Timeyin Akerele

And they said that overall for the economy, the costs were relatively small, but for individual household bills, they also did this modeling exercise and they compared

sort of household bill in 2025 with what it might be in 2050.

And basically in real terms, they say likely to be quite similar.

So it's not the case that net zero, according to the CCC, net zero is going to end up with people having much higher energy bills.

So to clarify, I think their analysis shows that the energy bill per se will be lower in real terms than what it is now.

And obviously we hope people's incomes will be higher.

So the actual effect will be lower still, the effective cost for people.

But then the CCC, I think rightly, said, yeah, but also people will have to buy a heat pump.

And heat pumps are a bit more expensive than gas boilers.

So whilst they might be cheaper to run than gas boilers, you've got higher capital cost.

And obviously the government helps with that at the moment with a subsidy.

But they basically, that's why the calculation came in.

So they do think that electricity should be cheaper per unit, if you like, than it is now.

So I think in the long run, that's what we should expect and what we should hope for.

2050 is pretty long.

That is the goal.

And I should say also, as I was saying before, if you have a renewable space system or a clean energy system, you've got more stability.

It matters far less if Putin invades Ukraine from a, obviously it matters for all sorts of reasons, but it matters less from a sort of volatility of your energy bill reason.

We're protected, we're increasingly already protected from that volatility in international markets.

And I think that's an important benefit.