Why we need "Net zero"

[-rick-]

14 minutes ago, SimonD said:

Yep, that was exactly my point 😊 As I was attempting to explain that simply measuring the eco credentials of something purely on CO2 grounds is simplistic. I'm certainly not advocating against the use of renewables, just that we all need to see the full picture and from this we can make properly educated decisions about the compromises we need to make. It's all about balance, me thinks.

 

Sure. I started replying because it sounded like you were against using concrete because it wasn't renewable which is true but the decision is much more nuanced.

 

14 minutes ago, SimonD said:

Interestingly, there was a leading academic in Sweden many years ago who very successfully demonstrated the problem with embodied carbon used in building to passivhaus levels on a full life-cycle basis and then the poor payback of this - so it was essentially a poor environmental decision. Back then, though, electricity generation, for example, was much dirtier, so within 15 years the basis of the decisions would change. It's the same for any of our technologies so we have to move with the times and review our choices regularly in light of progress. 

👍

[Beelbeebub]

18 hours ago, scottishjohn said:

only if i sold osme -wind men get money when the turbines are sitting doing nothing --thats the difference 

They aren't turning because there is no capacity to transport the power they were contracted to (and are able to) produce.

 

If I hire a bunch of workmen for a job but they can't do anything because the materials I ordered didn't arrive they still hat paid (at least if I want to keep my teeth). They turned up, ready to work and it's my fault they can't actually build anything.  So yes, they are getting paid for sitting around but if I started sending labourers and trades home without pay because *I* effed up, i"d quickly find nobody would want to work for me. 

 

Again, the curtailment issue isn't unique to wind and the bulk of the cost is actually going to gas generators for turning up production. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Beelbeebub

[Beelbeebub]

7 hours ago, LnP said:

Nice post and I love the pictures but please can we kill the myth that renewables are not eco friendly because of the materials used in their construction. The data speak for themselves. See my earlier post. CO₂e, per kWh of energy produced over the life of the asset for your onshore turbine is 12 g CO₂e and to produce the same energy from e.g. natural gas it's 458 g. That includes the embedded carbon in the concrete.

Even of the calculations were a fsctornof 10x out for wind turbines they would still be way better than gas plants. 

 

But the eco credentials of wind/solar are somewhat moot for this thread (though important of course). 

 

The argument this thread started with was that the "Net zero policies" like increacing renewable generation and electrifying heating and transport were worth doing from an economic and energy security perspective as they reduced the impact of world gas and oil prices on our economy. 

 

Subsequent events seem to be bearing this out. 

 

I listened to a podcast where the head of OFCOM was saying the impact of rising gas prices on electricity prices is less now than in 2022 because of the extra renewables. Electricity still rises but not as much. 

[SteamyTea]

41 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

They turned up, ready to work and it's my fault they can't actually build anything. 

Common practice in hospitality to send people home if it is quiet.

Part of the reason for the very high staff turnover.

[Roger440]

On 12/05/2026 at 14:14, Beelbeebub said:

Entirely consistent with the whole purpose of this thread. 

 

That we need "Net zero" policies to ensure our energy security. 

 

This thread started over a month before the Iran war. At the time gas prices were predicted to fall as more Lng capacity from the gulf and at European Lng terminals came on stream. 

 

My point was that if we abandoned NZ policies for a fossil fuel past/future (as some advocated) it would be bad for the UK in terms of energy security/prices - that we would be subject to fluctuations in the gas price that we had zero control over. 

 

I think, even you, would agree that I have been proven correct in the assertion that the uk is too exposed to fossil fuel price fluctiaons. 

 

Here's a thought experiment. 

 

The price of coal has jumped from just over 100USD to just over 130USD?

Have you heard anyone in the UK panicking about the price of coal? Are we worried about it's impact on our economy? Are our electricity prices rising because of the price of coal? 

Nope - because coal is such a tiny part of our energy mix. 

 

We should aim to do the same with oil and gas. 

 

Energy independance is a (mostly) seperate debate from the cost of that energy.

 

We still have some of the most expensive electricity in the world. That has a significant (negative) economic impact.

 

And thats, to a significant extent, driven by the market structure of the UK. Thats what needs fixing. And if those who say renewables are cheaper, great, when can we benefit?

[SteamyTea]

45 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

That has a significant (negative) economic impact.

On some industries. Not sure how much of an impact is is having on the service sector. Not heard anything on the radio that our banking, insurance and legal side is in trouble. 

Our energy sector is doing well.

 

[Roger440]

5 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

On some industries. Not sure how much of an impact is is having on the service sector. Not heard anything on the radio that our banking, insurance and legal side is in trouble. 

Our energy sector is doing well.

 

 

Id like to think the energy sector is doing well. Its like christmas day, every day!

 

I wasnt just thinking about industry, but everybody. The more you spend on energy, the less there is to spend on everything else, and that impacts all industries.

[Beelbeebub]

47 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

Energy independance is a (mostly) seperate debate from the cost of that energy.

Yes they are.  They tend to get rolled together when someone anti renewables days "ah but it costs so much! We should drill the north Sea for energy security and  to being down bills" 

 

That argument is countered by showing renewables aren't more expensive (which can go back and forth) and more importantly that drilling the north Sea cannot provide enrgy security or bring down bills. 

 

47 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

We still have some of the most expensive electricity in the world. That has a significant (negative) economic impact.

 

And thats, to a significant extent, driven by the market structure of the UK. Thats what needs fixing. And if those who say renewables are cheaper, great, when can we benefit?

Yes but with alot of nuance. 

 

For example - our gas is actually towards the cheaper end of comparable nations but our electricity and in particular our business elec is more expensive. 

 

This is a combination of multiple policy decisions. 

 

Even the much discussed marginal price auction system is not quite so cut a dried as appears.  Interestingly gas *used* to be the price setter over 90% of the time. That has fallen to 2/3 the time now and is projected to keep falling. 

 

As to wen we can benefit - we already are as renewables have bkunted the impact of the recent gas price rise, but more generally by around 2030 the effect of transmission capacity increaces, older subsidy schemes ending etc are expected to start to bite. 

 

Two podcasts with energy policy professionals (climate change committee and OFGEM) are quite illuminating 

 

https://youtu.be/mFMPSms6MS4

https://youtu.be/NXjwkvaWclk

 

 

[Beelbeebub]

1 hour ago, SteamyTea said:

Common practice in hospitality to send people home if it is quiet.

Part of the reason for the very high staff turnover.

Yup and whilst there is a fairly steady supply of new entrants to the hospitality workforce the same is not true of generators.... 

[Roger440]

1 minute ago, Beelbeebub said:

Yes they are.  They tend to get rolled together when someone anti renewables days "ah but it costs so much! We should drill the north Sea for energy security and  to being down bills" 

 

That argument is countered by showing renewables aren't more expensive (which can go back and forth) and more importantly that drilling the north Sea cannot provide enrgy security or bring down bills. 

 

Yes but with alot of nuance. 

 

For example - our gas is actually towards the cheaper end of comparable nations but our electricity and in particular our business elec is more expensive. 

 

This is a combination of multiple policy decisions. 

 

Even the much discussed marginal price auction system is not quite so cut a dried as appears.  Interestingly gas *used* to be the price setter over 90% of the time. That has fallen to 2/3 the time now and is projected to keep falling. 

 

As to wen we can benefit - we already are as renewables have bkunted the impact of the recent gas price rise, but more generally by around 2030 the effect of transmission capacity increaces, older subsidy schemes ending etc are expected to start to bite. 

 

Two podcasts with energy policy professionals (climate change committee and OFGEM) are quite illuminating 

 

https://youtu.be/mFMPSms6MS4

https://youtu.be/NXjwkvaWclk

 

 

 

For clarity i was talking about electricity specifically.

[Beelbeebub]

3 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

 

I wasnt just thinking about industry, but everybody. The more you spend on energy, the less there is to spend on everything else, and that impacts all industries.

Exactly. 

 

Energy and housing costs are basically dead money. Every £1 extra you have to spend on those is £1 less you can spend on a new outfit, a meal out, a holiday, a new kitchen etc. 

[Roger440]

2 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

Exactly. 

 

Energy and housing costs are basically dead money. Every £1 extra you have to spend on those is £1 less you can spend on a new outfit, a meal out, a holiday, a new kitchen etc. 

 

Or another car 🤪

[Beelbeebub]

1 minute ago, Roger440 said:

 

For clarity i was talking about electricity specifically.

Even then there is nuance - some countries prioritise keeping business electricity down at the expense of hugher domestic bills (Germany apparently) others the opposite. 

 

Some coubtries pay for infrastructure upgrades out of general tax rather than lumoing them on electric bills. Likewise things like green levies etc are on gas or general taxation. 

 

My understanding is the 15-20 years ago the thinking was to lump the transition costs on eekcteicty because everyone has electric and electric was, at the time, very co2 intensive so reducing consumption by cost was a good thing. 

 

We now have to unwind some of that. 

[Beelbeebub]

Just now, Roger440 said:

 

Or another car 🤪

An electric one would be sensible! 😁 

[Roger440]

55 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

An electric one would be sensible! 😁 

 

But largely useless to me. Plus unaffordable.

 

My wife might get one if it ever makes economic sense. Me, no. I enjoy driving. But not in an EV.

 

[SteamyTea]

38 minutes ago, Roger440 said:

I enjoy driving

I would enjoy driving a car with 0-60MPH times below 5 seconds.

Would also enjoy the quietness, and the self parking.

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, Beelbeebub said:

Yup and whilst there is a fairly steady supply of new entrants to the hospitality workforce the same is not true of generators.... 

Wish that were true down here.

[Onoff]

20 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Would also enjoy the quietness, and the self parking.

 

Not sure if mine self parks. Haven't opened the bonnet yet alone read the book. 

[SteamyTea]

5 minutes ago, Onoff said:

Haven't opened the bonnet

Nothing to see there.

[SteamyTea]

Just some economic data to back up what I said about high energy prices adversly affecting a small part of our economy.

 

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8353/