Forum menu
Anyone else see the parallels here between it wasn't Corbyn's fault it was the nasty right wing press and voters who sabotaged him and the increasingly strident claims of that the Lefty cabal is being shut down by those rotten centrists.
And to keep this vaguely relevant I think it's more a case that there's many more of us centrists who now we actually have a government worthy of it's name, feel more emboldened to take issue with the repeated negativity and demonstrably impractical views of a small number of very vocal posters. Posters now accusing others of the very behaviour they have been guilty of for years, it's all rather hypocritical, and like the Tories, you reap the rewards of toxic environment you have created, the lack of tolerance, name calling and insinuation that others are less worthy human beings because of their political views is now coming back to bite you with a vengeance.
As for power policy (which is much more significant moving forward compared to the 2 child cap) I too am very glad onshore wind is back, and would happily see Scout Moor doubled in size (I can see from the other direction), it's post industrial land anyway. I also think the grid is creaking and I would like to see solar generation at point of use massively increased so the grid will ultimately be less strained in future. Solar is already a mature and practical solution at domestic and commercial level and unlike wind can be installed easily and effectively on domestic properties. As EV cars become more common the need to get increased power out to all the suburbs is going to be a real challenge.
Thanks @igm very interesting
I notice there is no mention of tidal power. It's always intrigued me that there is so much predictable power sloshing up and down our shores but we can't find a way to harness it.
Could it be something for the future or is it just too difficult?
Sorry to derail the thread.
As EV cars become more common the need to get increased power out to all the suburbs is going to be a real challenge.
I liked that post for the last paragraph.
Can we have a politics forum please?
Dozens of pages pass and it's the same posters. I'm on holiday at present and just can't see how some folk can batter in a dozen pages of circular arguments (well not argument more like shouting as no minds are being changed or outlooks altered) every day.
I suppose this is a political thread flounce as they are pointless.
It’s currently operated by a number of localised monopolies. They are a nightmare to deal with and have to generate a profit for shareholders.
I think if the country does go for distributed power and storage then there is an argument for local companies eg for a new town spinning up a bunch of solar + wind + storage facilities to allow mostly independent functioning but with a connection to the broader grid.
but we can’t find a way to harness it.
My perhaps entirely incorrect understanding is that the sea bed being a notoriously difficult environment for machinery of any sort makes taking energy from it very much harder than almost all the alternatives.
The problem with those threads having the same few posters making the exact same points over and over again, so you can’t quickly scan and see any geniuley new content…?
Indeed. Like the rest of the forum there's genuinely interesting novel information on here, it's just ruined by the big hitters drowning it out with their noise.
As EV cars become more common the need to get increased power out to all the suburbs is going to be a real challenge.
If not already in existence (IANAE), to get planning permission for any new building development (there'll always be a justified exception) surely there could be a requirement to have solar installed on every building? That could help reduce grid demand.
makes taking energy from it very much harder than almost all the alternatives.
It seems to be a smaller market and so has had far less investment and hence progress to date.
Depending on the type, especially the barrage types, there are also significant environmental concerns as well.
Not sure its helped that a couple of the recent schemes at least in the UK seem more dodgy get rich schemes rather than a proper plan.
At one point, developments needed a minimum % of roofs with solar installed IIRC... the problem is/was that the local grids couldn't feed back enough unused electricity during the day. If you mandated solar AND storage, that could be mitigated though... and we have that technology at volume now.
surely there could be a requirement to have solar installed on every building?
The French passed a law requiring any carpark with 80 spaces to have a solar canopy installed which seems a good take on the subject.
Having the gathering is only half of it though. Thats where local storage options come in as well. After all a lot of the cars will be getting charged overnight.
My perhaps entirely incorrect understanding is that the sea bed being a notoriously difficult environment for machinery of any sort makes taking energy from it very much harder than almost all the alternatives.
IANAE but this is what I'd heard too. Also that they get blocked up and broken by debris.
My perhaps entirely incorrect understanding is that the sea bed being a notoriously difficult environment for machinery of any sort makes taking energy from it very much harder than almost all the alternatives
That makes lots of sense, but if it could work for any nation it must be us. If there is one thing we have which is genuinely world leading it's our tides.
This is the 'current' tide map
I notice there is no mention of tidal power.
Not against it in principle, but…
Tidal lagoons are difficult from an environmental point of view changing of changing the ecology in the lagoons.
Tidal flow (or wave power, or similar) keep getting tested but it doesn’t seem that there’s anything reliable in the long term just yet that’s available to be deployed at scale.
Someone will sort those in due course.
If not already in existence (IANAE), to get planning permission for any new building development (there’ll always be a justified exception) surely there could be a requirement to have solar installed on every building? That could help reduce grid demand.
That’s the energy / power confusion.
Domestic solar will assist with annual energy provision, but not with peak power demand. It’s probably better in reducing grid capacity issues than merchant solar, but not the peak power the grid needs to meet.
The local grid is pretty much stronger enough for domestic EV charging already (there are some exceptions).
Fast charging is more problematic.
Thats where local storage options come in as well.
How difficult are those storage options technically? (Planning, nimbyism) aside).
I've often, naively, wondered why we need to build solar farms covering entire fields, whilst building housing estates that are covering other entire fields. 2 birds with one stone. Naivety on my part. I'm not a technically minded person so this stuff both intrigues and baffles me.
Also, apologies, realise this isn't the place as it's about Government, however, again, naively, I'd have thought this would be easier to put into place,whilst putting fewer folks noses out of joint.
I did not claim that anyone to the right of Marx is a Tory-lite, what a daft and ridiculous allegation. How can you have a grown up discussion when you have to respond to nonsense like that?
Well no, you didn't. I was taking the proverbial out of this comment of yours
You do realise where the term centrist comes from don’t you? If you are in the centre you are by definition closer to the Tories. So you might not like the term Tory-lite
You just said that anyone who you consider "centrist" was in fact "Tory-lite". Despite the fact that being in the centre would make them the same distance to whatever you feel the opposite of Tory is, presumably "Marxist Lite as well.
I was highlighting the daftness of your point of view, and by extension the whole binary "left is good, not left bad" argument that puts so many people off getting involved in these threads.
And it seems to have needled you.
The problem with those threads having the same few posters making the exact same points over and over again
True. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen binners call people six-formers or have a rant about Jeremy Corbyn (the latest one was earlier today), not to mention the repeated use of the same monty python pictures which don't add anything to the debate. It would all be very tedious and annoying if this place meant anything at all. But it doesn't really does it? It's just a place where bored office workers come to avoid doing work so people can talk about what the hell they like as far as I'm concerned.
I’ve often, naively, wondered why we need to build solar farms covering entire fields, whilst building housing estates that are covering other entire fields.
Lots of new builds have solar panels - is it not mandatory now?
The problem is retrofitting them - the farmer is a business and can invest against future income or assets; the homeowner might not have the spare cash to splurge on solar panels - I certainly don't.
True. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen binners call people six-formers or have a rant about Jeremy Corbyn (the latest one was earlier today), not to mention the repeated use of the same monty python pictures which don’t add anything to the debate
It’s just a place where bored office workers come to avoid doing work so people can talk about what the hell they like as far as I’m concerned.
Hey!……….I resent that gross accusation…..…….jeez, I’ve been called some pretty disgusting things in my life but office worker?, some of us are disability benefit scroungers sat on our arse all day in our housing association house that’s paid for with nothing better to do than come on here and make a conscious effort to wind up binners
Anyways... as more eejits throw their hats into the ring.... Same old ****s enter Tory leadership race
The problem is retrofitting them – the farmer is a business and can invest against future income or assets; the homeowner might not have the spare cash to splurge on solar panels – I certainly don’t.
Me neither. I wasn't actually thinking of retrofitting. I guess my question was more about, if it's not already, can it be made mandatory that all new builds have solar as standard.
Jeezus, has that now become your standard reply when you can’t think of anything else to say?
How on earth is that relevant to Daz’s comment?
Just categorising the standard of discourse.
@igm probably knows far better than me, but to pick up on the point of large scale solar versus panels on houses. Obviously in an ideal world we should be putting them on all new builds. Again one of the problems as I understand it is the grid. It was designed for a small number of 'plants' to generate and distribute. The switch to renewables means a large number of smaller capacity points of generation. This is problematic to include within the existing grid, which wasn't built to incorporate lots of small scale generation.
Land use etc and rural/farmer attitudes towards these installations is one of my main areas of research. It's a contentious issue to say the least. A culture war fired up by the right/conspiracy theorists is brewing.
@fazzini - this was in last weeks Guardian. They're not mandatory as yet, but I think thats ultimately the plan
Labour’s ‘rooftop revolution’ to deliver solar power to millions of UK homes
Ministers are looking at bringing in solar-related standards for new-build properties from next year.
At present, while formal planning permission is not required, there are restrictions on where and how high up on buildings they can be placed. There are also restrictions in conservation areas and on listed buildings. These may also be re-examined.
I see the smilies/emoji’s are working as successfully as i can navigate my knackered carcass around the house, and a page load/response to a thread takes less time than using 2nd class Mail.
🙂
I was about to post exactly what Molgrips put. What we need is a return to subsidised retro fit solar for domestic users, you know like what we had before the Tory's scrapped it. Could be feed in tariffs but would be simpler as a grant. Fitting solar panels at the moment is pretty much break even or small gain for most people (unless you have an EV) so it's not worth taking on the debt.
And because this is a political thread the downside will be the left wing will wang on about it subsidising the wealthy (ie. those with mortgages) but in reality it will benefit everyone to move to more renewables, be less reliant of fossil fuel markets (which royally screwed lower income families), increase energy security and avoid the distribution grid falling over.
I'm not sure the suburban grid is capable of providing enough extra power. Lets take an example of the classic 4 bed estate (where EV ownership is likely to be higher). Average consumption is 5250 kW kW per year. Let's also assume you have a 60 kW EV battery you charge up by 60% 2 times a week, 36 kW for each charge, 72kW per week, that's 3750 kW per year, nearly doubling the estates consumption, factor in heat pumps, multi car ownership etc. and you can easily see that EVs will double the energy need for that estate. When the housing estate I'm on was built twenty years ago was developed I doubt the sub station they put in was intended to handle twice the load, and load will have already increased since installation eating up the overhead.
Me neither. I wasn’t actually thinking of retrofitting.
This is a good example of where we're getting the net zero approach wrong. Instead of 'we're going to build a windfarm on your favourite local landmark whether you like it or not', we could instead say 'we're going to pay for your house to be fitted with solar panels and that will save you loads of money on your energy bills'. If we did the latter then people would think net zero was the best thing that's ever happened to them, but sadly it doesn't because the large energy companies will stand to lose profits from it, and the govt would have to admit that the magic money tree actually does exist.
I worked out the break even on solar for our property was somewhere between 7 and 10 years. Given in that time we may move just not viable. Break evens need to be within 5 years or less, so grants / cheaper installs / better buybacks need to make that happen for wider adoption. If it was within3 I think you would see massive takeup
I was about to post exactly what Molgrips put. What we need is a return to subsidised retro fit solar for domestic users, you know like what we had before the Tory’s scrapped it.
I’d jump at the chance of solar panels as I already have an unused Tesla battery on my outside wall which could store the electricity generated, I rarely use above 4kw/day so to all intents and purposes I wouldn’t be paying anything.
I’ve tried to access grants/funding but nothing has came of them, from my experience (5 surveys over the previous 18months) they are scams designed to fill the pockets of the surveyors/dodgy companies who come out, promise you the earth only to eventually find that as I already have a heat pump (unused for heating/hot water for the previous 4 years due to running costs) and a Tesla battery (which was fitted to offset the heat pump running costs) mean I have too many “green” points so no funding for insulation (my house has none), no funding for new windows, doors, solar.
Meanwhile my log burner/multifuel inset stove is on 24/7 during the winter and has only been off for one day so far this year.
Now confirmed :
Britain will no longer be challenging arrest warrant proceedings for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in a move officials described as a shift in stance on the war in Gaza.
I suppose I figured mandate it for new buildings, commercial and domestic for a 'sensible' starting point, then look at the issue of existing buildings/housing stock etc. I wonder how the figures would stack up - investing in grants etc for homeowners vs investment for big infrastructure. I assume we need a bit of both ideally.
Britain will no longer be challenging arrest warrant proceedings for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in a move officials described as a shift in stance on the war in Gaza.
That's great, but it'll never happen, unlike Hollywood movies, this type of scenario has no real positive outcome.
The Israeli government does not appear to share your opinion over the matter:
And to add to the growing bad news for the far-right regime there is the likelihood that the recent judgement by the International Court of Justice will put pressure on the International Criminal Court to issue an arrest warrant :
Israel is in the process of learning that they might be held accountable for war crimes and that no country should be above international law.
I am hugely encouraged that the new Labour government is playing a small part in that that process, in sharp contrast to the previous Tory government.
How difficult are those storage options technically? (Planning, nimbyism) aside).
Thermal storage seems to have potential at a fairly local level. Used in the nordic countries currently especially for community heating which goes back to tight coupling between the new towns/dense housing and energy supplies.
Can't you keep the middle east issues on its own thread?
I agree with Ernie, the landscape is changing for Israel their international political support is shrinking, I don't think anything is going to change quickly for the people in Palestine, but maybe the next generation will be able to grow up without fear of genocide.
The worry is that Israel now lashes out and becomes even more brutal before that happens.
And I have to say this move by labour has surprised me, I really thought they were going to stick by Israel no matter what.
This is a good example of where we’re getting the net zero approach wrong. Instead of ‘we’re going to build a windfarm on your favourite local landmark whether you like it or not’, we could instead say ‘we’re going to pay for your house to be fitted with solar panels and that will save you loads of money on your energy bills’. If we did the latter then people would think net zero was the best thing that’s ever happened to them, but sadly it doesn’t because the large energy companies will stand to lose profits from it, and the govt would have to admit that the magic money tree actually does exist.
Exactly. Labour keep going on about what is going to happen by tweaking this and that but they are simply expecting the private growth fairy in the private sector to turn up and deliver it.
Everything they suggest is underminded by this sort of small print thinking.
They created this daft fiscal restriction.
Labour really don't plan to deliver much at all without the private sector growth fairy. Time and time again it's been proven that this conservative economic thinking just simply doesn't work.
Can’t you keep the middle east issues on its own thread?
The link I posted was specifically in relation to a UK government issue/policy and how it has changed as the result of the general election.