I could have told you this would happen some day....

[Roger440]

4 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Yes and curiously that includes the tax take to HMG so once we all go EV that tax take will need to transfer to EV recharging and as the electricity base price is now almost the same as for diesel ,accounting for the relative efficiencies - but not the value of longer distances on one refill, the cost to charge your EV will need to include the tax and all of a sudden it will be more expensive than diesel. Everything is connected to everything else - thank the early adopters who will have had cheaper motoring - but not for long.

 

All the more reason some of us will stick with petrol and diesel to the bitter end. Aside from the fact, that from an affordability point of view, an EV hasnt, and still isnt remotely viable.

[SteamyTea]

1 minute ago, MikeSharp01 said:

that tax take will need to transfer to EV recharging and as the electricity base price

Or they will just increase the VED from the currently proposed £150/year.

 

Still got a long time till all vehicles are electric, think we are at about 1.3% at the moment, around 370,000 out of about 30 million.

Plugin Hybrids are just a little behind at 346,000.

[Kelvin]

So Biden has cut production has he

 

 

 

 

[oldkettle]

24 minutes ago, Kelvin said:

So Biden has cut production has he

 

 

 

 

 

I have almost missed the most obvious :

>>>So Biden has cut production has he

 

How did you manage to read my post and decide that I claimed that Biden actually cut production? I mean, seriously, have you really read the quoted sarcastic text this way??? It was actually referring to the multiple statements made by this clown - see below. 

 

It is hilarious (and sad) when people take the first link off the Internet that seems to confirm their POV. Now, if you look at your own second graph you will notice the strength of the "rebound". What could possibly explain this?

 

To make it easier here are a few  links (note that I intentionally exclude any possible "right-wing" sites) 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/biden-suspends-oil-and-gas-drilling-in-series-of.html

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/15/drilling-permits-spiked-then-plunged-under-biden-00016814

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/7/republicans-rip-bidens-energy-agenda-after-he-vows/

In case you don't have access to the last one from Google 

"7 Nov 2022 Mr. Biden pledged "no more drilling" at a Sunday rally for New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, drawing headlines just two days after he said he would shut down coal plants "all across America" and ... "

 

Now, imagine that you are an investor considering whether US oil is a good place for your money. What do you think? 

 

Another example of "who do you believe, me or your lying eyes?" 

Edited December 15, 2022 by oldkettle
Clarification

[ProDave]

10 hours ago, Roger440 said:

 

All the more reason some of us will stick with petrol and diesel to the bitter end. Aside from the fact, that from an affordability point of view, an EV hasnt, and still isnt remotely viable.

I am in that group, but will compromise in that we already have one hybrid, and that will no doubt at some point get replaced with an EV.  But  we will retain one ICE car for the stuff that is beyond the ability of an EV.  The good thing being the ICE car will not be doing much mileage in that mix.

[SteamyTea]

16 minutes ago, ProDave said:

I am in that group, but will compromise in that we already have one hybrid, and that will no doubt at some point get replaced with an EV.  But  we will retain one ICE car for the stuff that is beyond the ability of an EV.  The good thing being the ICE car will not be doing much mileage in that mix.

We will all pick vehicles that suit our needs.

I currently need a vehicle that can easily do 300 miles, at very short notice.  So no BEV for me.

Have been looking at the fuel consumption of hybrids, and for my driving profile offer little advantage, if any.

 

Now if I still lived in within the M25, an EV would be worth while, though I would probably get a RangeRover "because they are safer" and hang the daily congestion and ULEZ charges.  I actually had a GM Corsa Automatic when I lived there, and lived to tell the tale.

 

Thing is, technology changes, even existing technology.  We will get BEVs that can be charged in a few minutes, can do 300+ miles, cost the same as existing vehicles.

 

We have to resist the knee jerk reaction to every price shock that happens.  The stone age did not end because of lack of stones, personal transport will cost about the same in a decade as it does now, as will energy prices.

Worth reading up about the Simon-Ehrlich wager.

[SteamyTea]

11 hours ago, oldkettle said:

As a hint - the min (last year) was 0.035GW.

Does not answer the question I asked of you.

 

You are doing a Robert McNamara "Never answer the question that is asked of you. Answer the question that you wish had been asked of you"

[oldkettle]

8 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

Does not answer the question I asked of you.

 

Your original question :

 

>>> Can you show me the times when there was no RE generation at all.

>>>Then it is just a matter of scaling.

 

"Can you show me something you didn't claim existed". I showed you how low it got - with all the installed capacity. Yes, the number is specifically for wind but it really changes nothing in the argument: a lull can occur at night when solar is not around either (actually, I did not check when it happened, it really does not matter). I do hope you are not planning on splitting hairs including biomass or other non-scalable options. 

 

[oldkettle]

@SteamyTea 

FCOL

@jack told you exactly the same thing this summer and you pretended that nothing must be equal to zero and not a very low number exactly the same way. 

 

Theory, theory, theory. I rest my case. Didn't plan to persuade you. I just want normal people to understand what they are getting into when they support politicians talking about net zero and similar BS, when they say they "understand the feelings" of eco-terrorists etc. Sleep-walking into a disaster. 

[SteamyTea]

3 hours ago, oldkettle said:

Can you show me the times when there was no RE generation at all.

Which you have answered admirably with absolutely nothing except insults.

Really no point in engaging with you as you just want to exclude all the other generation methods that have been deemed to be renewable, not by my rules, but by the generation industry and governments.

It does not matter if I agree with it or not, but if I want to play the grown ups game, I have to play with their toys, not yours.

That is just life.

[oldkettle]

1 hour ago, SteamyTea said:

Which you have answered admirably with absolutely nothing except insults.

 

hmm

is this "theory" that you take so hard? Have I actually used insults (plural)? Or do you take sarcasm ("clowns like me... smartest people like you") badly? I am slightly disappointed.

 

1 hour ago, SteamyTea said:

as you just want to exclude all the other generation methods that have been deemed to be renewable, not by my rules, but by the generation industry and governments.

It does not matter if I agree with it or not, but if I want to play the grown ups game, I have to play with their toys, not yours.

That is just life.

And here you go again trying to avoid accepting the obvious

 

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing

https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/how-much-uks-energy-renewable#:~:text=What renewables are used to,organic materials to generate electricity.

"Today, there are four main renewable energy sources used to power the UK: wind, solar, hydroelectric and bioenergy. They harness the natural power of the sun, our weather, our waterways and tides, and organic materials to generate electricity."

 

Your point was: we always have RE, we just need to scale it.

It could have been true if we could scale hydro massively - but we here in the UK and ultimately the world as a whole can't do it. It may become true in some remote future if tidal gets massive - something tells me that if it's not happened yet there are pitfalls. As hydro and tidal and bioenergy (don't they include US pellets into this??) are not scalable enough, they will not provide 50% let alone 99% of our needs if the output of your favourite 2 is down. So as things stand the only sources you can claim are scalable (and in fact you repeatedly claimed we need to scale, the link can be provided upon request) are wind and solar. And now - good luck proving these two may indeed get us through a winter after all your scaling effort from the low of 0.035GW.

Edited December 16, 2022 by oldkettle
typo

[George]

Wind is currently supplying 42% of the UK's electricity demand. Was briefly over 50%. 

 

That's from 0% 20 years ago.

 

Sure... on average it's about 1/3 but all the gas and coal not burnt today will still be available for tomorrow/when the wind doesn't blow. 

 

 

[Dillsue]

1 hour ago, George said:

Wind is currently supplying 42% of the UK's electricity demand. Was briefly over 50%. 

I think gov figures for the whole of 2021 were 38% renewable generation from all renewables. Still along way to go

[oldkettle]

On 19/12/2022 at 10:38, George said:

Wind is currently supplying 42% of the UK's electricity demand. Was briefly over 50%. 

 

That's from 0% 20 years ago.

 

Sure... on average it's about 1/3 but all the gas and coal not burnt today will still be available for tomorrow/when the wind doesn't blow. 

Great 

And how do you propose to finance a business that must be on standby 24/7/365 but sell nothing whenever someone else cheerfully says "I can generate now"? I.e. all buildings, machinery, infrastructure, personnel, contracts for all required inputs and the actual stored raw materials must be in place - but cannot function. Would it surprise you if the resulting cost of the output were say twice the normal level (normal - based on competition with no pressure to cut emissions)? Three times? Is it an acceptable price for the pleasure of knowing the rest is "green"? 

And by the way, the higher is the share of unreliable generation, the higher is the multiplier - for obvious reasons. 

[Dillsue]

1 hour ago, oldkettle said:

Great 

And how do you propose to finance a business that must be on standby 24/7/365 but sell nothing whenever someone else cheerfully says "I can generate now"? I.e. all buildings, machinery, infrastructure, personnel, contracts for all required inputs and the actual stored raw materials must be in place - but cannot function.

Same way as we finance lots of idle gas power stations now??

[oldkettle]

2 hours ago, Dillsue said:

Same way as we finance lots of idle gas power stations now??

 

Do you mean by paying 50p per kWth? 🙂 Or actually much more - I did link to the spot prices reaching £1.5 IIRC both here and in mainland Europe. 

I can only suggest to think a little as a potential owner or an investor of such a business. 

[George]

4 hours ago, oldkettle said:

Great 

And how do you propose to finance a business that must be on standby 24/7/365 but sell nothing whenever someone else cheerfully says "I can generate now"? I.e. all buildings, machinery, infrastructure, personnel, contracts for all required inputs and the actual stored raw materials must be in place - but cannot function. Would it surprise you if the resulting cost of the output were say twice the normal level (normal - based on competition with no pressure to cut emissions)? Three times? Is it an acceptable price for the pleasure of knowing the rest is "green"? 

And by the way, the higher is the share of unreliable generation, the higher is the multiplier - for obvious reasons. 

I'm no expert on electricity grids but I'm pretty sure that's how they've always operated. You need capacity for peak demand so power stations were brought on and off line as required. Now, they are brought on and offline as renewable generation changes and demand changes. 

[oldkettle]

59 minutes ago, George said:

I'm no expert on electricity grids but I'm pretty sure that's how they've always operated. You need capacity for peak demand so power stations were brought on and off line as required. Now, they are brought on and offline as renewable generation changes and demand changes. 

 

 

They? What percentage of the generation was baseload and what was peak previously (the first number I saw showed 50% for Germany)? And what part of the year would peak plants produce? These are pretty basic questions, look into this and it will be clear that there is no free lunch. Either you use expensive plants with a relatively low marginal cost as the baseload or you build relatively cheap gas plants (a lot of them!) with high or potentially extremely high marginal cost, in any case you need to have a very high percentage of your full generation capacity on standby. And if you do want to use mainly gas in this role you need to have a reasonable gas storage, at least 2 weeks of consumption, but not only for the peak anymore - for your full capacity. I can't see how this won't make the cost of this generation relatively higher. You invest 100mln in a plant which you might be able to use for an hour a day 20 days a year (and sometimes 24 hrs a day 14 days a year). Hmm... 

[George]

The free fuel for renewables clearly makes up for it. 

 

Either way, we need to move away from fossil fuels. 

[SteamyTea]

I have 5 doors and 5 seats in my car. While I have used them all over the years, I have never used them all at the same time, and probably never will.

But if I take the rear seats out, I can carry a lot of stuff.

Now I pay more than I need to most of the time, but it is cheaper, overall than riding around in a motorbike and hiring a car, or van, when I need one.

It is all to do with marginal cost differences. Through in division of labour, and market failures, and we end up with the cheapest option for the services we require.

 

What amazes me, especially about the RE doom mongers, is they, like conspiracy theorists, seem to think they have discovered something special, a problem the generation industry does not know about, or are hiding it from us sheeple.

 

You can go to university to study renewable energy systems, can't get more mainstream than an engineering course. I don't here conspiracies about engineering and how non of it really works.  Probably because we are used to it, it surrounds us every day, has small, incremental changes that don't worry people unduly, is at a price that most, in the developed world, can afford.

 

Most people will not care how electricity is generated, just as long as it works when they flip a switch. That is probably the best thing, we don't want people, who don't know much, thinking they can game the system with ridiculous ideas. Why I don't suggest suicide showers. They work, are cheap to buy, eady to fit, and (expletive deleted)ing lethal.

 

[Dillsue]

18 hours ago, oldkettle said:

 

Do you mean by paying 50p per kWth? 🙂 Or actually much more - I did link to the spot prices reaching £1.5 IIRC both here and in mainland Europe. 

I can only suggest to think a little as a potential owner or an investor of such a business. 

We heat by logs and many years ago a friend was helping splitting and stacking and remarked how cheap our energy(gas and electric)  was compared to the work involved in processing logs. Energy has been cheap.

 

We need to pay what it costs if we want the luxury of reliable, on demand and limitless energy. 

 

 

[oldkettle]

4 hours ago, Dillsue said:

We heat by logs and many years ago a friend was helping splitting and stacking and remarked how cheap our energy(gas and electric)  was compared to the work involved in processing logs. Energy has been cheap.

 

We need to pay what it costs if we want the luxury of reliable, on demand and limitless energy. 

 

Are you saying that before our energy prices were subsidised?? All these dictators of the world were helping us out until recently? You can't mean this surely? 

 

I am happy to pay the price, I am not happy to pay for the results of stupid and completely unsustainable policies. 

[oldkettle]

While some keep insisting "everything works in theory" I can only recommend reading the energy transition plans in the most "advanced", woke, "green" places like California or New York. You will be amazed by the detailed information on how exactly the net zero is going to be achieved. A spoiler: there are no details, just vague references that "technologies" would become available. They might - never say never - but no sane person would take a plunge on such a flimsy basis. 

[Onoff]

26 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

All these dictators of the world were helping us out until recently?

 

If we tow their line they will.

 

I believe pre the Ukrainian thing Belarus paid something like 6x less to Russia for energy than less subservient neighbours. 

 

A document from a while back:

 

bp0501gas.pdf

[oldkettle]

9 minutes ago, Onoff said:

If we tow their line they will.

 

Sorry, I am not sure what point you are making - is it about the past or the future. 

I asked whether somebody was subsidising our very reasonable energy prices for 20 years - say, until covid. 

I am aware of Belarus situation or rather was aware when I still cared. But as I am sure you know it is a tiny country in comparison to Russia. It is a relatively cheap way to buy influence. But Europe as a whole is too large to subsidise. Buying individual politicians and organising various "green" groups provides a much greater ROI.