity to how and where it can be built.

Britain’s experience with HS2 is an obvious reminder of how difficult large, long-term infrastructure programmes can become as requirements, costs and timescales evolve. The grid cannot afford the same fate.

From connection promise to power flowing

There is plenty of reason to be positive about Great British Grid.

Greater competition creates an opportunity to look at how grid infrastructure is delivered, not simply who delivers it. If it encourages new approaches while maintaining the safety, quality and reliability these projects demand, that can only be positive.

Expanded self-build rights could also give developers greater control over connections that might otherwise be held up. The government points to Ireland, where similar self-build arrangements have reduced connection times by up to 11 months, but Britain is trying to do something much bigger than process connection applications more efficiently. We are extending and reinforcing a national electricity system while simultaneously asking far more of it.

The important thing is that these reforms translate into working infrastructure on the ground.

Great British Grid should ultimately be judged by what happens on the ground. Are projects being built, commissioned and energised? Can renewable electricity get efficiently from where it is generated to where it is needed? Can businesses that need additional power actually access it?

Because Britain’s grid challenge will not be solved on paper — at some point, we have to build it.