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 Wednesday at 15:37 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/

 

 

 

[Gus Potter]

On 13/05/2026 at 08:34, saveasteading said:

Having spent a lot of time in such cages, doing qc, I'm left wondering how the steelfixers got out.  And how the concrete got to the bottom... how do we know it is well compacted?

Stop asking difficult questions! That's why I'm sitting on the far left trying to keep out of view while still trying to keep my job, I was still in my probationaly period at the time. 

[Gus Potter]

On 13/05/2026 at 09:00, 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.

Ok to keep the conversation light. I designed a lightweight cold formed steel building that went on top of one of the cooling ponds for the Bradwell decomissioning. You need to carry out all the due dilligence that is highly demanding in the nuclear sector. 

 

Below is a photo of the cooling ponds when they were getting built. When I went to uni at the age of 40 I worked for MacAlpine one summer so for me it's nostalgia. Check out the guys at the bottom left. When they were building this stuff they had no idea of the clean up costs. But at the time the UK needed energy. These cooling ponds are highly toxic.

That said you have to be pretty miserable not to admire the skill the Engineers had, the photo is date 1959. 

 

 

@LnP Please forgive me if I don't take your figures at face value. I'm too old and experienced to take any figures at face value. I have been a developer, am aware of how accademia works and common funding mechanisms. 

 

On a macro level we in the UK need energy security. We are threatened by the Chinese on many fronts. Domestically our political system is changing rapidly (more polarised) , some may argue along religious lines and we have political actors who are not, let's just say "deep thinkers". 

 

As an Engineer (my primary quailification is in Civil Engineering, for the public) I tend to think strategically on a macro level. 

 

That said we can still go about our day jobs, have fun and appreciate Buildhub, even though at times we disagree. 

 

I can say that I learn loads from folk on BH. I'm not that old / entrenched that I'm not able to change my mind when folk put forward valid aguement. 

 

 

[SteamyTea]

41 minutes ago, Gus Potter said:

Please forgive me if I don't take your figures at face value

Quite right, there are a number of factors that change the numbers.

A PV farm in Madrid, New York or Toronto, will probably outperform a similar sized on in the UK, and the Sahara.  So the embodied energy/CO_2e payback time (when compared to global averages) will be shorter.

Perversely, the lower the global emission become, the longer the payback becomes.  We are a long way off that at the moment.

When gas, coal and oil are combusted to generate electricity, the carbon costs of fuel extraction need to be taken into account.  This is not always done correctly as there is a difference between open cast and deep mine mining.

But I think you will find that RE generation is sub 50 g/kWh and FF are greater than 250 g/kWh.  That is a 5 to 1 difference, and you don't have to drill, dig, transport or processes the wind and sunshine.

[Gus Potter]

40 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

But I think you will find that RE generation is sub 50 g/kWh and FF are greater than 250 g/kWh.  That is a 5 to 1 difference, and you don't have to drill, dig, transport or processes the wind and sunshine.

You make a strong argument at a 5:1 difference. 

 

One basic question I have at the moment is why are we in the UK trying to drive this at the expense of our economy and national security when China and the US are contributing to most of the emissions. Brits seem to have gone soft / woke.. they talk about carbon emissions, but our government are not investing in the research and building factories to make the stuff!

 

Now to fund this we need to get rid of this woke fad. We need in my view to start drilling, exploring and selling our good sweet oil, to fund UK renewables. 

 

To make a point. The UK has never been bombed since the second world war. I was born in the 60's, my mum who is 95 remembers getting evacuated. We have been very lucky in the UK to have avoided that to date... so far. It's going to come as a major shock to the woke if Putin cuts our undersea internet cables!

Edited 9 hours ago by Gus Potter

[SteamyTea]

7 hours ago, Gus Potter said:

at the expense of our economy and national security when China and the US are contributing to most of the emissions

The USA and China have larger populations and economies, and are doing their bit to help.  China has probably peaked in CO₂ emissions.

I am not sure why installing the cheapest forms of power is perceived as hurting our economy.

The main reason that we are not investigate in R&D and manufacturing is that the UK does the business end, not the dirty end.