Energy Prices

[Harry's Lad]

8 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

The other choice is to not do it. 

By not going all electric and keeping with gas?, I don't think that's likely even if that does conjure up problems of its own.

Even if natural gas was replaced with hydrogen they would still need natural gas to make it.

Some of this has been discussed earlier in this thread.

 

[dockers_strike]

Since de regulation in 1998, the market has worked pretty well Id say. The consumer has more choice and Id say savings have been made.

 

The issue isnt really one of nationalisation v de regulation.

 

A shit storm of events, some that could be foreseen and some not, have, in recent months, forced a number of suppliers, not generators, out of business.

 

I think it's funny the owner of Forest Green Rovers FC effectively saying the industry shouldnt have been privatised. He wouldnt have an 'eco energy' business to run if it hadnt been.

 

We also have to pay eco generators to turn off wind powered generation when there isnt demand on the grid which can be met by existing generators. Hey ho!

[Strontium]

14 minutes ago, Harry's Lad said:

Utilities aren't just gas though are they, there's electricity and water.

If the country is about to go 'all electric' which seems likely  then re-nationalising seems sensible to me.

 

We should have been investing more strongly in renewables over previous decades. Unfortunately the progress made in this area during the coalition years, when annual investment grew from just over $10bn to more than $25bn, was halted by the Tories slashing it to pre-coalition levels by 2017, when they were governing on their own.

 

UK green energy investment halves after policy changes | Energy industry | The Guardian

[Harry's Lad]

57 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

We should have been investing more strongly in renewables over previous decades. Unfortunately the progress made in this area during the coalition years, when annual investment grew from just over $10bn to more than $25bn, was halted by the Tories slashing it to pre-coalition levels by 2017, when they were governing on their own.

 

UK green energy investment halves after policy changes | Energy industry | The Guardian

No surprises there. A total lack of foresight. Cameron and Osborne have got an awful lot to answer for.

Bastards.

[Carvalho Diablo]

Just received my dual fuel statement from Eon Next and I'm £422 in credit. Ordinarily I'd be asking them to s?end me a cheque but this time I don't mind letting that surplus build up, fucked if I'm gonna be freezing all winter.

 

I'm one of the lucky ones though.

[TheHowieLama]

2 hours ago, Harry's Lad said:

By not going all electric and keeping with gas?

Yea, that's the choice.

 

It is also the joke - you don't get a choice.

[Harry's Lad]

17 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Yea, that's the choice.

 

It is also the joke - you don't get a choice.

It's pretty obvious we won't/don't get a say in the matter, we just pay.

[Rico1304]

7 hours ago, sir roger said:

I would have paid good money to have seen you say ' I thought this might happen ' and dig out a sausage roll and pigs trotter from your briefcase.

Ha ha I wish I had too. 
 
Renewables and nuclear is the answer.  

 

[Creator Supreme]

16 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Ha ha I wish I had too. 
 
Renewables and nuclear is the answer.  

 

I half agree with you! Fuck Nuclear, too messy. If fusion ever becomes possible I'm in.

[Rico1304]

7 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

I half agree with you! Fuck Nuclear, too messy. If fusion ever becomes possible I'm in.

It’s safer than anything else, fewer emissions but people are fannies about it.  And it can be switched on/off really quickly when it’s not windy.  

[Creator Supreme]

10 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

It’s safer than anything else, fewer emissions but people are fannies about it.  And it can be switched on/off really quickly when it’s not windy.  

Agree to disagree. I see where you're coming from with the carbon emissions, but the waste is a nightmare!

[Rico1304]

7 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

Agree to disagree. I see where you're coming from with the carbon emissions, but the waste is a nightmare!

It’s a smaller problem than waste from any other fuel. But we aren’t going to agree.  

[Harry's Lad]

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

It’s a smaller problem than waste from any other fuel. But we aren’t going to agree.  

It makes me wonder if we do go nuclear, whether our great, great grandchildren will be left with problems with waste as we are with carbon.

[Captain Willard]

11 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

Agree to disagree. I see where you're coming from with the carbon emissions, but the waste is a nightmare!

The big problem with high level nuclear waste is that there is no solution to it apart from leaving it for 20,000 years. The UK navy still has never successfully decommissioned a nuclear sub and they are quietly rusting away in dockyards waiting for a technical solution that never comes. The Russians have over 100 derelict subs  now and every now and then they catch a disgruntled badly paid employee trying to sneak out some high level waste to sell to terrorists to make a dirty bomb. One day somebody will succeed.  We are the first generation in the history of the human race to knocking bequeath our successors a lethal problem. 

[Rico1304]

12 minutes ago, Harry's Lad said:

It makes me wonder if we do go nuclear, whether our great, great grandchildren will be left with problems with waste as we are with carbon.

Well it’ll be a few more ‘greats’ than that but there are solutions to it.  Stick it in salt mines for example.  Very stable and benign environment.  

[Harry's Lad]

19 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Well it’ll be a few more ‘greats’ than that but there are solutions to it.  Stick it in salt mines for example.  Very stable and benign environment.  

A lot more greats, but you got my drift. 

 

[Captain Willard]

45 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Well it’ll be a few more ‘greats’ than that but there are solutions to it.  Stick it in salt mines for example.  Very stable and benign environment.  

There isn’t a single operational deep storage nuclear waste facility anywhere in the world. They get talked about but in the meantime the waste is either left in situ like the submarines or stored in ponds at Sellafield. We are leaving all this for future generations 

 

 

[Rico1304]

5 minutes ago, Captain Willard said:

There isn’t a single operational deep storage nuclear waste facility anywhere in the world. They get talked about but in the meantime the waste is either left in situ like the submarines or stored in ponds at Sellafield. We are leaving all this for future generations 

 

 

Why is that?  

[Captain Willard]

13 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Why is that?  

Nuclear waste is a vote destroying issue. Nobody cares about leaving it in ponds and rusting submarines for future generations to deal with but if as a politician you suggest a more secure solution like deep storage then the local people go crazy and organise against you. Better to do nothing. It’s shameful really, our predessors built beautiful cathedrals that lasted for centuries, we are leaving lethal nuclear waste that will last for 20,000 years. 

[Rico1304]

4 minutes ago, Captain Willard said:

Nuclear waste is a vote destroying issue. Nobody cares about leaving it in ponds and rusting submarines for future generations to deal with but if as a politician you suggest a more secure solution like deep storage then the local people go crazy and organise against you. Better to do nothing. It’s shameful really, our predessors built beautiful cathedrals that lasted for centuries, we are leaving lethal nuclear waste that will last for 20,000 years. 

Exactly.  So it’s not the science, it’s not because it’s impossible. It’s nimbyism. Once we get past that it’s solvable. 

[Creator Supreme]

6 minutes ago, Captain Willard said:

Nuclear waste is a vote destroying issue. Nobody cares about leaving it in ponds and rusting submarines for future generations to deal with but if as a politician you suggest a more secure solution like deep storage then the local people go crazy and organise against you. Better to do nothing. It’s shameful really, our predessors built beautiful cathedrals that lasted for centuries, we are leaving lethal nuclear waste that will last for 20,000 years. 

Superb post! Sad but true, it will be a brave politician that grasps the nettle and does something about nuclear waste!

[dockers_strike]

It'll take upto 10 years to build and commission new nuclear power stations. And they dont come cheap in the scheme of things either.

 

Until fusion technology is cracked (bit of an oxymoron there!) and, that's a long way off despite what you may read, storing waste which has a half life of hundreds of thousands of years or more, is too easily dismissed.

 

Ive no problem with solar, wind and even wave generation but even these have problems. Wind farms need wind and as recently has shown, if there's no wind, you're becalmed like an old sailing ship of yore. Wave generation is relatively new.

 

Solar doesnt need to be in a desert and it baffles me why Government isnt doing more to get panels on more roofs. Not only does this cut consumers take from the grid but it can also be fed back into the grid.

 

I investigated this but it seemed once I had panels on my south facing roof, my roof wasnt entirely mine any more and Id need someone else's permission to do any remedial work on it!

 

We're sitting on 300 years supply of coal last I heard. We import wood pellets from the US which themselves, churn out co2 to make and then transported across the Atlantic on ships burning bunker oil. You couldnt make this 'green' nonesense up.

 

We need necessity to be the mother of invention and come up with a methodology to scrub co2 out of coal emissions.

 

And it still pisses me off ordinary folk in this country are being punished in the race to carbon zero while China pumps out 27%+ of the World's co2, Russia, India, US and Germany etc follow on behind them.

 

It doesnt help UK consumers when a gas field is stopped from being opened.

 

https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/uk-opred-rejects-shell-jackdaw-gas-field/

[Rico1304]

Anyone using the word ‘yore’ can be dismissed out of hand.  

[dockers_strike]

2 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Anyone using the word ‘yore’ can be dismissed out of hand.  

Keep taking the shilling mate.

[Rico1304]

12 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Keep taking the shilling mate.

What shilling? I’ll have it if there’s one going but I don’t know where or who to collect it from. 
 

Nuclear is the answer, we’ve just got to be brave and use it to supplement green energy.  Some areas are ripe for tidal as it’s the one thing you can rely on but isn’t great for wildlife. 
 

I guess we could use your bloviations for reliable wind but that’s very localised.  Your prose style reminds me of Pistonbroke’s cricket commentary. Jesus Christ.