This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

The boss of one of the world’s biggest energy companies has said governments should abandon expensive “moonshot” green technologies – such as the £1.3bn Swansea tidal project, axed last week – in favour of wind and solar.

Ignacio S Galan, chair of Spanish energy giant Iberdrola, which controls Scottish Power in the UK, said the decision on Swansea must see the end of support for what he described as unproven technologies that are a distraction and waste of resources.

“Now is not the time for expensive ‘moonshot’ projects that do little to make renewables more affordable, while possessing only limited potential for global growth,” Galan said.

“It is time to put a line in the sand. We should accept that some renewable technologies will never get to a level where they can compete with wind and solar.”



While investing small amounts to drive down new technology costs was acceptable, high spending on ideas unproven at scale was wasting time in the fight against climate change, he said.

Wind and solar deserved government support because they had already come down drastically in cost, and would continue to do so, Galan said.



Iberdrola is a major player in solar and onshore wind, but has been frustrated by the UK blocking onshore windfarms from competing for renewables subsidies. The firm is also building offshore windfarms in Britain.

But a spokesperson for Tidal Lagoon Power, the company behind the proposed Swansea scheme, said tidal lagoons could prove cost competitive.

“Having once bemoaned the incumbency of fossil fuels, it’s disappointing that some in the renewables sector have adopted this bad habit,” they said.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

New research has found that the UK government’s stance of blocking support for onshore windfarms and solar, and only backing offshore windfarms, will be more expensive and result in higher carbon emissions.

Analysts at Aurora Energy Research said that subsidising a mix of the three sources would be £210m-£330m cheaper than solely pursuing offshore windfarms.

Lord Deben, chair of the government’s statutory climate advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, criticised the exclusion of onshore windfarms. “To spend more because the government won’t do the low-cost alternative seems to me unacceptable,” he said.