[Politics] The Labour Government

[cunning fergus]

Wind and solar are brilliant, but they are unreliable - they can go from providing most of our electricity needs to barely any of it in the space of days. There is an expensive (and environmentally troublesome) gap to be bridged in terms of how we generate our base supply need of electricity without using fossil fuels (without relying on the unreliable), and how we store any excess that we can collect from wind and solar when it is available (more pumped storage perhaps? Where?) without damaging the environment, a problem exacerbated by increasing demand for electricity from industry (think data centres) and a population that has been predicted to grow significantly over the next few years.

It seems to me that we need to reduce demand in order for the transition to be realistically affordable for the consumer, but then if the consumer is paying less are the infrastructure changes needed going to be affordable? As with anything in life there needs to be a financial incentive in order for individuals and businesses to change - I think that this is likely to be technologically driven, and I don't think the government should be driving innovation down one specific route as we might be missing something beneficial that could be done elsewhere.

These are hard things for every government to circle, so why any government would hamper themselves with a net zero target is beyond me.

I doubt anyone would deny that the implementation of renewables is negative as long as the implementation costs/ongoing maintenance are at worst broadly cost neutral. The introduction of renewables should a) lower energy costs and b) secure the UKs energy security.

Once the algorithm points to negative costs/effects that create punitive costs for domestic and industrial users then the position changes and we should have a pragmatic position where we continue to use fossil fuels.

Like many issues the British public might be sympathetic with there is a threshold, and lower energy bills with usage of gas reserves in North Sea is a prime example.

I suspect like countries in the EU we would still happily import gas from Russia if bills were 33% lower.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I doubt anyone would deny that the implementation of renewables is negative as long as the implementation costs/ongoing maintenance are at worst broadly cost neutral. The introduction of renewables should a) lower energy costs and b) secure the UKs energy security.

How will it do that? Renewables combined with energy security must of necessity have massive redundancy in the system, because we need to be able to provide full power when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining. If renewables were provided primarily by hydro-electric and tidal power, and by cutting down our own forests rather than Canadian ones, then we might have a chance - but even then, the technology has a long way to go to being cheaper than gas or coal. Remember we've been paying green energy supplements for a long time.

 

[pb21]

Ideal energy mix is clear IMO

Nuclear, providing baseload.
Energy storage, using surplus renewable generation
ERFs with CC.
Wind/solar/green hydrogen and other renewables.
Interconnectors to the continent.
Gas back up for peak demand, with CC.

 

[cunning fergus]

How will it do that? Renewables combined with energy security must of necessity have massive redundancy in the system, because we need to be able to provide full power when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining. If renewables were provided primarily by hydro-electric and tidal power, and by cutting down our own forests rather than Canadian ones, then we might have a chance - but even then, the technology has a long way to go to being cheaper than gas or coal. Remember we've been paying green energy supplements for a long time.

I get it, and thats the point with this fanatical drive to net zero as oppose to a pragmatic approach that accepts renewables will not be a solution on its own.

As ever we are being rinsed, and the implications will be the loss of industry and more unemployment, and far from the growing economy this Government wants to pursue.

Even the head of GB energy doesn’t agree that the renewable policies will replace existing jobs supported by North Sea gas.

As I said, I reckon most people would prefer more gas from the North Sea or even Russia if bills went down and it helped British industry be more competitive. It’s just our leadership that doesn’t.

 

[Eeyore]

I coined a new phrase recently, as there seemed to be none.

I can't get my head round enslavement to political ideals. As in, a person will faithfully support a party or group regardless of whether or not they are clearly in the wrong. Additionally, they will argue against another party or group even if, all things considered, what they are doing may be right.

This is, of course, most evident in politicians themselves. The bizarre agreement on matters of security in a national crisis as if this was proof of some kind of cohesion on the higher ethics of life. Often tributes get paid with the words 'We rarely agreed on anything, but...' Yet you did agree on most things, you just cannot bring yourself to say it.

The phrase I use is 'Polidroid'. And it seems these half lived individuals are everywhere. I say it with sadness, because I was once one and thankfully no longer.

But it's evident too in things that matter less. I suppose here we could call them 'Footidroids'. A slightly more cuddlier phrase. Someone comes on NSC 'Palace fan in peace'. Well how else would you arrive here ? It's a default.

Of course, being a Polidroid is merely a reflection of insecurity within. A shame really, because threads like this could be great for rational discussion. Yet they end being a bun fight as the Polidroids take over and little gets agreed on, except within one camp. Unfortunate, because I suspect most who contribute are very intelligent and rational people in every other respect. Except, perhaps, the Trumpian Polidroids. That's another breed.

 

[Rdodge30]

Within days of entering government Miliband blocked all new licenses for North Sea oil and gas. Unions were quick to say this would cost 1000’s of jobs.

It’s Milliband who has to decide on Jackdaw gas field and Rosebank oil field which have been blocked pending government assessment of environmental impact.

These projects would bolster Britain’s energy independence, create thousands of jobs and raise billions in tax revenues. If he approves them it will be a significant boost to future economic growth but that would be completely at odds with his commitment to Net Zero and Great British Clean Energy

He also has to take it on the chin with the 3rd runway at Heathrow

I still think Slippery Ed wants Number 10 and he has absolutely nailed his colours to the mast with his Green Agenda.

 

[peterward]

Within days of entering government Miliband blocked all new licenses for North Sea oil and gas. Unions were quick to say this would cost 1000’s of jobs.

It’s Milliband who has to decide on Jackdaw gas field and Rosebank oil field which have been blocked pending government assessment of environmental impact.

These projects would bolster Britain’s energy independence, create thousands of jobs and raise billions in tax revenues. If he approves them it will be a significant boost to future economic growth but that would be completely at odds with his commitment to Net Zero and Great British Clean Energy

He also has to take it on the chin with the 3rd runway at Heathrow

I still think Slippery Ed wants Number 10 and he has absolutely nailed his colours to the mast with his Green Agenda.

Im as concerened as everyone about the impact of global warming and the world my son will grow up in, however, Net zero is totally barmy in the context of global realities.

As trump goes all in on his "Liquid Gold" and both China and India keep building ever more carbon producing power stations, hampering our own economy, jobs, tax revenues and energy independence by banning North Sea Oil/Gas is very short sighted.

Its pissing in the wind at the bigger problem as US/China/India are going the other way.

The correct solution imho is to invest heavily in Green technologies and to try and reach a point where such technologies can provide for our entire energy needs, nuclear is painfully obvious in this.

But when we are going to still require to import other nations Gas/Oil at a higher cost at the expense of domestic and energy independence, it makes no sense to virtue signal at huge cost, making little real world difference as we continue to import.

 

[Rdodge30]

I read an interview once about electric articulated Lorries and the difficulties with producing them.. the batteries alone are between 2000 and 4000 kg. apparently when this company approached the local authorities about building a factory the electricity they needed to pull down for production was the same amount that the whole town used.

I’ve no idea what the answer is unless it simply hasn’t been developed yet