The level of factual ammunition you provide to help present a detailed factual argument to many of the totally ignorant netzero zealots I come across is invaluable to me. So thank you.
Build of more renewables is simply laughable. For starters we are already behind schedule on the AR3 offshore projects, half the AR4 projects have been pulled, none were committed to in AR5 and the AR6 ones that aren't recycled from previous pots are slated for 28/29. Even if they throw a stash of support for AR7 those projects wont realise enough to capacity to close 2030 target. NESO intimate the supply chain challenges but don't go into reality of getting access to heavy lift vessels or manufacturing of turbines and HV kit, none of which would bring UK green jobs either. Oh and i note in the NESO report they quote a LF below the DENZ assumptions further undermining the financial numbers they use.
What this should engender is a reality check about what the art of the possible is. Of course i would prefer them to stop but they aren't and we can't change that but at least coming up with a realistic plan that has no increase in prices at its centre and puts in place a strategy to ensure that there are real UK green jobs at least makes its palatable. This of course is wishful thinking as at is heart here is an individual who having failed to become PM now wants to gain an accolade from saving the planet at whatever cost.
I would love to loudly chortle, guffaw, and belly laugh at this entire farce.
Now, I then start to think that such enjoyment on my part should only cover Millibrain, Stark, and the numerous other members of the U.K. Climate Cabal.
I’m afraid I might run up against the app character limit if I named everyone responsible for this ridiculous, irresponsible and impossible…well, without bankrupting the U.K., industrializing its formerly scenic lands, and the seas within a hundred miles surrounding the once-beautiful isles of Great Britain.
Which will surely decimate the seabird population: but at least your fish will surely learn to hold their mouths agape near each OSW turbine awaiting fresh-fileted gannet, gull and tern. Perhaps these increased feedings will help resupply the fish remaining after the illegal trawlers take their booty. A silvery-scaled cloud lining?
Oh, I almost forgot the deleterious effects on your crab, lobster and shrimp from EMF emitted from the thousands of miles of underwater cables needed to connect thousands of OSW turbines to the mainland.
Where was I before moving afield? Oh, yes…laughing at the powerful Climatatti who brought this NetZero travesty to the wonderful people of the U.K.
My first inclination would be to blame everyday citizens for not removing government representatives who keep all this going. All while I am confident there are plenty who have bought the NetZero program hook, lie (not a typo) and sinker.
At least from across the pond, it appears that no matter who is in 10 Downing, hordes of single army-age males stream in illegally, along with families with multiple child brides popping out babies like a Pez dispenser, and all living on the government payroll, not working and put up in fancy hotels and housing.
These folk, many apparently with 7th-century thinking AND comportment, invading your island with little pushback such that if anyone publicly mentioning what is seen with their own eyes has a good chance of ending up in prison…well, there seems to be a good chance of all this exploding, and that’s not even including the good chance of Islamists using actual explosives to remind people who’s in charge.
I have gone off on an unintentional excursion from my original thoughts. I wish David well for his exceptional article!
Thank you for another tour-de-force David! It looks as though in crowing, I am Blind Ed has failed to spot that Slye has handed him a bacon butty.
My hope is this: as it seems farmers are unlikely to die in the next few years in sufficient numbers to raise enough from inheritance tax, the plan will meet the Treasury shredder, and Miliband will resign.
A powerful point was made in the latest article on the Doomberg substack: in bringing an industrial product to market, it is normal to build and test prototypes and seek to understand market acceptance, before embarking on large-scale production. Yet there is no instance of even a small scale pilot project to operate a grid on predominantly weather-dependent sources.
So, so true. One might think that a prerequisite for a plan costing trillions of whatever extant denomination exists might seek to trial such a system, perhaps starting with a small utility.
Alas, there has still never been a successful demonstration of grid-scale non-dispatchable generation.
Even on an island of 10,000 people with copious solar panels, wind turbines and pumped hydro…the system still needs regular running of a hydrocarbon-fueled generator to supply 24/7 power.
But whoever brings up these facts, one will surely be labeled a “Denier.”
As if whether AGW is a problem has any connection to our ability to provide all needed power without thermal generation.
I try to always ask “renewable” advocates what are the specifics of the plans they endorse or propose to provide for all needed power. One would think those seeking such a change would have thought greatly about this.
But one would be wrong. It’s always 🦗🦗🦗and usually name-calling after such a query.
Thank you for that - it seems you report from an actual test bed, which from the population I'm guessing is the Isle of Skye.
To the renewable fanatics yet again I quote from the framed comment on my highly-esteemed former boss' office wall: "Nothing is impossible for those who don't have to do it".
And from the late and in my view great David Mackay: "I'm not trying to be pro-nuclear. I'm just pro-arithmetic".
Perhaps Mr Miliband believes when he pumps carbon dioxide down into big holes in the North Sea money will magically rise out of them rather than sink with life?
Fintan's lie or Fintan's sly. It really doesn't matter which. Mad Ed's Wet Zero dream is going down in flames - but it remains to be seen how much of the UK economy and our beautiful countryside it takes with it.
David, thank you for another great unveiling of energy supply reality. This is another troubling reminder that politicians can (and do) claim almost any result by making impossible assumptions, and by glossing over all sensible cost-benefit analyses. Miliband will of course fail badly but the cost to UK Ltd of his mad zealotry will be far, far worse than previous epic cost overruns such as HS2.
The UK’s current CO2 emissions are about 318m tonnes per year. So with a carbon cost of £147 per tonne it would cost £46bn annually to offset the whole of the UK’s emissions. Yet it’s going to cost us that annually to get the electricity grid alone to net zero. Maybe the new office for value for money will call foul on this one.
The Guardian article is laughable and yet again shows the arrogance and stupidity of Miliband’s ideological dream.
No government should be prepared to accept energy rationing, it’s not a viable or sane solution and I do know that there is a resistance mobilizing in Lincolnshire and east coast councils against the proposed pylons and battery farm’s which contradicts Red Ed’ “bringing communities with us” statement in that Guardian article. Thanks for your detailed article!
I haven’t looked at the comments under a Guardian climate change article for about 10 years (I only looked then to try to understand what made them tick) but it seems to me that there is much more sanity being expressed now than then. Most of the top comments are anti Miliband’s fantasies while the pro comments are mostly from the type of bedwetters who completely ruled the roost 10 years ago.
That’s interesting as I didn’t dare read the comments under that article. It took me long enough to get into the headspace to read The Guardian! But I wanted to know how Miliband was going to spin it to his own crowd.
Sounds like y'all are f*ck[d over there. But don't worry, large swaths of America and Europe are doubling down on similar stupidity. So we'll all be equally happy in our misery.
What is the “system cost” of £133/MWhr (FF&R) of Table 3 on P49 of the NESO Clean Power 2030 report?
Is this NESO’s predicted price of electricity at 2030 and if not how does this affect it and by how much?
The level of factual ammunition you provide to help present a detailed factual argument to many of the totally ignorant netzero zealots I come across is invaluable to me. So thank you.
Thank you for analysing this craziness in such detail, David. You are performing an essential public service.
Let’s just call it ‘Net Stupid’ from now on…
Build of more renewables is simply laughable. For starters we are already behind schedule on the AR3 offshore projects, half the AR4 projects have been pulled, none were committed to in AR5 and the AR6 ones that aren't recycled from previous pots are slated for 28/29. Even if they throw a stash of support for AR7 those projects wont realise enough to capacity to close 2030 target. NESO intimate the supply chain challenges but don't go into reality of getting access to heavy lift vessels or manufacturing of turbines and HV kit, none of which would bring UK green jobs either. Oh and i note in the NESO report they quote a LF below the DENZ assumptions further undermining the financial numbers they use.
What this should engender is a reality check about what the art of the possible is. Of course i would prefer them to stop but they aren't and we can't change that but at least coming up with a realistic plan that has no increase in prices at its centre and puts in place a strategy to ensure that there are real UK green jobs at least makes its palatable. This of course is wishful thinking as at is heart here is an individual who having failed to become PM now wants to gain an accolade from saving the planet at whatever cost.
Nutters...
I would love to loudly chortle, guffaw, and belly laugh at this entire farce.
Now, I then start to think that such enjoyment on my part should only cover Millibrain, Stark, and the numerous other members of the U.K. Climate Cabal.
I’m afraid I might run up against the app character limit if I named everyone responsible for this ridiculous, irresponsible and impossible…well, without bankrupting the U.K., industrializing its formerly scenic lands, and the seas within a hundred miles surrounding the once-beautiful isles of Great Britain.
Which will surely decimate the seabird population: but at least your fish will surely learn to hold their mouths agape near each OSW turbine awaiting fresh-fileted gannet, gull and tern. Perhaps these increased feedings will help resupply the fish remaining after the illegal trawlers take their booty. A silvery-scaled cloud lining?
Oh, I almost forgot the deleterious effects on your crab, lobster and shrimp from EMF emitted from the thousands of miles of underwater cables needed to connect thousands of OSW turbines to the mainland.
Where was I before moving afield? Oh, yes…laughing at the powerful Climatatti who brought this NetZero travesty to the wonderful people of the U.K.
My first inclination would be to blame everyday citizens for not removing government representatives who keep all this going. All while I am confident there are plenty who have bought the NetZero program hook, lie (not a typo) and sinker.
At least from across the pond, it appears that no matter who is in 10 Downing, hordes of single army-age males stream in illegally, along with families with multiple child brides popping out babies like a Pez dispenser, and all living on the government payroll, not working and put up in fancy hotels and housing.
These folk, many apparently with 7th-century thinking AND comportment, invading your island with little pushback such that if anyone publicly mentioning what is seen with their own eyes has a good chance of ending up in prison…well, there seems to be a good chance of all this exploding, and that’s not even including the good chance of Islamists using actual explosives to remind people who’s in charge.
I have gone off on an unintentional excursion from my original thoughts. I wish David well for his exceptional article!
Thank you for another tour-de-force David! It looks as though in crowing, I am Blind Ed has failed to spot that Slye has handed him a bacon butty.
My hope is this: as it seems farmers are unlikely to die in the next few years in sufficient numbers to raise enough from inheritance tax, the plan will meet the Treasury shredder, and Miliband will resign.
A powerful point was made in the latest article on the Doomberg substack: in bringing an industrial product to market, it is normal to build and test prototypes and seek to understand market acceptance, before embarking on large-scale production. Yet there is no instance of even a small scale pilot project to operate a grid on predominantly weather-dependent sources.
They don't care. They're not spending their own money.
Perhaps we can ask Caroline Lucas to volunteer Brighton to be the test bed
So, so true. One might think that a prerequisite for a plan costing trillions of whatever extant denomination exists might seek to trial such a system, perhaps starting with a small utility.
Alas, there has still never been a successful demonstration of grid-scale non-dispatchable generation.
Even on an island of 10,000 people with copious solar panels, wind turbines and pumped hydro…the system still needs regular running of a hydrocarbon-fueled generator to supply 24/7 power.
But whoever brings up these facts, one will surely be labeled a “Denier.”
As if whether AGW is a problem has any connection to our ability to provide all needed power without thermal generation.
I try to always ask “renewable” advocates what are the specifics of the plans they endorse or propose to provide for all needed power. One would think those seeking such a change would have thought greatly about this.
But one would be wrong. It’s always 🦗🦗🦗and usually name-calling after such a query.
Thank you for that - it seems you report from an actual test bed, which from the population I'm guessing is the Isle of Skye.
To the renewable fanatics yet again I quote from the framed comment on my highly-esteemed former boss' office wall: "Nothing is impossible for those who don't have to do it".
And from the late and in my view great David Mackay: "I'm not trying to be pro-nuclear. I'm just pro-arithmetic".
PS I've just read your latest comment, which rules out Skye.
That is an excellent point.
Perhaps Mr Miliband believes when he pumps carbon dioxide down into big holes in the North Sea money will magically rise out of them rather than sink with life?
The late great Christopher Booker was railing about the £250bn wind power industry scam of the age back in 2011: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361316/250bn-wind-power-industry-greatest-scam-age.html.
Nearly 15 years on, our eco-nutter politicians are still getting nowhere.
Fintan's lie or Fintan's sly. It really doesn't matter which. Mad Ed's Wet Zero dream is going down in flames - but it remains to be seen how much of the UK economy and our beautiful countryside it takes with it.
David, thank you for another great unveiling of energy supply reality. This is another troubling reminder that politicians can (and do) claim almost any result by making impossible assumptions, and by glossing over all sensible cost-benefit analyses. Miliband will of course fail badly but the cost to UK Ltd of his mad zealotry will be far, far worse than previous epic cost overruns such as HS2.
The UK’s current CO2 emissions are about 318m tonnes per year. So with a carbon cost of £147 per tonne it would cost £46bn annually to offset the whole of the UK’s emissions. Yet it’s going to cost us that annually to get the electricity grid alone to net zero. Maybe the new office for value for money will call foul on this one.
The Guardian article is laughable and yet again shows the arrogance and stupidity of Miliband’s ideological dream.
No government should be prepared to accept energy rationing, it’s not a viable or sane solution and I do know that there is a resistance mobilizing in Lincolnshire and east coast councils against the proposed pylons and battery farm’s which contradicts Red Ed’ “bringing communities with us” statement in that Guardian article. Thanks for your detailed article!
I haven’t looked at the comments under a Guardian climate change article for about 10 years (I only looked then to try to understand what made them tick) but it seems to me that there is much more sanity being expressed now than then. Most of the top comments are anti Miliband’s fantasies while the pro comments are mostly from the type of bedwetters who completely ruled the roost 10 years ago.
That’s interesting as I didn’t dare read the comments under that article. It took me long enough to get into the headspace to read The Guardian! But I wanted to know how Miliband was going to spin it to his own crowd.
To read the Guardian article you would think this was a done deal!
Sounds like y'all are f*ck[d over there. But don't worry, large swaths of America and Europe are doubling down on similar stupidity. So we'll all be equally happy in our misery.