"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Hang on, a box of wine doesn’t count as one of your five a day?
Why Kamala Harris isn't much of a success at identity poliitcs: Her father is a mixed-race academic from Jamaica; her mother is an academic from India. So she is, most likely, one-fourth black -- and doesn't look very black.
As a young child she was schooled in both Christian and HIndu teachings.
When she was 12, her mother moved her and her younger sister to Canada. She did not get back to the United States until she chose to attend Howard, a historically black university. (I suspect she chose Howard because of her political ambitions; she thought her best chance was to learn how to at least appear "authentically black".)
She did have an affair with a prominent black California politician, Willie Brown, but she married a Jewish lawyer in the entertainment business. They have no children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Hang on, a box of wine doesn’t count as one of your five a day?
Why wouldn’t it count as one of your five boxes of wine a day?
Finite is an entirely pointless concept when discussing how much of something there is. There's finite atoms in the solar system, in our galaxy etc etc.
The only relevant one is whether something is sufficiently abundant to mean we aren't going to run out of it for a very long time.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
That’s O2. I said oxygen.
Same thing...
Shame on you. I refer to the element oxygen. O2 is dioxygen, comprised of two covalently bound oxygen atoms. Would you say that ozone is the same thing? And you a chemist with papers published and all!
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
Exactly, Melania wasn’t doing Victoria’s Secret lingerie catwalks after Donald was elected. She showed decorum.
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Hang on, a box of wine doesn’t count as one of your five a day?
Grapes, barley, hops, sugar cane, potatoes. Wine, beer, whisky, rum, vodka. Five a day. Sorted. Cheers! 🍷🍺🥃
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
My breton dinner of magret de canard, tarte tatin, vin rouge and Calvados says otherwise. The french paradox FTW.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
That’s O2. I said oxygen.
Same thing...
Shame on you. I refer to the element oxygen. O2 is dioxygen, comprised of two covalently bound oxygen atoms. Would you say that ozone is the same thing? And you a BIOchemist with papers published and all!
[sticking feet up on the coffee table] Not since 2015! I haven't even worked in a lab since 2018, fact!
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
My breton dinner of magret de canard, tarte tatin, vin rouge and Calvados says otherwise. The french paradox FTW.
French paradox often attributed to French doctors NOT writing heart attack as cause of death on their close drinking buddies?
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
That’s O2. I said oxygen.
Same thing...
Shame on you. I refer to the element oxygen. O2 is dioxygen, comprised of two covalently bound oxygen atoms. Would you say that ozone is the same thing? And you a chemist with papers published and all!
Composed of or comprising
Oxone is O3, three atoms in a triangular shape. It is very unstable, which is why ozone is a fierce oxidising agent.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
My breton dinner of magret de canard, tarte tatin, vin rouge and Calvados says otherwise. The french paradox FTW.
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
Exactly, Melania wasn’t doing Victoria’s Secret lingerie catwalks after Donald was elected. She showed decorum.
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
That’s not decorum, that’s a women in armour on the cover of a fantasy novel!
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
No, it’s not. You can recycle lithium; you can’t recycle burned coal.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
It's a finite resource but 1. There's absolutely fuckloads of it 2. Demand for it is also finite 3. It can be recycled
Iirc it can also be produced. Not cheaply (it's a byproduct of some process and can be found in the ash?), but it can be done.
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
Exactly, Melania wasn’t doing Victoria’s Secret lingerie catwalks after Donald was elected. She showed decorum.
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
Carrie Fisher looked better than Melania in a metal bra.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
My breton dinner of magret de canard, tarte tatin, vin rouge and Calvados says otherwise. The french paradox FTW.
French paradox often attributed to French doctors NOT writing heart attack as cause of death on their close drinking buddies?
Verging on the teeniest hint of racism Shirley? Anyway enjoy your tap water.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
No, it’s not. You can recycle lithium; you can’t recycle burned coal.
How much lithium do you think we need, Sunil ?
So why are there so many Li mines springing up, causing pollution and general eye-soreness?
Good evening from the 21:30 Euston - Birmingham. Had expected to be home by now. But the great Windows FUBAR delayed and then cancelled my flight home from Luton to Aberdeen.
easyJet staff plentiful but with a reality check of minimal free seats on any flight north from London over the weekend meant not much they could do.
Have rebooked with Loganair tomorrow morning from Birmingham. easyJet will cover the expenses and bizarrely this is the quickest way to get home just the 15 hours or so late
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
And Oxygen is finite. There are only just so many atoms of it on the planet. Not making more here….
Whenever I'm considering a steak with blue cheese sauce, I console myself with the idea that it's basically the same atoms as salad.
And wine is grape juice, therefore one of your "5 a day". Indeed a whole bottle ticks the entire box.
And an entire box of wine an evening and you're basically immortal.
Yeah I am staking everything on dat resveratrol.
Good luck - there’s a lot of not very good evidence around that old chestnut.
My breton dinner of magret de canard, tarte tatin, vin rouge and Calvados says otherwise. The french paradox FTW.
Le ver vert va vers le verre vert.
I worked that out in the end. If it were a line of poetry you could do "Le vers 'Le ver vert va vers le verre vert' "
Good evening from the 21:30 Euston - Birmingham. Had expected to be home by now. But the great Windows FUBAR delayed and then cancelled my flight home from Luton to Aberdeen.
easyJet staff plentiful but with a reality check of minimal free seats on any flight north from London over the weekend meant not much they could do.
Have rebooked with Loganair tomorrow morning from Birmingham. easyJet will cover the expenses and bizarrely this is the quickest way to get home just the 15 hours or so late
You sound as if you are on safari. Remember, when you eventually get a flight home, don’t look out of the windows. P.S. I assume the sleeper was fully booked.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
No, it’s not. You can recycle lithium; you can’t recycle burned coal.
How much lithium do you think we need, Sunil ?
So why are there so many Li mines springing up, causing pollution and general eye-soreness?
Because there is an expansion of the use of lithium - which will require a larger stock of lithium in the use-recycle-use loop.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
Exactly, Melania wasn’t doing Victoria’s Secret lingerie catwalks after Donald was elected. She showed decorum.
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
Carrie Fisher looked better than Melania in a metal bra.
"What first attracted a very good looking young woman like you to a billionaire orange faced idiot?"
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Forgive me, I haven’t been following US politics particularly closely - can someone summarise for me, please, why is everyone so down on Harris’s chances in the general?
Like, I can read the polls, but is she like, hopeless on stage? Or a whack job, policy wise?
None of those things. Her previous experience is as largely as a somewhat effective prosecutor.
I think there's a degree of misogyny with Harris. A black woman who is also liberal is someone who doesn't know their place. We can say this is all very bad, but if she does become presidential candidate she will have to find a way to overcome the prejudice against her. Not certain she will.
Not entirely true, Michelle Obama polls way better than Harris and is a liberal black woman too.
The difference is she has charisma, Harris makes Hillary Clinton look like a woman with the common touch
Michelle Obama has never stood for high office and always felt she has been held back. Her biggest political role has been First Lady of the United States, where the word "decorum" was used a lot to describe her, thereby confirming the stereotype of a black woman knowing her place.
Leave it out. Decorum is the stock in trade of first ladies of any colour.
Exactly, Melania wasn’t doing Victoria’s Secret lingerie catwalks after Donald was elected. She showed decorum.
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
Carrie Fisher looked better than Melania in a metal bra.
"What first attracted a very good looking young woman like you to a billionaire orange faced idiot?"
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
A fairly normal sort of evening at Euston station in my experience.
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Been there. Got the t-shirt. You have my major sympathies ☹️
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
A fairly normal sort of evening at Euston station in my experience.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
Which is not, ultimately, used up. Within a fairly short time, one of the best sources of lithium ore will be old batteries….
I remain convinced that we are not many years from seeing old rubbish dumps as new ‘mines’ for exploitation.
Limited resource, though ...
Scrap yards never seem to run out…
A good Lyellist, I have to point out that they do. Even the one by the station at Oxford, which seemed eternal. As did the infamous stack of trains at Leicester.
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Hope the airline booked you a non-shithole hotel.
I booked my own hotel. Hilton as always.
Hilton! You have gone down significantly in my estimation.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
CHAOS UPDATE: 21:30 off Euston delayed to 21:45 due to train crew arriving late off another train. We depart. Roll a few yards and stop, still on the platform at Euston.
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
Been there. Got the t-shirt. You have my major sympathies ☹️
I concur. I remember St Pan on the night of the 1987 hurricane.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
There are all sorts of nasties that the previous government's Budget didn't... budget for.
Brace.
I suspect they did budget for them. They budgeted to not pay them. It was an easy decision for the Tories as the teachers and NHS workers probably weren't going to vote for them anyway.
The question is whether Starmer and Reeves can afford to use up some of their political capital on either giving the pay rise and putting up taxes or not giving the payvrise and pissing off the teachers and NHS staff.
"Supply exceeds demand 64% of the time, so, lacking any suitable storage technology, we'd be throwing out 120 TWh of power, worth well over £10 billion, every year. That's perhaps £500 per household chucked down the drain."
How can power produced in excess of what can be used have a value? It is, by definition, worth nothing. Also the assumption that we'd have no suitable storage technology is a bit of a biggie, especially given the possibility of using car batteries for storage.
Edit: The obvious way to go is to improve connectivity with other countries. After all, the wind is always blowing somewhere.
Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, through payments to windfarms when the power is not required:
"This means that the government is having to pay huge sums in curtailment fees to wind farm owners to switch off turbines when they are generating more power than is needed. Some £210m ($267m) of curtailment payments were made to renewable energy generators to curtail output in 2022, said the report With the UK planning to grow its offshore wind capacity from 14GW today to 50GW by 2030, the report says that curtailment costs are expected to rise to £3.5bn annually by the end of the decade."
The wind farms have guaranteed prices for the power they produce from contracts signed with the government, but they still participate in the spot market.
During periods of overproduction, instantaneous prices go negative (ie the grid offers to pay producers to reduce production and/or customers to use power). If their guaranteed strike price is higher than the negative market price, it still pays the wind farm to carry on producing; a negative price which exceeds what they earn pays them to stun off production.
Similarly with solar (though not all solar connections are 'throttleable' in the same manner.)
With the rapid increase in renewables production, total hours with negative pricing will also grown over then next few years. But the very strong market incentive is going to see the storage market grow in response.
The game changer is the drop in battery prices over the last year. They're now just about at the point it pays to deploy grid scale storage - it just needs the factories to build them.
Battery prices have dropped 55% since the beginning of last year.
Lots of things that weren't economic are now economic.
They won't stay low in the long term unless someone finds an awful lot more copper etc that can be mined cheaply. Raw materials of copper cobalt, lithium etc are a big elephant in the room
New "battery" techology is needed. Keep seeing breakthrough announcements but few make it to production as the announcements are normally about a lab concept to try and attract (high risk) investment money to turn that into something sellable.
More fortunes have been lost betting on commodities not being found than any other way.
As prices rise, more deposits become economic.
And there's a huge amount of known, unexploited lithium reserves. As an example, the US probably one of the world's largest known extractable deposit, and they haven't yet even started mining it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thacker_Pass_Lithium_Mine
Interestingly, ARPA-E, the US energy technology equivalent of DARPA is funding a few projects for innovative mining technology, in the hope of reviving US mining which has been undercut in recent years by low cost producers like China.
What happens when the lithium runs out?
Lithium isn't going to run out, there's loads. There was a price spike when batteries were selling much faster than people had expected and lithium production couldn't ramp up fast enough, but then it caught up and the price came back down.
Social media has a bias to bad news, doomers and Russian propaganda so lots of people saw the graph of the price going up a lot, but hardly anyone saw the graph of it going back down. So this survives as a zombie talking point. https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240
Once again
1) Rare earths aren’t rare 2) They aren’t earths 3) Lithium isn’t a rare earth 4) Lithium a very, very common element
Like we're saying, Lithium isn't going to run out. Last year the analyst they quote thought production would be too low around 2030. They may or may not still believe that now. But they say "We believe there will eventually be enough lithium to support the demands of electrification"
It's a finite resource!
So is oxygen, but we’d struggle to get through it all.
Oxygen is continuously produced during photosynthesis. Lithium isn't...
Oxygen isn’t continuously produced. It is recycled. That is why the amount of it in the air is quite stable.
But Lithium is finite, like coal...
No, it’s not. You can recycle lithium; you can’t recycle burned coal.
How much lithium do you think we need, Sunil ?
So why are there so many Li mines springing up, causing pollution and general eye-soreness?
Because there is an expansion of the use of lithium - which will require a larger stock of lithium in the use-recycle-use loop.
We probably need around 10-15 X current production, over the next decade.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
Why Kamala Harris isn't much of a success at identity poliitcs: Her father is a mixed-race academic from Jamaica; her mother is an academic from India. So she is, most likely, one-fourth black -- and doesn't look very black.
As a young child she was schooled in both Christian and HIndu teachings.
When she was 12, her mother moved her and her younger sister to Canada. She did not get back to the United States until she chose to attend Howard, a historically black university. (I suspect she chose Howard because of her political ambitions; she thought her best chance was to learn how to at least appear "authentically black".)
She did have an affair with a prominent black California politician, Willie Brown, but she married a Jewish lawyer in the entertainment business. They have no children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
Harris is a lawyer, not a natural campaigner and politician. Much like Sunak was a banker not a politician and party leader really.
She would do more good for the Democrats on the SC next time a vacancy comes up than running for POTUS again
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
Women may yet win it for the Dems based on Trump being the GOP candidate and the whole abortion rights agenda.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
I know what wins US Presidential elections and it is not uncharismatic elitist coastal liberals like she is
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
That's why Reeves is so desperate for the bank to cut rates so she can refinance debt at a lower cost, and create headroom for things like this.
Can't she just make them? Bank independence came in during Blair and has arguably outlasted its usefulness. People are so used to the status quo they forget things used to be done differently, and may be again.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
That's why Reeves is so desperate for the bank to cut rates so she can refinance debt at a lower cost, and create headroom for things like this.
Can't she just make them? Bank independence came in during Blair and has arguably outlasted its usefulness. People are so used to the status quo they forget things used to be done differently, and may be again.
Politicians will probably make even worse decisions than the economists.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
It's not often I disagree with you on matters Blue, but isn't this just plain wrong? As indicated by that table Carlotta posted, Con leaked to everybody and nobody leaked to Con. Con bled out on the table but Reform was only one of the knife wounds and nobody offered to be a blood donor
(Apologies for the violence of the analogy, but it's the only one I got ☹️)
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
Women may yet win it for the Dems based on Trump being the GOP candidate and the whole abortion rights agenda.
But first Biden needs to hand on the torch.
For goodness sake, even Hillary won women! It is white working class males Biden gained from Trump in 2020 the Democrats need to hold to win the EC, along with upper middle class highly educated suburban Independents of both genders Biden also won.
Or get massive black turnout of Obama 2012 levels in key swing states but the evidence is Harris can't
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
Have you looked at the demographic and social structure of the swing states?
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
It's not often I disagree with you on matters Blue, but isn't this just plain wrong? As indicated by that table Carlotta posted, Con leaked to everybody and nobody leaked to Con. Con bled out on the table but Reform was only one of the knife wounds and nobody offered to be a blood donor
(Apologies for the violence of the analogy, but it's the only one I got ☹️)
The Conservatives lost more of their 2019 voters to Reform than to Labour and the LDs combined, they need to regain both groups for a majority again yes but the first is the largest of the 2
It's probably a coincidence, but I have recently encountered only the second Trump supporter I have knowingly come across (no doubt there have been others I did so unknowingly), and where the other was a very stereotypically pro-Trumper and very keyed in to American GOP talking points, this one was more of the 'reluctant' variety. I also came across someone who was still Biden over Trump, but talked about the former being complicit in genocide, which I had not personally come across before.
Both were 100% certain Biden would be forced not to stand.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
The USA is going to get the President it deserves. The Supreme Court has made sure that President has no limitations on what they might do.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Am I the only one finding it unlikely Starmer will fight another election? I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71. Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea... Hang on.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Am I the only one finding it unlikely Starmer will fight another election? I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71. Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea... Hang on.
Good question. If he has a big ego, he's got to want two terms or at least a term and a half. But does he?
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
I know what wins US Presidential elections and it is not uncharismatic elitist coastal liberals like she is
Although, an uncharismatic left-liberal North London elitist lawyer just won handsomely in the UK. Including in the Red Wall.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 1h "What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Trump is eminently beatable.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Trump would crush Harris in the rustbelt
Not necessarily. You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
I know what wins US Presidential elections and it is not uncharismatic elitist coastal liberals like she is
Although, an uncharismatic left-liberal North London metropolitan elitist lawyer just won handsomely in the UK.
From opposition against an unpopular government and not very charismatic opponent not as an incumbent and Starmer as I said only got a clear majority under FPTP as the right was divided between Tories and Reform, in the US the right is united behind Trump.
Starmer also made efforts to marginalise much of the liberal left to get into power and reassure working class whites they could vote Labour again
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Am I the only one finding it unlikely Starmer will fight another election? I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71. Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea... Hang on.
If Trump wins in November, Boris will be fancying repeating the trick here again with an ageing dull Starmer facing the fate of Biden
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Am I the only one finding it unlikely Starmer will fight another election? I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71. Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea... Hang on.
Good question. If he has a big ego, he's got to want two terms or at least a term and a half. But does he?
To be pedantic, that wasn't one of the speakers, it was Tory MP for Christchurch, Christopher Chope, who must be standing in until they elect the deputy speakers, since he almost qualified as Father of the House.
What do the Americans get out of UK politicians abasing themselves across the pond? Sure, who doesn't love a good abasement, but when it's no longer a novelty I don't see the appeal.
Prediction: if Kemi wins she wont still be leading the tories by 2028 GE.
She would be a passable LOTO, as she is quite articulate at set pieces.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
They lost mainly as they leaked to Reform. Tories + Reform's combined voteshare was 38%, more than Labour's 33%.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
The Conservatives lost 7 million votes on July 4th - they polled nearly 14 million in December 2019, less than 7 million on July 4th.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
Yes they lost voters to stay at home too, hence turnout fell to under 60%.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
Am I the only one finding it unlikely Starmer will fight another election? I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71. Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea... Hang on.
Good question. If he has a big ego, he's got to want two terms or at least a term and a half. But does he?
We don't know. If he could stabilise the shitshow, take some very unpopular decisions, and take the grief on himself, before handing on to someone more appealing? That seems to have been the strategy in Opposition. But a succession of comedy own goals has gifted him power. We don't really know much about his character. He's inscrutable for a PM.
Why Kamala Harris isn't much of a success at identity poliitcs: Her father is a mixed-race academic from Jamaica; her mother is an academic from India. So she is, most likely, one-fourth black -- and doesn't look very black.
As a young child she was schooled in both Christian and HIndu teachings.
When she was 12, her mother moved her and her younger sister to Canada. She did not get back to the United States until she chose to attend Howard, a historically black university. (I suspect she chose Howard because of her political ambitions; she thought her best chance was to learn how to at least appear "authentically black".)
She did have an affair with a prominent black California politician, Willie Brown, but she married a Jewish lawyer in the entertainment business. They have no children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
At the moment my hunch is that Harris will be the nominee and that she'll win the election in November, but I may change that prediction over the coming weeks and months.
Comments
As a young child she was schooled in both Christian and HIndu teachings.
When she was 12, her mother moved her and her younger sister to Canada. She did not get back to the United States until she chose to attend Howard, a historically black university. (I suspect she chose Howard because of her political ambitions; she thought her best chance was to learn how to at least appear "authentically black".)
She did have an affair with a prominent black California politician, Willie Brown, but she married a Jewish lawyer in the entertainment business. They have no children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris
The only relevant one is whether something is sufficiently abundant to mean we aren't going to run out of it for a very long time.
Sly Stallone
Jack Straw
Just to demonstrate her decorum here is a picture of her before First Lady decorum.
I mean, come on Lancs, obviously, but this is beautiful to watch.
https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=kg&d=240#google_vignette
(That's from just a quick google look. If you know more about that market than I -- which would be easy -- please share some data with us.)
You can recycle lithium; you can’t recycle burned coal.
How much lithium do you think we need, Sunil ?
easyJet staff plentiful but with a reality check of minimal free seats on any flight north from London over the weekend meant not much they could do.
Have rebooked with Loganair tomorrow morning from Birmingham. easyJet will cover the expenses and bizarrely this is the quickest way to get home just the 15 hours or so late
EXCLUSIVE:
Teachers and NHS workers should get 5.5% pay rises, independent pay review bodies suggest
Move would cost £3.5billion and create a headache for Rachel Reeves ahead of first budget, which is now expected in October
If Reeves and Starmer reject recommendations they face risk of industrial action from unions
Pay review body advice reflects similar pay rises in the private sector. There are already significant issues with both retention and recruitment, particularly for teachers
Starmer and Reeves to make a decision in the next fortnight before Parliament rises
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1814393887177200069
I don’t see us running out of sodium.
@BillKristol
·
1h
"What I saw at this convention wasn’t confidence. It was overconfidence. It was complacency. I saw a party and a candidate who expect a coronation...[And] what I saw was a tired, meandering old man playing the hits...What I saw was opportunity."
Doors interlock issue. They’ve now rebooted the train 3 times and we’re still here. I now expect to be on the 22:30. Which is (a) much slower to travel than this one (an extra 30 mins padded for engineering allowance) and (b) will be rammed.
Update to the update. Now awaiting the fitter. Train is broke.
But the teacher pay recommendation was sent to the government before the election was called;
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/teacher-pay-response-wont-come-before-election-keegan-confirms/
There are all sorts of nasties that the previous government's Budget didn't... budget for.
Brace.
The problem is that he will win by default if Biden is the candidate.
Damian Green and Steve Baker publish joint endorsement of Tom Tugendhat this evening
https://x.com/christiancalgie/status/1814407315879289149
The question is whether Starmer and Reeves can afford to use up some of their political capital on either giving the pay rise and putting up taxes or not giving the payvrise and pissing off the teachers and NHS staff.
She just won't put in the work behind the scenes to sort out the Tory's electability problem because she doesn't understand why they lost.
If the right can be united again the next general election is certainly winnable for the Conservatives if the economy is poor under Starmer's government
You’re way to certain of your knowledge of US politics.
She would do more good for the Democrats on the SC next time a vacancy comes up than running for POTUS again
But first Biden needs to hand on the torch.
TBP polled 645,000 in 2019 - Reform polled 4.1 million so let's call it a gain of 3.5 million.
In other words, at most, HALF the Conservative loss went to Reform and it's probably not even that as Reform attracted support in Labour areas.
There's plenty of evidence, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, Reform voters are NOT Conservative voters but if you want to carry on with that delusion, fine. It took eight years and three defeats last time before you saw sense - probably 15 years and three defeats before you understand how politics really works.
(Apologies for the violence of the analogy, but it's the only one I got ☹️)
Or get massive black turnout of Obama 2012 levels in key swing states but the evidence is Harris can't
It’s not (yet) too late.
A Presidential Address for This Moment
https://fallows.substack.com/p/a-presidential-address-for-this-moment
Both were 100% certain Biden would be forced not to stand.
In 1997 the Tories had a charismatic centrist opponent as PM and Labour leader in Blair, Starmer is a dull Brownite social democrat, not in the same league. So GE victory is perfectly possible again if the 2019 coalition Boris built can be rebuilt
If I try to put myself in a Tory Member's shoes I struggle even further to get it.
https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1814364190825484402
Speaker: "The right honourable lady has behaved abominably"
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1814386224309649892
https://x.com/stephenflynnsnp/status/1814409275675943245?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
I mean. He'll be 66, and asking us to elect him till he's 71.
Can't imagine any electorate thinking that is a good idea...
Hang on.
Starmer also made efforts to marginalise much of the liberal left to get into power and reassure working class whites they could vote Labour again
That seems to have been the strategy in Opposition. But a succession of comedy own goals has gifted him power.
We don't really know much about his character. He's inscrutable for a PM.