|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 15, 2022 11:12:13 GMT
We already subsidise the production renewables now you want the Government to be in charge of supplying them as well?. How many years has the Government been fucking about over the decision to build new Nuclear Power capacity? - do you really want Civil Servents who cant run the DVLA put in charge of energy supply? The private sector will build and deliver - but Government has to get out of the way and there is no sign of that happening any time soon. you are aware the UK government built nuclear power plants without the private sector before right? If you want the French or the Chinese to build your nuclear power plants than by all means keep your head in the sand. What I am saying we should do is what we did before. Keynesism economics got America out of a depression, it can get the UK out of Trussonomics. The UK no longer has the technological know-how to build nuclear without overseas assistance. Even if it did you still need the will - and building Nuclear plants is fraught with problems and delays. For example Sizewell C was first proposed back in 2008 and construction still has not started. |
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 11:16:49 GMT
It should be said that to be energy sufficient by 2030, it will be wind not nuclear that gets us there. No - wind is not enough. We are hiring foreigners to build them... |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 15, 2022 11:20:14 GMT
We already subsidise the production renewables now you want the Government to be in charge of supplying them as well?. How many years has the Government been fucking about over the decision to build new Nuclear Power capacity? - do you really want Civil Servents who cant run the DVLA put in charge of energy supply? The private sector will build and deliver - but Government has to get out of the way and there is no sign of that happening any time soon. you are aware the UK government built nuclear power plants without the private sector before right? That seems unlikely but setting that aside, do you think that there exists, within the public sector, the skillset to design, build, and operate a nuclear power plant? If not, how long do you think it would take to secure the same? |
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 11:25:54 GMT
you are aware the UK government built nuclear power plants without the private sector before right? That seems unlikely but setting that aside, do you think that there exists, within the public sector, the skillset to design, build, and operate a nuclear power plant? If not, how long do you think it would take to secure the same? As I said, it will be wind not nuclear that will get us to energy efficiency by 2030, nuclear will just be the backup when the wind doesn't blow. Even Johnson wanted the UK to be the wind capital of the world FYI. As for the expertise, the answer is yes, but like building them it will take decades of R&D. Nuclear isn't the option we can take to be energy efficient by 2030 anyhow so is actually a strawman. Nor is it the option by 2050. And we are also investing in fusion which means they might not even be the silver bullet everyone is hoping for anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 15, 2022 11:42:09 GMT
That seems unlikely but setting that aside, do you think that there exists, within the public sector, the skillset to design, build, and operate a nuclear power plant? If not, how long do you think it would take to secure the same? As I said, it will be wind not nuclear that will get us to energy efficiency by 2030, nuclear will just be the backup when the wind doesn't blow. Even Johnson wanted the UK to be the wind capital of the world FYI. As for the expertise, the answer is yes, but like building them it will take decades of R&D. Nuclear isn't the option we can take to be energy efficient by 2030 anyhow so is actually a strawman. Nor is it the option by 2050. And we are also investing in fusion which means they might not even be the silver bullet everyone is hoping for anyway. Energy efficiency and self sufficiency are two different things. I thought you were talking about being self sufficient as a country? |
|
|
|
Post by sword on Oct 15, 2022 11:45:16 GMT
What about the Country Red? this is all about whats best for the Conservative party and their MPs,as Crusader said we need a election,even if they get Truss out,what then replace her with yet another clown of a leader? thats not democracy its a grotesque parody of one. What about the country? What are you proposing, Revolution? No an election. |
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 11:46:22 GMT
As I said, it will be wind not nuclear that will get us to energy efficiency by 2030, nuclear will just be the backup when the wind doesn't blow. Even Johnson wanted the UK to be the wind capital of the world FYI. As for the expertise, the answer is yes, but like building them it will take decades of R&D. Nuclear isn't the option we can take to be energy efficient by 2030 anyhow so is actually a strawman. Nor is it the option by 2050. And we are also investing in fusion which means they might not even be the silver bullet everyone is hoping for anyway. Energy efficiency and self sufficiency are two different things. I thought you were talking about being self sufficient as a country? Sorry, it is self sufficiency. Although that would include the public sector as well. GB energy is merely a nationalised green energy initiative and be a partner with their current contractoral obligations and the idea is for this company to also invest within the private sector. So it isn't one or... it is both. |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 15, 2022 12:05:45 GMT
Energy efficiency and self sufficiency are two different things. I thought you were talking about being self sufficient as a country? Sorry, it is self sufficiency. Although that would include the public sector as well. GB energy is merely a nationalised green energy initiative and be a partner with their current contractoral obligations and the idea is for this company to also invest within the private sector. So it isn't one or... it is both. OK, so if the aim is for the UK to be self sufficient and then remaining so, then great in theory Do I think it can be done by 2030, not on your life. Realistically it means going all electric - Whether that's wind, water, solar, nuclear etc etc, whatever. Personally a combination of technologies makes sense to me. Can that be done by 2030, whether its private or commercial, removing reliance on other forms of energy generation and transformation is a massive undertaking. Is it a total solve, not really. The UK doesn't have the raw materials, resources, or industry base to design, manufacture the required infrastructure - we are still going to be dependent on others, just for different things. Also centralising all this into a single point of control / failure ie 'GB Energy' is sub optimal. It puts an awful lot of power into the hands of a few. |
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 12:11:17 GMT
Sorry, it is self sufficiency. Although that would include the public sector as well. GB energy is merely a nationalised green energy initiative and be a partner with their current contractoral obligations and the idea is for this company to also invest within the private sector. So it isn't one or... it is both. OK, so if the aim is for the UK to be self sufficient and then remaining so, then great in theory Do I think it can be done by 2030, not on your life. Realistically it means going all electric - Whether that's wind, water, solar, nuclear etc etc, whatever. Personally a combination of technologies makes sense to me. Can that be done by 2030, whether its private or commercial, removing reliance on other forms of energy generation and transformation is a massive undertaking. Is it a total solve, not really. The UK doesn't have the raw materials, resources, or industry base to design, manufacture the required infrastructure - we are still going to be dependent on others, just for different things. Also centralising all this into a single point of control / failure ie 'GB Energy' is sub optimal. It puts an awful lot of power into the hands of a few. I believe it was more to do about energy sector than getting off fossil fuels Colbops. Perhaps I wasn't clear on what I meant by energy sufficiency. But wasn't Johnson stopping the sales of combustion engines by 2030 anyhow? Also, it hasn't taken much time to get 26% of our energy consumption from wind. I don't think it is unlikely that a manhattan type effort couldn't get us there by 2030 if the ambition is there. But in any case, can I ask, do you think energy sufficiency is going to be achieved quicker by the public or the private sector? |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 15, 2022 13:11:44 GMT
OK, so if the aim is for the UK to be self sufficient and then remaining so, then great in theory Do I think it can be done by 2030, not on your life. Realistically it means going all electric - Whether that's wind, water, solar, nuclear etc etc, whatever. Personally a combination of technologies makes sense to me. Can that be done by 2030, whether its private or commercial, removing reliance on other forms of energy generation and transformation is a massive undertaking. Is it a total solve, not really. The UK doesn't have the raw materials, resources, or industry base to design, manufacture the required infrastructure - we are still going to be dependent on others, just for different things. Also centralising all this into a single point of control / failure ie 'GB Energy' is sub optimal. It puts an awful lot of power into the hands of a few. I believe it was more to do about energy sector than getting off fossil fuels Colbops. Perhaps I wasn't clear on what I meant by energy sufficiency. But wasn't Johnson stopping the sales of combustion engines by 2030 anyhow? Also, it hasn't taken much time to get 26% of our energy consumption from wind. I don't think it is unlikely that a manhattan type effort couldn't get us there by 2030 if the ambition is there. But in any case, can I ask, do you think energy sufficiency is going to be achieved quicker by the public or the private sector? Combustion engines are only a part of what needs to be replaced. What about gas boilers, industrial and commercial plant etc etc. Just stopping new sales of some or all equipment that is powered by something other than electricity at a date doesn't enable self sufficiency at that date either. That would require the replacement of things already in circulation at pace. I'm not sure where your 26% consumption comes from but it smells fishy to me. Electricity generation, maybe, but consumption, not a chance. Could the UK get to a point where all energy demands are met by sustainable sources from within the UK, unlikely, however that is only part of the story as I say, the demand for other types of energy would still be there unless that is tackled too. Could all of this be achieved quicker by the public sector or the private sector. Neither, it would need to be both to get the quickest results. Quicker results will require more money to be thrown at it. |
|
|
|
Post by Morgan on Oct 15, 2022 13:42:21 GMT
Hiya jaydee, long time no see. Keeping up the good works I see. Fit and well I trust?  Nah not really. Knocking on for 80 I have been diagnosed with COPD or what ever the hell they call it. It was my own fault. Although not having smoked for some 40 years I was once a heavy smoker. For a while I could not walk the length of myself. But with treatment I can now get back out fishing and hill walking on the gentle slopes. The days of the Cuillins of Skye are well gone. So I will take this opportunity to any young bucks who smokes. Take it from me it has nothing going for it, And gasping for air at times. Trust me. It is no fun. But despite Covid, thanks to the NHS. Me and my good lady managed a seven week tour of France in my camper. I must have racked up about 4,000 miles So I am thankful for that. And as long as I can get fishing and my photography, with my wee dram of grouse at night. As my dear old dad used to say. I am as happy as a pig amongst shite. Hope you and yours are doing fine. By the way. Red is really a crakin guy. Misinformed but a crakin guy That's the trouble with old age. You see all these adverts on t.v. Fit old people smiling and playing with the kids in the park. The rest of the time they are trying to sell you funeral plans. No one tells you that you're going to spend half your life struggling to do the things you always used to enjoy doing. Still, que sera as they say and I'm glad that you're happy and coping. Long may it last. Old Red's OK. I quite like the old bastard really. We used to be very pally but he got a bit lippy one day and I slapped him, as you do. Since then we just have a friendly pop at each other now and then. There's never any malice. |
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 14:15:38 GMT
I believe it was more to do about energy sector than getting off fossil fuels Colbops. Perhaps I wasn't clear on what I meant by energy sufficiency. But wasn't Johnson stopping the sales of combustion engines by 2030 anyhow? Also, it hasn't taken much time to get 26% of our energy consumption from wind. I don't think it is unlikely that a manhattan type effort couldn't get us there by 2030 if the ambition is there. But in any case, can I ask, do you think energy sufficiency is going to be achieved quicker by the public or the private sector? Combustion engines are only a part of what needs to be replaced. What about gas boilers, industrial and commercial plant etc etc. Just stopping new sales of some or all equipment that is powered by something other than electricity at a date doesn't enable self sufficiency at that date either. That would require the replacement of things already in circulation at pace. I'm not sure where your 26% consumption comes from but it smells fishy to me. Electricity generation, maybe, but consumption, not a chance. Could the UK get to a point where all energy demands are met by sustainable sources from within the UK, unlikely, however that is only part of the story as I say, the demand for other types of energy would still be there unless that is tackled too. Could all of this be achieved quicker by the public sector or the private sector. Neither, it would need to be both to get the quickest results. Quicker results will require more money to be thrown at it. It may well be that given gas comes from the North Sea, Starmer put that into context when he evaluated the UK would be energy sufficient by 2030. I did say that nothing has been suggested that we would be off fossil fuels by 2030, only that GB energy would be a green initiative and the UK would be energy self sufficient. As for whether the public or private sector could fix this issue quicker, I would still maintain given profits are a factor in the private sector, that Public would be quicker in the sense of getting the infrastructure built now. Nonetheless as it happens, Starmers plan actually requires both as you suggest to get the fastest result. It is only the Tories who rely on one given they are hoping not taxing North Sea Oil means Shell and BP don't throw everything into dividends and instead they built infrastructure here. |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 15, 2022 14:42:16 GMT
Combustion engines are only a part of what needs to be replaced. What about gas boilers, industrial and commercial plant etc etc. Just stopping new sales of some or all equipment that is powered by something other than electricity at a date doesn't enable self sufficiency at that date either. That would require the replacement of things already in circulation at pace. I'm not sure where your 26% consumption comes from but it smells fishy to me. Electricity generation, maybe, but consumption, not a chance. Could the UK get to a point where all energy demands are met by sustainable sources from within the UK, unlikely, however that is only part of the story as I say, the demand for other types of energy would still be there unless that is tackled too. Could all of this be achieved quicker by the public sector or the private sector. Neither, it would need to be both to get the quickest results. Quicker results will require more money to be thrown at it. 1) It may well be that given gas comes from the North Sea, Starmer put that into context when he evaluated the UK would be energy sufficient by 2030. 2) I did say that nothing has been suggested that we would be off fossil fuels by 2030, 3) only that GB energy would be a green initiative and the UK would be energy self sufficient. As for whether the public or private sector could fix this issue quicker, 4)I would still maintain given profits are a factor in the private sector, that Public would be quicker in the sense of getting the infrastructure built now. Nonetheless as it happens, Starmers plan actually requires both as you suggest to get the fastest result. It is only the Tories who rely on one given they are hoping not taxing North Sea Oil means Shell and BP don't throw everything into dividends and instead they built infrastructure here. 1.) Thing is it doesn't only about 50% does, and that is going to run out relatively quickly 2.) You may not have said we will be off fossil fuels by 2030 but in order to be self sufficient the UK would need to be off fossil fuels for new demand and on a very aggressive program of eliminating existing infrastructure requiring it. 3) That's a given though, the UKs reserves of oil and Gas require an aggressive move away from it. The UK could be self sufficient now, but it would run out of Gas and Oil well before 2030 if it relied on domestic sources of fossil fuels only. 4) the public purse can't finance it at the pace required. Its not just building generating infrastructure, it is necessary to replace gas boilers with technologies such as ASHPs /GSHPs creating District heating schemes, Building smart decentralised energy grids. To be self sustaining by 2030 is going to take epic amounts of capital, materials and labour. |
|
|
|
Post by vlk on Oct 15, 2022 14:59:56 GMT
This is beginning to remind of the final moments of the John Major-government.
However, back then there was Tony Blair waiting in the wings and there was genuine belief that once you get the Tories out things are going to get better.
No such feeling this time around.
|
|
|
|
Post by B0ycey on Oct 15, 2022 15:02:13 GMT
1) It may well be that given gas comes from the North Sea, Starmer put that into context when he evaluated the UK would be energy sufficient by 2030. 2) I did say that nothing has been suggested that we would be off fossil fuels by 2030, 3) only that GB energy would be a green initiative and the UK would be energy self sufficient. As for whether the public or private sector could fix this issue quicker, 4)I would still maintain given profits are a factor in the private sector, that Public would be quicker in the sense of getting the infrastructure built now. Nonetheless as it happens, Starmers plan actually requires both as you suggest to get the fastest result. It is only the Tories who rely on one given they are hoping not taxing North Sea Oil means Shell and BP don't throw everything into dividends and instead they built infrastructure here. 1.) Thing is it doesn't only about 50% does, and that is going to run out relatively quickly 2.) You may not have said we will be off fossil fuels by 2030 but in order to be self sufficient the UK would need to be off fossil fuels for new demand and on a very aggressive program of eliminating existing infrastructure requiring it. 3) That's a given though, the UKs reserves of oil and Gas require an aggressive move away from it. The UK could be self sufficient now, but it would run out of Gas and Oil well before 2030 if it relied on domestic sources of fossil fuels only. 4) the public purse can't finance it at the pace required. Its not just building generating infrastructure, it is necessary to replace gas boilers with technologies such as ASHPs /GSHPs creating District heating schemes, Building smart decentralised energy grids. To be self sustaining by 2030 is going to take epic amounts of capital, materials and labour. Honestly Colbops, you are implying that the usage of gas we use today will be the same in the future. Gas is a transition fuel and by 2030, most of our electricity will be generated by renewables. it isn't inconceivable that if we still haven't replaced our gas boilers (which I doubt), that the gas we get from the North Sea would be pumped into homes and not into electric plants. Besides, it seems to me that you are dead against Labour so much you can't acknowledge that they may well have answered all these questions anyway. |
|
