UK Electricity decreased 23.24 GBP/MWh or 22.68% since the beginning of 2025, according to the latest spot benchmarks offered by sellers to buyers priced in megawatt hour (MWh). This dataset includes a chart with historical data for the United Kingdom Electricity Price.

Wholesale electricity prices in the United Kingdom hit a record-high in 2022, reaching **** British pence per kilowatt-hour that year. Projections indicate that prices are bound to decrease steadily in the next few years, falling under **** pence per kilowatt-hour by 2030.

Electricity prices in Europe are expected to remain volatile through 2025, with Italy projected to have some of the highest rates among major European economies. This trend reflects the ongoing challenges in the energy sector, including the transition to renewable sources and the impact of geopolitical events on supply chains. Despite efforts to stabilize the market, prices still have not returned to pre-pandemic levels, such as in countries like Italy, where prices are forecast to reach ****** euros per megawatt hour in September 2025. Natural gas futures shaping electricity costs The electricity market's future trajectory is closely tied to natural gas prices, a key component in power generation. Dutch TTF gas futures, a benchmark for European natural gas prices, are projected to be ***** euros per megawatt hour in July 2025. The reduced output from the Groningen gas field and increased reliance on imports further complicate the pricing landscape, potentially contributing to higher electricity costs in countries like Italy. Regional disparities and global market influences While European electricity prices remain high, significant regional differences persist. For instance, natural gas prices in the United States are expected to be roughly one-third of those in Europe by March 2025, at **** U.S. dollars per million British thermal units. This stark contrast highlights the impact of domestic production capabilities on global natural gas prices. Europe's greater reliance on imports, particularly in the aftermath of geopolitical tensions and the shift away from Russian gas, continues to keep prices elevated compared to more self-sufficient markets. As a result, countries like Italy may face sustained pressure on electricity prices due to their position within the broader European energy market. As of August 2025, electricity prices in Italy have decreased to ****** euros per megawatt hour, reflecting ongoing volatility in the market.

The objective of the project was to provide econometric analysis and theory for modelling energy and soft commodity prices. This necessitated data analysis and modelling together with theoretical econometrics, dealing with the specific stylised facts of commodity prices. In order to analyse energy and soft commodity prices, the determination of spot energy prices in regulated markets was first considered, from the point of view of the regulator. Direct data analysis of futures commodity prices was then undertaken, resulting in the collection of an extensive dataset of most traded futures commodity prices at a daily frequency, covering 16 different commodities over a 10-year period.

UK Gas fell to 72.60 GBp/thm on December 2, 2025, down 1.67% from the previous day. Over the past month, UK Gas's price has fallen 11.75%, and is down 40.33% compared to the same time last year, according to trading on a contract for difference (CFD) that tracks the benchmark market for this commodity. UK Natural Gas - values, historical data, forecasts and news - updated on December of 2025.

The project consisted of undertaking a comprehensive empirical survey of public opinion towards future energy options for the UK, with a particular emphasis on attitudes towards nuclear power when placed in the context of climate change.

The survey questionnaire consisted of 4 main sections. The first main section looked at climate change and nuclear power from a broad perspective, comparing these two with a range of other environmental and energy-related issues at different global/local scales. This section also examined attitudes towards various options for generating electricity. The second section specifically considered attitudes towards nuclear power. The third section examined attitudes towards climate change in more detail. Sections two and three contain a number of standardised questions that were aimed to measure general attitudes towards nuclear power and climate change, the perceived risks and benefits of the two issues, as well as questions on ambivalence, attitudinal certainty, and trust in risk regulation. In addition, the two sections contain a number of issue-specific questions. The fourth and final section of the questionnaire looked specifically at attitudes towards the reframing of nuclear power as a solution to climate change. This section contains questions that were designed to compare the risks of climate change with the risks of nuclear power, and attitudes towards different energy futures and options of electricity generation that might help to prevent climate change, using a split-sample technique.

Although there are a range of one-off or tracker surveys and risk perception studies available that have asked about energy generation, nuclear energy, and climate change separately, the value of the current instrument is that it generates a database which allows responses to be compared across all three sets of issues. In addition there is no comparable existing survey which asks, in a comprehensive way, about the reframing question.

Project Overview This data is part of a multiple case study of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), a form of geothermal energy used for heating and power generation. Examining two EGS sites in Ithaca, NY, USA, and Redruth, UK, this project used ethnographic observation and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in deep geothermal projects. Participants included geothermal experts (researchers, developers, and communication professionals) and members of the host communities. The interviews assessed participants' feelings towards deep geothermal, their visions of energy futures, and how their interpretations of geothermal energy intersected with the meanings and attachments participants held towards place. The data consists of de-identified transcripts of the stakeholder interviews and observational memos from ethnographic fieldwork. Case Study Locations The two sites for this case study are the Cornell Earth Source Heat (ESH) Project in Ithaca, New York and the United Downs Deep Geothermal Project (UDDGP) in Redruth, UK (labeled as “US”/”UK” in the project materials). ESH aims to provide district heating to Cornell University’s Ithaca campus and aid in making the campus carbon neutral by 2035. The project is located on campus land within the Town of Ithaca. Ithaca, NY is a college town of approximately 30,000 people located in the Finger Lakes Region of New York State. UDDGP is being developed by Geothermal Engineering Limited (GEL), with the aim of providing 10MW of electricity and 55MW of local heating. The project is located in an industrial park near the town of Redruth (15,453) and the village of Carharrack (1,300) in the Duchy of Cornwall. Data Collection Interviews were conducted with two groups: geothermal experts and community stakeholders. The “expert” samples included researchers, geothermal professionals, university administrators, and project developers. Expert participants were recruited using personal and professional contacts and snowball sampling from an initial list of those involved with the projects. Community stakeholder interviews included interviews with students on the Cornell University campus. Students were recruited via the Sona system for participant pool management and were compensated with Sona credit. In the US case, additional community stakeholder interviews and focus groups did not include consent for data sharing; in the UK case, plans for formal interviews with community members were replaced with informal interviews during field observations, described below, due to recruitment challenges and high levels of local burnout with research projects. Separate interview guides were developed for each group of participants, and adapted to each of the case settings. The expert interview guide asked participants to describe their involvement with UDDGP/ESH, for those who were directly involved in the projects, and their perspectives on the projects, the public responses, and their views on EGS and energy futures in general. The student interview guide followed a semi-structured format that began with a question about their feelings towards community and place before raising the topic of EGS. Participants were first asked if they were familiar with the EGS project in question, before being given a one-page handout describing EGS to read. They were then asked about their reactions and their feelings about EGS as an energy source for their community, as well as what their ideal vision of energy in their community would look like. The US student interviews (N=19) were conducted between October and December 2021. The expert interviews were conducted between August 2021 and February 2022 (N=10, US) and February and June 2022 (N= 8, UK), for a total of 37 formal interviews. All interviews were conducted by Catherine Lambert. The student interviews took place over Zoom and lasted 15-20 minutes, while the expert interviews primarily took place over Zoom (25-30 minutes), with the exception of on-site interviews during the UDDGP site visit (UK_EXP06, 07, and 08), which lasted from 40 minutes to an hour. Qualitative observation for the US case took place from 2018-2023. Dr. Lambert observed events in the Ithaca area including townhall meetings, public talks, and open house hours at the drill site visitors’ center. During the drilling of the exploratory CUBO well in summer 2022, Dr. Lambert attended the open house hours, documented the materials at the visitors’ center, and observed the interactions between visitors and the project team during the hour-long sessions. As part of these observations, Dr. Lambert also walked the area surrounding the drill site and recorded perceptions of the physical landscape as well as the sensory impact of the drilling activity. Observation in the UK case was conducted by Dr. Lambert in June 2022 over the course of a week and involved visits to the UDDGP site; the GEL and GeoScience offices, the communities of Redruth, Gwennap, and Carharrack;...

In 2024, the price of natural gas in Europe reached 11 constant U.S. dollars per million British thermal units, compared with 2.2 U.S. dollars in the U.S. This was a notable decrease compared to the previous year, which had seen a steep increase in prices due to an energy supply shortage exacerbated by the Russia-Ukraine war. Since 1980, natural gas prices have typically been higher in Europe than in the United States and are expected to remain so for the coming two years. This is due to the U.S. being a significantly larger natural gas producer than Europe. What is natural gas and why is it gaining ground in the energy market? Natural gas is commonly burned in power plants with combustion turbines that generate electricity or used as a heating fuel. Given the fact that the world’s energy demand continues to grow, natural gas was seen by some industry leaders as an acceptable "bridge-fuel" to overcome the use of more emission-intensive energy sources such as coal. Subsequently, natural gas has become the main fuel for electricity generation in the U.S., while the global gas power generation share has reached over 22 percent. How domestic production shapes U.S. natural gas prices The combination of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) and horizontal drilling can be regarded as one of the oil and gas industry’s biggest breakthroughs in decades, with the U.S. being the largest beneficiary. This technology has helped the industry release unprecedented quantities of gas from deposits, mainly shale and tar sands that were previously thought either inaccessible or uneconomic. It is forecast that U.S. shale gas production could reach 36 trillion cubic feet in 2050, up from 1.77 trillion cubic feet in 2000.