Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2022 15:58:14 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 26, 2022 19:50:22 GMT
MidCat (that could be built 'future proof') Bit of a spat on that front between Macron & Sholz :- 'Tous pour un et jeder für sich' as they say across the channel. No wonder Germany are building quite unnecessary LNG ports to get gas to German industry (from 2024 perhaps) when they have the French in the way of far better 'team' solutions such as 'future proof' pipelines linking Spain to Germany. Whilst a 'conspiracy theorist' might think Macron is hoping to get a decent return on the investment in EDF via prolonging the period of very high electricity prices (once he gets the French nuclear fleet fully operational again) then maybe the Germans will enjoy some Schadenfreude.
EDF sues French government for £7bn after being forced to sell energy at a losswww.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/10/edf-sues-french-government-for-7bn-after-forced-to-sell-energy-at-a-loss-macron-price-cap |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2022 13:18:22 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 27, 2022 14:46:40 GMT
Dealing with just the Energy specific issues on this thread then WRT to Germany's ' €200 billion energy price relief package' that upset the French then " Breton promised the Commission will "carefully review" Germany's plan and its potential impact on the EU's level playing field*"
"Without a common European solution, we seriously risk fragmentation. So it is paramount that we preserve a level playing field for all," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over the weekend, without mentioning Germany.
"How can EU countries that do not have the same fiscal space also support businesses and households?"
However, as with UK/others packages then with gas prices having dropped significantly recently then the eventual cost of the various packages will be a lot lower now - although that might change in the future of course. TBC what happens there but it won't just be the French that get upset if Germany is allowed to do things that their country doesn't have the 'fiscal space' for. Also by locking the help in for so long then Germany creates a disincentive** to reduce their gas consumption (part of the reason why they are so against an EU wide import price cap). www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/10/04/germany-faces-scrutiny-from-eu-peers-over-massive-200-billion-aid-scheme-to-cushion-high-gI'm concerned by Germany's desire to sign up LNG deals with whoever they can as that feels very much like they intend to kick the can with 'Climate Delay'. 'Future Ready' (ie H2 capable) pipelines would be a much better solution for the EU as a whole, for the planet and to ensure they don't just swap one 'bad' source for another. markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/europe-energy-crisis-germany-natural-gas-deals-qatar-uae-russia-2022-9* As should UK and EU's others trading partners ** Even the Groan picked that one up: 'While the price cap will probably prove less politically toxic than the gas levy, there are fears it could disincentivise consumers from saving gas of their own accord. In spite of rallying cries from the government, gas consumption in the first week of October was up year-on-year.'
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/germany-to-pay-december-gas-bills-for-households-and-businesses |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 27, 2022 15:16:25 GMT
Mr Poppy - "Also by locking the help in for so long then Germany creates a disincentive for their businesses to reduce their gas consumption (part of the reason why they are so against an EU wide import price cap)." Several mistakes there, tbh. The German package is big, but it is also quite clever (unlike the UK one, which is big, but very dim). It is designed to provide a certain level of subsidised energy (80% of last years consumption) with the 20% at current market prices. So there remains a very strong incentive to reduce energy consumption to at least 20% less than previously. This is also the reason why they are currently unhappy with the proposed price cap. They prefer a system of collective (EU wide) purchasing, to drive down costs, but without a formal cap as proposed, and they prefer this for the precise reason that they fear a cap would create a disincentive to reduce etc etc etc. I'm sure they'll work it out though.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 27, 2022 16:02:43 GMT
Arguably France has the worst solution WRT to creating a disincentive as they effectively have the lowest cap (unless/until prices drop a lot further) and very small amount of 'targeted' help. Doesn't cover everything and every country but lots of different approaches: www.euronews.com/next/2022/10/26/energy-bills-are-soaring-in-europe-what-are-countries-doing-to-help-you-pay-themLots of targeted help in UK and thankfully Hunt cut the time span down to 6mths for our 'cap' (and IIRC then Sir Keir wanted a much lower cap which would have been more expensive to provide and create a lower disincentive to reduce demand). Plenty more we could and IMO should be doing. I have a particular dislike for the planet killers (electric/propane heaters) you see in pub gardens. You'd hope the cost of running them would make the pubs that use them switch them off, but sometimes you need to be more drastic and force change so IMO they should be banned (subject to a large fine if caught using them) and IIRC then some countries are taking measures to stop some of the most unnecessary forms of energy wastage. I'd also obviously like to see a sensible 'Insulate Britain' campaign and ways to fund that. Although clearly not a lot of ££ to go around at the moment that could be called an 'investment' and just need a tweak of the fiscal rules and convincing BoE that it is a disinflationary measure (if Rachel has detailed ideas on how to do that then please, for the country and planet's sake, don't be shy about saying how LAB think it could be done). No need for anyone to glue themselves to roads* and TBC what we'll see in the upcoming national campaigns that ask people to reduce their energy demands. * 'Irritate Britain' as it became known and in the process alienating the public to what was a noble and worthy cause:
Three weeks into motorway climate change protests, public opposition has only grownyougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/10/08/three-weeks-motorway-climate-change-protests-publi |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 27, 2022 16:50:43 GMT
Echo....  Old habits die hard, I guess. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 27, 2022 18:09:45 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2022 8:09:09 GMT
Dealing with just the Energy specific issues on this thread then WRT to Germany's ' €200 billion energy price relief package' that upset the French then " Breton promised the Commission will "carefully review" Germany's plan and its potential impact on the EU's level playing field*"
"Without a common European solution, we seriously risk fragmentation. So it is paramount that we preserve a level playing field for all," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over the weekend, without mentioning Germany.
"How can EU countries that do not have the same fiscal space also support businesses and households?"
However, as with UK/others packages then with gas prices having dropped significantly recently then the eventual cost of the various packages will be a lot lower now - although that might change in the future of course. TBC what happens there but it won't just be the French that get upset if Germany is allowed to do things that their country doesn't have the 'fiscal space' for. Also by locking the help in for so long then Germany creates a disincentive** to reduce their gas consumption (part of the reason why they are so against an EU wide import price cap). www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/10/04/germany-faces-scrutiny-from-eu-peers-over-massive-200-billion-aid-scheme-to-cushion-high-gI'm concerned by Germany's desire to sign up LNG deals with whoever they can as that feels very much like they intend to kick the can with 'Climate Delay'. 'Future Ready' (ie H2 capable) pipelines would be a much better solution for the EU as a whole, for the planet and to ensure they don't just swap one 'bad' source for another. markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/europe-energy-crisis-germany-natural-gas-deals-qatar-uae-russia-2022-9* As should UK and EU's others trading partners ** Even the Groan picked that one up: 'While the price cap will probably prove less politically toxic than the gas levy, there are fears it could disincentivise consumers from saving gas of their own accord. In spite of rallying cries from the government, gas consumption in the first week of October was up year-on-year.'
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/germany-to-pay-december-gas-bills-for-households-and-businessesLooks like they aren't too confident about this winter. This report is extraordinary. If it was the UK it would send UKPR2 into howls of outrage :- "A German wind farm is being demolished to make way for a vast open-cast coal mine despite Berlin’s ambitious clean energy goals. The eight wind turbines will be dismantled with a dozen nearby villages and hamlets to clear space for a pit that will ultimately cover an area about the size of Swindon 25 miles to the northwest of Cologne. The Garzweiler II mine is expected to yield about 190 million tonnes of lignite, a relatively dirty fuel also known as brown coal, even though the government says it hopes “ideally” to phase out coal power by the end of the decade. The case illustrates Germany’s predicament as it struggles to reconcile the conflicting imperatives of its energy policy. Yet these aims have collided with geopolitical reality: in an effort to burn as little Russian gas as possible this winter, the state has reluctantly resorted to coal. A dozen coal-fired power stations are being brought out of retirement. The energy ministry has reached a compromise with RWE, Germany’s largest power company: a sprawling complex of lignite surface mines in the west of the country will be maintained and expanded, but only until 2030. The most controversial of these is Garzweiler II, which requires about 7,500 people to be resettled. While most have quietly accepted their fate, Eckardt Heukamp, a farmer, has clung on to his land in the village of Lützerath, fighting a long but ultimately futile rearguard action through the courts and becoming a rallying point for anti-coal protesters." Times |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 8:26:08 GMT
Looks like they aren't too confident about this winter. This report is extraordinary. If it was the UK it would send UKPR2 into howls of outrage :- "A German wind farm is being demolished to make way for a vast open-cast coal mine despite Berlin’s ambitious clean energy goals.... Very upsetting and concerning. Whilst I can appreciate their desire for 'Energy Security' then going it alone with very backwards steps is completely unnecessary and shows a complete lack of trust in their neighbours (notably France to get their nuclear fleet fully operational and to allow 'future ready' pipelines). I do wish Rishi could have made 1day in his schedule to attend COP27, for appearances sake, but it is a complete waste of time when actions are the opposite of the words. www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/10/24/council-sets-out-eu-position-for-un-climate-summit-in-sharm-el-sheikh-cop27/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2022 8:37:30 GMT
Looks like they aren't too confident about this winter. This report is extraordinary. If it was the UK it would send UKPR2 into howls of outrage :- "A German wind farm is being demolished to make way for a vast open-cast coal mine despite Berlin’s ambitious clean energy goals.... Very upsetting and concerning. Whilst I can appreciate their desire for 'Energy Security' then going it alone with very backwards steps is completely unnecessary and shows a complete lack of trust in their neighbours (notably France to get their nuclear fleet fully operational and to allow 'future ready' pipelines). I do wish Rishi could have made 1day in his schedule to attend COP27, for appearances sake, but it is a complete waste of time when actions are the opposite of the words. www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/10/24/council-sets-out-eu-position-for-un-climate-summit-in-sharm-el-sheikh-cop27/He has much more pressing business here than showing the flag at COP27. And when you read about things like this I can understand why he has chosen a domestic priority just now. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 8:58:35 GMT
He has much more pressing business here than showing the flag at COP27. And when you read about things like this I can understand why he has chosen a domestic priority just now. Domestic priorities are certainly more important that the virtue signalling (then backtracking) that goes on at COP but for 'appearance' sake then he should have made time for a very quick visit and photo-op (IMO). One of my concerns about Rishi is that he'll struggle with the broad mandate of PM and be poor at political judgement (ie he sees COP27 as just a waste of time, ignoring the photo-op stuff) and delegation (Hunt can pour over the details of the spreadsheets as CFO). Rishi has to learn to delegate and will be expected to do the 'Chairman' type stuff that Boris used to do along with the role of CEO. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 28, 2022 10:38:45 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 11:48:10 GMT
Not sure that was the definitive conclusion but for sure we need to consider the implications of certain aspects of the Green Industrial Revolution (eg final sentence in your link: ' a change in current working practises and in the disposal of dredged sediment to ensure this redevelopment can continue without causing more damage to the marine ecosystem') At a planet level then the consider: Pollution, anthrax - even nuclear waste - could be released by global warmingwww.bbc.com/future/article/20190612-the-poisons-released-by-melting-arctic-iceWe need to stop the ice melting, or at least slow the process down in the short-term. The implications of 'climate delay' will do enormous irrecoverable damage to ecosystems the World over but thank you for the link - we certainly need to proceed with caution and adapt practises as we go, but not via 'delay'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2022 11:59:04 GMT
Wow-how much more of this casual pollution from the past is lying around i wonder ? |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Oct 28, 2022 13:10:40 GMT
Like many relatively new technologies, there may be various issues to resolve, and there may be a degree of hype early on, and early on it may underperform and cost quite a bit. but these are things that may be typical engineering problems and unless there is some showstopper of an issue, one might hope that over time there will be continued refinements in efficiency and reductions in cost etc., as we have seen with batteries, wind turbines and so on. What might swing things a bit though, is if rather than just storing the carbon, instead the carbon becomes something saleable that can be put to other uses. Article in the Times a few days ago about how they are using carbon extracted from the atmosphere to make diamonds. Another use for the carbon could be to make synthetic biofuels, in combination with green hydrogen. (synthetic biofuels might be preferred for aviation rather than hydrogen or ammonia which have a lower volumetric density etc.) |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 28, 2022 13:13:05 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2022 13:38:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Oct 28, 2022 14:30:29 GMT
Yes we had great fun pushing the little balls of mercury round the desk with our bare fingers. Must admit that some of the new Health and Safety measures are are a good thing  |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 14:31:35 GMT
leftieliberal colin I'll very quickly mention the 'new' issues surrounding Lithium.
The spiralling environmental cost of our lithium battery addictionwww.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environment-impactBioenergy (from Ethanol used for biofuels to wood pellets used by Drax) has some issues as well. That doesn't mean the approach is 'wrong' but it does mean that we should adapt to better solutions once the 'tech' is proven and starts to get scaled up to levels that are causing harmful consequences. Carbon credits and the broader issue of carbon accounting is a very complicated area. Some cheeky chaps* are looking to 'arb'(itrage) the system and IIRC then Tesla is only still going coz of the tax credits they receive. Some eggs get broken in order to make an omelette, but we do need to 'learn by doing' (ie adapt processes as various tech gets scaled up) rather than have further climate delay. * www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/britains-drax-signs-deal-sell-2-million-us-carbon-removal-credits-2022-09-21/
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Oct 28, 2022 14:36:17 GMT
He has much more pressing business here than showing the flag at COP27. And when you read about things like this I can understand why he has chosen a domestic priority just now. Domestic priorities are certainly more important that the virtue signalling (then backtracking) that goes on at COP but for 'appearance' sake then he should have made time for a very quick visit and photo-op (IMO). One of my concerns about Rishi is that he'll struggle with the broad mandate of PM and be poor at political judgement (ie he sees COP27 as just a waste of time, ignoring the photo-op stuff) and delegation (Hunt can pour over the details of the spreadsheets as CFO). Rishi has to learn to delegate and will be expected to do the 'Chairman' type stuff that Boris used to do along with the role of CEO. Agree with this but I suspect it'll be hard for Sunak to delegate the spreadsheets to Hunt when he feels he could do a better job himself. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 14:44:00 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w , etc. Future (new) nuclear won't have this issue: climatecrocks.com/2022/08/18/as-french-rivers-dry-nukes-still-need-cooling-water/Not sure of the specific river ecosystem issues of pumping hot water (bad I assume) versus the impact of a drought (very bad) by itself but droughts are likely to become more widespread and more frequent due to Climate Change but MSR version of SMR doesn't need water and has some storage capacity as well. Then there is Thorium of course... 
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 28, 2022 15:11:26 GMT
It's not lithium per se, but the production in countries with poor environmental regulation (that includes China). I don't doubt that if we were mining lithium in Cornwall there would not be these pollution issues.[1] Exactly the same article could have been written about cobalt-mining in the DRC (also a vital component for smartphones). Sadly, it is a fundamental failure of capitalism that external costs do not get accounted for; only government regulation can force them to recognise and minimise them. [1] Of course, in the times represented by Poldark there was a great deal of pollution in Cornwall from mining, but in those days UK environmental regulation was pretty minimal too. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 15:31:29 GMT
It's not lithium per se, but the production in countries with poor environmental regulation (that includes China). I don't doubt that if we were mining lithium in Cornwall there would not be these pollution issues.[1] Exactly the same article could have been written about cobalt-mining in the DRC (also a vital component for smartphones). Sadly, it is a fundamental failure of capitalism that external costs do not get accounted for; only government regulation can force them to recognise and minimise them. [1] Of course, in the times represented by Poldark there was a great deal of pollution in Cornwall from mining, but in those days UK environmental regulation was pretty minimal too. Very valid point. Cornish Lithium Ltd* do have a 'better' process but I admit to a bias on that, beyond just naked nativism! Part of 'Carbon Border Adjustment Tax' should also reflect the very wide differences in broader environmental regulations and perhaps also worker's rights between 'The West' and places like Qatar** or China. * cornishlithium.com** Qatar, less so US, are improving on 'flaring' of gas and methane leakage but another reason to buy British gas (blue hydrogen, Lithium, etc) is that our regulations and worker's rights are much higher than many of the places that we buy it from if we don't make/buy/sell it in Britain. Buy British also avoids transport costs (not usually recorded in carbon accounting) as well. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Oct 28, 2022 15:45:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 28, 2022 15:52:49 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "Another use for the carbon could be to make synthetic biofuels, in combination with green hydrogen." Well that would rather blow the 'storage' bit of 'carbon capture and storage' surely?
|
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Oct 28, 2022 16:02:03 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "Another use for the carbon could be to make synthetic biofuels, in combination with green hydrogen." Well that would rather blow the 'storage' bit of 'carbon capture and storage' surely? Yes it recycles the carbon rather than sequestering it, but might be preferable to continuing to add more carbon into the atmosphere by burning more fossil fuels (if batteries remain too heavy for long-haul aircraft for a while yet, and using hydrogen or ammonia requires significant passenger aircraft redesign - flying wings etc. - because of the problem that the fuel takes up rather more space etc.) You can use a similar idea, capturing carbon for use in fertiliser. Yes, it gets released back into the atmosphere eventually but then you recapture it again and make more fertiliser: recycles the carbon rather than adding more by using fossil fuels to make more fertiliser. (And you can still capture and store some carbon on top in other ways). “ The International Energy Agency predicts that such fuels may become our main use for captured carbon, perhaps utilising more than five gigatonnes (GT) a year. That’s a large chunk of the 36GT that humanity emitted last year, and vastly more than the quarter of a gigatonne utilised by industries today.
The agency also predicts that we might transform between 1GT and 5GT a year into building materials, locking it away for millennia. Carbon8, a spinout of the University of Greenwich, is doing exactly that, capturing carbon from the flue stacks of cement and steel factories and combining it with waste from those same facilities to create building aggregates.” |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 28, 2022 16:29:57 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - yes, I can understand that reasoning, but my concern would be the repeated processes that have an energy cost at every stage. We actually need to remove carbon from the atmosphere, not just keep recycling it.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 28, 2022 16:39:34 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - yes, I can understand that reasoning, but my concern would be the repeated processes that have an energy cost at every stage. We actually need to remove carbon from the atmosphere, not just keep recycling it. Biochar is a good way of removing carbon from the atmosphere: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar better than burning wood pellets at Drax. It also has benefits for soil quality. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Oct 28, 2022 16:55:42 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - yes, I can understand that reasoning, but my concern would be the repeated processes that have an energy cost at every stage. We actually need to remove carbon from the atmosphere, not just keep recycling it. It ought to be clear that I am not advocating just recycling carbon and leaving it at that. I explicitly said we can keep removing carbon on top and gave building materials as an example. But for situations where it may be hard to use a process that avoids carbon in the near future since alternatives have issues - e.g. aviation - it might be better to at least recycle - rather than to keep using fossil fuels and adding more carbon. My main point was that rather than just storing the carbon, possibly incurring further cost, it might useful where possible to make use of it in a way that not only removes it but adds utility and makes money. And I find it interesting to look for a bit less obvious examples. An example I have been looking into was graphene. Despite its potential utility it’s quite tricky to make and I wondered if they might use captured Carbon Dioxide to make it. Turns out researchers have come up with a process (inspired by an enzyme plants use to capture CO 2 in photosynthesis) to use captured CO 2 to make graphene. I also discovered that another company is exploring making graphene from Carbon Dioxide released from waste and then using it to reinforce cement, thus not only storing carbon but due to the reinforcement also reducing the amount of cement required and hence the amount of CO 2 involved in making the cement. (And because graphene is also conductive, it improves the conductivity of the cement so that you can use it for underfloor heating). On top of this, researchers at EPFL in Lausanne are also looking to use graphene to improve the performance of the filters used for carbon capture. (They reckon it “can reduce the cost carbon capture down to $30 per ton of carbon dioxide.”) |
|
