Hinkley, HS2, Third Runway
- Thread starter Drone
- Start date
AliGupter
At the Start
Bloody hope not.
G-G
Senior Jockey
Hinkley won't be ( BREXIT scare mongers and 25k jobs at stake); HS2, I hope so; Third Runway, we've already had leaflets through door from Airport Authority saying minimum disruption, compensation etc, even though I am not that close to it.
Of the three I'd say Hinkley Point will be the only one that won't happen.
Heathrow is a nailed on certainty at some point, and HS2 for this size of project is far more advanced than most realise and will happen, although not on the current timetable.
Heathrow is a nailed on certainty at some point, and HS2 for this size of project is far more advanced than most realise and will happen, although not on the current timetable.
This is an interesting alternative
Local power stations for local people
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...wer-britains-nuclear-future-with-mini-reacto/
Local power stations for local people
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...wer-britains-nuclear-future-with-mini-reacto/
If the Government had half a brain they's use the same £18 billion to partially fund a sensible alternative incentive for renewables.
There's a much better chance of that happening now Cameron, Osborne and Rudd are out of the picture. That said I've still not seen anyone in UK Government even capable of grasping the basics of how to make it happen.
The key is funding to a critical mass, and it would cost significantly less than the Hinckley Point budget. I'd also add that HP is likely to cost nearer £25 billion on completion.
There's a much better chance of that happening now Cameron, Osborne and Rudd are out of the picture. That said I've still not seen anyone in UK Government even capable of grasping the basics of how to make it happen.
The key is funding to a critical mass, and it would cost significantly less than the Hinckley Point budget. I'd also add that HP is likely to cost nearer £25 billion on completion.
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
It would take roughly 1600 2Mw wind-turbines to generate as much power as Hinkley is expected to generate. Could that many be added to the grid in the same timescale?
As far as R&D is concerned, I'd heavily-load it towards wave/tidal energy. If we can find an efficient way to generate power via this method, its 24-hour-a-day generation, regardless of the weather.
As far as R&D is concerned, I'd heavily-load it towards wave/tidal energy. If we can find an efficient way to generate power via this method, its 24-hour-a-day generation, regardless of the weather.
No one's made tidal work yet, in fact no one's really come close to making it viable (there is a reason why the UK leads the world in this area!). Everyone whose looked at it to date has pretty well given it up. At the moment its a bad bet. Even the Seven estuary scheme (which had the second strongest tidal flow in the world) was abandoned
The greatest scope exists in PV. I'm not as up to date with as I used to be, but when I was required to be I was aware that the Swiss had developed a 24 storage technology now, and that PV windows had also been developed (replaces conventional glass). As ever though, these technologies aren't being released until its deemed commercially advantageous (its basically the old Apple model of technology locking)
Wind is also viable and they can be built and installed relatively easily, the issues we face in the UK tends to be related to the town and country planning act. Again the UK used to lead but GEC have taken a massive step forward now. The European epicentre has also shifted to Denmark. Cameron might have promised one thing, but it takes more than driving a husky sled in Spitzbergen I'm afraid. Basically it was a lead we surrendered. By way of trivia I was talking to a GR3 Tornado pilot about this once and they told me that wind turbines played havoc with the onboard radar. He said you got an air defence system against low flying fast jets too
For local schemes AD is also viable, albeit we're talking about neighbourhood schemes, but none the less, it's not a difficult technology (just that people don't like it). You could AD to the mix, but it doesn't really possess the scope of PV or wind (better than tidal though)
I'm not entirely sure I know what's going on with Hinkley. We know that Theresa May has undertaken a tour of Europe this week, and for most part got a good reception in everywhere apart from France. I do wonder if the two aren't connected. We also know of course that she's a notoriously slow decision maker (something which drove Michael Gove mad when they clashed over Trojan Horses). Could be a combination of both
So far as we know, the Saudis are committed to a gamble on pumping more oil to try and prevent the west from undertaking the prohibitive capital start-up investment in renewables. At the same time the Saudis are also selling state owned stakes in their oil production and turning to the markets now to finance infrastructure investment of their own (think of the famous Maktoum quote about driving camels and Mercedes). If they continue to pump at the rate they are doing, the Osborne/ EDF deal could look really bad for us. I'm also a little nervous about what happens when the private sector gets on the wrong end of a public contract. The evdience of PFI (and this has some of the same characteristics) is they simply insist on renegotiating on pain of walking away. In a commercial transaction you can call their bluff, but when you're dealing with essential infrastructure it becomes harder. EDF won't run a plant at a loss indefinitely if it turns out that Osborne got us a good deal. They'll just close it down
One of the biggest villians in all of this is Ofgem and the pious way they accepted the price fixing which in turn led to the abandonment of the carbon floor price, when they all pretty well stuck together and said they couldn't innovate the price down, and would instead operate as a cartel.
One thing that does occur to me though is whether the scope now exists to take one of the big six into state ownership and run it as a backdoor state aid outside of European legislation? It would be one way paying a subsidy to industry
The greatest scope exists in PV. I'm not as up to date with as I used to be, but when I was required to be I was aware that the Swiss had developed a 24 storage technology now, and that PV windows had also been developed (replaces conventional glass). As ever though, these technologies aren't being released until its deemed commercially advantageous (its basically the old Apple model of technology locking)
Wind is also viable and they can be built and installed relatively easily, the issues we face in the UK tends to be related to the town and country planning act. Again the UK used to lead but GEC have taken a massive step forward now. The European epicentre has also shifted to Denmark. Cameron might have promised one thing, but it takes more than driving a husky sled in Spitzbergen I'm afraid. Basically it was a lead we surrendered. By way of trivia I was talking to a GR3 Tornado pilot about this once and they told me that wind turbines played havoc with the onboard radar. He said you got an air defence system against low flying fast jets too
For local schemes AD is also viable, albeit we're talking about neighbourhood schemes, but none the less, it's not a difficult technology (just that people don't like it). You could AD to the mix, but it doesn't really possess the scope of PV or wind (better than tidal though)
I'm not entirely sure I know what's going on with Hinkley. We know that Theresa May has undertaken a tour of Europe this week, and for most part got a good reception in everywhere apart from France. I do wonder if the two aren't connected. We also know of course that she's a notoriously slow decision maker (something which drove Michael Gove mad when they clashed over Trojan Horses). Could be a combination of both
So far as we know, the Saudis are committed to a gamble on pumping more oil to try and prevent the west from undertaking the prohibitive capital start-up investment in renewables. At the same time the Saudis are also selling state owned stakes in their oil production and turning to the markets now to finance infrastructure investment of their own (think of the famous Maktoum quote about driving camels and Mercedes). If they continue to pump at the rate they are doing, the Osborne/ EDF deal could look really bad for us. I'm also a little nervous about what happens when the private sector gets on the wrong end of a public contract. The evdience of PFI (and this has some of the same characteristics) is they simply insist on renegotiating on pain of walking away. In a commercial transaction you can call their bluff, but when you're dealing with essential infrastructure it becomes harder. EDF won't run a plant at a loss indefinitely if it turns out that Osborne got us a good deal. They'll just close it down
One of the biggest villians in all of this is Ofgem and the pious way they accepted the price fixing which in turn led to the abandonment of the carbon floor price, when they all pretty well stuck together and said they couldn't innovate the price down, and would instead operate as a cartel.
One thing that does occur to me though is whether the scope now exists to take one of the big six into state ownership and run it as a backdoor state aid outside of European legislation? It would be one way paying a subsidy to industry
Last edited:
PV is the way forward Grassy. I spent five years in Australia setting up and building the largest PV business over there. The economics work. Australia has a critical mass with consumer PV but still has work to do in the commercial space. Turnbull (and Abbott before him), has been taking Australia on a very similar path to the UK. The difference being that the momentum already exists and the market continues to grow, whereas the Comservatives pulled the plug before we achieved it, and it's gone into full stall. Any number of jobs have been lost as a consequence.
In the commercial space the Aussie Government is also a bit backwards like the UK Government. All they need to do is get feed in tariffs and tax incentives right. Germany has done it, and the U.S. are doing a pretty good job. Much of South America is catching up fast, and India is on the right road. We however are operating more like a third world economy with regards PV. In fact we are a laughing stock around the world pretty much everywhere, because as usual we think we're right and pretty much all of the rest of the world is wrong.
The second best opportunity is energy efficiency and the associated energy savings. Again the Conservatives have totally mucked it up. Green Deal was a joke, and it hasn't been satisfactorily replaced more than two years on.
Hinckley Point was regarded as the only play with regards energy security, which is total bollox. When complete its likely to cost upwards of £25 billion, and in 60 years we'll still have no idea how to clean it up. EDF themselves have said they can't afford to build it which means if it goes through it's likely to cost more again. And however many billions it ultimately costs it's got to be paid for, and just what all that will mean for energy bill hikes god only knows.
Last edited:
simmo
Senior Jockey
The CAA routinely object to the building of any new turbines in my area (South Lanarkshire) on the grounds that the existing turbines have degraded their radar capabilities - even the 60 footer stuck behind my house by the local farmer got one. The Scottish government and local council routinely ignore their complaints.
I read last month that Chile is now meeting 100% of their needs from renewables. The UK actually had a golden opportunity but completely spurned it. This time I'm afraid the buck really rests with the government who really allowed the big six to dictate, and Ofgem who meekly drew their salaries and carried on doing an impression of Uriah Heep
Although China is often bemoaned (largely by America) as the world's bogeyman in this area, they like India, are also making huge strides. They have the advantage of being able to make the technology leap in one move and aren't necessarily having to shore up crumbling old infrastructure through a transitional stage like America is having to do.
You can probably add the Green Investment Bank to the list of Cameron era casualities too Paul. It's actually quite remarkable how much ground he lost in the six and half years he had his hand on the tiller
I'm not quite so convinced by energy efficiency as the answer (clearly it plays a roll) but the evidence I've seen in various studies was that people had a tendancy to consume to budget, and once they'd made a saving they then set about working out what new gadgets they could introduce to their lives (certainly in the domestic sector). It also has the capacity to set up a dual pricing structure, albeit that wasn't the reason Green Deal failed, albeit I suspect that would have emerged as providers whacked up their unit prices to compensate for the reduction in consumption (its why I'd like to see one of the big six taken back into public ownership)
The other area we've surrendered a leading edge is in emerging low carbon technologies, particularly fuel cells and CCS.
I too daren't think how many jobs we've lost in the last decade, and what export potential we've allowed to drip through our hands. I wouldn't mind betting though that if you asked the average voter, they'd rate Cameron as a green Prime Minister just because of some crass publicity stunt that he performed about a decade ago and which the BBC obediently used to show as background fill everytime a green issue cropped up in the news.
Politics I'm afraid.
Vote Trump - Send America backwards (and hopefully give us a chance to pick up some lost ground)
Although China is often bemoaned (largely by America) as the world's bogeyman in this area, they like India, are also making huge strides. They have the advantage of being able to make the technology leap in one move and aren't necessarily having to shore up crumbling old infrastructure through a transitional stage like America is having to do.
You can probably add the Green Investment Bank to the list of Cameron era casualities too Paul. It's actually quite remarkable how much ground he lost in the six and half years he had his hand on the tiller
I'm not quite so convinced by energy efficiency as the answer (clearly it plays a roll) but the evidence I've seen in various studies was that people had a tendancy to consume to budget, and once they'd made a saving they then set about working out what new gadgets they could introduce to their lives (certainly in the domestic sector). It also has the capacity to set up a dual pricing structure, albeit that wasn't the reason Green Deal failed, albeit I suspect that would have emerged as providers whacked up their unit prices to compensate for the reduction in consumption (its why I'd like to see one of the big six taken back into public ownership)
The other area we've surrendered a leading edge is in emerging low carbon technologies, particularly fuel cells and CCS.
I too daren't think how many jobs we've lost in the last decade, and what export potential we've allowed to drip through our hands. I wouldn't mind betting though that if you asked the average voter, they'd rate Cameron as a green Prime Minister just because of some crass publicity stunt that he performed about a decade ago and which the BBC obediently used to show as background fill everytime a green issue cropped up in the news.
Politics I'm afraid.
Vote Trump - Send America backwards (and hopefully give us a chance to pick up some lost ground)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25200808
London second cheapest cityfor gas in europe
Nothing further to discuss . Clearly our market is working well.
London second cheapest cityfor gas in europe
Nothing further to discuss . Clearly our market is working well.
Don't forget poles and wires in this debate. Our infrastructure is basically knackered and isn't getting the investment it needs. It's a problem that's being largely ignored and is likely to bite us in the arse at some point in the future.
It's all well and good spending billions on Hinckley, but pretty damned useless when the transmission system is decaying.
No our energy isn't the cheapest in Europe and I think we are possibly the most expensive. We also face some inevitable price rises to pay for Hinckley. And we can expect future price rises to pay for upgrading infrastructure if it finally happens on any kind of scale.
In addition, and crossing loosely to HS2, the same problem exists on the rail network. The rail network in the South is basically knackered and being help up by rubber bands.
It's all well and good spending billions on Hinckley, but pretty damned useless when the transmission system is decaying.
No our energy isn't the cheapest in Europe and I think we are possibly the most expensive. We also face some inevitable price rises to pay for Hinckley. And we can expect future price rises to pay for upgrading infrastructure if it finally happens on any kind of scale.
In addition, and crossing loosely to HS2, the same problem exists on the rail network. The rail network in the South is basically knackered and being help up by rubber bands.
Last edited:
I'd also add that the best our Government seems to manage is thinking that energy switching will drive the cost down.
They need to focus on reducing wholesale energy costs. Hinkley Point will do the opposite, whereas the cost of renewables is increasingly reducing and is the soundest investment of all.
Unfortunately DECC cant grasp even the most basic concepts. They are utterly useless.
They need to focus on reducing wholesale energy costs. Hinkley Point will do the opposite, whereas the cost of renewables is increasingly reducing and is the soundest investment of all.
Unfortunately DECC cant grasp even the most basic concepts. They are utterly useless.
Ok I've answered my own question. We have the highest retail energy cost in Europe at 14.8p per kWh prior to taxes.
I preume you you must have been looking at something referring to wholesale rates, or retail rates post taxation.
I preume you you must have been looking at something referring to wholesale rates, or retail rates post taxation.
Last edited:
Retail residential
That's it really. I don't follow this stuff much bit whichever administration brought this in should be congratulated for delivering choice and cheapest prices in europe. Public ownership does of course fail the consumer and serves itself
As for rail I use swt trains extensively all week long. Frankly service never been better. Certainly far more so than 10 and especially 20 years ago. Delays for anything other than jumpers or non travk issues are pretty rare
That's it really. I don't follow this stuff much bit whichever administration brought this in should be congratulated for delivering choice and cheapest prices in europe. Public ownership does of course fail the consumer and serves itself
As for rail I use swt trains extensively all week long. Frankly service never been better. Certainly far more so than 10 and especially 20 years ago. Delays for anything other than jumpers or non travk issues are pretty rare
Its a myth Clive, and its also worth remembering that the BBC will often write a lazy piece based on a government press release (spin in any other language)
Thanks the lord then for the Daily Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...harge-most-for-electricity-in-Europe-why.html
It's really difficult to introduce a scheme that seeks a 30% reduction in consumption and ask the retailers to front it. What incentive do they have to reduce their own sales? Their reaction is typically three fold
1: You have to compensate us for the lost revenue
2: Yes we can do it, but its going to involve all these additional costs (quite a lot of which are questionable)
3: Yes we can do it, but we'll put the prices up one way or the other (basically Green dealers in this scenario would get some shelter, but none signatories wouldn't)
The industry structure is very similar to America's broadband, which is expensive
I think we really needed a more adversorial relationship between Ofgem and the big six to be honest
The real great loss to the country though was the small picture view and reduction in horizon and ambition that Cameron brought in. To be honest, Gordon Brown was about the best PM we had in this area, as he at least saw that ELC (renewables to a lesser extent) was an industry capable generating massive export earnings and supporting good quality jobs in R&D and manufacturing. Cameron switched the focus to domestic fuel bills and the protection of landscapes, and along with Osbortne wouldn't face down the big six
Thanks the lord then for the Daily Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...harge-most-for-electricity-in-Europe-why.html
It's really difficult to introduce a scheme that seeks a 30% reduction in consumption and ask the retailers to front it. What incentive do they have to reduce their own sales? Their reaction is typically three fold
1: You have to compensate us for the lost revenue
2: Yes we can do it, but its going to involve all these additional costs (quite a lot of which are questionable)
3: Yes we can do it, but we'll put the prices up one way or the other (basically Green dealers in this scenario would get some shelter, but none signatories wouldn't)
The industry structure is very similar to America's broadband, which is expensive
I think we really needed a more adversorial relationship between Ofgem and the big six to be honest
The real great loss to the country though was the small picture view and reduction in horizon and ambition that Cameron brought in. To be honest, Gordon Brown was about the best PM we had in this area, as he at least saw that ELC (renewables to a lesser extent) was an industry capable generating massive export earnings and supporting good quality jobs in R&D and manufacturing. Cameron switched the focus to domestic fuel bills and the protection of landscapes, and along with Osbortne wouldn't face down the big six
Total crap you and mau are way adrift in your facts. End of story and no avalanche of side issues will change that
I defy anyone to look at that bbc piece and claim it's "spin"
Fair enough if a poster has got it wrong but don't drag it out
Also it's been reported from years that we have some of the cheapest energy in europe. It's not a subject that interests me much but if self appointed experts cannot pick up on that basic fact the it's big black marker through the rest of their posting
I defy anyone to look at that bbc piece and claim it's "spin"
Fair enough if a poster has got it wrong but don't drag it out
Also it's been reported from years that we have some of the cheapest energy in europe. It's not a subject that interests me much but if self appointed experts cannot pick up on that basic fact the it's big black marker through the rest of their posting