|
Post by alec on Aug 26, 2022 6:18:40 GMT
neilj - yes, new builds are a big missed opportunity. But FITs are no more, and haven't been for some time. There are no subsidies for new solar now.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,832
|
Post by Danny on Aug 26, 2022 6:31:05 GMT
mercian - "I agree in principle, but let's not get carried away. I think I read somewhere that the UK's contribution to climate change is around 1% of the total, so while we should do what we can it's not exactly an emergency." On the contrary, countries like ours will be hit hardest by climate heating, in terms of the impacts on our lives, so yes, it really is an emergency - unless you're an elderly selfish person who doesn't care what comes next. I noticed yesterday we produce about 1% of world gas supply but use 2%. Similarly produce about 1% of world oil but use 1.5%. Didn't check coal but expect that's small by now. Even if our usage of fossil fuels is only 1-2%, we cannot do nothing and expect big consumers like US or china to make all the cuts. Real cuts in our usage are long overdue, rather than what we have mostly done in recent years which is out source industries heavily dependent on energy to other countries. Then import the finished goods. There has been no real investment in making this happen for the last twelve years of con rule, and it has now come back to bite them. Yesterday had some news discussion that Google have bowed to pressure to redefine the global warming effects caused by air travel and halved their totals. The problem seems to be that only half the effect is simply burning fuel, but the rest is about where and how it takes place in the upper atmosphere doubling it's impact. And another report said that forest fires have increased recently assumed due to global warming, and the smoke produced is severely depleting the ozone layer. So just as we thought we had fixed that problem by banning cfcs, it turns out general warming was making it worse in another way. This also highlights the questionable idea of offsetting co2 emissions by planting trees. It's only a short term fix because those trees die and release the co2 again. Sometimes spectacularly fast.
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Aug 26, 2022 6:31:44 GMT
Being a customer trapped on the new capped rate for energy supply, due to my previous supplier going bust, I am really concerned about energy prices through the winter.
Luckily, we have received listed building consent to fit a woodburner and work starts in a fortnight, so far prices for seasoned wood has risen in line with general inflation rather than fuel inflation so we should be able to reduce our overall outgoings this year, it might even pay for itself within two years. Of course, it does nothing to reduce particulate pollution and claims of carbon neutrality are seriously overplayed.
In other mitigation measures, I notice that the prices for, slippers, jumpers, hot water bottles and blankets have all risen in the past few weeks, but heat the person, not the space is still really good advice.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,031
|
Post by neilj on Aug 26, 2022 6:42:06 GMT
neilj - yes, new builds are a big missed opportunity. But FITs are no more, and haven't been for some time. There are no subsidies for new solar now. Thanks Alec, I think the new scheme is called the Smart Export Guarantee When I was crunching the numbers on this a couple of months ago as I was thinking of installing solar panels the export tariff I would get would be a fraction of the tariff I have to pay to the electricity company to 'import' the electricity Am not talking about subsidies but legislation to ensure there is not profiteering from the energy suppliers on electricity exported to them Just checked again and found this www.theecoexperts.co.uk/solar-panels/smart-export-guarantee#:~:text=The%20best%20Smart%20Export%20Guarantee%20tariff%20is%20Octopus's%207.5p,the%20price%20they%20charge%20you. 'Octopus offers the best SEG rate... 7.5p per kWh offering, while the standard rate consumers pay for electricity is currently 28.3p per kWh. That means the Smart Export Guarantee allows companies to buy electricity from you for, at most, 27% of the price they charge you... E, which has 300,000 customers across the UK, pays the least for your renewable energy, handing over just 1p per kWh. It’s also worth mentioning EDF’s paltry 1.5p per kWh rate, which is – at best – half as much as you’ll receive from the other Big Six suppliers, despite EDF making a net profit of €5.1 billion (£4.2 billion) last year.'
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 26, 2022 6:43:27 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,832
|
Post by Danny on Aug 26, 2022 6:50:53 GMT
Martin Lewis being interviewed R4. Discussing that fuel bills reaching 1/3 of income for people on benefits or basic pensions. Which has tripled since a year ago.
Also attacked the rise in the standing charge, which is increasingly being used to pay back past losses and fund other subsidies. As a standing charge, you cannot avoid paying it even if you just use one light bulb. It disproportionately affects the poor.
Thirdly attacked that no new subsidy scheme has been announced in advance of today's price rise even though what was coming was known in advance.
Fourth, that blaming and regulating retail energy companies isn't very helpful when it is wholesale energy companies making the huge profits.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2022 7:00:22 GMT
mercian I appreciate that most of your posts are unserious and some do occasionally actually amuse me. I can also well understand, as you admit, that they all greatly amuse yourself. No problem with any of that but great humourists don't often have to signal when they are being humourous, nor do they berate their audience for failing to be amused by it. I only signal jokes because a lot of people don't seem to get my humour, and it is hard to convey things in writing that can be done by tone of voice for instance in real life. And I don't claim to be a great humourist! Anyway, here's little tale that I found amusing: The BBC was banging on about GCSE results and I said to Mrs Mercian "I don't know why people get so excited about these results. If you get good results you take one path, and if bad, another. So what?" To which she replied "That's because you don't think like normal people"! On reflection that might well be true but it's the first time in 44 years of marriage tomorrow that she's said that. It made me laugh anyway. You think like a normal Daily Mail reader though
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,106
|
Post by domjg on Aug 26, 2022 7:01:47 GMT
The limited publicity given to Truss’s embarrassing insult in respect of one of this country’s best allies speaks volumes about where we have got to as country ourselves. The sooner she is in - and on her way out again- the better. Maybe the Conservative Party can then reinvent themselves as mainstream again. But I very much doubt it. ps And what a really weird question from the interviewer and then ridiculous applause/guffaws from the Tory faithful at Truss’s response. They are all despicable oafs. The question was clearly designed for drama and her answer to her horrifying audience was in a way inevitable but it underlines how far in the gutter we are. These people are totally estranged from the sensible, pragmatic country that I was once proud to belong to. Primary school children have got more sense and self awareness than Tory members it seems.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,832
|
Post by Danny on Aug 26, 2022 7:21:09 GMT
There seems to be a singular lack of leadership from government over the energy price crisis. it's saying something that an indivudual campaigner Martin Lewis seems to be the main person explaining the problem and what could be done.
There needs to be a statement of really what is expected. how long and how high prices will be. Government has simply minimised the problem and refused to address them.
There needs to be a decision who will pay. Will it be all consumers. Will there be real subsidies for the poor (ie not loans repaid through future charges).
We have regulated retail energy supply where there are only small profits, but not wholesale supply where there are massive profits. Truss has declared she opposes windfall taxes on these massive and unexpected profits. Which means she intends consumers to pay and the economy to be destabilised to create those profits. Fine, it's a point of view, but government needs to make clear it will always favour industry profit over national good.
What is realy need is control of the wholesale energy market to prevent excess profits. Big silence on that one.
And news this morning Russia is flaring off gas instead of supplying it to Germany. This used to happen in the north Sea because gas is released alongside oil from wells and there was then no means to bring the gas ashore. It could be Russia can still market oil but is just burning off the accompanying gas.
Or there could be a technical failure. Especially with withdrawal of western support.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,832
|
Post by Danny on Aug 26, 2022 7:23:14 GMT
I begin to wonder if Truss may have realised she doesn't want to be PM after all.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,281
|
Post by steve on Aug 26, 2022 7:30:43 GMT
Brearley( Chair of Ofgem) told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “the truth is, this is beyond the capacity of the regulator and the industry to address”. He said the next prime minister needs “to act urgently and decisively” to tackle the situation.
200%+ rise in this time last year , half of the poorest families income going on energy by January and we've got Liz Truss and her band of merry fuckwited uber brexitanian right wing nutters soon to be at the helm. Any prime minister up to and including May would have realised the nature of this imminent disaster and acted Truss is still fucking about insulting Europeans warring on woke and promising tax cuts for the rich.While the departing pm carried on with his end of term jolies the latest pretending to be Poundland Winston Churchill. And no one in the regime or their client media ( hello BBC) gives a shit.
We are utterly screwed.
|
|
|
Post by pete on Aug 26, 2022 7:39:19 GMT
A must watch
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 26, 2022 7:40:54 GMT
neilj - on the Smart Export Guarantee: yes, it's poor. We had hoped the government would go for a regulated rate of at least 5p/kWh when launched, with an automatic inflation uplift as per FITs. But they didn't. The legislation only says that the supplier must contract to buy any renewable surplus and that the SEG offered has to be "more than zero". This came about after intense lobbying by the power companies, and we all know that when big business shouts, Tories jump. The only effective way to make domestic PV pay, in conventional financial terms, is to use it to offset your own demand. The easiest way is to fit a cheap diverter unit so you heat hot water with any excess, but in summer, even this won't soak up all the output of a reasonable size PV array on a sunny day. It also won't help those on combi boilers, unless you reconfigure your boiler. Since installing our modest sized PV system last summer, we've actually bought a dishwasher, as I've worked out that it's more water and energy efficient than running a hot feed from the oil heated cylinder for handwashing. We also wash clothes during the day on free electricity and generally switch our use to suit the weather. We can do this as home workers, many others though can't. We desperately need a grown up, well thought out energy policy.
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Aug 26, 2022 7:51:18 GMT
neilj - on the Smart Export Guarantee: yes, it's poor. We had hoped the government would go for a regulated rate of at least 5p/kWh when launched, with an automatic inflation uplift as per FITs. But they didn't. The legislation only says that the supplier must contract to buy any renewable surplus and that the SEG offered has to be "more than zero". This came about after intense lobbying by the power companies, and we all know that when big business shouts, Tories jump. The only effective way to make domestic PV pay, in conventional financial terms, is to use it to offset your own demand. The easiest way is to fit a cheap diverter unit so you heat hot water with any excess, but in summer, even this won't soak up all the output of a reasonable size PV array on a sunny day. It also won't help those on combi boilers, unless you reconfigure your boiler. Since installing our modest sized PV system last summer, we've actually bought a dishwasher, as I've worked out that it's more water and energy efficient than running a hot feed from the oil heated cylinder for handwashing. We also wash clothes during the day on free electricity and generally switch our use to suit the weather. We can do this as home workers, many others though can't. We desperately need a grown up, well thought out energy policy. But what about the embedded energy used in producing and, finally, scrapping the dishwasher Alec?
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 26, 2022 8:08:11 GMT
I begin to wonder if Truss may have realised she doesn't want to be PM after all. I fear it may be too late for her to scupper her own chances. If the Tory membership polling is anything like accurate, and the calculation that most members have already voted similarly so, then nothing Truss can say or do now will make any difference. It's in the bag for her in other words, whether she likes it or not. Of course, if so, and as others have already said, it does make the interminable campaigning virtually pointless now. I'm a student of political clichés and have often mused about the one that says that a country and electorate gets the politicians and government it deserves. In a sense, like a lot of clichés, it's self evidently true; we elect the scoundrels after all. Truss is a product of the Tory Party that, in one way or other, we keep electing. Of course, this may beg the question as to what on earth we as a people have done to deserve a Prime Minister like Truss and ministers like Rees-Mogg, Dorries, Patel, Braverman etc, but we have to take some responsibility for this unholy mess. These mediocrities wouldn't be where they are, governing us, unless we'd enabled them to do so. That could be by direct consent, and we have voted for them because we like them governing us or by indirect facilitation; a chronic failure to oppose them effectively and defeat them. It is that failure we must now address and find a way in our flawed democracy to defeat them and rid ourselves of them in government. That's where our salvation as a nation lies and it's a momentous responsibility that falls on our opposition politicians now. They simply have to win next time around and set our country on a completely different course. The stakes just couldn't be any higher. We have to help them find a way to win. No more howling into the wind.
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Aug 26, 2022 8:09:54 GMT
mercian - "I agree in principle, but let's not get carried away. I think I read somewhere that the UK's contribution to climate change is around 1% of the total, so while we should do what we can it's not exactly an emergency." On the contrary, countries like ours will be hit hardest by climate heating, in terms of the impacts on our lives, so yes, it really is an emergency - unless you're an elderly selfish person who doesn't care what comes next. I don't really get that statement Alec? What will the huge impact in the UK be? Personally I would prefer to live in a climate more like southern Europe. That's not to say that other countries in southern Europe and around the world won't suffer a lot and it is certainly an emergency for them and we should do our bit to help them.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,281
|
Post by steve on Aug 26, 2022 8:14:46 GMT
crossbat11 Perhaps you should have concluded that it's the muppets who voted for them. I've spent the last forty years doing everything within my ability to prevent the election of Tory governments.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,106
|
Post by domjg on Aug 26, 2022 8:20:25 GMT
I begin to wonder if Truss may have realised she doesn't want to be PM after all. I fear it may be too late for her to scupper her own chances. If the Tory membership polling is anything like accurate, and the calculation that most members have already voted similarly so, then nothing Truss can say or do now will make any difference. It's in the bag for her in other words, whether she likes it or not. Of course, if so, and as others have already said, it does make the interminable campaigning virtually pointless now. I'm a student of political clichés and have often mused about the one that says that a country and electorate gets the politicians and government it deserves. In a sense, like a lot of clichés, it's self evidently true; we elect the scoundrels after all. Truss is a product of the Tory Party that, in one way or other, we keep electing. Of course, this may beg the question as to what on earth we as a people have done to deserve a Prime Minister like Truss and ministers like Rees-Mogg, Dorries, Patel, Braverman etc, but we have to take some responsibility for this unholy mess. These mediocrities wouldn't be where they are, governing us, unless we'd enabled them to do so. That could be by direct consent, and we have voted for them because we like them governing us or by indirect facilitation; a chronic failure to oppose them effectively and defeat them. It is that failure we must now address and find a way in our flawed democracy to defeat them and rid ourselves of them in government. That's where our salvation as a nation lies and it's a momentous responsibility that falls on our opposition politicians now. They simply have to win next time around and set our country on a completely different course. The stakes just couldn't be any higher. We have to help them find a way to win. No more howling into the wind. Absolutely. Unlike those people who say they want to 'vote positively for Labour' rather than being primarily motivated to vote against this Tory govt (and by implication won't vote tactically), I can see clearly that this rabble are an existential threat to the country we know and that they've already eroded it significantly. They need to be stopped as a matter of urgency, and this is far more important than wanting more 'Labourish' policies from Labour for example.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2022 8:22:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Aug 26, 2022 9:18:04 GMT
So no UK Government Minister doing the broadcast interview rounds today. If they can't attack striking workers, wage war on wokery or berate nasty foreigners they're not really interested.
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 26, 2022 9:48:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Aug 26, 2022 9:58:34 GMT
Slow cookers are very energy efficient too. I prefer casseroles etc cooked in a conventional oven, but needs must.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 26, 2022 10:03:32 GMT
The point I made re- first term incumbency was rather born out by the actual 2019 results - in that Labour did hang on to many of the gains made in 2017. I have also been happy to remind people that evidence of this factor does go back quite a long time - eg in 1964 the Tories held on to quite few seats which had not been won until 1959! Some of the gains labour made suggested underlying structural changes in seats, particularly it was suggested pro labour people moving out of London and turning some of the nearer tory shires red. Something similar but in reverse with the collapse of the northern red wall as former unionised industrial labour supporters die off. It struck me that the effect of a long term structural change is to eventually flip a seat and create a new incumbent. That new MP stands a good chance of avoiding losing their seat despite future national reverses of fortune for their party, because it was local changes not national which won it for them. Looked at overall this process would create a bias towards new incumbents keeping their seats more easily than challengers winning others. But the reason would not be because being in a seat for a term boosts your chances, but because underlying local factors won it for you in the first place and still apply. In the case of london red spreading outwards I would judge this is likely to have continued since. But if the red wall collapse was really because of support for brexit then this is much more likely to crumble as the post brexit economy collapses. There could be a southern apparent 'incumbency bonus' for labour but none for con in the north. Of course structural changes were at work - as indeed they always are! I strongly suspect though that in 2019 the Corbyn and Brexit factors were the main forces driving the big pro-Tory swings in traditional Labour seats. Both are likely to be transient and it will be fascinating to see the extent to which they unwind in 2024. Will such seats show an above average swing back to Labour? Re-longterm structural change the SW Norfolk seat is interesting in terms of its electoral history. Now held by Liz Truss and one of the safest Tory seats in GB, until 1964 it was Labour-held. It was a Tory gain that year very much against the national trend - and the Tories went on to increase their majority there in 1966 despite the national Labour landslide. Labour has not come close since - though Gillian Sheppard's majority was reduced to 2,000 or so in 1997. There have been boundary changes over the years , but the main longterm factor has been massive demograhic change - as reflected in the other rural Norfolk seats. The former seat of Rugby was interesting in a rather different way. It was a Tory gain in 1959 - and the Tories managed to hold the seat with an increased majority in 1964 probably benefitting from their strong performance in the West Midlands that year. Labour did narrowly gain the seat in 1966 - and then saw a big increase in its majority in 1970 against the national tide!
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Aug 26, 2022 10:15:24 GMT
shevii - ground mounted panels are significantly better that roof mounted in general [perfect orientation guaranteed, pitch also perfect, which is normally not the case for buildings, can be single or dual axis mounted trackers, so gaining 40% greater output, will be less prone to efficiency loss through overheating, as panels >27C lose efficiency] and are also cheaper to install. Worth noting also that they are in essence temporary; most installations require minimal below ground infrastructure and sites can be restored and remediated very easily, with limited soil loss etc. They are also not incompatible with food production, with sheep grazing common under ground mounts (with some loss of grazing output). Beekeepers increasingly love solar farms too, as management plans often include wild flower planting and a great opportunity for significant wildlife gains from insects and micro-habitats. Bottom line, we're burning up the planet and unless we act fast, within 10 - 15 years we'll probably have triggered runaway global heating with massive methane release from melting tundra and acidification of the oceans leading to a collapse of ocean food stocks alongside the climate effects on land based food production and fresh water availability. [Somewhere between 1 and 2 billion people live in coastal regions supplied by ground water that is vulnerable to encroachment by salination under very modest sea level rises]. If we trip into runaway heating, we'll be in a situation where we have perhaps 8bn people trying to live on a planet that can only support 4bn. So we need clean energy, fast. Ground mounted solar is the quickest and easiest to install. Set against that, in this country, we waste around a third of the food we produce and over half the population are fat. We can do well with a lot less food. Time to get organised and to start worrying about what really matters, I would suggest. Thanks. It was a genuine question rather than getting all nimby (although nimby can also be simple common sense because in your local area you can understand the implications of, say, building 1,000 new houses which might not be so obvious to someone working off a spreadsheet and map). My immediate local area walk from our doorstep has mixed land use- ex slag heaps which are gradually being reclaimed by young trees and bushes, ponds, arable farming land, woodland and even the Wigan training ground has it's uses for birds to rest/graze as well as bunnies popping up at the edges. There's one field in our area that is unused as it is a farm that has turned residential for the buildings use and they haven't done anything with the field apart from a cut back when it was getting overgrown with knotweed. So I get edgy at the thought it would potentially be ideal for a solar farm as it's one bit of ground that is largely left alone and we have kestrels and buzzards "using" it as well as being used by deer as a cut through plus a good area for butterflies etc. So it was interesting what you said about the potential for wildflowers and perhaps safe areas for butterflies to reproduce incorporated into a solar farm design but I'd still worry about the effect on other wildlife in the area. That's why I was questioning solar farms rather than tops of buildings even while it is obvious that Truss's comment is not based on anything other than wanting a slogan. I guess your 40% less efficient is relevant to the whole eco equation as there's climate change implications to needing to produce 40% more solar panels to achieve the same output.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 26, 2022 10:17:15 GMT
Personally I would prefer to live in a climate more like southern Europe. This is a common mis-conception about climate change. As temperatures rise on a global level, it does not necessarily mean that they will in the UK - indeed, it is possible that the opposite might happen. We have a much looser climate than a lot of places, indeed the range of extreme high and extreme low is alost 70 degrees here (Highest being the recent 41 degrees, lowest minus 27). We have a large landmass right on our doorstep - hot in summer, cold in winter, a large ocean to our west with much less temperature differential and a fairly high latitude. We also have what is known as the "Gulf Stream", a sea current, originating in the Carribean/southern tip of Florida and ending up here. This keeps the UK significantly warmer than it would otherwise be. To give one scenario, melting ice from the Arctic flows south. Should such a flow interrupt the Gulf Stream or even push it southwards, we would see a significant reduction in temperatures, particularly in winter. There is precident for this, as it happened after the end of the last ice age.
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,089
|
Post by oldnat on Aug 26, 2022 10:46:24 GMT
Interesting discussion about solar panels. I am surprised for new house builds solar panels on roofs are not made compulsory (with perhaps limited exceptions when they aren't practical). There have been thousands of new houses built on my area alone and only a tiny amount have solar panels. Would also think it would work out cheaper to do a bulk order during the actual building. Also from what I can see FITs have not kept track with the huge rises in energy costs? Given how slowly the machinery of government creaks in response to change, perhaps prescribing any one particular solution may not be the best solution. Almost all of the new housing that I see has photovoltaic panels installed. According to "Save Money : Cut Carbon" - "In 2015, the Scottish Government brought in new building regulations that encouraged developers to install solar panels to help keep carbon dioxide emissions below a certain level.
The calculated carbon dioxide emissions are assessed using a government-approved method (SAP2012), which is available in software form.
The level the designer must keep below is arrived at by calculating the emissions from a house of the same shape, but with energy performance features defined in the regulations, a so-called ‘notional dwelling’. The thermal insulation performance (U-value) for the walls, floor, roof and openings is defined for this notional dwelling, as well as other features such as values for air-tightness, the type of heating system and other energy saving measures such as use of low energy light fittings.
The reason for taking this approach is that it is not prescriptive. It allows the building industry to experiment with combinations of measures that achieve the overall goal (lower carbon emissions) in the best way for them, which almost always means the cheapest way."
|
|
|
Post by bedknobsandboomstick on Aug 26, 2022 10:49:32 GMT
Some polling from GB News of all people here. Do take a look the tables as the word cloud on Truss is genuinely extraordinary.
Positive points are that there's lots of room for voters to warm to her, and that almost as many people used the word Strong to describe her as used the word C**t.
|
|
|
Post by Old Southendian on Aug 26, 2022 10:50:52 GMT
Hard to believe that the Tory leadership still drags on with yet more “hustings” to come. What an utterly pointless waste of time and platitudes. Not utterly pointless. It seems the longer it drags on, the more the CON vote goes down, so there's something to be said for it.
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,089
|
Post by oldnat on Aug 26, 2022 10:57:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Aug 26, 2022 11:07:51 GMT
Industry energy costs are taking their toll:
This will also hit CO2 supplies
|
|