Topic: Never mind 'Stop the Boats' - STOP THE TORIES

[Elmo!]

Thangam Debbonaire with some waffle about what Labour would do. Are renewables our short term way out of this? No way.

They are only a way out of this if you can decouple wholesale electricity prices from wholesale gas prices. I'm not nearly enough of an expert to say how that is achievable, but at the moment the wind energy providers are coining it in selling electricity to the grid at the price of gas.

[ljycb]

I asked this once before, but I'm not sure anyone knew the answer.

Why is 'Keir' sometimes turned into 'Keith'? Is it a spellcheck thing? Is it used for 'Hardie' as well, or just 'Starmer? Is it a class thing? ('Keith' being, in the minds of those who use it, a bit more proletarian).

There was definitely a journalist on one of the news channels who called him it by accident not long after he won the leadership, but I’m not sure if people were using it before then or not.

[west_london_red]

Thangam Debbonaire with some waffle about what Labour would do. Are renewables our short term way out of this? No way.

There’s dashboards online that show you how much of each fuel is used to generate our electricity, and it swings quite a lot, wind doesn’t seem to be as reliable as we’d like, yesterday it was providing about 10% of our electricity with gas at about 60%, nuclear at about 18%, solar was at about 20% so I don’t think we’re gonna be shot of gas for a long time yet unfortunately.

https://www.energydashboard.co.uk/live

[PaulF]

A lot of power prices will have been hedged so the windfall pricing won't all have fed through to the renewables generators.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Why are we talking about New Labour again?

I think at this point you have to assume he's on crack

[Andy @ Allerton!]

The shadow Chancellor - at least twice

"We all applaud the work that Trussell Trust and others on the frontline of the food poverty crisis are doing to provide a lifeline for families in need. But is it really right that people are forced to rely on handouts to feed their families – rather than decent wages and a proper social safety net?" - Rachel Reeves

"it is an absolute insult to tell women they should go on the dole. These women have worked and brought up families – they do not want handouts.”  Rachel Reeves

So you disagree with the statements and are on the side of  the Tories when it comes to foodbanks and on the side of Tories when they expect women to not work?

That would suggest to me that the hard left have gone full circle and are moving towards the hard right.

These forums really do bring up some interesting facts. Your reasoning seems to adhere to the horseshoe theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

[spen71]

Maybe, just maybe a government owned renewable energy company should be priority.   Needs huge investment and resources NOW.   

[Kenny's Jacket]

So you disagree with the statements and are on the side of  the Tories when it comes to foodbanks and on the side of Tories when they expect women to not work?

That would suggest to me that the hard left have gone full circle and are moving towards the hard right.

These forums really do bring up some interesting facts. Your reasoning seems to adhere to the horseshoe theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

someone asked if the word Handout had been used by Labour, I answered.
Literally the only thing on my post  was the answer to the question. See Ian Burns post for a reasoned reply
Are you suggesting Reeves is hard left?  What is my reasoning ?

btw if I wanted to criticise Reeves on the subject of benefits I could easily have found more.  Her rhetoric on the subject isnt great,
but I avoided that.   

[Andy @ Allerton!]

someone asked if the word Handout had been used by Labour, I answered.
Literally the only thing on my post  was the answer to the question. See Ian Burns post for a reasoned reply
Are you suggesting Reeves is hard left?  What is my reasoning ?

btw if I wanted to criticise Reeves on the subject of benefits I could easily have found more.  Her rhetoric on the subject isnt great,
but I avoided that.   

So you are saying that you didn't use those two quotes to directly attack Labour?

I'm honestly confused now mate.

If you didn't attack Labour with those quotes then .. er.. what? You defended Labour by attacking Labour?

I'm obviously a bit thick. What was the intention in posting the quotes?

[PaulF]

I'm not sure Kenny is applying any nuance to the phrase. There might be some dog whistling going on.  Hand outs does seem a poor choice of phrase, eliciting the images of benefit scroungers in the eyes of Tories. But for people in general I think , especially in the context kenny quoted, that it's meant more as a helping hand .

[ianburns252]

So you are saying that you didn't use those two quotes to directly attack Labour?

I'm honestly confused now mate.

If you didn't attack Labour with those quotes then .. er.. what? You defended Labour by attacking Labour?

I'm obviously a bit thick. What was the intention in posting the quotes?

Not to speak to Kenny but my take was that he was pointing out a situation where Labour had used a term which people were castigating the Tories for using and the gist was that Labour should be better and more careful about using potentially inflammatory language and asking if there was a way to take those quotes that doesn't make Labour seem tone deaf.

At least that was how I read it and the basis for my response

[Red-Soldier]

So you disagree with the statements and are on the side of  the Tories when it comes to foodbanks and on the side of Tories when they expect women to not work?

That would suggest to me that the hard left have gone full circle and are moving towards the hard right.

[PaulF]

Edit, but deserves a post.
Hand outs is going to become a controversial phrase. I can see how it's definitely associated with the idea that people would rather live on benefits than work. (I'm not for a second suggesting theres even a handful of people that think this way). Furlough was essentially a handout and millions took that. Obviously huge numbers simply couldn't work, and even if you took up a second job, you got paid furlough. So we have to revisit hollow we view handouts.  Nobody's really made anything of the handout that is the fuel allowance already being distributed. It's more like the self imposed view by the elderly that they don't need their winter fuel allowance.  A tax cut to help us pay our fuel this winter is essentially a hand out.  And I'm certain the government has to do something similar but larger again.
And will continue to do so until we reach a new world balance on energy consumption.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Not to speak to Kenny but my take was that he was pointing out a situation where Labour had used a term which people were castigating the Tories for using and the gist was that Labour should be better and more careful about using potentially inflammatory language and asking if there was a way to take those quotes that doesn't make Labour seem tone deaf.

At least that was how I read it and the basis for my response

So you're saying the context of Labour criticising the Tories over it is the same as the Tories criticising those that need 'handouts'

Now I'm reallty confused.

You seem to be saying that the opposite usage of a word is the same thing? Is that even possible?

[ianburns252]

So you're saying the context of Labour criticising the Tories over it is the same as the Tories criticising those that need 'handouts'

Now I'm reallty confused.

You seem to be saying that the opposite usage of a word is the same thing? Is that even possible?

Not at all - I'm criticising the choice of word as I feel it has too many negative connotations (and as per my reply to KJ it is clearly meant in a different tone to the Tories use of it) but saying that the spirit of what has been said is correct.

My point was entirely based around the context being key, even though I think the word was a poor choice

[Dr. Beaker]

‘Keith’ is one of those proletarian names, like Jason or Kenneth, used as a coded insult by people with names like Piers or Odo.

I just thought they call him Keith because it's so hilarious.

[Circa1892]

The absolute scam on energy is the standing charge.

The whole “heating vs eating” ignores the fact you can do neither and still not be able to afford to live thanks to paying a fortune for literally nothing.

Any government intervention needs to deal with that, needs to somehow incentivise low useage - especially in business and needs to massively subsidise interventions that reduce energy use/create new energy. Massive investments in insulation, compulsory solar panels on new builds, massively subsidise solar for houses etc.

This government just doesn’t understand anything though. It’s missing the ball on two fronts here. Yes there needs to be a huge support package targeted at the lowest incomes (people who can manage can manage without extra support - we’re in the fortunes position where our energy hills will mean we can’t have a holiday, others will die…), but this isn’t a one off thing. Russia is a pariah state with no meaningful way back to positive relationships and trading with the west until a long time after that little syphillitic c*nt running their country dies a (hopefully) painful death. We’ve already missed the boat on being prepared (mass renewables, gas storage etc), so we need to get cracking.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Not at all - I'm criticising the choice of word as I feel it has too many negative connotations (and as per my reply to KJ it is clearly meant in a different tone to the Tories use of it) but saying that the spirit of what has been said is correct.

My point was entirely based around the context being key, even though I think the word was a poor choice

So you don't think that the posting of it was to attack Labour then?

That's what it seemed like to me.

[ianburns252]

Edit, but deserves a post.
Hand outs is going to become a controversial phrase. I can see how it's definitely associated with the idea that people would rather live on benefits than work. (I'm not for a second suggesting theres even a handful of people that think this way). Furlough was essentially a handout and millions took that. Obviously huge numbers simply couldn't work, and even if you took up a second job, you got paid furlough. So we have to revisit hollow we view handouts.  Nobody's really made anything of the handout that is the fuel allowance already being distributed. It's more like the self imposed view by the elderly that they don't need their winter fuel allowance.  A tax cut to help us pay our fuel this winter is essentially a hand out.  And I'm certain the government has to do something similar but larger again.
And will continue to do so until we reach a new world balance on energy consumption.

I gues Furlough was universal enough (people for all ends of the spectrum getting it/needing it) and also relied on you being in work (the whole strivers vs skivers bullshit) that it didn't get treated as a "hand out" by those who would oppose a fully funded benefit system.

For the old people's fuel allowance many see them as having worked their share and see the old as deserving as they have "put in the hours" in a way.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

The absolute scam on energy is the standing charge.

The whole “heating vs eating” ignores the fact you can do neither and still not be able to afford to live thanks to paying a fortune for literally nothing.

Any government intervention needs to deal with that, needs to somehow incentivise low useage - especially in business and needs to massively subsidise interventions that reduce energy use/create new energy. Massive investments in insulation, compulsory solar panels on new builds, massively subsidise solar for houses etc.

This government just doesn’t understand anything though. It’s missing the ball on two fronts here. Yes there needs to be a huge support package targeted at the lowest incomes (people who can manage can manage without extra support - we’re in the fortunes position where our energy hills will mean we can’t have a holiday, others will die…), but this isn’t a one off thing. Russia is a pariah state with no meaningful way back to positive relationships and trading with the west until a long time after that little syphillitic c*nt running their country dies a (hopefully) painful death. We’ve already missed the boat on being prepared (mass renewables, gas storage etc), so we need to get cracking.

No we didn't miss the boat as far as I'm aware. The Tories actively torpedoed their own country to make a quick buck.

We had reserves and we had options. The Tories gave those away.

I'd still like to see the results of the investigation into Russia-Tory relations.

[ianburns252]

So you don't think that the posting of it was to attack Labour then?

That's what it seemed like to me.

To me it was a critique of Labour and the choice of language without necessarily criticising the intent behind the quote

[Kenny's Jacket]

So you are saying that you didn't use those two quotes to directly attack Labour?

I'm honestly confused now mate.

If you didn't attack Labour with those quotes then .. er.. what? You defended Labour by attacking Labour?

I'm obviously a bit thick. What was the intention in posting the quotes?

just answering a question.  Now maybe you can answer mine.  Who is hard left? (referring to you previous post )

[Yorkykopite]

I just thought they call him Keith because it's so hilarious.

Do you think late- Victorian posh boys used to call Keir Hardie 'Keith'?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

just answering a question.  Now maybe you can answer mine.  Who is hard left? (referring to you previous post )

Well I'm fairly left (Very left if you believe those left/right spectrum thingies you fill in) and I'd say that your persona comes across as being quite a bit further left than I am.

I came from a working class background with a single mum who had to do three jobs to stand still and me and my sister used to have paper rounds, work in shops and do other stuff like cleaning cars and the like to pay into the household. I also grew up in a shithole and we didn't have central heating or even a bath (Had a tin one in front of the fire) and an outside bog. I can't stand the Tories and hated Thatcher in particular because I could see how much she fucked us over.

But you come across as further left than I am. How would you describe yourself? Would you say you're 'lefter' than some on the left or to the right of them? I'd suggest that you're quite a lot lefter (Or, at least that's how you come across to me)

[Kenny's Jacket]

Well I'm fairly left (Very left if you believe those left/right spectrum thingies you fill in) and I'd say that your persona comes across as being quite a bit further left than I am.

I came from a working class background with a single mum who had to do three jobs to stand still and me and my sister used to have paper rounds, work in shops and do other stuff like cleaning cars and the like to pay into the household. I also grew up in a shithole and we didn't have central heating or even a bath (Had a tin one in front of the fire) and an outside bog. I can't stand the Tories and hated Thatcher in particular because I could see how much she fucked us over.

But you come across as further left than I am. How would you describe yourself? Would you say you're 'lefter' than some on the left or to the right of them? I'd suggest that you're quite a lot lefter (Or, at least that's how you come across to me)

Crikey Andy, this is getting deep mate.  I honestly dont know where to place myself.  Grew up in a terraced house, not a council house
I Also had great parents.  Mum was a hairdresser and Dad a furniture restorer, who worked for the local small businessman Antique dealer.  Neither parents were politically active, just the odd, "people like us vote Labour son"  My grandfather I found out after he died was a Trade Union leader.  This was my only ever political steering.
I was lucky enough to fall into a job with an ok basic salary but uncapped commission. I earned well at a young age.  Then in typical Tory fashion I jumped on the capitalist dream and bought some buy to let houses. (before the credit crunch when it was a lot easier.

In an argument in work about Corbyn (he was leader then) someone pointed out that he had a policy that long term tennents could have a right to buy from Private landlords.  I never checked if this was true, Ill vote for him anyway as Ill always back the underdog.

I had a stroke last year and Im now unable to work, The insufficient state help available would mean without my income from the buy to lets, I would need to sell my residential house to survive.  If this is what happens to others, they loose everything, then thats shit.
Based on the rhetoric from Reeves (which I havent posted for RAWK harmony) its not left or caring.  It scares me. Someone who got my job and salary but didnt create passive income would be fucked if one fateful day, they couldnt work.

Edit :  I think the point Im making is, I have lived the life the that Centrists and the right say they want from the plebs. Get a job, work hard earn money Bla bla bla, but without my investments.  Id still be fucked. 

[PaulF]

I gues Furlough was universal enough (people for all ends of the spectrum getting it/needing it) and also relied on you being in work (the whole strivers vs skivers bullshit) that it didn't get treated as a "hand out" by those who would oppose a fully funded benefit system.

For the old people's fuel allowance many see them as having worked their share and see the old as deserving as they have "put in the hours" in a way.

I don't think you e misunderstood my point about fuel allowance. But to be clear .
I think that some pensioners that are totally entitled to it feel that recieving from the state is wrong and thus don't take it.
Obviously, there are millionaire pensioners that absolutely don't need it , and it would be wrong for them to accept it.  The cost of means testing it though seems to outweigh giving it out to all .
My badly worded point is how handouts are viewed, both by the recipient, non receipts and different members of the public.
To me it feels we are making a mountain out of a molehill about the phrase. But I am very mindful how these 'little' things can sow the seeds of huge damage.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Crikey Andy, this is getting deep mate.  I honestly dont know where to place myself.  Grew up in a terraced house, not a council house
I Also had great parents.  Mum was a hairdresser and Dad a furniture restorer, who worked for the local small businessman Antique dealer.  Neither parents were politically active, just the odd, "people like us vote Labour son"  My grandfather I found out after he died was a Trade Union leader.  This was my only ever political steering.
I was lucky enough to fall into a job with an ok basic salary but uncapped commission. I earned well at a young age.  Then in typical Tory fashion I jumped on the capitalist dream and bought some buy to let houses. (before the credit crunch when it was a lot easier.

In an argument in work about Corbyn (he was leader then) someone pointed out that he had a policy that long term tennents could have a right to buy from Private landlords.  I never checked if this was true, Ill vote for him anyway as Ill always back the underdog.

I had a stroke last year and Im now unable to work, The insufficient state help available would mean without my income from the buy to lets, I would need to sell my residential house to survive.  If this is what happens to others, they loose everything, then thats shit.
Based on the rhetoric from Reeves (which I havent posted for RAWK harmony) its not left or caring.  It scares me. Someone who got my job and salary but didnt create passive income would be fucked if one fateful day, they couldnt work.

Edit :  I think the point Im making is, I have lived the life the that Centrists and the right say they want from the plebs. Get a job, work hard earn money Bla bla bla, but without my investments.  Id still be fucked. 

Well you come across as a lot more political than you've said there (Which is meant as a compliment)

Really sorry to hear about your health issue and yeah, these Tories are hateful in their lack of support.

I took the quotes to mean the opposite of what you seem to think they meant, so not sure how to square that circle.

Your postings on here seem to me to be more politically left than I am - but as I've said on countless occasions, I'm not really 'Politically left' - I'm 'left' because I think that fairness, decency and support should be a given in any decent society. If people are going hungry or are about to lose their house or can't afford the heating then a first-world country that allows that to happen is a shithole run by c*nts.

A lot of things are perception. Some people seem to think of me as 'centrist' or even 'right wing' (lol) but I think that's because I can see both sides of pretty much every argument. I also think that many things are a lot more complicated than you might first think. It's annoying me that people that disagree with some parts of the Labour Party get labelled as 'Right-wing' - like honestly you have what I thought were sensible intelligent people saying that the Labour Party are no different than the Conservatives and that their policies are 'Right wing' - when pulled up on it, or questioned, their answers are bewlidering.

I think that most people 'on the left' or even 'in the centre' want broadly the same thing - a fair country with those that need help to be helped.

The current direction of the Tory party is even more disgusting than normal - their tax cuts and the like will, again, favour those that don't need the help. Giving £400 to households that aren't having a problem is fucking disgusting - I don't want their fucking dirty shithouse money - give it to households that need it.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Well you come across as a lot more political than you've said there (Which is meant as a compliment)

Really sorry to hear about your health issue and yeah, these Tories are hateful in their lack of support.

I took the quotes to mean the opposite of what you seem to think they meant, so not sure how to square that circle.

Your postings on here seem to me to be more politically left than I am - but as I've said on countless occasions, I'm not really 'Politically left' - I'm 'left' because I think that fairness, decency and support should be a given in any decent society. If people are going hungry or are about to lose their house or can't afford the heating then a first-world country that allows that to happen is a shithole run by c*nts.

A lot of things are perception. Some people seem to think of me as 'centrist' or even 'right wing' (lol) but I think that's because I can see both sides of pretty much every argument. I also think that many things are a lot more complicated than you might first think. It's annoying me that people that disagree with some parts of the Labour Party get labelled as 'Right-wing' - like honestly you have what I thought were sensible intelligent people saying that the Labour Party are no different than the Conservatives and that their policies are 'Right wing' - when pulled up on it, or questioned, their answers are bewlidering.

I think that most people 'on the left' or even 'in the centre' want broadly the same thing - a fair country with those that need help to be helped.

The current direction of the Tory party is even more disgusting than normal - their tax cuts and the like will, again, favour those that don't need the help. Giving £400 to households that aren't having a problem is fucking disgusting - I don't want their fucking dirty shithouse money - give it to households that need it.

Oh I am political, I just wasnt brought up so. 

The £400 is even worse than you describe mate, people are not getting the cash, The energy companies are getting it. 
We cant see the fat cats have a cash flow issue now

[filopastry]

Updated forecast for energy price cap, January forecast looking even worse than previously

https://twitter.com/CornwallInsight/status/1556913695804071938

[spen71]

Updated forecast for energy price cap, January forecast looking even worse than previously

https://twitter.com/CornwallInsight/status/1556913695804071938

Millions are not going to be able to afford the new cap.    A massive recession is on the cards.    Businesses left right and centre are going to go  under, unemployment will
Go up etc etc

I’m starting to worry about my own business.   A simple window cleaning round BUT I can see a lot of my customers stopping the service

[Circa1892]

No we didn't miss the boat as far as I'm aware. The Tories actively torpedoed their own country to make a quick buck.

We had reserves and we had options. The Tories gave those away.

I'd still like to see the results of the investigation into Russia-Tory relations.

Fair. Sunk the boat rather than missed it. Either way we have to do the equivalent of swimming the atlantic because of these useless Tory c*nts.

[Circa1892]

Giving £400 to households that aren't having a problem is fucking disgusting - I don't want their fucking dirty shithouse money - give it to households that need it.

Giving the £400 multiple times to people who own multiple houses is the worst.

We're going to see a lot of landlords owning multiple student houses with all-inc bills taking multiple lots of £400 from the Govt, taking their thousands a month for shit houses from the students and then turning their tenants heating off...

[Red Raw]

They are only a way out of this if you can decouple wholesale electricity prices from wholesale gas prices. I'm not nearly enough of an expert to say how that is achievable, but at the moment the wind energy providers are coining it in selling electricity to the grid at the price of gas.

It doesn't work like this in the renewables sector.

Many of the big wind/renewables contracts are awarded as Contracts for Difference (CfD). If the price of electricity drops below the 'strike price' agreed in the contract the government pays the difference to the generator. If however the price increases above that strike price the difference is paid back to the government.

The system is designed to reduce the risks for developers and provide a platform from which they can develop and innovate to drive prices down (which they have, massively) while at the same time not overcompensating them.

It is a pity that more fossil fuel licences aren't offered on a similar basis.

[Red Raw]

There’s dashboards online that show you how much of each fuel is used to generate our electricity, and it swings quite a lot, wind doesn’t seem to be as reliable as we’d like, yesterday it was providing about 10% of our electricity with gas at about 60%, nuclear at about 18%, solar was at about 20% so I don’t think we’re gonna be shot of gas for a long time yet unfortunately.

https://www.energydashboard.co.uk/live

Most of the dashboards draw data from the Balancing Mechanism Reporting Service (BMRS) run by Elexon. The core data only covers metered assets on the transmission system, not unmeterered assets within the distribution system run by the DNOs (Scotish and Southern, Northern Powergrid, Electricity North West, Western Power etc.)

BMRS estimate ~50% of the wind/solar total is included in their data and the dashboard you reference does attempt to make some allowance for this.

This is just a snapshot however, and the direction of travel is better illustrated using other data such as the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) which is updated annually. This is from the latest issue:


Renewables will have good days and bad days but (along with efficiency improvements - EU hoover ban anyone?) they are currently our best hope of reducing emissions and keeping energy prices down - they are cheaper and can be deployed more rapidly than any other sources. We still need to find more ways to accommodate intermittency through storage, demand management/load shifting etc. but none of this is seen as insurmountable - all that is lacking is political will.

[ianburns252]

I don't think you e misunderstood my point about fuel allowance. But to be clear .
I think that some pensioners that are totally entitled to it feel that recieving from the state is wrong and thus don't take it.
Obviously, there are millionaire pensioners that absolutely don't need it , and it would be wrong for them to accept it.  The cost of means testing it though seems to outweigh giving it out to all .
My badly worded point is how handouts are viewed, both by the recipient, non receipts and different members of the public.
To me it feels we are making a mountain out of a molehill about the phrase. But I am very mindful how these 'little' things can sow the seeds of huge damage.

I think I have articulated poorly to be fair - I was aiming at how they were viewed and that from those I know, no one would consider the fuel allowance to be a "hand out" as they then think of their gran sat at home refusing to turn the heating on and so would say they rightly should get them.

My thing was that too many see JSA/UC as being unearned or just a "hand out" whereas furlough and fuel allowance are seen as "support" which has a very different, much more positive, connotation.

[Red-Soldier]

Most of the dashboards draw data from the Balancing Mechanism Reporting Service (BMRS) run by Elexon. The core data only covers metered assets on the transmission system, not unmeterered assets within the distribution system run by the DNOs (Scotish and Southern, Northern Powergrid, Electricity North West, Western Power etc.)

BMRS estimate ~50% of the wind/solar total is included in their data and the dashboard you reference does attempt to make some allowance for this.

This is just a snapshot however, and the direction of travel is better illustrated using other data such as the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) which is updated annually. This is from the latest issue:


Renewables will have good days and bad days but (along with efficiency improvements - EU hoover ban anyone?) they are currently our best hope of reducing emissions and keeping energy prices down - they are cheaper and can be deployed more rapidly than any other sources. We still need to find more ways to accommodate intermittency through storage, demand management/load shifting etc. but none of this is seen as insurmountable - all that is lacking is political will.

Good points and I totally agree.

It really is all about political will!

[PaulF]

Renewables will have good days and bad days but (along with efficiency improvements - EU hoover ban anyone?) they are currently our best hope of reducing emissions and keeping energy prices down - they are cheaper and can be deployed more rapidly than any other sources. We still need to find more ways to accommodate intermittency through storage, demand management/load shifting etc. but none of this is seen as insurmountable - all that is lacking is political will.

I'm assuming you mostly mean wind\solar here. I'm not sure what others there are.  Not sure if nuclear fits in there.
Deployment of wind I know a bit about. There's a lot of planning regulation and site preparation (eg trying to clear bridges to get the turbines to location without disturbing wildlife).  Even super expedited I doubt you are looking at less than 2 years from identifying an appropriate site to pushing power to the grid.

The variablity is the real pain though.  I guess if we can make electricity for almost free for half the year, then a double in price for the rest of the year isn't so bad.

Not sure if fracking is now 'viable' though.


--edit-- is there a thread for the energy geeks amongst us?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Good points and I totally agree.

It really is all about political will!

With Johnson in command, it was more about polticial willies

[PaulF]

It really is all about political will!

Like many things. And though it's a horrible thought, a 10-20 year government term to see them reap rewards would help. 

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I'm assuming you mostly mean wind\solar here. I'm not sure what others there are.  Not sure if nuclear fits in there.
Deployment of wind I know a bit about. There's a lot of planning regulation and site preparation (eg trying to clear bridges to get the turbines to location without disturbing wildlife).  Even super expedited I doubt you are looking at less than 2 years from identifying an appropriate site to pushing power to the grid.

The variablity is the real pain though.  I guess if we can make electricity for almost free for half the year, then a double in price for the rest of the year isn't so bad.

Not sure if fracking is now 'viable' though.

Fracking was never viable in the UK.

America is a massive, massive country and even there look how much environmental damage was caused by Americans making a quick buck.

They've fucked the aquifiers, water tables and cause thousands of spills of contaminated liquids across the regions they operate in


This is a Pro/Con argument; https://selectra.co.uk/energy/guides/environment/fracking-pros-cons


The conclusion there is that short-term it might be viable, but long term it isn't.

Problem is that once you've fucked your aquifiers, water table and ecological environment then it isn't going to recover anytime soon.

Also 'strange' that the Tories are hell bent on fracking in the North rather than the South