OFGEM

[danumdon]

It amused me to hear Johnson proclaim, Labour failed to invest in nuclear!

... How long have the Tories been in power? And how expensive is nuclear energy?

I can tell you now this shining fleet of new nuclear power stations he's promising is about as likely to arrive as a new airport in the Thames or a road bridge to Northern Ireland.

For all of his failings Johnson does have some merit in this statement, Labour did neglect to invest in new nuclear power, if it had done so we would now have new functioning power stations coming on line, the lead in time for a typical nuclear power station can be anything between 5 to 10 years or more, this additional boost to the energy baseline would of given us valuable breathing space now in an energy crisis. The fact you say its expensive fails to stand up when you factor in how much we are paying for our energy now and also any further energy inflation which could become horrendous if the market conditions continue to degrade.

The issue now is that the tories also failed to invest in nuclear, any semblance of an integrated energy policy is nowhere to be seen, action, even now will still not see us profit from it for another decade or so. All this lost time will and has come back to haunt us now, in future it will become even worse

Id of liked to have seen some movement from the government to sponsor the development of the RR type mini reactors, what they have agreed to do now is very little very late. Our kids and grand-kids will pay dearly for this lack of joined up thinking by governments of either nomination.

[SydneyRover]

Nuclear energy, any type of energy cannot compete against renewables,

especially solar panels

''Solar costs have fallen 82% since 2010
The levelized cost of energy generated by large scale solar plants is around $0.068/kWh, compared to $0.378 ten years ago and the price fell 13.1% between 2018 and last year alone, according to figures released by the International Renewable Energy Agency''

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/03/solar-costs-have-fallen-82-since-2010/#:~:text=The%20levelized%20cost%20of%20energy,the%20International%20Renewable%20Energy%20Agency.

[River Don]

It amused me to hear Johnson proclaim, Labour failed to invest in nuclear!

... How long have the Tories been in power? And how expensive is nuclear energy?

I can tell you now this shining fleet of new nuclear power stations he's promising is about as likely to arrive as a new airport in the Thames or a road bridge to Northern Ireland.

For all of his failings Johnson does have some merit in this statement, Labour did neglect to invest in new nuclear power, if it had done so we would now have new functioning power stations coming on line, the lead in time for a typical nuclear power station can be anything between 5 to 10 years or more, this additional boost to the energy baseline would of given us valuable breathing space now in an energy crisis. The fact you say its expensive fails to stand up when you factor in how much we are paying for our energy now and also any further energy inflation which could become horrendous if the market conditions continue to degrade.

The issue now is that the tories also failed to invest in nuclear, any semblance of an integrated energy policy is nowhere to be seen, action, even now will still not see us profit from it for another decade or so. All this lost time will and has come back to haunt us now, in future it will become even worse

Id of liked to have seen some movement from the government to sponsor the development of the RR type mini reactors, what they have agreed to do now is very little very late. Our kids and grand-kids will pay dearly for this lack of joined up thinking by governments of either nomination.

Labour did fail to invest in nuclear but after a decade and more so have the Tories. So it is a bit rich of Johnson to call Labour out on this.

Particularly when the one nuclear project they have got off the ground after promising 8, is turning out to be so expensive.

[Filo]

Is that Johnson playing at being Captain Hindsight?

[danumdon]

Nuclear energy, any type of energy cannot compete against renewables,

especially solar panels

''Solar costs have fallen 82% since 2010
The levelized cost of energy generated by large scale solar plants is around $0.068/kWh, compared to $0.378 ten years ago and the price fell 13.1% between 2018 and last year alone, according to figures released by the International Renewable Energy Agency''

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/03/solar-costs-have-fallen-82-since-2010/#:~:text=The%20levelized%20cost%20of%20energy,the%20International%20Renewable%20Energy%20Agency.

More nonsense, when in your utopian world the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow, you've run out of battery storage because you've raped the world of all it precious trace elements and your beloved pressure groups have rendered gas, biomass and coal redundant what are you going to do.

Ill stick to my nuclear reactors whilst you ask your aboriginal friends how to dig for grubs and bugs.

[SydneyRover]

From someone that doesn't know where it rains, I'll take your criticism with a pinch of salt DD

PS I hope you have the fully costed the disposal for your radioactive waste in your junior high math.

[danumdon]

From someone that doesn't know where it rains, I'll take your criticism with a pinch of salt DD

PS I hope you have the fully costed the disposal for your radioactive waste in your junior high math.

Would that be the same costings you have allowed for the renewal of the generating panels and turbines over the same life cycle of a nuclear reactor, something like 4 to 1 I'd say at a conservative estimate.

Or are you also working off your primary school math?

[SydneyRover]

Ah, there you are I though you'd like to expand on the mining and refining of uranium but you may have to take off your shoes and socks.

Any rime you want to publish the two sets of costs and factor in the time in take to build a nuclear power station I'll be ready to receive your argument

Nuclear against solar, off you go little fella

[danumdon]

From someone that doesn't know where it rains, I'll take your criticism with a pinch of salt DD

PS I hope you have the fully costed the disposal for your radioactive waste in your junior high math.

My junior high math also tells me that the new reactors that will come online will be able to recycle the majority of the spent fuel.Did you factor that into your calculation?

[SydneyRover]

The challenge is posted above, add in what you wish please ensure it's all there.

[SydneyRover]

Here you go, have a read while I make a cuppa

''Solar Power VS Nuclear Power -Which is better?''

https://gienergy.com.au/solar-power-vs-nuclear-power-which-is-better/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Nuclear%20Power%20is%20nearly,a%20cost%20per%20KW%20basis.

[danumdon]

The challenge is posted above, add in what you wish please ensure it's all there.

No government in the world that has any semblance of competence would ever plan an integrated energy policy that relied on renewables as its primary baseline energy source. Not in our lifetime.

For somebody that professors to know the price of everything but the cost of nothing you don't do answers do you?

[SydneyRover]

Is this gunner DD I wuz genner go to Australia but ........... but ...........

Keep your childish insults and stick to the costsings

[danumdon]

Is this gunner DD I wuz genner go to Australia but ........... but ...........

Keep your childish insults and stick to the costsings

Take the kid out of Donny but you can't take Donny out of the kid.

Poor.

[SydneyRover]

Here you go, have a read while I make a cuppa

''Solar Power VS Nuclear Power -Which is better?''

https://gienergy.com.au/solar-power-vs-nuclear-power-which-is-better/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Nuclear%20Power%20is%20nearly,a%20cost%20per%20KW%20basis.

when you've read it let me know where you would put your money

[danumdon]

Here you go, have a read while I make a cuppa

''Solar Power VS Nuclear Power -Which is better?''

https://gienergy.com.au/solar-power-vs-nuclear-power-which-is-better/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Nuclear%20Power%20is%20nearly,a%20cost%20per%20KW%20basis.

when you've read it let me know where you would put your money

The text is nearly as blinkered as you, in all its conclusions its comparing apples with pears, it hasn't told me, and nether have you , what you are going to use as your primary base load when this system is not able to.More importantly how much is the backup system going to coast to be on standby for this system that is inefficient for a good part of a day and will become even more inefficient as the panels start to decay?

[SydneyRover]

Here you go, have a read while I make a cuppa

''Solar Power VS Nuclear Power -Which is better?''

https://gienergy.com.au/solar-power-vs-nuclear-power-which-is-better/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Nuclear%20Power%20is%20nearly,a%20cost%20per%20KW%20basis.

when you've read it let me know where you would put your money

The text is nearly as blinkered as you, in all its conclusions its comparing apples with pears, it hasn't told me, and nether have you , what you are going to use as your primary base load when this system is not able to.More importantly how much is the backup system going to coast to be on standby for this system that is inefficient for a good part of a day and will become even more inefficient as the panels start to decay?

Point by point, list your argument and explain why. If you want to back up what you said earlier I want to your argument and some supporting data, do you think you're the first person to debate this?

[danumdon]

Here you go, have a read while I make a cuppa

''Solar Power VS Nuclear Power -Which is better?''

https://gienergy.com.au/solar-power-vs-nuclear-power-which-is-better/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20Nuclear%20Power%20is%20nearly,a%20cost%20per%20KW%20basis.

when you've read it let me know where you would put your money

The text is nearly as blinkered as you, in all its conclusions its comparing apples with pears, it hasn't told me, and nether have you , what you are going to use as your primary base load when this system is not able to.More importantly how much is the backup system going to coast to be on standby for this system that is inefficient for a good part of a day and will become even more inefficient as the panels start to decay?

Point by point, list your argument and explain why. If you want to back up what you said earlier I want to your argument and some supporting data, do you think you're the first person to debate this?

So you wish me to back up and explain my points for you to reply to me but you don't offer me the courtesy to answer any of the points i have made be it because you don't want to or it doesn't suit your narrative?

Do one fella.

[SydneyRover]

Nuclear energy, any type of energy cannot compete against renewables,

especially solar panels

''Solar costs have fallen 82% since 2010
The levelized cost of energy generated by large scale solar plants is around $0.068/kWh, compared to $0.378 ten years ago and the price fell 13.1% between 2018 and last year alone, according to figures released by the International Renewable Energy Agency''

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/03/solar-costs-have-fallen-82-since-2010/#:~:text=The%20levelized%20cost%20of%20energy,the%20International%20Renewable%20Energy%20Agency.

More nonsense, when in your utopian world the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow, you've run out of battery storage because you've raped the world of all it precious trace elements and your beloved pressure groups have rendered gas, biomass and coal redundant what are you going to do.

Ill stick to my nuclear reactors whilst you ask your aboriginal friends how to dig for grubs and bugs.

All I want you to do is explain and prove your argument with supporting data, nothing more.

[albie]

The windfall tax proposal does not commit to HOW that money would be spent.
This is crucial, because it is not just low income families in the firing line.

Take manufacturers for whom energy is a high proportion of business costs.
If prices continue to rise, then they will be at a serious disadvantage to producers in a country like France, where a 4% price cap is in place.

This mistake has a multiplier effect within the wider economy. Other cost of living increases come on the back of this competitive disadvantage, so the unaffordability gap is widened.

The idea that prices will be allowed to increase without a ceiling limit comparable to European neighbours is simply economically illiterate. Neither the Tories nor Labour have shown any understanding of this, and Ofgem have not taken this into account.

Syd/DD,

The issue of future energy sources is likely to follow the declining cost curve profile of the renewables.
This is not really a matter of opinion any more, as we have good data to inform the debate.

Other options, such as nuclear, are only able to secure project finance from state agencies. Very difficult to see private investment choosing nuclear without a guarantee of return on investment, which means much higher prices to consumers per unit.

Labour are supporting Sizewell C, which is very expensive and will displace other options (like heat pumps and insulation) as a result.

Bringing in a one off windfall tax, while leaving the National Grid in the private sector is ignorant nonsense.
There is little understanding of the distinction between infrastructure provision and energy supply services.

Best general summary with graphics is here, for those who like more detail;
https://twitter.com/DrSimEvans/status/1493906926907924481

[BillyStubbsTears]

R4 last night. A Tory minister was being quizzed on why they won't back a Windfall Tax.

He said that of course Labour support a the tax because they always want to take away money from people and companies that have worked hard to make it.

Which is an odd argument if you think about it. BP isn't making obscene profits this year because they have worked really, really hard. It is because there is a global shortfall of their product because of a war. So, without doing anything, the price that they can charge to consumers has gone through the roof.

The logic is so, so simple. But once again, as so many times before, we get a Tory assuming that the population is so thick, they won't notice when he ignores that and talks utter b*llocks to make a party political point.

[SydneyRover]

I think solar has been improving in efficiency at an average of around at 0.5% per year for quite a while with the price drop massive, totally agree with the finance bit for nuclear Albie.

[SydneyRover]

I listened to johnson the dispatch box from yesterday and that's all he had, labour want to increase tax, wash rinse repeat.

[SydneyRover]

And this for nuclear waste

''The UK government is working with technical specialists, local communities and regulators to find a safe disposal route for HLW. The preferred option for managing HLW is ‘geological disposal’. This involves placing packaged radioactive waste in an engineered, underground facility or ‘repository’. The geology (rock structure) provides a barrier against the escape of radioactivity. There is no intention to retrieve the waste once the facility is closed. Radioactive Waste Management Limited (a subsidiary of the NDA) is responsible for implementing the long-term solution for managing Higher Activity Wastes in England and Wales. The Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and the Scottish Government are responsible for developing policies for managing these wastes safely''

It has not yet been worked out!!!

https://ukinventory.nda.gov.uk/about-radioactive-waste/how-do-we-manage-radioactive-waste/#:~:text=Most%20Low%20Level%20Waste%20(LLW,concrete%20lined%2C%20highly%20engineered%20vaults.

I have my suspicions that the libs in Oz have manufactured a fight with china so they can go with the nuclear option subs, big mining here want and the right want to exploit the uranium mining and  expand the industry for waste too. I'm betting some time in the future (atm we only have a rough sketch of a sub to wave at china) they will want to process the waste from the subs here.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Which again shows you the DoubleSpeak world we now inhabit.

Claim: The Tories are the party of low taxation

Fact: Our national tax bill as a % of GDP is higher than it ever was under Wilson, Callaghan, Blair or Brown.

[SydneyRover]

Which again shows you the DoubleSpeak world we now inhabit.

Claim: The Tories are the party of low taxation

Fact: Our national tax bill as a % of GDP is higher than it ever was under Wilson, Callaghan, Blair or Brown.

Yep, Starmer couldn't go down the rabbit hole and say all that because that's what johnson would have wanted, to stop chewing out over the cost of living.

[danumdon]

The windfall tax proposal does not commit to HOW that money would be spent.
This is crucial, because it is not just low income families in the firing line.

Take manufacturers for whom energy is a high proportion of business costs.
If prices continue to rise, then they will be at a serious disadvantage to producers in a country like France, where a 4% price cap is in place.

This mistake has a multiplier effect within the wider economy. Other cost of living increases come on the back of this competitive disadvantage, so the unaffordability gap is widened.

The idea that prices will be allowed to increase without a ceiling limit comparable to European neighbours is simply economically illiterate. Neither the Tories nor Labour have shown any understanding of this, and Ofgem have not taken this into account.

Syd/DD,

The issue of future energy sources is likely to follow the declining cost curve profile of the renewables.
This is not really a matter of opinion any more, as we have good data to inform the debate.

Other options, such as nuclear, are only able to secure project finance from state agencies. Very difficult to see private investment choosing nuclear without a guarantee of return on investment, which means much higher prices to consumers per unit.

Labour are supporting Sizewell C, which is very expensive and will displace other options (like heat pumps and insulation) as a result.

Bringing in a one off windfall tax, while leaving the National Grid in the private sector is ignorant nonsense.
There is little understanding of the distinction between infrastructure provision and energy supply services.

Best general summary with graphics is here, for those who like more detail;
https://twitter.com/DrSimEvans/status/1493906926907924481

I agree with your point that the way this government is hoping to lighten the load is going to be ineffective at best.Some targeted help is not out of the question here, it needs to be thought through and implemented, it looks like a sizable percentage could suffer quite badly this next winter.

With regards to the nuclear issue, i appreciate that the way is now being created for renewables to take on the bulk of our future energy requirements and that zero emission alternatives will be required in the future.

The point i was trying to make was that renewables will require a zero emission backup until such a time exists that we don't need it, this cannot be any carbon based alternative so at this time it can only be nuclear power?

[SydneyRover]

dd-

''The point i was trying to make was that renewables will require a zero emission backup until such a time exists that we don't need it, this cannot be any carbon based alternative so at this time it can only be nuclear power?''

well maybe you should have said that instead of this and stop being a complete dick.

''More nonsense, when in your utopian world the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow, you've run out of battery storage because you've raped the world of all it precious trace elements and your beloved pressure groups have rendered gas, biomass and coal redundant what are you going to do.

Ill stick to my nuclear reactors whilst you ask your aboriginal friends how to dig for grubs and bugs.

[danumdon]

dd-

''The point i was trying to make was that renewables will require a zero emission backup until such a time exists that we don't need it, this cannot be any carbon based alternative so at this time it can only be nuclear power?''

well maybe you should have said that instead of this and stop being a complete dick.

''More nonsense, when in your utopian world the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow, you've run out of battery storage because you've raped the world of all it precious trace elements and your beloved pressure groups have rendered gas, biomass and coal redundant what are you going to do.

Ill stick to my nuclear reactors whilst you ask your aboriginal friends how to dig for grubs and bugs.

Cry me a river,

Now do one, again.

[BillyStubbsTears]

What is it about Alliterative Argumentative Arses in here?