Energy Scenarios
Compare what the UK's credible institutions forecast for energy futures. From climate targets to grid resilience, see how institutions differ on heating, generation, and the path to net zero.
The UK faces competing visions for how to reach net zero and maintain energy security. From the Climate Change Committee to National Grid, from Ofgem to DESNZ, credible institutions publish detailed scenarios. These aren't speculative. They shape investment decisions, set policy targets, and guide how the energy system will be built.
Published Scenarios
Click any scenario to view detailed metrics, methodology, and what the pathway means for energy bills, employment, and grid reliability.
CCC 6th Carbon Budget: Balanced Pathway
Climate Change Committee's policy-credible pathway. 78 per cent reduction by 2035, 100 per cent clean electricity by 2035, 19 million heat pumps by 2050.
FES 2024: Leading the Way
National Grid's fastest pathway to net zero. Achieved by 2047. Highest electrification, most distributed generation, 22 million heat pumps, 175 TWh hydrogen by 2050.
FES 2024: Consumer Transformation
Demand-side led. Reaches net zero by 2050 through aggressive efficiency and heat pump adoption. 25 million heat pumps, conservative hydrogen deployment.
FES 2024: System Transformation
Hydrogen-focused pathway. Large-scale blue and green hydrogen production by 2050. 210 TWh hydrogen. Moderate heat pump roll-out, strong network investment.
FES 2024: Falling Short
Slower policy action. Misses net zero by 2050. Low demand reduction, limited heat pump and hydrogen deployment. Reflects the cost of insufficient climate progress.
DESNZ Net Zero Strategy
Government's delivery plan. 50 GW offshore wind by 2030, 24 GW nuclear by 2050, 600,000 heat pump installations annually from 2028. Clean power by 2035.
Ofgem RIIO-3: System Transformation
Regulator's planning scenario. Guides network investment decisions and allowances. Strong renewable and hydrogen focus. Determines allowed network spending of billions.
National Infrastructure Commission: Baseline
Independent infrastructure assessment. Emphasises resilience, system flexibility, and the cost of delayed action. Bridges policy ambition with engineering reality.
Pathway Comparison at a Glance
Four credible pathways compared across five dimensions. Data from NESO FES 2024, CCC 6th Carbon Budget, and DESNZ Net Zero Strategy.
FES Leading the Way is the most ambitious on renewables and hydrogen but reaches net zero earliest (2047). FES Consumer Transformation relies on heat pumps rather than hydrogen. CCC Balanced sits between them. DESNZ is the government delivery plan, with a 24 GW nuclear ambition that exceeds all independent scenarios.
Key Metrics Comparison
How each scenario differs on peak demand, renewable capacity, hydrogen production, heat pumps, and EV deployment.
| Metric (2035) | CCC Balanced | FES Leading | FES Consumer | FES System | Falling Short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peak demand (GW) | 75 | 85 | 65 | 70 | 55 |
| Offshore wind (GW) | 65 | 86 | 52 | 60 | 30 |
| Onshore wind (GW) | 28 | 32 | 32 | 28 | 18 |
| Solar (GW) | 32 | 38 | 36 | 34 | 20 |
| EVs deployed (millions) | 23 | 30 | 25 | 23 | 12 |
Comparing 2050 Targets
Where scenarios diverge most dramatically by mid-century.
Heat pump scale
Hydrogen production
Renewable capacity
Nuclear contribution
What They Agree On
Consensus points across credible institutions.
Electricity is the backbone
All scenarios reach 95+ per cent clean electricity by 2050. The grid becomes the central infrastructure asset. Renewable generation scales massively.
Heat must decarbonise
Heating accounts for half UK energy demand. Every scenario requires either heat pumps at scale (CCC, FES Consumer) or hydrogen heating (FES System). Neither gets delayed.
Transport electrifies rapidly
New petrol and diesel car bans (2032–2035 across scenarios) are locked in policy. EV deployment ranges 23–30 million by 2035. The transition is credible.
Hydrogen remains uncertain
System Transformation counts on 210 TWh hydrogen for heating and industry. Other scenarios 45–90 TWh. Green hydrogen cost and scaling are the key unknowns.
Networks need investment
All scenarios require billions in electricity and gas network upgrades. Ofgem RIIO-3 will allow spending to support whichever pathway emerges.
2030s are decisive
The decade to 2035 sets the trajectory. Renewable capacity, heat pump roll-out, and EV deployment must hit aggressive targets or net zero becomes much harder.
Why do different models produce different numbers?
Each scenario model makes different assumptions about technology costs, build rates, consumer behaviour, and policy implementation speed. The NESO Future Energy Scenarios model four distinct pathways with different levels of societal change and speed of decarbonisation. The CCC's Balanced Net Zero Pathway assumes high policy ambition. DESNZ scenarios reflect current government policy. Comparing across models reveals which outcomes are consistent (appear in all scenarios) and which are uncertain (appear in some but not others).
What is the difference between a scenario and a forecast?
A forecast predicts what will happen. A scenario describes what could happen under specific assumptions. No scenario is a prediction. They are tools for testing strategy against uncertainty. The GB energy system uses scenarios to stress-test network investment, market design, and policy frameworks. If a decision works well across all four NESO scenarios, it is resilient. If it only works in one, it is a gamble.
Most published pathways rely heavily on electrification, with hydrogen more targeted
Recent CCC and NESO-style scenarios generally place most building heat decarbonisation on electrification, while reserving hydrogen for industrial clusters, selected transport uses, and other harder-to-abate segments. That reflects current cost evidence, technology readiness, and the amount of end-use conversion required for widespread residential hydrogen use.
Hydrogen remains relevant in scenarios that prioritise industrial decarbonisation, storage, and some flexible system roles. The live policy question is therefore less about a single winner and more about which end uses can justify hydrogen at scale, under what cost assumptions, and on what delivery timetable.
Falling Short is useful because it illustrates the system cost of delay. Comparing it with more delivery-focused pathways shows how much renewable capacity, network build, and low-carbon heat deployment still depend on timely planning, consenting, supply chains, and project execution.
Methodology and sources
Last reviewed: 17 March 2026
Scenario data reflects published models from NESO, CCC, and DESNZ. All figures are drawn from the latest available version of each model as of March 2026.
| Source | NESO Future Energy Scenarios - Current pathways and archived scenario documents. |
| Source | CCC Sixth Carbon Budget - Balanced Net Zero Pathway and sector analysis. |
| Source | DESNZ Powering Up Britain - Government energy security and net zero strategy. |
Next route
History: how did Britain's energy system get here?
From nationalisation in 1947 through privatisation to the net zero target. The decisions that shaped the system you see today.