26-Nov 2022 : LAB: 50% / CON: 27% / LDEM: 9% / GRN: 4%

[Danny]

Nov 28, 2022 18:43:19 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Another day with very little wind in GB and NG got very nervous again:

Shame the government banned building onshore wind turbines, otherwise we would have a lot more of them, which means even when not very windy they still contribute significantly. The way they must be used is with a large margin of overcapacity at most times. So maybe we need something like an average generating capacity double average demand. We have nothing like that, and no plans to create it. i wonder why?

Nov 28, 2022 19:04:08 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

posted the link in the energy thread, but Rolls and Ineos are chatting about the former providing a small reactor for the latter to make hydrogen. 

Or we could just not bother with the expensive and frankly hazardous nuclear at all, and just use the surplus wind energy? And when I say dangerous, I dont just mean in case of accidents or reprocessing and disposal difficulties, but if some maniac decided to drop a bomb on it.

[somerjohn]

Oldnat: "My point was simply a light hearted reference that "pleading the 5th" is only relevant within a particular constitution which is irrelevant in the UK'

That would be a fair comment if JimJam had posted about literally taking the 5th, instead of doing so metaphorically (and light-heartedly).

[ladyvalerie]

Nov 28, 2022 19:29:16 GMT leftieliberal said:

Nov 28, 2022 18:47:03 GMT oldnat said:

Doesn't work in a state that could never be sufficiently arsed to create a codified constitution that could be amended - except by whoever has wormed their way into Downing St.

The last completed amendment to the USA Constitution took over 200 years to get enough State legislatures to approve it so that it became part of the constitution. Is this your idea of progress? 

And, at a stroke some hand-picked judges denied women the right to have control over their bodies.

[ladyvalerie]

Nov 28, 2022 19:29:16 GMT leftieliberal said:

Nov 28, 2022 18:47:03 GMT oldnat said:

Doesn't work in a state that could never be sufficiently arsed to create a codified constitution that could be amended - except by whoever has wormed their way into Downing St.

The last completed amendment to the USA Constitution took over 200 years to get enough State legislatures to approve it so that it became part of the constitution. Is this your idea of progress? 

And, at a stroke, some hand-picked judges denied women the right to have control over their bodies.

[ladyvalerie]

Clearly, something I feel very strongly about. 😡

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Most people say Britain needs workers from abroad, poll on immigration reveals

“Almost half of Britons believe the UK has too much immigration, but a majority want more foreign doctors, care workers, farmers, builders and waiters.

In a YouGov poll for The Times, 46 per cent of Britons said that there was too much immigration, 18 per cent said there was too little and 19 per cent thought there was about the right amount. The poll was carried out on Tuesday and Wednesday last week, shortly before it emerged that total immigration had reached about 1.1 million in the year to June.

Opposition to current levels of immigration is starkest among Tory voters, 73 per cent of whom said it was too high, compared with 7 per cent who said it was too low. Among Labour voters, 26 per cent said that it was too high and 31 per cent said it was too low.

Every region said immigration was too high, but the gap was narrowest in London, where 29 per cent said there was too much and 22 per cent too little.

Yet when asked whether the government should let more migrants into the country to work in specific sectors, there was support for every one. On the NHS, 64 per cent agreed and 21 per cent were against, and on social care, 58 per cent agreed and 23 per cent against. The figures for agriculture were 57 per cent and 23 per cent respectively. On hospitality, 46 per cent wanted more migrant workers and 32 per cent were opposed, and on construction, 41 per cent agreed and 35 per cent were opposed.

Asked which party they trusted more to set the right level on immigration, 26 per cent chose the Conservatives, and 32 per cent chose Labour. Eight per cent of those who voted Conservative at the last election said they trusted Labour more on immigration.”

Times

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

Nov 28, 2022 20:57:40 GMT Danny said:

Nov 28, 2022 18:43:19 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Another day with very little wind in GB and NG got very nervous again:

Shame the government banned building onshore wind turbines, otherwise we would have a lot more of them, which means even when not very windy they still contribute significantly. The way they must be used is with a large margin of overcapacity at most times. So maybe we need something like an average generating capacity double average demand. We have nothing like that, and no plans to create it. i wonder why?

Nov 28, 2022 19:04:08 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

posted the link in the energy thread, but Rolls and Ineos are chatting about the former providing a small reactor for the latter to make hydrogen. 

Or we could just not bother with the expensive and frankly hazardous nuclear at all, and just use the surplus wind energy? And when I say dangerous, I dont just mean in case of accidents or reprocessing and disposal difficulties, but if some maniac decided to drop a bomb on it.

Well, I’m not sure, but that might not be such a problem for fusion. The UK startup I just posted about on the energy thread uses a pellet gun that fires a pellet every 30 seconds. Not a huge target. (Might not be a big problem for some fission methods either, e.g. the one where the fuel is in tiny grains encased in carbon and ceramic materials that are very robust and survive high temps). 

That said, there can be coolant issues, though some of the new reactor designs are rather compact and can be sited underground. 

Don’t forget that some of the nuclear tech I post about can burn up existing nuclear waste, reducing the threat from that. 

Regrading Wind turbines, there’s quite a bit coming online on the next few years but the government might anyway have it in mind to add to it with SMRs to reach overcapacity. (Of course that could just be a bit of a dream, esp. in the nearer future, like solar arrays in orbit, but may probably happen eventually). 

[ladyvalerie]

Nov 28, 2022 20:53:02 GMT oldnat said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:42:52 GMT leftieliberal said:

You are misrepresenting what I wrote as usual. The Twenty-Seventh Amendment to the USA Constitution was presented to the States for ratification on September 25, 1789 but did not reach the threshold until May 5th 1992. Those Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights were quickly approved, but this one which prevented Congress from voting themselves pay-rises while in office was not. Do you really think it is desirable that individual states can hold up amendments to the constitution? It is notable that the amendments to prohibit slavery (Thirteenth to Fifteenth) were passed in the period just after the Civil War, at a time when the Southern States had not been re-admitted so they were forced to ratify them when they rejoined the Union.

And you are misrepresenting me, so stop hypocritically playing the victim. I didn't posit the US constitution as some holy grail to be copied. That example was entirelyacrosss yours.

My point was simply a light hearted reference that "pleading the 5th" is only relevant within a particular constitution which is irrelevant in the UK which, unlike almost every other state, has no codified constitution that can be amended.

You do come across as someone whose moniker is the antithesis of your beliefs.

It was JimJam who made a light-hearted comment. You came across like a ton of bricks 😃

[somerjohn]

Danny: " which means even when not very windy they still contribute significantly."

I'm all for doubling wind capacity, and storing the resulting frequent surpluses in one of the many technologically interesting ways now under development (or selling them overseas). But twice very little is still very little. As I write, wind is contributing just 0.74% of our electricity requirement. Doubling that would mean a massive leap to, let's see... just under 1.5%!

As I pointed out earlier, it's at times like this that undersea links come into their own. And whatever massive wind capacity we eventually build, it will make sense to retain much of our current CCGT fleet for conditions like today's, or to meet peak demand through the interconnectors.

[oldnat]

Nov 28, 2022 21:04:21 GMT somerjohn said:

Oldnat: "My point was simply a light hearted reference that "pleading the 5th" is only relevant within a particular constitution which is irrelevant in the UK'

That would be a fair comment if JimJam had posted about literally taking the 5th, instead of doing so metaphorically (and light-heartedly).

@jimjam made a light hearted comment. I replied in similar fashion, while making the point that the UK doesn't have a meaningful constitution.

I do understand that many fans of the UK structure rather like that situation.

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2022 21:08:11 GMT ladyvalerie said:

Clearly, something I feel very strongly about. 😡

You can delete repeated posts Val.

(Or plead the 5th)

[graham]

Nov 28, 2022 20:27:27 GMT @isa said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:18:15 GMT neilj said:

Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022

Thanks neilj . That seems quite a marked swing in just over a week considering  domestic politics has probably been pushed down the news agenda a bit by the World Cup. Could still be largely MOE, I suppose. Time will tell. 

It may be a House effect in that Delta has been jumping around a bit. Three weeks ago it came up with this-

'Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll.
Con 29% (+3)
Lab 47% (-4)
Lib Dem 9% (-)
Other 16% (+1)
Fieldwork: 4th - 7th November 2022
Sample: 1,049 GB adults
(Changes from 28 - 31 October 2022)

[oldnat]

Nov 28, 2022 21:08:11 GMT ladyvalerie said:

Clearly, something I feel very strongly about. 😡

Indeed, and quite rightly so. However, do you prefer the UK system where there is no constitution, and hand picked judges are also free to interpret the law and constitution as they see fit?

[somerjohn]

Crossbat: "One of the aspects of the discussions on this forum that has always fascinated me is the perception that the ROC contributors clearly have of themselves that they are a beleaguered minority, kicking back bravely at a left wing echo chamber and the overall left-leaning groupthink that pervades it."

Well, I'm not going to endorse your comment and thereby contribute to the victimhood delusion. But your post was as interesting and readable as ever.

As you may have noticed, I'm doing my best today to remedy the appalling gulf between my productivity and that of the beleaguered minority. Just 27 posts to go to reach my 500!

Edit: I've just noticed my posts are stuck on 473. Have I missed something, like the freezing of post tallies?

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2022 21:32:46 GMT oldnat said:

Nov 28, 2022 21:04:21 GMT somerjohn said:

Oldnat: "My point was simply a light hearted reference that "pleading the 5th" is only relevant within a particular constitution which is irrelevant in the UK'

That would be a fair comment if JimJam had posted about literally taking the 5th, instead of doing so metaphorically (and light-heartedly).

@jimjam made a light hearted comment. I replied in similar fashion, while making the point that the UK doesn't have a meaningful constitution.

I do understand that many fans of the UK structure rather like that situation.

Well, if they were fans then one can assume that they are pretty much bound to “like the situation”.

Of course, that has no relevance to the evil, LOC super-majority on here, who don’t like it one bit, but do feel free to bore away - surely there’s much more mileage (post-wise) to be got out of JJ’s innocent (or so he thought..) comment, and the evening is still young.

[oldnat]

It's certainly an interesting idea that everyone who wants the current UK Union to continue, wish that it should not have any reform of its constitutional "system". That surprises even me.

[crossbat11]

[Mr Poppy]

Nov 28, 2022 21:14:14 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:57:40 GMT Danny said:

Shame the government banned building onshore wind turbines, otherwise we would have a lot more of them, which means even when not very windy they still contribute significantly. The way they must be used is with a large margin of overcapacity at most times. So maybe we need something like an average generating capacity double average demand. We have nothing like that, and no plans to create it. i wonder why?

Or we could just not bother with the expensive and frankly hazardous nuclear at all, and just use the surplus wind energy? And when I say dangerous, I dont just mean in case of accidents or reprocessing and disposal difficulties, but if some maniac decided to drop a bomb on it.

Well, I’m not sure, but that might not be such a problem for fusion. The UK startup I just posted about on the energy thread uses a pellet gun that fires a pellet every 30 seconds. Not a huge target. (Might not be a big problem for some fission methods either, e.g. the one where the fuel is in tiny grains encased in carbon and ceramic materials that are very robust and survive high temps). 

That said, there can be coolant issues, though some of the new reactor designs are rather compact and can be sited underground. 

Don’t forget that some of the nuclear tech I post about can burn up existing nuclear waste, reducing the threat from that. 

Regrading Wind turbines, there’s quite a bit coming online on the next few years but the government might anyway have it in mind to add to it with SMRs to reach overcapacity. (Of course that could just be a bit of a dream, esp. in the nearer future, like solar arrays in orbit, but may probably happen eventually). 

Well there is actually a plan to build massive Wind Farm over-capacity* but the problem with wind is that whilst the AVERAGE load factor might be 40% (rounded) then it varies a lot - see the load duration curves in the below link (which I'll repost on the Energy Specific thread)

energynumbers.info/uk-offshore-wind-capacity-factors

Hence the need for some base load provision (eg nuclear but perhaps also stuff like tidal lagoons with battery 'smoothing'), lots of storage (short to long-term) and plenty of other stuff in the mix (eg hydrogen fired 'peaker plants' once we've proven they are safe on 100% Hydrogen or at least a high Hydrogen blend). It looks near certain that Rishi is going to 'evolve' his view on Onshore Wind (more than happy to say that is a 'U-turn' but S.Clarke's** amendment doesn't IMO go far enough and would still mean slow progress on building more Onshore Wind - hence quite easy for Rishi to say he'll put S.Clarke amendment into the legislation)

* I could post the gov.uk but better IMO to post
www.nationalgrideso.com/news/eso-publishes-pathway-2030-major-step-deliver-50gw-offshore-wind-2030

** See the NIMBY clause: "Clarke’s amendment would ensure that the projects could only go ahead where they had the backing of councils.."
www.ft.com/content/1601b8b5-a435-4d63-bd0e-8bae26dccace

[alec]

somerjohn - regarding the interconnectors, the price paid is also significant. Average day ahead prices for today were 31p/kWh (that's the wholesale price) with peak prices at over 80p/kWh.

But the question really isn't one about which side of the channel needs the interconnectors and yah-boo look we're better than the Europeans. The real question is how comes we've had such an incompetent government and such a useless National Grid regulator that a well forecast period of flat wind with no great demand peak leads to a Capacity Market Notification (CMN) and then a high Loss of Load Probability (LoLP) warning.

We haven't even got to the end of a very benign November and we've had two LoLP episodes already. This isn't about a shortage of gas either - there is loads of gas washing round Europe. It's about an utterly failed power market policy that has all but collapsed after twelve years of gross mismanagement and inaction.

[alec]

China and covid; a potentially very big global crisis.
China is facing huge problems now. While they have been exceptionally successful at keeping covid out, the methods they have employed to do this are draconian and increasingly lack public support, and they have failed to use the time their successful control strategy bought them to good effect.

Unlike most other countries, China failed to initiate widespread vaccination, and their covid strategy was dogged by nationalistic hubris. The developed their own vaccine, which has turned out to be significantly less effective that the other western design vaccines, and with also a shorter period of duration. China stayed with their own vaccine rather than use the better foreign made versions. Worse, they targeted working ages for vaccination, relying on keeping the virus out as the protection for the elderly. I didn't realise this until recently, but China has some very low rates of vaccination for the over 80s - less than 40%. Coupled with limited hospital facilities and lots of existing lung related health issues, China is going to face a truly terrible situation if it can't control covid. They have also failed to take effective steps on indoor air quality for the same reason as their vaccine failure - they assumed they would be able to keep the virus out completely.

They have put themselves in a real bind, claiming their success against covid as a national triumph, closely wedded to President Xi. As a result, changing tack is going to be humiliating for the communist party, and they seem to be stuck. If this blows up in China, the global economic impacts will be severe, and the political ramification start to look very significant indeed.

The lesson here is that you need a multi pronged approach; control the virus as far as is practicable, use the best vaccines available, target the vulnerable for vaccination first, and win and keep broad public support for the essential collective actions needed. As with the Russian war effort, what we are seeing here is how autocratic regimes based on the projection of power of a single leader go wrong. Unable to listen, learn and adapt, because protecting the image of the leader is more important to the regime than getting policy right, which can often involve accepting mistakes and conducting public U turns.

In both cases, if and when the response fails, the rest of the world faces major disruption.

[somerjohn]

Alec: "regarding the interconnectors, the price paid is also significant.'

Yup. That's why (to use a politician's phrase I find really irritating - sorry!) I wrote "the point of these links is to balance out supply and demand between national markets, by responding to price signals."

I'm not surprised we had to pay top whack to import electricity today, as the low wind presumably affects most of northern Europe (though it was quite breezy where I am in Spain, as well as bright and sunny all day. Maybe some of the resulting renewable electricity found its way to France to allow exports from there to the UK).

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2022 21:38:48 GMT graham said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:27:27 GMT @isa said:

Thanks neilj . That seems quite a marked swing in just over a week considering  domestic politics has probably been pushed down the news agenda a bit by the World Cup. Could still be largely MOE, I suppose. Time will tell. 

It may be a House effect in that Delta has been jumping around a bit. Three weeks ago it came up with this-

'Labour lead is eighteen points in latest results from Deltapoll.
Con 29% (+3)
Lab 47% (-4)
Lib Dem 9% (-)
Other 16% (+1)
Fieldwork: 4th - 7th November 2022
Sample: 1,049 GB adults
(Changes from 28 - 31 October 2022)

An interesting thought. So with Deltapoll, we're back where we were three weeks ago, except both LAB and CON are one point higher. Sounds like polldrums to me, at least as far as Deltapoll are concerned.

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2022 21:54:23 GMT crossbat11 said:

I think I have seen a few polls lately where LAB VI has dropped slightly and the main beneficiaries have been LDEM and GRN. That might play itself out more in places like the SW next time around, where tactical voting for LDEM might give CON a few bloody noses which aren't reflected in current predictions. I think seats like Wells, Somerton and Frome and Taunton Deane, which UKPR, for example, predict as CON holds, may well be vulnerable to LDEM. They held all three in the recent past and LDEM did very well in the new Somerset Council elections in May.

[pjw1961]

Nov 28, 2022 21:38:52 GMT oldnat said:

Nov 28, 2022 21:08:11 GMT ladyvalerie said:

Clearly, something I feel very strongly about. 😡

Indeed, and quite rightly so. However, do you prefer the UK system where there is no constitution, and hand picked judges are also free to interpret the law and constitution as they see fit?

Hand picked judges? You are normally a stickler for the facts:
www.supremecourt.uk/about/appointments-of-justices.html

And their rulings are non-political, whether anyone likes them or not. They have certainly annoyed the Conservative government on a number of occasions, notably over Johnson's illegal prorogation of parliament. The ruling on the the Scottish independence referendum issue was legally uncontroversial and expected whatever the fiery politics of it. 

P.s. I would also like some codification of the UK constitution, mainly to curtail the extreme power of the executive, although a rigid inflexible one like the US constitution is not the answer either. The UK helped draft a pretty good constitution for the Federal Republic of Germany after WWII; pity we can't manage the same for ourselves.  

[Deleted]

I note no less than 796 guests have visited the site over the last 24 hours. They must include a large number of people who like to watch a good internecine scrap which generates a lot of heat but not much light. I can't help thinking that anyone logging on to gain any political insight or forensic debate of important polling issues will have wondered why they bothered. Not even much left field banter to soothe the fevered brow.

[mercian]

Nov 28, 2022 18:35:52 GMT Danny said:

Nov 28, 2022 11:20:43 GMT alec said:

Danny - "Growing unrest in China because of its policy of zero covid. Governments everywhere else in the world, and even posters here such as alec should pay attention at what happens if you really try to eradicate covid."

Even posters like Danny should pay attention to the meaning of eradication.
I've never once called for eradication of covid. Something else you don't understand.

Then I really dont understand what you do want. Either you eradicate it so it cease to be present altogether, or it will come back the moment you stop suppressing it. Thats even supposing there is anything short of Chinese style locking people in their homes indefinitely which will actually suppress it anyway. As china makes very obvious, the more you succeed in suppression, the harder it becomes to do it.

Have you and alec given up on the Covid thread because hardly anyone else ever looks at it? There's a reason for that - everyone else has moved on. It's like having some endless debate about the causes of WWI. Interesting to a few diehards, of passing interest to a few more, and no interest to anyone else.

[mercian]

Nov 28, 2022 18:37:52 GMT James E said:

Nov 28, 2022 18:20:07 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

Yes, the long-term impact did crop up in the convo at the time IIRC. 

There was quite a lot of revisionism after the referendum, but I don't recall any Leave leader (or supporter) speak about short-term or even medium-term difficulties, until after the vote had taken place. 

This is what I remember of the promised land portrayed by the Leave campaigns - and as with the YouGov poll I provided earlier - this is evedence from before 23rd June 2016, not after.

reaction.life/britain-looks-like-brexit/

I was talking about Leave voters. The ones I knew were well aware of likely consequences. Whatever Remainers on here think, a lot of Leave voters were quite capable of taking campaign promises with a pinch of salt and to make their own decisions. Voters aren't sheep.

[mercian]

Nov 28, 2022 20:27:27 GMT @isa said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:18:15 GMT neilj said:

Changes from 17th - 19th November 2022

Thanks neilj . That seems quite a marked swing in just over a week considering  domestic politics has probably been pushed down the news agenda a bit by the World Cup. Could still be largely MOE, I suppose. Time will tell. 

I seem to remember that if the England football team does well (which it is so far) there is a polling benefit to the government of the time. Perhaps because of a general feel-good factor?

[mercian]

Nov 28, 2022 20:52:10 GMT crossbat11 said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:43:35 GMT oldnat said:

Making an equivalence between "LoC" and "Labour" may be something of a conceit of Labour supporters.

Maybe, but my point was more about the general prevailing tone of the discussions. It doesn't seem to often be  a group of people reinforcing each others monochrome left wing biases. That is often the accusation.

There seems to be quite a chorus of disapproval when I suggest a quite reasonable proposal such as castrating men who can't afford to feed their children. 😁

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2022 23:38:11 GMT mercian said:

Nov 28, 2022 20:27:27 GMT @isa said:

Thanks neilj . That seems quite a marked swing in just over a week considering  domestic politics has probably been pushed down the news agenda a bit by the World Cup. Could still be largely MOE, I suppose. Time will tell. 

I seem to remember that if the England football team does well (which it is so far) there is a polling benefit to the government of the time. Perhaps because of a general feel-good factor?

I think that was the case in 1966, where LAB got a majority of 97 around the time of the World Cup win. I know England did very well against Iran, playing some lovely stuff, (the two goals conceded were annoying and arguably avoidable, though), but the USA match was pretty dire. I certainly didn't come out of that one feeling on top of the world.