Why lost LAB and LD deposits tonight would be bad news for CON – politicalbetting.com

System

Why lost LAB and LD deposits tonight would be bad news for CON – politicalbetting.com

Perhaps the worst news for the Tories that could come out of today’s Westminster by-elections is Labour losing its deposit in Tiverton and Honiton while the Lib Dems lose there’s in Wakefield.

Read the full story here

DavidL

Two relatively easy victories. Not that exciting.

Selebian

DavidL said:

Two relatively easy victories. Not that exciting.

Two? Were you first in the last thread, too?

eek

DavidL said:

Two relatively easy victories. Not that exciting.

T&H isn't an easy victory. It will be the result of 30% (minimum) of the constituency deciding for the first time ever to either not vote Tory or to seat on their hands and not vote at all.

Pulpstar

FPT: @Misty Only an idiot would "bet the house on wind". The capacity from gas, coal, nuclear and everything else is simply kept for quiet days. The case for wind is that if the wind is blowing at all it produces by far the cheapest marginal electricity. So you want to have as much capacity as possible.

Richard_Tyndall

FPT

MISTY said:

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

That is not how NET zero works. It means that overall our carbon emissions are zero - any C02 we produce is offset by removing CO2 elsewhere. It does not mean having no carbon emissions.

BartholomewRoberts

Tactical voting against a government during a by-election isn't news.

Doesn't mean such voting will happen in a General Election, any more than it did any of the plethora of prior times its happened at by-elections.

Its been all over the national media for the past month or so that Labour aren't campaigning in Tiverton etc - that kind of news is not repeated in a General Election where Starmer will be giving it his all to get attention, as will every other leader, and not be giving off "don't vote for us here, there, or there" signals.

dixiedean

7.1% for Merseyrail workers.
No strikes threatened.

bigjohnowls

dixiedean said:

7.1% for Merseyrail workers.

No interference from Shapps

eek

Pulpstar said:

FPT: @Misty Only an idiot would "bet the house on wind". The capacity from gas, coal, nuclear and everything else is simply kept for quiet days. The case for wind is that if the wind is blowing at all it produces by far the cheapest marginal electricity. So you want to have as much capacity as possible.

Technically Nuclear is a baseline 24/7 supply.

As for batteries / storage the important question becomes one of can wind + storage (batteries / concreate batteries / hydro pumped storage) be cheaper than gas / coal on days when wind isn't available.

wooliedyed

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

Sunil_Prasannan

dixiedean said:

7.1% for Merseyrail workers.
No strikes threatened.

Not bad. New trains incoming within the next 12 months (Class 777).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_777

bigjohnowls

bigjohnowls said:

dixiedean said:

7.1% for Merseyrail workers.

No interference from Shapps

Is what our Socialist RMT hero said this morning

EPG

Well, no, of course not everyone will tactically vote. But the tactical divorce of 2015 was a gift of dozens of seats to the Tories, and a return of tactical voting is the interesting phenomenon here.

eek

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

Any voter switch from the Tories to Labour is +2 to Labour (Tories get 1 less vote, Labour 1 more)
Any Tory voter not turning out to vote or not voting Tory is still +1 to Labour (one less Labour vote needed for Labour to win)

BartholomewRoberts

Pulpstar said:

FPT: @Misty Only an idiot would "bet the house on wind". The capacity from gas, coal, nuclear and everything else is simply kept for quiet days. The case for wind is that if the wind is blowing at all it produces by far the cheapest marginal electricity. So you want to have as much capacity as possible.

True, but the amount of energy storage that will exist in the future is grossly underestimated by some people based on assumptions as to how we use power today.

Electric usage is measured in the GWs but energy storage in the future could be in the TWh mark. Once every car and every van is electric, the storage of each of those batteries, distributed, will vastly be more than the amount of electricity that we use in general.

As homes and charging stations switch from petrol to electricity too, in can justify investing in energy storage. That way even if you are driving when the wind was blowing, when you come home you can use that (much cheaper) stored power to recharge your vehicle.

In the future, if cars are driving on windless days, using energy that was generated and stored on windy days, that is going to provide a real shift in how we consume our power and allow us to far, far, far exceed 100% of what is typical consumption today without it being wasted.

DavidL

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

Two relatively easy victories. Not that exciting.

Two? Were you first in the last thread, too?

Only early morning. Been busy with my devil calling this morning. But I will be genuinely surprised if the Lib Dems do not win by a few thousand. They are good at this.

GIN1138

Reposting FPT as it's great post and must have taken @Andy_Cooke ages to write:

Andy_Cooke said:

In my experience, people vote based on:

- Personal identity (ie: "We're Labour in this house"/"True Blue Tory; always have been")
- Habit
- Party perceived ideology/stance
- Party record and expectation
- Party leadership and perceived competence
- Expectation as to which party can win
- One or two specific policies they like
- Keep out the other buggers
- The person running for MP/re-election

There's then a long swathe of sunlight down to:
- All the specific policies and complete platform

(Not to mean these are to be forgotten about. Voters like to feel that the parties have got a full suite of specific policies and a platform, even if they're not usually front and centre in the mind. This, though, is the bit that parties tend to focus on afterwards in saying they have a mandate for whatever)

Those nine main drivers vary from person to person. In HYUFD, the first is pretty much all. In most other people, their importance can wax and wane over time and different areas become more important and people can change the ideology/stance they're after, their expectations, and so on. And the parties themselves change under ideology/stance, record/expectation and leadersgip/competence especially, and the one or two specific policies they champion. There's absolutely nothing at all wrong with responding to those changes, or to having ones' own priorities and drivers vary in magnitude and direction over the years.

wooliedyed

eek said:

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

Any voter switch from the Tories to Labour is +2 to Labour (Tories get 1 less vote, Labour 1 more)
Any Tory voter not turning out to vote or not voting Tory is still +1 to Labour (one less Labour vote needed for Labour to win)

National picture versus who wins Wakefield. The latter is pretty certain anyway, the former largely unaffected by a handful of Wakefield LD votes.

NickyBreakspear

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

So LD saving their deposit in Wakefield would be noteworth?

wooliedyed

NickyBreakspear said:

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

So LD saving their deposit in Wakefield would be noteworth?

Yes it would against the national picture. Very much so

Nigelb

FPT

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

The more practical near term solution is Europe wide high voltage DC interconnects. It wouldn't remove the intermittency or 'wind drought' problems (and Europe is the region most vulnerable to the latter once we rely on a lot of renewables), but it would massively reduce them.

There are plenty of studies - and practical plans - for this. It would make sense to bring them forward as rapidly as possible, as they will pay for themselves. That's one of the things both we and Europe should be spending big money on now.
And including very large solar schemes in North Africa, if possible.

Energy storage is part of the equation. There are some practical and economic systems ready now (see Highview Power, for example), but as you say, it will take considerably longer.
And of course the ongoing electrification of transport will contribute a substantial distributed storage capacity as well.

Andy_JS

If today's Kantar poll was exactly reflected in Wakefield the result would be:

Lab 43%
Con 36%
LD 5%

MattW

MISTY said:

MattW said:

LostPassword said:

MattW said:

Interesting situation in Power Supply this morning. In the UK:


Fr has once again maxed out electricity imports from UK at 2GW. Has been the case throughout this year so far. To do with very old nuclear reactors in Fr; half turned off for maintenance.

Also interesting to note that the UK is generating 3% from coal - that is afaik all the coal generation we have left. In addition to 5.5% of supply from UK, Fr also importing 5.2% from De.

Suggests UK currently preferred to De in prevailing conditions, has De has more links available. Impacted by EDF owning UK-Fr links (if they do?)?

This is apparently more to do with gas supply than the French nuclear reactors, or any preference for using British supply over German.

Ever since the start of the war there's been more LNG import into the UK, but we only have limited gas pipeline capacity to send that to Europe. So we're converting it to electricity and sending the electricity to the continent instead, thus displacing continental gas use.

This then means we're more likely to need our leftover coal plants to make up the deficit when the wind isn't blowing.

Variations in French-German supply are mostly driven by variations in German wind generation.

Gas interconnectors carry far greater energy capacity that Electricity Interconnectors, but then I use 6-8x as much energy from gas as I do from electricity in my house.

Our two gas interconnectors to the continent carry about 6-8x as much energy capacity as do our 7.5GW or so of electricity interconnectors. If my approx maths is right.

Why are you talking about gas? The government has a net zero by 2050 policy. That means no gas. No oil. No coal. And soon.

Others have explained "net zero". Clearly we will continue to need hydrocarbon fuels eg you can't power a Eurofighter or an Aircraft Carrier from a battery. We should also go ahead with the coal mine in Cumbria imo.

On the other aspect we are talking about Europe coping with the current Russian gas-flow reduction, and the lack of LNG import facilities.

We have them, and gas pipelines, so that can be used to fill a chunk of the gap left by the Russian turn-off.

And a smaller top-up-of-the-top up can be from our elecricity interconnectors.

It's interesting that the capacity of Gas Interconnectors (typically a 36 in or 40in pipe) is specified in either MWh/day or Billion Cubic Metres per year.

eg afaics the Becton-Balgzand gas interconnector pipeline is specced at 16 bcm of gas per annum or 623 MWh of energy per day (=26 GW continuous power).

For comparison UK gas usage is approx 72 bcm per annum, and we have 2 gas interconnectors. So our gas interconnectors may be able to supply the demand of say Belgium, which is a help, and assuming we have the infra from our LNG terminals to our pipelines. I just hope bloody Boris is very public about how we are helping out Brussels, rather than just arsesitting.

And UK electricity usage runs at about 35 GW continuous on average, and we have around 7 GW of electricity interconnector capacity.

(Ignoring interconnections to Ireland)

It will be interesting to see the impact on balance of payments. Electricity exports at this morning's level are several billion per annum.

CorrectHorseBattery

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Foxy

Epic twitter thread on a former MP for T and H, who led a life unbelievable to the modern world:

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1539934516478984192?t=ScVpwTsk29xjJ3Go58enew&s=19

By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.

He had quite a life. https://t.co/I8GildabvH

wooliedyed

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

CorrectHorseBattery

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Nigelb

BartholomewRoberts said:

Pulpstar said:

FPT: @Misty Only an idiot would "bet the house on wind". The capacity from gas, coal, nuclear and everything else is simply kept for quiet days. The case for wind is that if the wind is blowing at all it produces by far the cheapest marginal electricity. So you want to have as much capacity as possible.

True, but the amount of energy storage that will exist in the future is grossly underestimated by some people based on assumptions as to how we use power today.

Electric usage is measured in the GWs but energy storage in the future could be in the TWh mark. Once every car and every van is electric, the storage of each of those batteries, distributed, will vastly be more than the amount of electricity that we use in general.

As homes and charging stations switch from petrol to electricity too, in can justify investing in energy storage. That way even if you are driving when the wind was blowing, when you come home you can use that (much cheaper) stored power to recharge your vehicle.

In the future, if cars are driving on windless days, using energy that was generated and stored on windy days, that is going to provide a real shift in how we consume our power and allow us to far, far, far exceed 100% of what is typical consumption today without it being wasted.

It's not quite as simple as that.
There are various type of storage, and the one that's most difficult to do at scale is the two weeks and above problem, which we've barely begun to address.

@MISTY rightly refers to the "wind drought" problem. Europe is quite compact in terms of land mass to total energy demand, and at a relatively high latitude, so reliant on wind (vs solar) to quite a large extent.
Although they are not common, periods of two weeks+ without any significant wind generation are not rare, either.

As we get more reliant on renewables, that becomes a bigger problem, and requires significant storage (something which if available at scale, and at reasonable cost would also further improve the economics of renewables).

eek

NickyBreakspear said:

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

So LD saving their deposit in Wakefield would be noteworth?

Either of the LD saving their deposit in Wakefield and Labour saving their deposit in T&H would be noteworthy as it would show the amount of core LD / Labour vote and the limit of anti-tory tactical voting .

wooliedyed

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

Cyclefree

Anyway, Daughter has had an interesting time applying for jobs on her return from holiday.

Lots of interviews. But some employers really need to up their game.

- One advertised a permanent job but when she turned up it turned out to be a short-term 8 week contract doing something completely different to what was advertised.
- One well known hotel group spent half the interview bitching about its previous staff. On inquiry it turned out that most of their staff had only just been hired.
- One place wanted her to do shifts of a duration which would be in breach of the rules.
- Some don't bother to respond at all or leave it so long that they may as well not bother.

She has had a number of offers but two good ones, one in hospitality and one in events management. She's having a day with the latter this weekend to get to know the team and is, subject to no nasties being revealed, going to go with them. They had the most professional and friendly approach and are offering a good salary for a permanent job. Plus it gives her the best opportunity to expand her skills, network with a wide range of of people and learn about a new area, as well as giving her a bit of financial security.

So fingers crossed.

I know that finding good staff is not easy but treating applicants decently is the bare minimum. If Daughter could do it with her staff then more established employers can do the same.

Managing people, understanding them, motivating them, inspiring and leading them, teaching them, setting them a good example, setting them high expectations and making it clear what the boundaries are, what behaviour will not be accepted, what crosses the line, helping them get past their frailties, working effectively with them is hard work, the hardest work anyone ever has to do. And by far the most valuable – and rewarding.

It's the single most important thing employers need to do. Too many don't. Employees are people. Not "human resources". Ghastly phrase.

Rant over.

slade

As well as the 2 parly elections we have some interesting local by-elections. In Kingston upon Thames there is a deferred election for 2 seats. It is a new ward so technically a free-for-all but it is made up of parts of two wards which were both Lib Dem before. The is also a deferred election in Neath Port Talbot which was Lab unopposed last time. There are 2 Con defences in Harlow and Waverley and an Ind defence in Shropshire.

MattW

Foxy said:

Epic twitter thread on a former MP for T and H, who led a life unbelievable to the modern world:

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1539934516478984192?t=ScVpwTsk29xjJ3Go58enew&s=19

By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.

He had quite a life. https://t.co/I8GildabvH

Sounds like the bloke who founded the US Navy. Bet it isn't, though !

CorrectHorseBattery

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

The question is, would anyone else in Labour be doing better. Not convinced.

wooliedyed

eek said:

NickyBreakspear said:

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

So LD saving their deposit in Wakefield would be noteworth?

Either of the LD saving their deposit in Wakefield and Labour saving their deposit in T&H would be noteworthy as it would show the amount of core LD / Labour vote and the limit of anti-tory tactical voting .

LDs saving in Wakefield would mean gaining support that isn't prepared to vote tactically for Labour

CorrectHorseBattery

What effect do Britons believe Boris Johnson's Government has had on setting up or relocation a business to the UK? It has made it...

Harder 35%
Easier 15%
Don't know 30%

Nigelb

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

wooliedyed

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

The question is, would anyone else in Labour be doing better. Not convinced.

Time will tell i guess.

CorrectHorseBattery

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

CorrectHorseBattery

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

The question is, would anyone else in Labour be doing better. Not convinced.

Time will tell i guess.

Agreed. You are one of the people I most enjoy talking to on this.

Foxy

MattW said:

Foxy said:

Epic twitter thread on a former MP for T and H, who led a life unbelievable to the modern world:

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1539934516478984192?t=ScVpwTsk29xjJ3Go58enew&s=19

By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.

He had quite a life. https://t.co/I8GildabvH

Sounds like the bloke who founded the US Navy. Bet it isn't, though !

Though he did found the Chilean navy and insisted they speak English!

TheScreamingEagles

Losing two deposits in one night is great.

Oh wait, we're talking about by elections.

Applicant

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

By all standards that existed before 2015, he's pretty crap. But Labour made Corbyn leader, and he redefined the boundaries.

Nigelb

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

Mainly 'or what', I think.

TheScreamingEagles

Hurrah for the RMT, I've been working in the garden in this glorious weather and watching the cricket.

WFH is awesome, I expected to have finished this report around 4pm today if I was in the office.

But because I started earlier with no commute I got it finished 3 hours early, and I can focus on other work things.

BartholomewRoberts

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

Yes there are promising new technologies. Gravitational batteries (because lithium is pricey and not particularly clean). Iron rust batteries. I saw one the other day where the turbine pumped water in pressurised form into underground rock wells that can be released to drive a turbine when needed. Smart. And if fusion works, well, its game set and match.

I don't want hydrocarbons any more than anybody else. But the technologies have to be there.

But the technologies are here, already.

Already the technology to generate wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to use wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to store cheap electricity is here, and is becoming more widespread as we go on.

So there's no reason not to invest in wind. All the boxes are already ticked. Relying solely upon wind, that's another question, but its not a question for today (except in the planning stages, but nobody is planning solely wind anyway).

Wind is cheap, economic, viable and the technology is here today. Is there a single good reason why we should not be using it today, forget about 28 years from now for a minute, today, is there any reason not to use what is by far the cheapest form of electricity available to us?

CorrectHorseBattery

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hurrah for the RMT, I've been working in the garden in this glorious weather and watching the cricket.

WFH is awesome, I expected to have finished this report around 4pm today if I was in the office.

But because I started earlier with no commute I got it finished 3 hours early, and I can focus on other work things.

How are you TSE?

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

Losing two deposits in one night is great.

Oh wait, we're talking about by elections.

Custard shortage?

TheScreamingEagles

*GRABS POPCORN*

Boris Johnson tells Prince Charles to ‘keep an open mind’ on Rwanda deportations

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/politics-live-23-06-2022-68wbs0rz0

Selebian

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

I suggest we adjust MPs' salaries to match the median* salary of elected representatives in this country

*calculated in the same way, so we'll take MPs and councillors, add the salaries and divide by two.

MattW

Foxy said:

MattW said:

Foxy said:

Epic twitter thread on a former MP for T and H, who led a life unbelievable to the modern world:

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1539934516478984192?t=ScVpwTsk29xjJ3Go58enew&s=19

By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.

He had quite a life. https://t.co/I8GildabvH

Sounds like the bloke who founded the US Navy. Bet it isn't, though !

Though he did found the Chilean navy and insisted they speak English!

I like the Chilean Army.

They were modelled on the Prussian army, and they still use Pickelhaube (the ones with the spike as punctured the balloon in Those Magnificent Men) ceremonially, and Stahlhelm (German Army, WW2), and Goosestep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Army

These are Russians, though. Very Monty Python.

BartholomewRoberts

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

That is not how it works.

Though £33k+ median for "travel assistants, ticket collectors, guards and information staff" seems high. That's higher than many police officers or teachers get as far as I knew.

BartholomewRoberts

TheScreamingEagles said:

*GRABS POPCORN*

Boris Johnson tells Prince Charles to ‘keep an open mind’ on Rwanda deportations

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/politics-live-23-06-2022-68wbs0rz0

Any quotes not behind the paywall?

Prince Charles should be advised to STFU on politics. If he wants to be a politician, he should abdicate his position in the monarchy and run for election.

williamglenn

...

TheScreamingEagles

CorrectHorseBattery said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hurrah for the RMT, I've been working in the garden in this glorious weather and watching the cricket.

WFH is awesome, I expected to have finished this report around 4pm today if I was in the office.

But because I started earlier with no commute I got it finished 3 hours early, and I can focus on other work things.

How are you TSE?

Counting down the hours for my weekend away, which starts in 20 hours.

algarkirk

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

The question is, would anyone else in Labour be doing better. Not convinced.

Of the choices on offer for PM as of today SKS is without doubt the pick, as the contest is between SKS and Boris.

The SKS Labour party have four hurdles to overcome:

1) The Tories may not stick with Boris
2) They may stick with him, and he is a genius at winning when it counts, and being lucky when it matters
3) Labour would like, of course, to offer an honest, coherent, popular and plausible programme for government. They can't. Firstly because no-one can, and secondly because Labour stands for a number of completely incompatible ideologies.
4) SKS is dull

There is a big prize waiting for anyone who can combine 'popular' and 'honest' in their plan for the 5 years after the next election. No-one is even trying to find one at the moment.

BartholomewRoberts

Luckyguy1983 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

How frequently do you need to turn the gas power stations on and off to deal with the wind or lack of it?

Me? Never. I switch my lights on, or TV on, or computer on etc, and they come on.

I couldn't care less whether my electricity supply is getting switched from gas to wind and vice-versa once, ten times or a thousand times a day, so long as my supply is uninterrupted, and it is, and its as cheap as possible - which means using as much wind as possible, and as little gas as possible.

What about you?

eek

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

Yes there are promising new technologies. Gravitational batteries (because lithium is pricey and not particularly clean). Iron rust batteries. I saw one the other day where the turbine pumped water in pressurised form into underground rock wells that can be released to drive a turbine when needed. Smart. And if fusion works, well, its game set and match.

I don't want hydrocarbons any more than anybody else. But the technologies have to be there.

But the technologies are here, already.


Already the technology to store cheap electricity is here, and is becoming more widespread as we go on.

What is the cheap method of storing electricity in bulk - I know of many that seem to work in theory but none have been implemented on mass yet (because there hasn't been the demand until very recently).

NorthofStoke

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

Yes there are promising new technologies. Gravitational batteries (because lithium is pricey and not particularly clean). Iron rust batteries. I saw one the other day where the turbine pumped water in pressurised form into underground rock wells that can be released to drive a turbine when needed. Smart. And if fusion works, well, its game set and match.

I don't want hydrocarbons any more than anybody else. But the technologies have to be there.

But the technologies are here, already.

Already the technology to generate wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to use wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to store cheap electricity is here, and is becoming more widespread as we go on.

So there's no reason not to invest in wind. All the boxes are already ticked. Relying solely upon wind, that's another question, but its not a question for today (except in the planning stages, but nobody is planning solely wind anyway).

Wind is cheap, economic, viable and the technology is here today. Is there a single good reason why we should not be using it today, forget about 28 years from now for a minute, today, is there any reason not to use what is by far the cheapest form of electricity available to us?

Having tried to research this topic I believe that you are (unfortunately) mistaken and are being irresponsibly optimistic. I think we need a lot of nuclear to be commissioned to provide a strong base supply and in the shorter term some relatively low-carbon gas from secure sources during the transition. Excess wind power (given strong nuclear base generation) can be put to good use (hydrogen fuel cells, artificial fuels etc.).

MattW

MattW said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:

Foxy said:

Epic twitter thread on a former MP for T and H, who led a life unbelievable to the modern world:

https://twitter.com/RussInCheshire/status/1539934516478984192?t=ScVpwTsk29xjJ3Go58enew&s=19

By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.

He had quite a life. https://t.co/I8GildabvH

Sounds like the bloke who founded the US Navy. Bet it isn't, though !

Though he did found the Chilean navy and insisted they speak English!

I like the Chilean Army.

They were modelled on the Prussian army, and they still use Pickelhaube (the ones with the spike as punctured the balloon in Those Magnificent Men) ceremonially, and Stahlhelm (German Army, WW2), and Goosestep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Army

These are Russians, though. Very Monty Python.

Found it. Chilean Army with Stahlhelm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJAL_OR8-MY

algarkirk

BartholomewRoberts said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

That is not how it works.

Though £33k+ median for "travel assistants, ticket collectors, guards and information staff" seems high. That's higher than many police officers or teachers get as far as I knew.

Plain vanilla teachers are on £37k at the end of 6 years. Starting on £25.7k.

BartholomewRoberts

eek said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

Yes there are promising new technologies. Gravitational batteries (because lithium is pricey and not particularly clean). Iron rust batteries. I saw one the other day where the turbine pumped water in pressurised form into underground rock wells that can be released to drive a turbine when needed. Smart. And if fusion works, well, its game set and match.

I don't want hydrocarbons any more than anybody else. But the technologies have to be there.

But the technologies are here, already.


Already the technology to store cheap electricity is here, and is becoming more widespread as we go on.

What is the cheap method of storing electricity in bulk - I know of many that seem to work in theory but none have been implemented on mass yet (because there hasn't been the demand until very recently).

Re-read the phrase. I never said there is a cheap method of storing electricity, I said the technology is there to store cheap electricity, and it is becoming more widespread.

What is it? Cars and in-home/business batteries that store electricity when it is at its cheapest.

Mass storage of electricity might end up being a moot point, if distributed storage of electricity is widespread.

OnlyLivingBoy

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

That is hilarious.

CorrectHorseBattery

How are you @BartholomewRoberts

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

BartholomewRoberts

NorthofStoke said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

MISTY said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.

Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.

Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.

Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.

For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍

Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.

Right now you can't.

What intermittency problem?

As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.

So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.

Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??

The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.

When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.

But how is that a problem?

We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.

Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?

In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.

The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??

Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.

By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.

By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.

In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?

Yes there are promising new technologies. Gravitational batteries (because lithium is pricey and not particularly clean). Iron rust batteries. I saw one the other day where the turbine pumped water in pressurised form into underground rock wells that can be released to drive a turbine when needed. Smart. And if fusion works, well, its game set and match.

I don't want hydrocarbons any more than anybody else. But the technologies have to be there.

But the technologies are here, already.

Already the technology to generate wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to use wind, cheaply, is here.

Already the technology to store cheap electricity is here, and is becoming more widespread as we go on.

So there's no reason not to invest in wind. All the boxes are already ticked. Relying solely upon wind, that's another question, but its not a question for today (except in the planning stages, but nobody is planning solely wind anyway).

Wind is cheap, economic, viable and the technology is here today. Is there a single good reason why we should not be using it today, forget about 28 years from now for a minute, today, is there any reason not to use what is by far the cheapest form of electricity available to us?

Having tried to research this topic I believe that you are (unfortunately) mistaken and are being irresponsibly optimistic. I think we need a lot of nuclear to be commissioned to provide a strong base supply and in the shorter term some relatively low-carbon gas from secure sources during the transition. Excess wind power (given strong nuclear base generation) can be put to good use (hydrogen fuel cells, artificial fuels etc.).

I never said we shouldn't invest in nuclear for the long-term, I said we should invest in wind as much as possible as well as alternatives.

Nuclear, tidal etc to provide a baseline, and wind to provide cheap electricity as much as possible, and to export cheap electricity, and to feed whatever is capable of storing cheap electricity (ie cars) with the baseline to provide what can't be provided from storage as a more expensive alternative is an entirely logical solution is it not?

Benpointer

"...Lib Dems lose there's"?

Theirs a shocker in that header!

JonWC

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

MattW

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

I think they will be used very sparingly. They are only getting the short range version.

They will only have about 10 launchers, I think. Unless I am not up to date. UK only has 42 iirc and we have sent about 10% of ours, but that 42 may be a result of Treasury salami-slicing.

BartholomewRoberts

CorrectHorseBattery said:

How are you @BartholomewRoberts

So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.

I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂

How are you?

wooliedyed

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

wooliedyed said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?

Ive never wavered from it. He is crap

I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.

Could be better, absolutely

Yes, could indeed be better.

The question is, would anyone else in Labour be doing better. Not convinced.

Time will tell i guess.

Agreed. You are one of the people I most enjoy talking to on this.

Thank you Horse, i try and give good chat

Benpointer

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

Well I hope they are a cameo-ghanger but each one only carries six missiles unless I am mistaken, so the supply of missiles will be critical, won't it? Or have I missed something?

BlancheLivermore

Benpointer said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

Well I hope they are a cameo-ghanger but each one only carries six missiles unless I am mistaken, so the supply of missiles will be critical, won't it? Or have I missed something?

Word up.

Flatlander

BartholomewRoberts said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BadDataTakes/status/1539595109502619648

Does anyone in Government do Maths or what

That is not how it works.

Though £33k+ median for "travel assistants, ticket collectors, guards and information staff" seems high. That's higher than many police officers or teachers get as far as I knew.

This was covered in "More or Less" on R4. Grant Shapps was essentially correct although the nurses figure he was comparing to was slightly skewed by there being more part time nurses than part time railway workers.

I was surprised at the £33k figure, I have to admit.

Benpointer

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hurrah for the RMT, I've been working in the garden in this glorious weather and watching the cricket.

WFH is awesome, I expected to have finished this report around 4pm today if I was in the office.

But because I started earlier with no commute I got it finished 3 hours early, and I can focus on other work things.

...like, the cricket!

Benpointer

BlancheLivermore said:

Benpointer said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

Well I hope they are a cameo-ghanger but each one only carries six missiles unless I am mistaken, so the supply of missiles will be critical, won't it? Or have I missed something?

Word up.

Bloody auto-corrupt at work again!

wooliedyed

JonWC said:

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph?
My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.

Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....

What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?

Benpointer

wooliedyed said:

JonWC said:

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph?
My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.

Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....

What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?

I'll let you know tomorrow!

148grss

I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).

For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).

CorrectHorseBattery

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

Sandpit

Benpointer said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Ukrainian Defense Minister Reznikov says that the first M142 HIMARS multiple rocket launchers have arrived in Ukraine...
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1539934682963484672

"Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers..."

You really don’t want to be downrange of those!

They do get through the ammo quickly though, need to have a good supply line behind them.

Well I hope they are a cameo-ghanger but each one only carries six missiles unless I am mistaken, so the supply of missiles will be critical, won't it? Or have I missed something?

Yes, they have cartridges with six missiles. There’s a larger, tracked version, M270, with two cartridges on board. They only take a few minutes to reload, but they do need to have the supplies ready.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MwCanzHpb5E

wooliedyed

Benpointer said:

wooliedyed said:

JonWC said:

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph?
My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.

Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....

What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?

I'll let you know tomorrow!

Tbf im clearly angling here for sage points, just in case!
But, jokes aside, ive got a weird feeling here. Just the odd comment piece and throwaway line. No such doubts in Wakefield (although much easier to gain)
To clarify - by which i mean a weird feeling of it being a much easier hold (10 points plus) than it should conceivably be

OnboardG1

BartholomewRoberts said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

How are you @BartholomewRoberts

So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.

I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂

How are you?

Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.

Mexicanpete

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

I suspect he has a "little man" to charge his phone for him, and was assuming an EU diktat on what nationality of "Phone Charger" he would be allowed to employ.

Benpointer

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

Indeed. Good to know all those UK phone makers can invent our very own charger that no one else can use.

Oh wait,...

ClippP

eek said:

NickyBreakspear said:

wooliedyed said:

Lab losing deposit in Tiverton would be noteworthy, yes
LD last 3 Wakefield efforts 3.9, 2.0, 3.5. Utterly irrelevant how they do, like asking where the TUSC vote is going or the Natural Law vote. More interesting does anyone SAVE deposit showing a reluctance to go Labour?

So LD saving their deposit in Wakefield would be noteworth?

Either of the LD saving their deposit in Wakefield and Labour saving their deposit in T&H would be noteworthy as it would show the amount of core LD / Labour vote and the limit of anti-tory tactical voting .

Not necessarily. It would depend very much on the kind of campaign they were running.

Applicant

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

There is already a de facto international standard to which all bar one manufacturer subscribes.

Benpointer

wooliedyed said:

Benpointer said:

wooliedyed said:

JonWC said:

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph?
My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.

Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....

What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?

I'll let you know tomorrow!

Tbf im clearly angling here for sage points, just in case!
But, jokes aside, ive got a weird feeling here. Just the odd comment piece and throwaway line. No such doubts in Wakefield (although much easier to gain)
To clarify - by which i mean a weird feeling of it being a much easier hold (10 points plus) than it should conceivably be

If I bet on my weird feelings I'd have been bankrupt many years ago.

Having said that, if the LDs don't win now it will be an upset, but if someone forced me to put £100 on the winner I'd probably put it in the Tories because of the odds.

Harris_Tweed

148grss said:

I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).

For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).

I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.

Mexicanpete

Harris_Tweed said:

148grss said:

I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).

For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).

I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.

Do you include Gaulkeists and Grievesters in your "broad left" church?

eek

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.

There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.

Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.

MattW

Applicant said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

There is already a de facto international standard to which all bar one manufacturer subscribes.

Indeed.

Delighted to say that I stopped buying Apple before 1990, having never bought any - apart from one tablet. They haven't changed.

JosiasJessop

On this warm, sunny summer's day, 48% of our power is being generated by gas. 16% by nuclear. 16% solar. 6% wind.

We have a long way to go until we can fully rely on renewables.

https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

boulay

Mexicanpete said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

I suspect he has a "little man" to charge his phone for him, and was assuming an EU diktat on what nationality of "Phone Charger" he would be allowed to employ.

I would imagine JRM still uses The Telegram as all right minded people do - none of this common telephony.

Selebian

wooliedyed said:

JonWC said:

No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.

Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph?
My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.

Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....

What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?

Dunno. I haven't bet on this one, because I don't know. The odds on LDs haven't looked appealing to me. I've been occasionally tempted by a small punt on Conservative, but in the end have concluded that I've no idea and would do better to keep my money.

I'm on Wakefield from early on, sold Con at 5, so I'm pretty happy about that.

BartholomewRoberts

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

JRM is a moron, but not over this.

Phone manufacturers have already all but one merged on USB-C which was done so without the EU forcing them to do so, and they did so with their own motivations because it was the right thing to do (indeed since early in the 21st century phone manufacturers were collaborating together on how to come up with a universal design, before USB-C was even designed).

But there should be absolutely nothing preventing innovation. USB-C has a plethora of flaws in the design, the protocols are not universal and some plug converters and some cables won't work with some devices. Half my USB-C cables are not powerful enough to allow the Nintendo Switch to operate on the TV for instance.

If someone can come up with a newer and much better design and wants to lead with it first, lets call it USB-D for reference, then there should not be a law preventing USB-D coming onto the market and insisting people continue to use the far inferior USB-C at that point.

148grss

Harris_Tweed said:

148grss said:

I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).

For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).

I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.

I agree with that, but to the question of "could this be a long lasting phenomenon" I think the answer could be yes when it comes to LDs voting for Lab in areas they weren't willing to before in 2019. I think the bigger question is do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed. Or, indeed, the unasked part of this, would Tories abstain from voting as they did to help with Blair's surge back in 97 in a GE with Johnson with a likely Starmer led government as the other option (does the Scottish Nationalists still act as a bogeyman that allows Johnson to keep getting away with it).

CorrectHorseBattery

eek said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.

There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.

Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.

That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.

Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.

The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.

BartholomewRoberts

OnboardG1 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

How are you @BartholomewRoberts

So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.

I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂

How are you?

Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.

Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.

Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.

rcs1000

eek said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "

JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea

The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.

There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.

Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.

Also, Thunderbolt over USB C leads to significant confusion.