UK Government Thread

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.

@dazh

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

Whataboutism

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

I appreciate the effort you put in @somafunk :D

Whataboutism

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?

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.

I appreciate the effort you put in @somafunk :D

Solidarity comrade, fight the power.

;)

@ernielynch

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?

Ad hominem

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.

https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/uk/2024/07/25/uk-set-to-drop-icc-case-intervention-in-tougher-netanyahu-policy/

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:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-working-to-block-feared-icc-arrest-warrants-against-pm-others-over-gaza-war/

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  :

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-07-21/ty-article/.premium/israel-fears-icj-opinion-will-lead-to-icc-arrest-warrants-for-netanyahu-and-gallant/00000190-d473-dd02-a3d3-ffff9b5a0000

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.

Wasn’t there an outstanding arrest warrant for Ariel Sharon up until he died? I don’t recall him being led away in handcuffs for that…

The problem with paying to upgrade peoples houses is that it excludes the poorest in society and benefits house owners and landlords. Now in the drive for cleaner energy I think it could/would be beneficial but I can’t see how government can encourage it without benefiting the wealthiest, as with the child benefit cap I don’t mind some who perhaps don’t need or deserve the assistance actually getting that assistance if the major goal is achieved.

A quick google suggests that 50% of UK adults own their own homes (I have assumed that includes those who are still paying mortgages) and I suspect that brings in some social and age demographics that mainly excludes those who are already struggling most to have decent affordable homes.

IMO that would only be acceptable if there is also a sizeable investment in modern “council houses” so the 50% who don’t own homes can also benefit from clean energy and affordable housing without being left even further behind. I don’t think anyone wants tory mp’s to get solar panels on their duck houses financed by the state, while those most in need get nothing.

Also I expected a larger percentage of home owners.

Wasn’t there an outstanding arrest warrant for Ariel Sharon up until he died? I don’t recall him being led away in handcuffs for that…

Instead of picking holes and dismissing the importance of the new Labour government’s position on the ICC how about celebrating the fact that with the Tories out of government the UK now appears to have a more ethical attitude towards foreign policy?

The last two paragraphs in my link:

Once the arrest warrant for a person is issued it is valid for the rest of their lives, until they are arrested and sent to The Hague, home of the international courts, or until they die, he added.

“Overall, the whole process strengthens the institution of the ICC. It’s the first time that two western leaders are in the spotlight,” he said.

Not everyone will welcome that but I certainly do, and I think the current Labour government should be given credit.

Instead of picking holes

Perhaps I’m missing something, but it didn’t read like that to me?

Two separate posters diminishing the importance of the Labour government’s announcement felt like picking holes at this important announcement. If they are celebrating the change in UK policy it wasn’t obvious to me

Where to start.

The grid was originally designed to connect medium-ish sized generators typically at 33kV via 132/33kV sites.

The supergrid with the large power stations came later.

We have been successfully connecting small generators at LV and 11kV for decades now – yes there are occasional issues but generally it works.  The Americans can’t work out how we do it.

I have no comment to make on the relative financial merits of fields or roofs. I can see obvious practical merits.

Home EV charging at 3.6-7.2kW adds around 1 to 1.5kW to the domestic ADMD.  Networks were typically designed for around 2-2.5kW ADMD at each property, but loads have been falling to closer to 1-1.5kW so adding another 1-1.5kW (allowing for the fact that standard cables sizes mean the system will have been installed bigger than 2.5kW originally).

So urban networks allowing for a bit of workplace, destination etc charging ought to support EVs for a good long time.

Heat pumps are more challenging.

The problem with paying to upgrade peoples houses is that it excludes the poorest in society and benefits house owners and landlords.

Last time I rented a house I still had to pay my energy bills. And besides, there are plenty of ways of mitigating this problem, for instance landlords could be mandated to install solar panels at their own cost (yes you’d need protections against rent inflation before anyone says they’ll just put the rents up), benefits claimants and other low income people could be given direct subsidies on their bills.

I agree that there could be innovative ways of benefitting those who rent and levering against the wealthy.

Perhaps the electricity generated on a building is used for free by the tenant, and a matching smaller payment made back to the landlord who has to pay a significant proportion of the install costs – but judged so that long term both tenant and landlord ‘win’ a larger income/lower costs.
Let us not forget that reducing costs such as this is more beneficial than a tax cut to a tenant, but increases taxes landlords pay.

This here GB Energy may be better focussing on smaller projects, insulation and efficiency for the lowest income folk in society than big projects…?

Labour’s first step to set up Great British Energy will save families up to £300 a year off their energy bills.

A vote for Labour on Thursday 4 July is a vote for change and to make you better off.https://t.co/XeQ2o5q9df

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 19, 2024

They really shouldn’t have gone with this £300 off the bills during the election campaign – with the creation of GB energy from 2030.  The modelling for it was pretty terrible – which assumed price caps didn’t change. Rather than looking at any benefit that may come with GB energy.

Now they are moving away from it as some sort of a promise.

Bit of a mess this one.

Yep Dazh is right, issues around low income families and energy efficiency need to be tackled separately. Theres plenty of poorly insulated rental properties pushing up the bills of those that can afford them least but we don’t stop wealthy people from insulating their homes cos it isn’t fair.

The rental market needs a proper overhaul and basic standards around housing enforced including things like insulation and solar panels as well as basics wlike the building being water tight and secure.

Personally I’d still expect the wealthy to contribute to the cost, generate some of the mythical private sector investment Rone can’t get his head around. As DT78 says pay back needs to be 3 to 5 years and people will happily contribute. Ironically the cost of installing panels would come down as demand increased, when the Torys killed the feed in tariffs loads of solar companies just going went to the wall as demand dried up. Grants for 50% of the cost is simple and will work, feed in tariffs, 3rd party ownership etc. are complex and put people off.

Wasn’t there an outstanding arrest warrant for Ariel Sharon up until he died? I don’t recall him being led away in handcuffs for that…

Aye. We were and still occasionally scoop up shitbags with warrants. Bosnia and those connected to the atrocities there are some notable examples, however they were not in positions of power or privilege anymore and often shunned by their state.

It’s a strong position for sure, but until such a time that he is in a position that is deemed vulnerable and with zero blowback, he’s quite safe from being detained.

Sad but true.

There was no International Criminal Court arrest warrant issued for Ariel Sharon. The Belgium courts tried and unsurprisingly failed to prosecute him. You would expect the ICC might have more luck. It is widely assumed that Netanyahu wants to prolong the conflict and extend it beyond Israel’s northern boarders to save his political skin. But eventually one day he will no longer be PM, any arrest warrant will stay in place until the day he dies.

They (windfarms) are more likely to be generating too much electricity rather than none.

I’m not great on renewables or storage, but as i look out the window at another grey drizzly summer day…. I understand the sun can power a solar panel that creates electricity that can turn a turbine.

Can we not use the too much electricity from windy days to feed into the solar panels and back upwards and turn the **** sun up a few notches to burn these clouds off instead.

IANAE.

I agree with having solar and other energy efficiency areas such as adequate insulation and heat pumps where viable should be mandatory for new builds. There’s one glaring issue with it as far as I can see. Houses are already pretty much unaffordable for a lot of people. I’d imagine energy efficiency mandates would simply push them even further out of reach of your average person or family looking to purchase a property. It will just benefit those who are already better off. God knows what the actual solution is beyond capping house prices at a sensible level.