The True Cost of Net Zero: £7.6 Trillion

Video Description

The British government spends £1.2 trillion annually on everything from the NHS to defence, representing 45% of GDP. Yet according to official modelling from the National Energy System Operator, the gross cash cost of achieving net zero could reach £7.6 trillion – almost seven times the entire UK government budget. This represents one of the most expensive economic transformations in British history, yet there's been remarkably little honest debate about who will ultimately bear these costs. Official bodies like the Climate Change Committee have systematically understated net zero costs by using fantasy assumptions: comparing against made-up baselines rather than measuring gross costs, assuming technologies will magically become cheaper, and using borrowing costs below market rates. The reality is already proving far more expensive. Offshore wind is costing double what officials predicted, heat pumps are far more expensive than estimated, electric vehicles aren't getting any cheaper, and interest rates are far higher than assumed. Recent solar farms at Stoke and Atherton cost nearly double the Climate Change Committee's 2025 estimates and more than double their 2030 projections. Projects are being cancelled because the numbers simply don't add up. Who pays for net zero? British taxpayers and consumers do, through higher energy bills, higher taxes, increased government borrowing, and suppressed economic growth. Before committing to making ourselves poorer, we need an honest, democratic debate about the true cost of net zero. This video examines the facts that official bodies would rather you didn't know about Britain's most expensive policy commitment. The Institute of Economic Affairs is a registered educational charity. It does not endorse or give support for any political party in the UK or elsewhere. Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. The views represented here are those of the speakers alone, not those of the Institute, its Managing Trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff.