The UK’s energy transition is being pulled in two directions at once. At the very moment government is embracing more centralised, long-term planning to deliver Clean Power 2030 (CP30), regional and local actors are being handed ever greater responsibility for shaping delivery on the ground. Balancing these competing instincts – national control and local agency – is fast becoming one of the defining challenges (or opportunities) for energy policy. 

The Case for Centralised Planning 

At the heart of this new approach sits the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP), billed as a 25-year blueprint for electricity, gas and hydrogen infrastructure. Its aim is to bring order to an increasingly complex system, aligning investment decisions with national objectives for decarbonisation, security of supply and ensuring infrastructure is built where it is needed.  

In principle, the argument is compelling. A system-wide plan should reduce uncertainty, accelerate delivery and provide clearer signals to investors. Delivering CP30 demands the pace and coordination – particularly on networks and connections – that the existing framework has struggled to provide. But this is also a return to central planning at a scale not seen in decades – and it comes with risks. 

The SSEP will need to remain flexible enough to respond to a rapidly changing system or risk being overtaken by events. The delay to its publication means there will be a two-and-a-half-year gap between NESO being commissioned and the first plan being released, during which demand patterns – most notably from data centres – have shifted significantly. The danger is that strategic plans drift away from real consumer need, leaving networks planning for a ‘fantasy grid’, rather than the system that will actually be needed. 

Another missing piece in the puzzle is the Government’s forthcoming Reformed National Pricing Delivery Plan, now expected in January. This plan will be critical in determining whether Reformed National Pricing can genuinely support the SSEP and deliver value to consumers. With planning through the SSEP set to do much of the heavy lifting, RNP will need to provide clear and consistent locational signals to steer investment to the right places. The Government has a number of levers at its disposal to achieve this, notably Transmission Network Use of System (TNUoS) charges and reform of the connections queue – both of which are expected to be addressed.  

The Inherent Tension: Energy Is Local 

Despite this, energy systems are built in places, not spreadsheets. Demand, resource availability, planning constraints, grid connections and public consent vary widely across the country. Alongside greater centralised planning, there is a growing recognition that regional and local actors must play a much bigger role in shaping – and in some cases owning – local energy systems. 

The Government’s answer is a tiered framework: national direction through the SSEP, place-specific translation via Regional Energy Strategic Plans (RESPs), and delivery on the ground through Local Area Energy Plans (LAEPs). In theory, this should marry national strategic objectives with local flexibility. In practice, it could introduce a new layer of complexity and cost, with RESP costs alone expected to exceed £1bn. Whether local and regional bodies have the capacity, capability and long-term funding to make this model work remains an open question 

Anchoring the Transition Locally 

Alongside this technocratic shift sits a more overtly political attempt to root the transition in communities. Great British Energy’s local energy plans, with community energy placed front and centre, reflect a growing recognition within government that while it may be winning the technical argument for the transition, it has yet to sell its vision to voters. 

Added to this, as millions of homes adopt heat pumps, rooftop solar and batteries, consumers will engage with the energy system to a degree never seen before. Realising this potential will depend on greater digitisation of the sector and far better sharing of data across the system. 

With households facing stubbornly high energy bills, public concern remains high. Polling from More in Common shows that three quarters of Britons are worried about their energy bills, while 43% believe the government either has no plan or one that is actively making things worse1. By creating visible local input and ownership, community energy schemes may be modest in megawatt terms, but ministers will hope they can punch well above their weight politically. 

Local politics may yet make this balancing act even harder. The May local elections are expected to bring significant churn across councils and authorities, including the rise of parties openly opposed to the Government’s energy agenda. Where national strategy and local political leadership are pulling in opposite directions, delivery risks becoming slower.  

Decisions Ahead 

The direction of travel is becoming clear: more planning, greater coordination and a stronger role for the state. What remains uncertain is whether this model can genuinely work with regional priorities, local consent and market factors. By 2026, with the SSEP and its supporting plans finally in place, we should have a much better sense of whether the UK has truly found a way to think national and act local.