The UK Government’s latest announcement to reduce the influence of gas on electricity prices is a welcome and necessary step. Its plan includes voluntary long-term fixed-price contracts for existing low-carbon generators, alongside an increase in the Electricity Generators Levy from 45% to 55%. The stated aim is clear: reduce the share of electricity still exposed to gas-linked wholesale pricing and give households and businesses better protection from future shocks. Government says around 30% of Britain’s power supply remains exposed to wholesale prices set by gas, even though gas is already setting the power price less often than it did in the early 2020s.
At OnGen, we support that direction of travel.
But it is also important to recognise what this announcement is and what it is not.
This is not a simple administrative “switch” that suddenly disconnects electricity prices from gas. It is a practical attempt to reduce the extent to which low-carbon power revenues remain tied to volatile gas-driven wholesale markets. That matters. And as Regen has argued, practical measures are far preferable to headline-grabbing market-splitting proposals that risk distorting price signals and undermining investment in flexibility technologies such as batteries and interconnectors.
For businesses, public sector organisations and large estates, there is an equally important point: real decoupling does not happen only in Whitehall or the wholesale market. It also happens on site.
Every kilowatt-hour generated onsite from solar, wind or other viable renewable technologies is a kilowatt-hour that does not need to be bought from the grid at a price still influenced by gas. Every well-designed battery system increases the ability to shift consumption, reduce peak exposure and make better use of low-cost onsite generation. In other words, onsite renewables and storage are one of the most direct ways an organisation can reduce its own exposure to energy price volatility while improving resilience and cutting carbon. OnGen’s own assessment approach is built around exactly that principle: objective, site-specific analysis using energy data and geophysical data to identify the best-value mix and sizing of technologies for each site.
That is why the next phase of the conversation matters so much.
If this policy announcement encourages more organisations to look seriously at onsite generation and storage, the sector has to ensure those projects are appraised properly at the feasibility stage. Too often, deployment starts with a technology-first mindset: a basic solar estimate, a battery added on later, or a recommendation shaped more by installer preference than by the actual needs of the site. That is how organisations end up with undersized systems, oversized systems, poor sequencing, weak paybacks or missed opportunities to combine technologies for a stronger financial case. Those are not just technical issues; they are commercial issues that directly affect ROI.
Proper option appraisal changes that.
It means starting with the actual demand profile of the building or estate, not with a preconceived answer. It means assessing multiple technologies together, not in isolation. It means testing storage as part of a system, not as an afterthought. It means understanding site constraints, likely savings, capital costs, carbon impact, funding routes and deployment phasing before money is committed. And it means being objective enough to say when a site is not ready — or when a different mix of technologies will deliver a better return. OnGen positions itself precisely around this need for independent, impartial, multi-technology feasibility and best-value sizing, with the ability to connect viable projects to funding and accredited installers once the case is proven.
This matters at portfolio level as well as site level.
Many organisations do not need one renewable energy project; they need a prioritised pathway across dozens or hundreds of sites. In that context, robust feasibility work becomes even more valuable. It helps identify where deployment should start, where battery storage strengthens the business case, where constraints make a project unviable today, and where future phases should be planned. Better appraisal leads to more efficient capital allocation, faster decision-making and fewer stalled projects.
So yes, the Government is right to act.
Bringing more low-carbon generation onto fixed contracts should help reduce the extent to which international gas shocks feed through into electricity prices. But if the UK wants to maximise the benefits of that policy direction, it also needs to accelerate a second form of decoupling: helping organisations consume less grid power, generate more onsite and deploy storage intelligently. Government can create the signal. Delivery depends on better project choices on the ground.
That is where feasibility becomes strategic, not procedural.
At OnGen, we believe the strongest response to gas-linked price volatility is not just more clean power on the system. It is more informed, objective and commercially robust deployment of onsite renewables and battery storage starting with proper option appraisal at the feasibility stage, where ROI is either protected or lost.
