The green revolution, led by governments and big business and informed by the green movement and decarbonising parties, is encountering consumer and political resistance as soon as it tries to get people to spend more money on replacing their transport or heating.
Voters often object to paying higher prices for fossil fuel-based ways of doing things when they are taxed, or to incurring more fines and penalties for not being green enough.
The Dutch government was thrown out of office for trying to stop farmers farming to cut rural methane and CO2; the French have demonstrated against dearer diesel; half the British refuse to have âfreeâ smart meters.
Meanwhile, the American electorate is taking a shine in the polls to Donald Trumpâs belief in having more cheap oil and gas and allowing people to drive their internal-combustion-engine cars, vans and pickups; Joe Biden has intervened to get the price of petrol (gasoline) down, even though dearer gas would push more people to electric.
The sheer magnitude of the task to get to net zero means that, for governments, it will only get tougher from here. They picked the low-hanging fruit first, concentrating on closing coal power stations as they persuaded and regulated the power sector to cut its emissions and ensuring big business takes measures to curb its own appetite for fossil fuels.
Now they have to persuade the consumer voter that it is time they banished the diesel or petrol car and ripped out the gas boiler â and many people will say that whilst they accept the climate change message, but they cannot afford an electric car or a heat pump.
There are only 18 million battery-electric cars in the world out of a total of 1500 million vehicles. It tends to be the rich who buy the battery cars, as they can afford the up-market Tesla or the more expensive electric versions of other well-known brands.
Putting in a heat pump is especially costly. In an older house a lot of work has to be undertaken first to insulate to much higher standards, before the disruptive work to install the heat pump system.
Some governments are offering high subsidies to people to get over these cost problems. The Chinese have the biggest numbers of electric cars thanks to early large subsidies and considerable pressure against buying new fossil-fuel vehicles. Norway for many years offered electric cars free of 20 per cent VAT and free of road taxes which gave them a boost there.
Yet such subsidy schemes can still leave many people unwilling as they worry about range, battery life, repair costs and ability to recharge on long journeys.
Heat pumps require even higher capital subsidies. Even so, many are reluctant. They fear big bills when they need to use plenty of electricity to keep the home warm, given the much higher prices of electricity than gas. They are concerned that on really cold days the home would not be sufficiently warm, as there would be less heat to pump successfully to its destination in the home.
There are issues with how green these preferred products are. If a person plugs in a car to recharge when there is too little wind or solar energy, a gas- or coal-fired power station has to supply the juice. That does not make the electric car green.
Such is also the case with a heat pump: on very cold still days, a lot of fossil fuel will be burned at power stations to keep the grid going.
Making the new electric car and heat pump generates a lot of carbon dioxide itself, and scrapping the old petrol car and gas boiler uses energy. The world only starts to win from your switch after many miles have been driven or many hours have passed with the heating, (assuming they are running on renewable power).
There are always problems with top-down revolutions. Governments may back the wrong technology: some of the smart meters given out free to users in the UK do not work properly and have to be replaced. It may run out of money and have to cut or end the subsidies designed to sustain the green changes; democratic governments may lose too many votes if it becomes clearer some of these changes mean paying more for such essentials as energy, transport, and heating.
Enthusiastic Greens portray a world full of wind farms where electricity is cheaper, powering homes, cars and industry. They claim energy is only dear today because oil and gas has gone up.
The truth is that todayâs green electricity has needed much subsidy, paid for by taxpayers, to get it introduced. Whilst the average cost of wind power has now fallen a long way from the original peaks, it still needs substantial back up power to be available from fossil fuel generators for the low-wind days, the cost of which must be added to the overall cost of wind energy.
If we are to transfer much home heating and car transport from fossil fuel to electricity, there needs to be a massive expansion of generating capacity, and of grid and cable capacity to get the power to every home.
All this requires huge outlays to put in the generators and cables, to span the pylons across the fields and place the wires on the seabed to get to offshore wind. We need better answers to how much this will cost and who will pay.
In the meantime, it is very important we keep enough generating capacity available to meet our needs on days of no wind and little sun. The other day 26 per cent of our demand was met through imported energy even though demand was quite low â and the continent, grappling with its own problems from shortages and transition, will not always have the power to supply us.
March 9, 2024
Good morning.
The reason why people are having a hard time changing over to the new technologies is, because they simply do not work as advertised.
They do not cut CO2 levels as their manufacture, running and decommissioning simply does not tick all the environmental boxes. They can not meet the requirements of the consumer and, quite frankly, the whole environmental thing to the eye of the ordinary man in the street looks bonkers.
I and many others have written much about this, but let us look at it in a different way. Let us take the now humble mobile phone. In the late 80’s and early 90’s these were very large, very expensive (to buy and use) pieces of kit that had very little battery and connection range. Sounds familiar ? Yet it received no government subsidy or top down mandate (law / regulation) to use one. ie The market was to decide. The market persevered because it believed that there was a market. Today the mobile phone is everywhere and is itself replacing other technologies such as credit cards for payment.
Yes it took time, but we got there ! Problem is, this top down mentality driven by what most people see as nonsense is what is causing the push back.
Either you listen or, you will be replaced. Something that sadly, given the passed budget this government now only seems to have discovered.
March 9, 2024
We the people are not convinced, there is no ‘settled science’ on this matter. However, Sir J. says he will only attempt to check government actions, not the science. Well, Sir J. how about asking for the governments financial analysis and costing of each of their action plans to achieve Net Zero?
How much for the necessary wind farms?
How much for the upgrade to electrical infrastructure?
How much for the SMR’s?
How much for replacing gas boilers with heatpumps?
etc. You can make a very long list.
These are PCP government spending initiatives, have they been costed?
March 9, 2024
JRs party just made a case for all rich people not come and invest here. Private schools taxed and social engineering to not accept them based on merit and grades- exactly opposite to lies spouted by Sunak in his speech last week. High corporation tax, high personal taxes- was Sunakâs wife not a non Dom until raised by the press with his green card?
Cabinet appointments, like himself, are quota based as Dowden told us previously- exactly opposite Tories spouted by Sunak last week. War memorials were erected for all faiths and none until this week when Hunt segregated Muslims for special attention. Sunak now hiring Muslim czar no other faith czar, yet Lords full of clergies to give advice!
A very good socialist budget directed by socialist ONS and OBR for socialist CCP chancellor Hunt! Meanwhile Cameron flying around to get as many contacts for his further interests no doubt! We read Valance now working for Blaireâs organisation!! Your party denying debate on leaving or stop treaty with WHO!!
March 9, 2024
Yes the next phase is going to be costly and unpopular
The voter will decide especially after you try to ration holidays abroad for the masses, shut down farming causing food shortages and covering the land with windmills and solar farms.
The stupidity of politicians is nor lost on the general public and it’s good the protesters ate targeting MPs
March 9, 2024
Aeroplanes were rubbish when the Wright brothers flew one on the beach. But now look at them. Say a modern US jet fighter.
Green Tech is the way forward, whether you or i like not like it. It’s a tsunami. Even the Chinese are embracing it big time. Only the Oil & Gas companies in the West are really opposing it cause they are too lazy to figure out how to make lots of money from Green energy – and the risks involved in all capitalist adventures.
True capitalists are embracing Green Tech as they know there is a tonne of money to be made out of it and they enjoy the ADVENTURE. Real capitalists are after the adventure – not the money. Although the money really flows when you embrace adventure!
Lastly, whatever is calling the problems with our environment – nature or man – we CAN create the tech to CONTROL nature whilst making more money from that than the dinosaur capitalists in the Oil & Gas industry.
March 9, 2024
If you think you can control nature you are seriously deluded Ed. For a start why not control the various jet streams around the world to give us more settled weather and while you’re at it have a go at stopping volcanoes as these cause death and destruction.
March 9, 2024
The M stands for Miliband? At least it would explain your fantasy world of green crony “capitalism”.
March 9, 2024
Hi Ed M,
‘True capitalists are embracing Green Tech as they know there is a tonne of money to be made out of it and they enjoy the ADVENTURE.âReal capitalists are after the adventure â not the money.’
Those you identify as making a tonne of money are subsidy farmers.
Capitalists do not seek adventure, they seek return.âThose seeking adventure are drawn to high risk and then loss.âHopefully they lose their own capital and this stops their further malinvestment as its ties up resources unproductively.
March 9, 2024
The Chinese are building a coal fired power station at an unprecedented scale.
If our kind host allows (please)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/859266/number-of-coal-power-plants-by-country/
March 9, 2024
The green revolution âŠâŠ.is encountering consumer and political resistance as soon as it tries to get people to spend more money on replacing their transport or heating.
So they just make it more difficult for people. Cripple the road network with narrow lanes and constant roadworks. Destroy rail with engineering works every weekend.
Many politicians donât care provided they themselves are alright. If you paid one recent Prime Minister enough money he would do whatever you wanted; and then talk about it if you offered him ÂŁ1 million for an interview.
Cars seem much more expensive now anyway. Not just luxury or performance cars either – average vehicles. Make them electric and itâs even worse. Hyundai ionic for example. I only pick this one because I saw it in a driveway on charge and googled it.
March 9, 2024
“to get people to spend more money on replacing their transport or heating” for a less efficient method.
March 9, 2024
Exactly.
March 9, 2024
But MOST people donât see it as nonsense. Most people believe in ânet zeroâ – thatâs the problem. There is no pushback. There is no group called âKeep Using Oilâ. Ask people âdo you think it is important we reach net zeroâ – I think 9 out of 10 would answer âyesâ. They might not be able to afford (or want)!an electric car or air source heat pump, but they do believe the general principle. Hence, no pushback.
Changing course away from net zero might make the 1 in 10 who are anti it vote Tory. Which will make no difference to the fact of replacement. And they will be replaced with even bigger zealots.
March 9, 2024
Rubbish Mike. Only a handful of mainly European countries are willing to bankrupt themselves on the altar of net zero.
China, America and India have no intention of going down this route. Trump will open the spigots and make Europe even more irrelevant on the world stage. Greening needs to come from evolution not revolution because it’s not sustainable what er are doing.
March 9, 2024
Err, the article is about the UK. I was referring to people in the UK. Most are pro net zero – due to relentless brainwashing from government and the media.
March 9, 2024
“Ask people âdo you think it is important we reach net zeroâ â I think 9 out of 10 would answer âyes”
If you explained the cost (Trillions) and the truth around how much CO2 we would save (0.00045%) I think you would find those figures would reverse.
March 9, 2024
Absolutely. But that is never pointed out by the government and media. There are those on here who, rather oddly, assume that âeveryoneâ thinks like them because they themselves are obviously (to them) right about everything. They may be right about something but they should not make the assumption that âmostâ people agree with them. Net Zero is a good example. Some on here believe the masses are seething at the governmentâs pursuit of net zero. My observation is that most people support net zero – even if the canât afford the EV, heat pump etc.
March 9, 2024
Indeed Mike, because the full facts are never explained to the public. They only hear the Green Zealots scaremongering.
March 9, 2024
Morning Sir John.
It seems to me that we are trying to run at record breaking speed when we can hardly walk.
It cannot be Green to scrap perfectly good cars and boilers before the end of their useful life.
I cannot see how I can retro fit the kind of insulation required in my home, in order to make the inefficient heat pumps they want me to use, to heat my home to anywhere near the temperatures I enjoy now. The costs to fit and then to use the system are too prohibitive.
The sensible thing for the government to do is to legislate that new homes should have the insulation and new technologies rather than trying to force an already skint and frankly, weary population to spend a fortune Retrofitting their old and existing homes.
In the meantime, we need to increase generation and storage capacity.
Being a bit green used to have a far different meaning when I was growing up, it meant nieve, inexperienced and daft.
Finally Sir John, there is no such thing as a free smart meter.
I also think that trying to convince people to upgrade to smart meters are green products in general is misleading to say the least… All to often, these products are not better than the product they are to replace, hardly an upgrade in reality.
March 9, 2024
As you say there is no sense in them scrapping perfectly good cars. With cars much of the lifetime energy cost of them is invested in their manufacturing, especially EVs , it taking an EV some 5 to 7 years of motoring to pay off the additional carbon manufacturing cost compared to an ICE car. Of course at this point it is most likely the EV’s battery will be knackered , so they are unlikely to ever get into the carbon credit situation, worse, as it is very difficult to replace an EV battery the car is pretty much scrap. So this green transport revolution is nothing of the sort, it is a one use disposable product. Old cars on the roads are actually the most ‘green ‘ cars, for the longer you extend their use the more years you are spreading out the initial energy cost of their manufacturing. The way things are there will be no classic EV car market, our brilliant whizzes in government, banned us having one use plastic bags, but then remove repairable cars from the roads, and force us to buy unrepairable cars
March 9, 2024
Rarely mentioned either is that a Wind Turbine has a working life of 15 years, perhaps slightly more. So as well as building all the news ones, to sit idle when the wind does not blow, the Tax payer will have to pay to replace the existing ones.
Joined up thinking in action.
March 9, 2024
A wind-turbine with full maintenance may indeed have a life cycle of 10-15 years …however the return on investment is 15-20 years, it just doesn’t compute as they need subsidy all its life
March 9, 2024
Running in the wrong direction. Storing electricity is rarely ever very practical or very economic, it also wastes much of the energy at least 30% often 70%+. The best way to store it is before it is generated as coal, gas, oil, wood, nuclear fuel and generate only when required. Alas wind and solar cannot do this so far less useful than on demand power.
March 9, 2024
He did put “free” in inverted commas to make the point.
March 9, 2024
Yesterday I received an email from my energy supplier, Scottish Energy:
“”Ofgem have announced their next energy price cap, which takes effect from 1st April 2024, and we want to let you know what this means for you. From 1st April, the price you pay per unit of energy will reduce, however the daily standing charge will increase. We’ve calculated that from April you’ll pay ÂŁXX less per year for gas, and ÂŁXX more per year for electricity.”
They helpfully explain that:
“A standing charge is a fixed daily fee that most energy customers pay to connect to a supply, maintain the energy supply networks, take meter readings and cover the cost of dealing with failed energy suppliers. No matter how much energy you use, your standing charge will stay the same and is a daily amount added to your overall energy costs……This means that if youâre a low user of gas and electricity, your standing charge may make up most of your bill.”
Nowhere do they explain that the increased cost of electricity is caused by the Government deliberately increasing subsidies to mainly foreign organisations to pay for the windmills which are blighting our land and seascapes are killing thousands of birds every single year and provide – at best – intermittent electricity at great cost.
Vote for the Not-a-Conservative-Party and deliberately increased energy bills, which are destroying our economy and international competitiveness, thanks to the Net Zero lunacy?
Not even if hell does eventually freeze over.
Meanwhile, in Germany, they are starting to cut down 120,000 trees in an ancient woodland to make space for windmills. How very “green” …… not.
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/03/08/germany-begins-felling-120000-trees-from-fairy-tale-forest-to-make-way-for-wind-turbines/
March 9, 2024
A budding politician, asked me to calculate gas and electric prices if the daily charge was combined into the kWh charge. For the average GB domestic consumer, a gas rate of 7.52 p/kWh would go to 8.36 p/kWh. For electric, a 28.79 p/kWh would go to 34.81 p/kWh. A big advantage for low users. I hope she gets to be Energy Secretary one day soon.
March 9, 2024
What is the justification for the vast increases in the standing charges? The poor can reduce their consumption by wearing thermals & ski-jackets but can do nothing about these evil poll taxes charged for supplying zero energy.
March 9, 2024
LL justification for standing charge increases is partly government and Ofgem foul-ups. The usual official response is that “we have failed and YOU must pay for the remedy”.
March 9, 2024
Precisely. It’s a flat-tax levy which is unavoidable and for poorer people, whose only means of cutting their energy bills is to go without heating or lighting, it could prove fatal.
March 9, 2024
Donna
I left Scottish Energy only a couple of weeks ago due to their rates.
March 9, 2024
The Germans did at least cut down a wind farm to open a new lignite mine.
March 9, 2024
Double damage to the environment! ‘Ve haf vays of doing vot ve vont!’
March 9, 2024
As you say, top down change is reluctantly accepted by some but declined by the majority on cost grounds. Check out the value of the EV two years after leaving the showroom. Then at what point does the government realise it can no longer continue losing all that road tax.
Get it in your heads that all government subsidy is paid for by you the tax payer. Government only uses your money. Even when it prints it, you pay through inflation. When it pays benefits, you the taxpayer pays. Reportedly 20 million UK citizens enjoy some form of government benefit. The result is that those who really need support get too little while a vast number leech off the taxpayer.
Example, my partner and I are living with her sister for a week while our Airbnb accommodates an earlier booking. Our builders hopefully finish in April. Sister has a first floor flat. The occupant of the ground floor smokes canabis that filtrates to above. Said occupant has not worked for years, claiming mental illness. Government provides a mid range 2024 model car, for a canabis fuelled driver to drive. You dear taxpayer are paying for this, like it or not. This is the creation of consocialism, so think carefully should you be tempted to vote for more.
March 9, 2024
+1
March 9, 2024
LL,
It is unbelievable how many ice cars the govt give out at taxpayersâ expense for the so called disabled, none electric!! Remember the blue cars which they were given? Apparently it stigmatises them! So now they all sorts of cars only working people could dream of ie BMW or Audi!
Could you explain to us JR why they do not any state paid car at all, if one is provided why not a low cost small economic one?
March 10, 2024
Hope
Yes another Policy that needs to be investigated, I am given to understand (happy to be corrected) they do not even have to drive the car that is purchased themselves, as long as they have a dedicated driver, perhaps why some cars purchased were not really only for the disabled person themselves, but perhaps suitable also for other family members !
March 9, 2024
Exactly the point I have made many times before,
The Government has no money of its own, just what it takes from taxpayers, or borrows in your name.
Any subsidy/benefit is paid for either by you, or some other taxpayer, and it is inefficient and poor value for money, because the system needs millions of government/taxpayer funded workers to distribute it.
Far better not to take such a huge amount in tax from those who have it, and let them spend it directly, and get the full value of it themselves without all of the Governments overheads applied.
All Governments subsidy’s are someone else’s tax payment.
March 9, 2024
Interesting that the Insurance company is suing the owners of the ship and the Cato of electric Vehicles which caught fire and sank the ship to the tune of ÂŁ150 million (I believe).
They claim that they had not been informed that the ship was carrying âdangerous cargoâ.
A runaway EV on the U.K. motorway network had to be physically stopped by police cars – for the second time! The driver was obviously guilty of using his mobile phone while driving to call for help.
The NATO rout by Russia continues at pace. But Shapps gives ÂŁ350 million to Ukraine and the alien who runs Scotland gives ÂŁ250 million to Gaza – none of which was mentioned in any budget. Who do they think they are? Zelensky?
March 9, 2024
+many
Utter madness. No increase in defence spending but ÂŁ7 billion has gone to corrupt Ukraine of no strategic value or interest to UK. It was agreed Ukraine would be a neutral buffer between east and west when USSR fell. Minsk agreement by west not honoured, coup of Ukraine leader in 2014 by EU and Cameron and co publicly promoting EU policy to March to the Urals! Get our troops out of Ukraine and send Cameron and family if he is so wedded to Ukraine cause, others volunteered!
March 9, 2024
I’m sure his electric Jag would have allowed completely hands free use of the phone via Bluetooth. My much older vehicle allows a quick press on the end of the direction indicator stalk to turn on voice control, where the conversation would be Dial – Number please? – 999 – Dialling. I actually did that when I spotted someone threatening to jump from a bridge over the M3.
March 9, 2024
Do you think the phone would work – hands free, when the car was not working – all hands on deck?
I see Jaguar has sensibly stopped making the iPace. Stupid idea – a politicians idea!
March 9, 2024
Much guff recently about solar farms and new pylons taking agricultural land out of production – including during your well attended Oxford lecture yesterday.
Research by CPRE, the countryside charity, found almost 14,500 hectares of farmland has been permanently lost to housing development since 2010 – over 6000 acres (source; NFU)
Thanks to the planning restrictions around new solar, less than 3% – or about 180 acres – has been used for solar farms. But once the solar panels have reached the end of their useful lives, the land becomes available for agriculture again.
Your very interesting talk yesterday focused on the costs of the green revolution – but as several questioners noted before lunch, the costs of failing to get the insane amounts of CO2 currently being emitted by burning fossil fuels under control will be orders of magnitude greater
March 9, 2024
There has been a hiatus in new solar farm development since nominal solar capacity approached 15GW, a level above which curtailment becomes necessary on windy, sunny days. National Grid has been putting in place the mechanisms to make such curtailment feasible, such as Downward Flexibility Management. When the FiT regime for small solar was ended, for the same reason they got OFGEM to set a low minimum on the domestic solar export tariff to discourage oversize installations, and required export metering. The energy crisis has seen an upsurge in domestic solar as an attempt to defend against high cost power.
Policy was reset for the AR5 CFD auction, resulting in over 1.9GW of new solar CFDs, set to use at least 10,000 acres from just 1 year’s auction. This map shows the locations and mouseover details of all the awarded AR5 projects.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/N76ms/3/
There are massive projects like Botley West, 3,400 acres of farmland in the Blenheim estate, that are in the pipeline for AR6. The picture is about to change dramatically, and it will require lots more pylons to take the solar surpluses away – but this time in the NIMBY lands of the SW and South.
March 9, 2024
For once an interesting and informative post. Many thanks.
I note that today, wind and solar have – again – been producing over 50% of our electricity demands. All day. And that Gravitricty are now building a full-size demonstration plant using their mechanical/gravity energy storage technology – in conjunction with the Swedish firm ABB, who make HVDC electrical switchgear and transformers etc
March 10, 2024
I have studied the Gravitricity plans over a number of years. Whilst the physics show that they should work, they are nevertheless limited by the need for free deep mine shafts and will only ever be able to store a few MWh per site. They could be strong competitors against small short duration grid batteries, and have similar capability for rapid response, but it is a niche market already heavily occupied by batteries, with revenues that have been eroding as a result of excess capacity already.
I note that there was some 4.7GWh of wind curtailment for 9th March, at a very costly ÂŁ709,500 or over ÂŁ150/MWh. Supposedly OFGEM were clamping down on excessive prices for wind curtailment, fining the Dorenell Wind Farm ÂŁ5.5m recently.
March 9, 2024
Youâd think the NFU would know that 1 hectare is about 2.5 acres. So, about 36,250 acres.
Whilst that is a horrifying figure – who wants all these bloody new estates? (Answer: politicians to support high immigration and growth) – itâs a trivial amount compared to the total useable land.
March 9, 2024
Governments need voter consent.
Some governments force people to comply with what voters oppose until an election stops them.
This government sneaks in laws between elections to enforce their will
…… but no government can match the force of Nature’s laws of physics against their hare-brained intent.
March 9, 2024
That is ABSOLUTELY not true.
Who consented to high immigration?
Who consented to expensive energy?
Who consented to the death of ICE cars?
Who consented to HS2?
I could go on and on and on. Our political system is barely a democracy and politicians do whatever they like without our consent. Vote âem out? And replace them with the same policies under a different colour.
March 10, 2024
+1
March 10, 2024
You refer, Mike, to governments in my 2nd sentence, but governments need voter consent to gain power in the 1st place, unless the votes are rigged.
Many existing failing MPs will not be standing at the next election. Disgruntled and apathetic voters will keep many other bad ones out.
The Reform Party has sensible intent. Enough votes for better may lead to less of the worse.
March 9, 2024
As Net Zero advocates I am struggling to understand why any Tory MP should feel the need to express any public concern whatsoever about the social and financial cost of those policy decisions required to achieve Net Zero objectives?
We all know what Net Zero is really concerned with, environmental protection it isn’t. It’s akin to Mrs M. Thatcher publicly declaring her adoration for Marx, Engels and Socialism. It ain’t passing the truth test
Do you want to know why the majority vote Labour, Tory and SNP? Because they’re state dependents who fear change and the unknown. It’s Stockholm Syndrome writ large, on a national scale
And please someone inform the ophidian Gove that freedom of expression trumps all considerations. We know the meaning of the term extremism no matter who vilely politicians try to expand it to criminalise and demonise lawful opinion. A disgusting attack on British culture by a governing class contemptible of our fought for freedoms
March 9, 2024
DOM,
Ophidian is different to the adjectives you usually employ. It doesnât sound quite as angry either.
March 9, 2024
Iâm prepared to admit my ignorance- I donât know what ophidian means.
March 9, 2024
The Net Zero narrative is a scam. It rests on dodgy data about temperatures, and as you point out going green adds CO2 (the alleged villain) not reduce it. Others have pointed out there is no way the world can expand the capacity needed to produce the raw materials needed to achieve the transition demanded by NZ zealots. Voters are waking up to the scam. Farmers already have.
The other day I got yet another phone call from British Gas wanting to change my perfectly sound gas meter for a “smart meter”. I was assured it wouldn’t cost me anything. I pointed out it wasn’t free as I doubted that the engineer installing it would be doing so for free from the goodness of his heart. To this the caller had no answer and promptly rang off. It is a falsehood to call it free. We, as taxpayers, are already paying for it and ÂŁbillions more for other costly, inefficient, useless government schemes like it. At the next election I hope voters deliver the punishment that both Labour and Conservative parties deserve.
March 9, 2024
I have smart meters, they do not always work therefore energy providers require me to send them meter readings! This is the second house where meters do not work. They even send out people to check meters are not being fiddled with! It is costing us all a fortune.
March 9, 2024
Perhaps this rushed and unnecessary revolution is at last being seen for what it is, a farce.
The UK contributes 0.00045% of the CO2 in the Earths atmosphere. IF we reach ‘net zero’ that tiny amount will be taken up by China/India/USA in week or even days.
March 9, 2024
Green subsidies and taxes now cost UK consumers over ÂŁ14 billion/year, or ÂŁ500 per average home. This will rise further in the coming years. The UK produces circa 1% of the world’s CO2 and less than China’s average annual increase.
Net Zero is impoverishing our people and industries to achieve absolutely nothing which is measurable.
March 9, 2024
No mention of hydogen . I am not a great fan of smart meter. Now being stopped from getting lower tariff without having a meter. This is not fair and should be stopped for people pay by direct debit and submit meter readings on line.
March 9, 2024
Where did you get the petrol and diesel yesterday? Hint: it wasn’t the North Sea.
Where do you get the petrol and diesel today? Best not to think about it.
Where will you get the petrol and diesel in the future? Are you worried yet?
Will it even be available to you at a price we can afford? Too late!
What subsidies will we have to pay, wars will we have to support, how many more lives will we have to spend?
Don’t worry about it, just carry on regardless, run your clunker today and rely on our kids carrying the costs and consequences of your locust habits tomorrow.
March 9, 2024
Dixi
A very simplistic argument.
IF we all went electric tomorrow, the Power system would collapse.
The solution that works is gradual evolvement through development and customer satisfaction.
ICE cars are now cleaner, more reliable, and more efficient than ever before, they were purchased and evolved because they work better for transportation than a horse, but it took many years.
The government is trying to short circuit a common sense arrangement, which people may/will eventually buy into, but not until they are satisfied such a range products will work for them, at a sensible cost. !
March 9, 2024
What argument and I made no mention of a transition to EVs.
Quite simply so many on this blog demand they retain their ICE vehicles but I doubt know where their precious fuel comes from, at what costs and how long they will have access.
The issue is not CO2 but the sense of entitlement, the lack of concern that their access to fuel and power could end tomorrow.
March 10, 2024
Fossil fuels can come from all over the World, are usually traded and purchased on the open market.
The final mixture in the tank after refining is a hybrid of various suppliers and oil types, (heavy and light) so it is just like the cocktail mixture of electricity from various generation sources in the grid system.
The Government make more money out of the sale of fossil fuels than the oil exploration, transportation, distribution, and retail sale forecourts, than all of them put together, by virtue of its tax on such.
March 9, 2024
I usually just fill up at my local petrol station Dixie – which is both quick and convenient thank you.
“Locust Habits” – Interesting label but I think we normally refer to it as Consumerism.
So I think you should ask people what they would be willinmg to give up to live in your ‘Non-Locust’ future
Would they prefer to drive or cycle to go about their every day business?
Do they want to continue to be able fly away on holiday?
Can they afford locally made alternatives (if available) compared to cheaper imported Chinese goods?
Do they enjoy ‘fast fashion’ (or have too many shoes)?
Do they spend a lot of time on the Internet?
Would they prefer to live in a warm (or cold) home?
Can they afford everything they need/want right now or be willing to give something up?
Are they willing to fundamentally change the way they live?
I’m pretty sure I know the answers that most folk will give you. We are in fact all ‘Consumers’ (Locusts if you will) – it’s not just us dreadful car drivers. We all consume things that ultimately involve the consumption of energy and that energy is neither free or cheap (even less so if from Renewables). Personally, I wouldn’t want to live in the post-industrial agrarian society that seems to be the ultimate objective of some green policies. Nor would most people, because from our own history, we know that for most, pre-industrial life was both very hard & short.
March 10, 2024
How very convenient, until you can’t get the petrol/diesel/gas, a situation even more likely as it has to be imported.
The issue is not what people could chose to give up, it’s what they will no longer be able to get or afford.
So how will we preserve our industrial/information based society? Demand you simply must have your hydrocarbons and stamp your foot if you cannot? Continue acting like a locust (extract-waste-dispose) with no concern for tomorrow?
I see no evidence of anyone here or debate on how to preserve what we need through development or behaviour or policy, only blind and ignorant demands for cheap fuel and belittling anyone who dares to comment against that attitude.
Doing nothing is not an option./
March 10, 2024
I’ve no problem with adopting new technologies Dixie but would much prefer to use those that are both viable and affordable. We are doing really stupid things in the name of Net Zero and it won’t end well (we can already see that).
By all means, jump off a cliff intending to invent a parachute on the way down if you wish – but I’m afraid I’m not going to make that leap of faith.
March 10, 2024
To use your example, the bulk of commentary on here is along the lines of knowing they will be jumping off a cliff and knowing they will need a parachute but demand someone else take on all the responsibility and all the cost of making the parachute, just in time for the jump.
March 9, 2024
It’s a good idea to research renewable energy, as you say the oil won’t last for ever. However I don’t believe the state of development in renewables is at the stage where it can supplant fossil fuels. To my mind the way to go is to use electrical energy to make synthetic liquid fuels, rather than low energy to weight ratio batteries. I still think more should be done about drilling down miles to tap into geothermal energy, which will be renewable and reliable. Fusion energy may become a reality, but so far it is a solution thirty years into the future, as it was when I left school over 40 years ago.
March 10, 2024
A gold star for identifying a potential solution rather than blindly expect and demand you must always have access to fuel and gas, regardless of cost, that pervades comments on this blog.
March 10, 2024
Dixie
You were not asking for alternatives at the outset were you !
Having visited Iceland and Norway in recent years, and seen the benefits of Geothermal and Hydro, and the very economic use of those natural resources in those Countries to generate electricity, that is the way to go for them.
Likewise vast areas of desert could be potential solar farms, Countries with large tidal rises could be used for continuous generation at sea (although a more costly and hostile environment)
Then we have nuclear, but a potential waste problem.
So plenty of alternatives, but not yet enough development or capacity to make a huge difference. instead we choose the most variable source, wind, in the most hostile environment, the sea !
No joined up thinking by our Government yet !
March 10, 2024
You are right, I wasn’t asking for alternatives. It is a waste of time discussing alternatives here because they are clearly too uncomfortable and inconvenient for many commenters.
Instead of discussing alternatives or government’s energy strategy, which isn’t just wind, commentary is flooded with pseudo science/engineering, bullshit statistics and bile about appropriate degrees.
A start might be to consider the costs and consequences of depending on imported energy based solely on hydrocarbons and whether that is a sustainable addiction.
March 9, 2024
I grew up in a house with a coal fire in the back room – only lit in winter evenings. The house was an ice block in winter. As soon as I bought my first property, I put gas fired central heating in. Iâve had it ever since. Iâm not giving it up.
I used to stand waiting for buses freezing to death with feet like blocks of ice and chilblains on my ears. When I was 17 I bought a car – for freedom, warmth and, sometimes, for sex. Although the sex part is a distant memory, I have had a car ever since. I am not going back to wait for very rare lesser spotted bus – never seen in my area after 5.30 pm. I run a hybrid that does 60 mpg and have a newish, highly efficient boiler. Thatâs it. Thatâs my lot. If you want to live in the Stone Age – be my guest. China emits more CO2 in a year than we have since the industrial revolution. If youâre bothered about CO2, stop buying goods from China.
March 10, 2024
I grew up in very similar circumstances but had to wait longer to afford the car & CH.
But you make a false assumption wrt extreme greenism.
You also falsely assume you will always be able to access petrol, diesel and gas …
So if you want to keep your ICE and boiler, what are you going to do about it? How will you ensure that access if you cannot import it?
You/We have to do something now, not when we actually need alternatives.
March 10, 2024
Our crude oil imports come mainly from the USA and Norway. We are net exporters of petrol. Diesel imports now come from Belgium and the Netherlands, while jet fuel has been coming mainly from Kuwait and the UAE and India. Jet is clearly the most vulnerable at the moment, but we will probably see supply maintained via the Cape laden route, rather than the quicker journey via Suez.
March 10, 2024
Another gold star for knowing or bothering to find out.
March 9, 2024
Paying EVEN more! We already pay very high prices due to your taxes.
March 9, 2024
Sky News understands energy secretary Claire Coutinho had intended to ditch the policy, known as the Clean Heat Market Mechanism (CHMM), but will now proceed following objections from ministerial colleagues, who argued that it is crucial to decarbonising home heating and meeting wider net zero policy. Manufacturers have warned the policy will increase the cost of boilers.
In a concession to the industry, fines for missing electric heat pump targets will be pushed back by 12 months to April 2025.
March 9, 2024
She should drop her push through the Competition and Markets Authority that attempts to blame the industry for putting up prices to cover costs of the levies. She hasn’t had energy retailers investigated for charging for all the green costs in energy bills. The imposition is set to be real unless Parliament votes it down – but it’s just as likely in its present mood to vote not to defer the start of the levy.
March 9, 2024
JR says âIf we are to transfer much home heating and car transport from fossil fuel to electricity, there needs to be a massive expansion of generating capacity, and of grid and cable capacity to get the power to every home.â
This is hugely underestimated the seasonal nature of the heating and heat pumps demand might mean you need circa 10+ times the grid capacity and up to 20 times the generating supply (this as you need Gas/coal etc. backup for no wind no sun periods). This if we all switch to heat pumps amd EVs. This capacity will be mainly wasted for most of the year perhaps running at under 20% average capacity. A vast capital investment but then very underused for all but a few winter weeks – bonkers.
March 9, 2024
The back-up will be long duration; 8+ hours, storage, theoretically, by 30 GW / 300 GWh of grid controlled batteries; 12 hours worth of average daily grid demand. A very big ask!!! Have a read of https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/electric-power-and-natural-gas/our-insights/facing-the-future-net-zero-and-the-uk-electricity-sector
Heat Pumps. The snag is they don’t like cold, high humidity climates like the UK. When the air source gets close to its “dew point” temperature, the heat exchanger gets a layer of frost on it which stops heat transfer and causes the machine to go into defrost mode. Defrost can be 10 minutes every hour. Plus, if you have old radiators like mine, you will need the Heat Pump to deliver a water temperature of at least 60 degrees C. That will mean a COP of 2.4 to 2.8. That is, you will get 2.8 kW of heat from your radiators for every kW of electric consumption.
March 10, 2024
Have a read of the Royal Society report on storage. 300GWh is 0.3% of the 100TWh they consider is the minimum we need – and they are probably underestimating, because they have lots of favourable assumptions like no really cold weather, and that heat pumps work rather more efficiently etc..
McKinsey are relying on unicorns.
March 9, 2024
Do you think, perhaps, that the policy of net-zero is a mistake ….a policy that the people don’t want
March 9, 2024
Only the propaganda says this.
There are still so many false tales around ‘Climate Change’, and everyone I speak to can see this, so telling us that everybody supports netzero is yet more propaganda!
Well, OK, those people that spend all day on their couches watching what passes for news on the BBC will believe anything they see, but we all know how the BBC and others, twist the news as well as supplying a constant flow of false information.
Just imagine that:
…. A world full of windmills that have a lifespan of about ten years, more than enough to fill up every last landfill site for ever more!
March 9, 2024
….and they say wind-turbines will reduce the price of domestic energy ….my arse
March 9, 2024
Oh the irony that Theresa May is to concern herself with some sort of anti-slavery commission having enslaved all of us with her Net Zero legislation.
March 9, 2024
Until China and the USA toe the line there is little or no point in us accepting disciplines we find difficult . I have a petrol car and I will not go electric ; my central heating is oil and extremely economic ; I would certainly not have a heat pump . I will not pursue any policy that does not fit with my own objectives . I have just received an e-mail from my energy supplier congratulating my household on its low consumption .
March 9, 2024
Thatâs weird. Bit like getting a message from your local pub thanking you for not patronising it.
March 9, 2024
I found oil com I boiler for heating/water very cheap compared to gas or electric. Very efficient. Same for log burner, heating the whole house, drying washing. So efficient the thermostat for oil heating would not cut in.
March 9, 2024
The false CAGW theory and its âsolutionâ to net zero the Westâs CO2 emissions is not a green revolution but a red one. We all know that the Net Zero Strategy cannot work, and itâs not intended to work, but rather to destroy the Westâs access to cheap, abundant and reliable energy in order to bring economic disaster, then social upheaval, authoritarian government and finally subjugation.
To argue the case that the Net Zero Strategy will not work because it is ruinously expensive, impractical and unacceptable to the Westâs populations is futile. This is because, as history shows with the deaths of millions in the last Century, Communists believe that the means always justifies the ends and hence we are now told that no expense or hardship, even if it means again that millions starve to death, can be considered unacceptable when the very existence of the planet is at stake.
So the unilateral Net Zero Strategy that is national suicide can only be defeated by first defeating the totally false belief that the Westâs (and only the Westâs) CO2 emissions will cause runaway CAGW.
March 9, 2024
What you perceive to be consumer resistance is often caused by bureaucratic incompetence. For example why did the earlier smart meters have to be replaced by version two smart meters just a few years later? What benefit do smart meters give to the consumer? I perceive no benefits and therefore I would not purchase one, but I do permit my energy supplier to keep his smart meter in my cupboard.
I am currently at an earlier stage of fitting a Heat Pump to replace my Gas boiler and using the Government’s incentive scheme, I am already meeting illogical conditions of implementation that threaten progress. I assure you based upon my current experience that using Government incentive schemes can be really hard work for the consumer first to understand and to implement they also contain conditions that contradict their own objectives.
March 9, 2024
Yes, as Dieter Helm as probably our leading world-class energy economist, is constantly pressing, the how much and who pays for Net Zero related developments in Britain needs to be honestly debated with the public: at the moment it is not despite much analysis having been undertaken by HMT.
March 9, 2024
“Such is also the case with a heat pump” the muted ditching of what is termed the ‘boiler tax’ has now been shelved by the Conservative Government. So those that live in homes that are not capable of supporting heat pumps, that is the majority, will have to pay even more to stay warm as a punishment. In fact as it is not possible they are destined to freeze. The Conservative Government motto if you are not as flush with disposable income as the members of the Government are, you will be financially punished to keep funding the rich. A very Socialist Labour way of Governing, punishment first approach to everything.
Starmer and his crew are total idiots, but Sunak/Hunt have demonstrated they are the worst of the worst – all round the UK deserves better
How is the Palace of Westminster heated? Lord Callanan & Graham Stuart are reported as threatening to resign if the tax wasn’t imposed – do they have air sourced heat pumps at all of their homes?
March 9, 2024
Keeping to the Sunak/Hunt Conservative Governments aspirations of destroy the UK first, then feed all our foreign competitors with UK taxpayer money until it runs dry. The highest tax take since 1948 being given away to those that would love to hasten the UKs demise to that end we get “A ÂŁ400m scheme set up to encourage the rollout of electric buses is effectively subsidising Chinese companies to the detriment of British ones, a group of transport businesses have claimed.”
March 9, 2024
In the US there are limits on foreign ownership of Newspapers and the media. The reason why Murdock became a US Citizen.
I have no objections to the flow between countries as such, as long as it is reciprocated in full.
When this Conservative Government gets involved that have a different attitude, it down to how much can they give away and can the use the Taxpayers Money to do it.
March 9, 2024
We are still fully under EU Control.
Admitted by Ministers, the VAT threshold so-called uplift in the budget didn’t keep pace with inflation, for the simple reason Rishi signed to say we would obey the EU. The EU says you cant change your VAT criteria, you have to obey us at all times!
March 9, 2024
“Perkins, we need a futile gesture at this juncture.”
At least it explains why they reduced the M4 speed limit in early December. I pointed up the NAEI map on the earlier thread, showing how NO2 emissions are completely dominated by aircraft in the Heathrow area, and made mention that in practice measured levels are dominated by weather conditions.
I should have pointed to the Ventusky weather website. You can examine the history at 3 hour intervals by setting a start date (1 Dec works well), and then selecting NO2 from the Air Quality layer to display. The ability to switch to other layers for temperature, pressure, wind speed etc. allows correlations with weather conditions to be followed. Clicking the play icon then shows the influence of weather systems on the estimated NO2 levels, which are totally dominated by the weather effects.
Does slowing motorway traffic affect the weather? The reverse is certainly true.
March 9, 2024
Not altogether true – I often see idiots thrashing along in all weathers, certain it seems that the cars in front will not ever use the brakes nor take evasive action some some fool in front of them might cause.
March 10, 2024
That’s when the motorway grinds to a complete halt behind an accident.
March 9, 2024
If there was honesty in our Parliament, in our Conservative Government and someone had proved the need for the UK to play its part in the drive to reduce the Worlds CO2 emissions and achieve NetZero all in harmony with the whole World. Then we wouldnât simply be offshoring our industry and importing from the Worldâs Largest Polluters. – Hypocrisy!
In effect every singly policy that has emanated from this Conservative Government without exception has increased World emissions exponentially. They have single handedly increased World CO2 faster than would have happened if they had left well alone. Then to take it a step further they have left the UK without the means to cope with whatever the World chooses to thorough at us down the line. In practice as with all the other incompetent moves, they have not been thought through, the consequences not considered, their heads have been buried in the sand.
The big unanswered question is out of the all the Countries on this Planet causing so-called World pollution why is it that 189 of them covering more than 95% of the Worlds population, do they all carry on polluting, all continue to enjoy growth and wealth, and enjoy the additional trade this Conservative Government has thrown their way.
If this Conservative Government was âhonestâ had âgood intentionsâ to the UK, they would be applying levies and taxes to the 189 countries that donât work to their (UK Conservative Governments) punishment regime while they still get to trade with the UK. As they donât you can only rationalize it is the UK they seek to punish, it is the UK and its people they seek to destroy.
March 9, 2024
Think about what this Conservative Governments message is to those it was supposed to serve. If you as a UK Business or Citizen and donât do what we order we will punish you, ban you and generally inhibit your opportunity to exist and prosper. However, if you import the things, we have banned from manufacture in the UK that is OK. If you import goods and services from those Countries that are not inhibited or punish on the same terms of UK indigenous equivalent are, that is OK. If you import from the Worlds Greatest polluters thatâs OK. Then to take it to the next step this Conservative Government will take your taxpayer money and give it to the World biggest polluters rather than have things home grown and owned. This Conservative Government is actively encouraging greater World pollution under the guise that it is only a UK problem. Causing World pollution to increase destroys any dream of a NetZero future â pollution doesnât see boundaries.
That in part sums up the hypocrisy and insane nonsense that is coming from our UK Parliament and this Conservative Government. Is NetZero the aim or is the destruction of the UK? At the moment they are focused on destroying the UK. The World can with this Conservative Government encouragement and UK taxpayer money get to increase CO2 production, no ifs or buts â just Government policy.
March 9, 2024
It isn’t clear what the Government’s climate change message is. Judging by its actions it is that the world is about disappear in a fireball. Its message is not that some caution is required so an affordable reduction in CO2 admissions is advisable. It is that unless UK gets to net zero by 2050 the world will end. That is not responsible. It is lunatic. Or perhaps the Government is deluded enough to believe that the rest of the world, which is responsible for 98% of CO2 emmissions, will beinspired by UK’s brave lead? Well three small parts of the world are indeed taking note: Russia, China and Iran. And they will be very happy to see the UK destroy itself on the altar of Net Zero.
March 9, 2024
You know that Net Zero is wrong and based on a false premise. So why keep talking about how to mitigate the effects rather than tackling the cause?
Our seriously intellectually challenged PM and Chancellor will never face that simple truth and dump Net Zero.
How much damage will be done to the UK before someone faces reality?
As the budget showed, neither the PM nor the Chancellor had a clue. If with a war in Europe and the Middle East they don’t think they need to increase defence spending then what hope is there. Lets have a GE now and get rid of these incompetents.
March 9, 2024
https://open.substack.com/pub/sandrews/p/climate-change-perspective-is-not?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=b9r3f
More evidence from ice cores that give reliable temperature records. We are living in a completely cool period and recent warming is not unprecedented. The hockey stick used by climate zealots is false. There is no emergency and there is plenty of time to build sufficient nuclear for storage heating, making heat pumps and thick insulation unnecessary.
March 9, 2024
Dear Sir John,
At your 2023 party conference , Claire Coutinho said the government would announce its partner for small modular atomic reactors “early next year”. Is there any sign of this happening before the Easter recess?
March 9, 2024
Jam tomorrow
March 9, 2024
Off topic but related to peoples democracy –
The people have voted âNOâ to both of the Irish referendums âŠ.are you getting the message yet
March 9, 2024
Has anyone got the current figure for maximum generating capacity
without solar , wind or interconnetor imports ?
Would br good to know we have enough to keep going .
March 9, 2024
The home smart-meters will cut (redistribute) energy long before anyones realises that there isn’t enough energy for everyone
March 10, 2024
Gridwatch shows the data separated by type of source over various periods of time.
But it only roughly guestimates solar – and likely underestimates it as it doesn’t all go to the grid but can be used to charge EV (displacing petrol/diesel), heat water (displacing gas) or go to battery (displacing night time demand on grid).
March 12, 2024
Gridwatch uses the data from Sheffield University on solar – as does National Grid. It is compiled from real time monitoring of several thousand solar installations giving a good sample by system size, geographic location, age, and panel orientation. If you go to their site you will find that they quote the uncertainty bounds of their estimates, some of which derive from delays in the statistics on total solar installations. At the national level it is reasonably robust. If capacity is significantly expanded they will need to look at all larger solar farms which may suddenly be clouded over or see clouds clear, and also provide a granular regional set of data. Large solar farms caused difficulties for the Danish grid last year due to rapid output variations as cloud passed: they have to have generation that cuts back to handle surpluses, and fills in promptly when the clouds pass. This kind of reserve is costly: the following is from an article by P-F Bach, a specialist in commenting on the Nordic and European power scene.
The director of system operation at the Danish TSO, Energinet, Klaus Winther, has told Ellen
SynnĂžve Viseth from the Norwegian technical journal, Teknisk Ukeblad, that one large solar
park has forced Energinet to purchase additional secondary reserves (aFFR). Klaus Winther
characterizes the additional cost as unreasonable.
Probably all large solar farms will need batteries simply to reduce the rate at which their output cycles up and down by smoothing the output from second to second and minute to minute: that is an added cost.
March 12, 2024
I suggest the majority of domestic PC systems use deemed export which means their generation is reported every 3 months, not monitored or measured in real time So any “Live PV” data could only be guesstimated based at best on proxy monitoring in the same general area (ie the monitored panels are generating X and there are M times as many panels registered for FIT in the same general area …)
Even then not all generated power will go on the grid as I described above.
To your argument of reserve I don’t disagree. I have commented before that I think a solar or wind farm acting as a power generator should incorporate storage so it’s output is consistent and dispatchable. Perhaps the ESO should comment on this since they are the ones who must cope with the problem.
Better hope the convoys of LNG tankers from the US and Middle East don’t get interrupted.
March 13, 2024
You are correct that most older small individual systems are not live monitored, but in just the same way as political polling can produce estimates of voting patterns, so can sampling of solar systems: Sheffield University has a good understanding of the error margin, which they publish on their daily charts. New systems have smart meters that report actual rather than deemed export. Individual household demand is mostly not live monitored either yet, although there are a few tariffs with half hourly metering already which do report every half hour. So far as the grid is concerned, it only looks at demand on its high voltage network, so it simply considers generation embedded in distribution grids to be equivalent to a reduction in demand, and it only looks at aggregated demand at high voltage substations – but it is monitoring from second to second.
This is starting to change as the control room looks for ways to balance the system at the distribution level, such as curtailing embedded generation, and curtailing demand, and calling on local batteries to charge or discharge. Not quite as simple as it sounds, as small units have to be aggregated to have much effect, and the effect of those on grid supply balances will depend on the topology of the distribution grid and patterns of demand within it. These mechanisms tend to be costly to implement in part because of the complexity, and because smaller scale systems are often benefiting from large per kWh subsidies e.g. from Feed in Tariffs.
March 10, 2024
“If we are to transfer much home heating and car transport from fossil fuel to electricity, there needs to be a massive expansion of generating capacity, and of grid and cable capacity to get the power to every home.”
But this isn’t universally true.
In a range of circumstances domestic solar can significantly reduce grid demand for EV charging and hot water. The issue is heating but batteries could help there. Circumstances will vary so a more helpful approach would be to figure out a range of approaches rather than the heat-pump one-size fits all model.
With solar PV such a significant component of domestic independent energy and figuring so greatly in the “Powering Up Britain” strategy (70GW by 2035) what is HMG doing to get PV production facilities established in the UK?
March 12, 2024
Working people are not at home during the middle to the day to recharge their EVs. If domestic solar output is to help them, the grid must transmit the energy to their workplace parking. In fact, domestic solar surpluses will become a major problem for distribution grids in particular, as they already are in parts of Australia, where they are moving towards curtailing output, as the utility solar farms already have to do to avoid negative prices. Private battery systems are very expensive, and impose significant losses on generated electricity: a rich person’s toy, rather than a real solution. Of course, during the winter solar is basically useless in the UK, so you would need a backup water heating system and backup generation. If you have to provide 100% grid capacity for an average of 11% output, then that capacity costs 9 times as much as grid capacity for nuclear per delivered MWh. Consumers get to pay in the end.
Having examined the work done for the Climate Change Committee on the feasibility of their plans for high levels of wind and solar I have to say it is not credible: the criticisms of Prof Llewellyn Smith about inadequate calculation of storage need are just the tip of the iceberg.
March 12, 2024
Mark
Thakyou for the information posted.
March 12, 2024
You could have workplace PV just like Domestic PV. The problem is not engineering or even economics, it is that HMRC consider it a taxable benefit.
Private cars started out as a rich persons toy long before they became cheap enough for everyman (which then became a major source of pollution). Are you suggesting that process should never have happened?
Mobile phones were originally a rich man’s toy before they became cheap enough for everyman – though that depended on development of Lithium batteries … Are you suggesting that should never have happened?
Domestically, PV has continued to generate enough hot water and keep my EV fully charged to meet my needs through the winter. We aim to use as much of what we generate as we can. However, heating and Cooking require extra power from the grid throughout the year so my monthly draw from the grid does not vary that much except for heating like everyone else with or without PV.
I’m not clear what significant losses you are referring to associated with a domestic PV and battery setup, there wouldn’t be transmission losses for example.
It would be interesting to see National Grid’s views, data and plans on UK domestic solar surpluses as they are the ones that would need to manage it …
March 10, 2024
Dear John
The whole concept of Net Zero is ludicrous. The so called ‘science’ behind CO2 being dangerous is accurate as the lies we were and told about covid and the vaccines. CO2 has been historically at FAR higher concentrations and supported prehistoric life. The analysis linking manmade CO2 and global warming is full of errors and not credible. What you should be talking about is the interesting facts that as the World has warmed slightly and CO2 concentration has improved, there has been a 15% in greening improving ability to produce food so a very good thing, so contrary to the scare stories the opposite is happening. In addition, the recent (in last 50 years) rises in temperatures are not continuing with even the IPCC suggesting there may even been cooling. The only point of Net Zero is a totally futile self destruction of our economy to help China and India (who are happily carry on). What we should be tackling and genuinely effects people is pollution rather than a beneficial inert gas.
March 11, 2024
Who does the Fed send the bill to?
Reply It just reports losses