The UK’s electricity was the cleanest ever in 2024

[SteamyTea]

2 minutes ago, Mattg4321 said:

But nobody has a crystal ball and experts/general consensus been completely wrong time and time again throughout history

But less wrong that armchair commentators.

 

[Roger440]

31 minutes ago, Mattg4321 said:

Possibly. But nobody has a crystal ball and experts/general consensus been completely wrong time and time again throughout history. 
 

The problem is that the choice is between carrying on as we are and doing our best to reduce emissions where possible, or net zero and near complete deindustrialisation. 
 

Renewables/air travel/heating our homes/working more than walking distance from our houses/car ownership including EV. None of them are compatible with net zero, unless we agree that offshoring our emissions doesn’t count - which is of course ludicrous. 
 

Whether or not you agree with the idea of man made climate change - I’m still somewhat on the fence - the ‘solutions’ are nonsense spun up by the very few people who will benefit from them. 

 

Agreed.

 

Problem is, it will be more than deindustrialisation. Its the complete destruction of life as we know it. 

 

Those flag waving for it, are either sufficently wealthy to be insulated from the effects, or unable to see the consequences of said net zero policies. Sunlit uplands it certainly isnt.

 

Fortunately, well, probably, i shall be dead before it gets really bad.

 

Meanwhile, the rest of the world will sit around pointing at us, while there living standard go up.

 

[ProDave]

3 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

Problem is, it will be more than deindustrialisation. Its the complete destruction of life as we know it. 

Yes.  All very well for us to close our steel works and oil refineries as they are too polluting, but it's okay we will buy steel and fuel from others.

 

but if everyone shuts down their steel works and refineries, then we are back to pre industrial.  Which of course is what a lot of people want.  But perhaps they might not want it so much when they see what that would really mean?

[SteamyTea]

This is from the government website that tracks these sorts of things

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/monthly-domestic-energy-price-stastics

[Roger440]

3 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Yes.  All very well for us to close our steel works and oil refineries as they are too polluting, but it's okay we will buy steel and fuel from others.

 

but if everyone shuts down their steel works and refineries, then we are back to pre industrial.  Which of course is what a lot of people want.  But perhaps they might not want it so much when they see what that would really mean?

 

Good summary

 

Which is the utterly ludicrous part. We are just off shoring it. Stangely, because we still want all the benefits of modern life.

 

As you say, if/when, we progress the destruction of our way of life, it will certainly be interesting if those same people urging us down that road are quite as keen when it impacts them. 

[Mattg4321]

42 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

But less wrong that armchair commentators.

 

Source for that?! 
 

The only remotely viable way is nuclear, but for some reason those in charge would rather pursue their visions of utopia. 

[SteamyTea]

4 minutes ago, ProDave said:

All very well for us to close our steel works and oil refineries as they are too polluting

I think it is much more complicated than that.

If a product is traded globally, and locally produced goods cost more, then you loose your business base.

 

We could start paying 'highly skilled' workers minimum wage, let us see how well that goes down.

[Mattg4321]

2 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

This is from the government website that tracks these sorts of things

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/monthly-domestic-energy-price-stastics

So gas is barely more expensive than 8 years ago, yet electricity is fairly significantly higher, and was so before Ukraine war. Wonder why on earth that could be. 

[Roger440]

3 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

This is from the government website that tracks these sorts of things

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/monthly-domestic-energy-price-stastics

 

Thats wonderful. It tells us whats happened.

 

Sadly, it tells us nothing about whats going to happen.

 

Except we know whats going to happen, because, handily, government have told us. Shortage of supply, remote demand management and ever increasing prices.

 

In some respects im fairly relaxed on the basis we all know government cannot deliver the things they say they will. Especially when the money runs out.

[SteamyTea]

Just now, Mattg4321 said:

Wonder why on earth that could be

Because of the way it is priced.  Been though that.

It is not the renewable energy business set government policy on tax and incentives.

Considering that electricity from off shore wind is coming in at 5p/kWh or cheaper, it is quite amazing that any money is spent on fossil fuels.

But as we have seen over the last few years, our reliance on fossil fuels is rapidly diminishing, regardless of government policies.

[SteamyTea]

1 minute ago, Roger440 said:

handily, government have told us. Shortage of supply, remote demand management and ever increasing prices.

Can you point me to the source of that information.  I keep a constant eye on what is happening and not seen those statements.

[Roger440]

1 minute ago, SteamyTea said:

Can you point me to the source of that information.  I keep a constant eye on what is happening and not seen those statements.

 

Really? 

 

How about something like this: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/663b7d0c1834d96a0aa6d299/sses-2024-consultation-first-phase-regulations-analytical-annex.pdf

 

Yes, i know its wrapped up in warm words about security threats, to cloud the issue. But its demand management.

 

And of course, surely you know, that if something is in short supply, prices can only go one way?

 

Oh, and the law passed last year that allows the minister to dicatate what electrical appliances you can have. They can now force you to replace perfectly servicable devices with "internet enabled" ones so that they can dicate when you use it. And jail time if you fail to comply.

 

Sounds just like the actions you would take if you wewre confident you could meet demand.....................................

 

 

[Mattg4321]

8 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Because of the way it is priced.  Been though that.

It is not the renewable energy business set government policy on tax and incentives.

Considering that electricity from off shore wind is coming in at 5p/kWh or cheaper, it is quite amazing that any money is spent on fossil fuels.

But as we have seen over the last few years, our reliance on fossil fuels is rapidly diminishing, regardless of government policies.

Gas prices have come down as the Ukraine war has progressed. Yet electricity prices have not followed to the same extent. If it was gas causing the price to stay higher this wouldn’t be the case. 

[SteamyTea]

4 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

How about something like this: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/663b7d0c1834d96a0aa6d299/sses-2024-consultation-first-phase-regulations-analytical-annex.pdf

So this is a proposal, to do what already happens via a different mechanism.

[SteamyTea]

2 minutes ago, Mattg4321 said:

Gas prices have come down as the Ukraine war has progressed. Yet electricity prices have not followed to the same extent

That is because they are still based on cheapest energy source, be thankful it is not based on the 'too cheap to meter' nuclear prices.

It is not the fault of renewable energy supporters that out governments have a crap system of setting taxation on energy.  The RE industry has been trying to get this changed for years.

[Roger440]

1 minute ago, SteamyTea said:

So this is a proposal, to do what already happens via a different mechanism.

 

So, the thought " why would they want to do that" doesnt enter your head? You just accept it at face value.

 

You clearly have far greater faith in our glorious leaders than i do. 

 

If the direction of travel isnt obvious to you, i dont think i can help.

 

[Roger440]

1 minute ago, SteamyTea said:

That is because they are still based on cheapest energy source, be thankful it is not based on the 'too cheap to meter' nuclear prices.

It is not the fault of renewable energy supporters that out governments have a crap system of setting taxation on energy.  The RE industry has been trying to get this changed for years.

 

Yep. And i say again, its NOT going to change. However much you want it too.

 

They "could" change it tommorow.

 

Which again, can only lead to the conclusion that high prices are intentional and deliberate.

[saveasteading]

13 minutes ago, ProDave said:

to close our steel works and oil refineries as they are too polluting

The steel works have closed because the UK can't compete with China and Mexico etc. 

It's not because of pollution.

China uses coal and cheap labour, but we aren't about to change that.

 

It gets confusing when such arguments are mixed up with the current subject of sustainable energy, and I expect it is meant to muddy the waters.. Nothing is simple in reality.

Britain had the industrial revolution because of sufficient resources at the time to benefit from scientific and technological innovation.

We don't have the underground resources any longer and the populace don't want the dangerous dirty, low paid work that made Britain rich, and the Empire.

Other countries do that.

 

Thus steel making is from elsewhere, and will stay that way.

 

There isn't a magic solution, or any right to have cars and houses and foreign holidays. Yet there is is that expectation.

 

It's simple really.....

No more mass housing outwith the cities, which generates traffic and the expectation of the right to space and cars.

Infrastructure has to be designed and integrated from the outset.

An agricultural policy that makes use of all appropriate land.

Foreign holidays may have to stop.

Wind and solar. Air source heating.

 

It will be more primitive but that is a matter of expectation, and will be accepted through habit and necessity.

 

The biggest problem is who is going to make the decision and tell the public. They mostly don't want any change and revolt.

 

[saveasteading]

15 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

replace perfectly servicable devices with "internet enabled" ones so that they can dicate when you use it. And jail time if you fail to comply.

I can't have been paying attention. What legislation is this?

[Mattg4321]

12 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

The steel works have closed because the UK can't compete with China and Mexico etc. 

It's not because of pollution.

China uses coal and cheap labour, but we aren't about to change that.

 

It gets confusing when such arguments are mixed up with the current subject of sustainable energy, and I expect it is meant to muddy the waters.. Nothing is simple in reality.

Britain had the industrial revolution because of sufficient resources at the time to benefit from scientific and technological innovation.

We don't have the underground resources any longer and the populace don't want the dangerous dirty, low paid work that made Britain rich, and the Empire.

Other countries do that.

 

Thus steel making is from elsewhere, and will stay that way.

 

There isn't a magic solution, or any right to have cars and houses and foreign holidays. Yet there is is that expectation.

 

It's simple really.....

No more mass housing outwith the cities, which generates traffic and the expectation of the right to space and cars.

Infrastructure has to be designed and integrated from the outset.

An agricultural policy that makes use of all appropriate land.

Foreign holidays may have to stop.

Wind and solar. Air source heating.

 

It will be more primitive but that is a matter of expectation, and will be accepted through habit and necessity.

 

The biggest problem is who is going to make the decision and tell the public. They mostly don't want any change and revolt.

 

It won’t be accepted. Get the pitchforks ready!

 

Let’s impoverish our population - with all the death and destruction and social breakdown that would go with it, all to stop the emission of a gas that has no effect on human health, but ‘may’ cause global temperatures to rise slightly (which by the way we could adapt to life with). 
 

I can’t believe how so many people are happy to go along with this nonsense. 

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, Roger440 said:

dont think i can help

Not me that needs help.

 

[saveasteading]

1 hour ago, Mattg4321 said:

death and destruction and social breakdown that would go with it

OK that is strong. But you may be right unless humankind becomes caring and unselfish suddenly. 

Or the other worst alternative is to cross fingers and carry on as is. No, it would be to reverse into turning off 'windmills'.....but half the populace might support that in their ignorance (I mean that word in its non pejorative sense.)

 

Your solution then please. 

[ProDave]

The US president elect wants to "turn off the windmills"  No I don't support that view but the next 4 years could be "interesting"

[joe90]

1 minute ago, ProDave said:

The US president elect wants to "turn off the windmills"

Yes and “drill baby drill”. A real climate sceptic.

[Mattg4321]

21 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

OK that is strong. But you may be right unless humankind becomes caring and unselfish suddenly. 

Or the other worst alternative is to cross fingers and carry on as is. No, it would be to reverse into turning off 'windmills'.....but half the populace might support that in their ignorance (I mean that word in its non pejorative sense.)

 

Your solution then please. 

I’m not sure how forcibly putting people into a state of poverty, or even just worsening their living standards is caring. But anyway off the top of my head. 

 

1. Mandate PV on all new build / large extension roofs

2. Invest heavily in nuclear

3. Improve insulation and ventilation requirements for new build and extension. 
4. Take into account all emissions from mining/manufacture/shipping/disposal etc when deciding on carbon emission figures of a product. If a product is made elsewhere those emissions must be taken into account. 
5. Invest in wind to the point where it can be properly utilised. No point running wind and nuclear concurrently for when the wind doesn’t blow. 
6. Scrap the ban on petrol/diesel vehicles. It won’t work. Too soon. 
7. Those who make the rules to lead by example and any breach to be punished more harshly than the general public. 
8. More emphasis on clean and healthy air/water/food supply than C02

9. Plan for temperature/sea level rise and invest in what’s needed to cope with it. If the Maldives can keep expanding their land area when they were meant to be underwater years ago then it must be possible. 
10. End political interference by big corporations/‘philanthropists’. No donations over £200 allowed. 
11. Stop wasting taxpayers money on vanity projects and other nonsense that doesn’t benefit the taxpayer

 

Drifting slightly off topic but I could go on. 
 

Basically do the best we can with the technology we have and invest in new technology as much as possible. It won’t happen though - too much money to be made.