Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Powered Up – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,456

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.

  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,126
    Thanks Robert, good article.

    My view is that there are other reasons apart from energy prices to think that the next decade might be rather more benign than the last. Though I can't now remember what any of them are!
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,842
    As for stock markets surely this is very good news? Cheaper energy will be of benefit to all businesses who will do better than they were going to do?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,318
    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    https://grid.iamkate.com/ gives the live figures. Currently 34.3% renewables (10.2% solar), 24.3% fossil fuels, 12.6% nuclear, 7.1% biomass, 10% from France, 1.1% pumped storage, etc.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,318
    Looking at https://grid.iamkate.com/ for past year...

    38.1% renewables, of which 4.9% solar

    It's wind that currently dominates at 31.8%, more than any other single source. Followed by gas at 28.8%, then nuclear at 14.5%.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,314
    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,600

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    There are lots of solar panels being fitted on the new builds in Cambourne West near me.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,616
    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542
    stjohn said:

    As for stock markets surely this is very good news? Cheaper energy will be of benefit to all businesses who will do better than they were going to do?

    Not discussed yet here is demand. We’re going to need a LOT of power as the energy economy transitions from fossil. And then there’s AI data centres.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,314

    Looking at https://grid.iamkate.com/ for past year...

    38.1% renewables, of which 4.9% solar

    It's wind that currently dominates at 31.8%, more than any other single source. Followed by gas at 28.8%, then nuclear at 14.5%.

    Although wind is more productive in the UK, the good thing about solar is that it tends to complement wind. That is, it's often sunny when the wind's not blowing, and vice versa.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    Interestingly there's now more non Conservative MPs than Conservative MPs entitled (Adding Sinn Fein & the recently whip-lost Labour MPs here) to sit on the opposition benches...

    Must be the first time ever.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,728

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,600

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.
    Weight might be an issue with pre-existing warehouses; they are built to cope with the usual dead loads and live loads. Whilst solar panels and their peripherals don't weigh that much, over that sort of area the weight (and hence load) add up.

    I do wonder how panels raised up off an existing roof affects the wind loading; if the wind gets behind them, they could act like a sail.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,486
    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,866
    One thing I have wondered about for some time: Would solar electricity be a good match for properly-designed energy-intensive manufacturing plants? For example, aluminum production. When the sun shines, make aluminum; when it doesn't, stop.

    (I don't doubt that there have been studies of this idea, but I haven't seen anything, yet. In some deserts, it would be a fairly predictable day/night cycle, or so it seems to me.)
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    This is all true. But I am pretty pessimistic to be honest. Big chunks of our economy will be difficult to convert to renewables any time soon, especially while maintaining democratic consent for the cost impact. Then there’s international competitiveness on the harder to abate sectors. Personally I think net zero by 2035/40 etc… is a bust. And politicians need to start being a lot more honest with electorates about what that likely means.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,616
    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
    I'm not so sure about that even the small business owners I know have leased rather than bought their cars outright...
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,318

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    Not if we support the developing world to make the transition to solar, an energy production source that will work much better for them in multiple ways beyond its contribution to reducing CO2 output.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,318
    moonshine said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    This is all true. But I am pretty pessimistic to be honest. Big chunks of our economy will be difficult to convert to renewables any time soon, especially while maintaining democratic consent for the cost impact. Then there’s international competitiveness on the harder to abate sectors. Personally I think net zero by 2035/40 etc… is a bust. And politicians need to start being a lot more honest with electorates about what that likely means.
    We're back to the point made in https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/07/17/the-dangers-of-oppositionalism/ All the right wingers here protesting about net zero, for no other reason than that it's associated with the left, so they feel they have to badmouth it.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,728

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    Not if we support the developing world to make the transition to solar, an energy production source that will work much better for them in multiple ways beyond its contribution to reducing CO2 output.
    What does that look like in practical policy terms?
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    And what do you think the current rate of climate change is going to do to the developing world?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542

    One thing I have wondered about for some time: Would solar electricity be a good match for properly-designed energy-intensive manufacturing plants? For example, aluminum production. When the sun shines, make aluminum; when it doesn't, stop.

    (I don't doubt that there have been studies of this idea, but I haven't seen anything, yet. In some deserts, it would be a fairly predictable day/night cycle, or so it seems to me.)

    Chinese aluminium refining used to be based on or close to the coast. The local govt in western China then told all the producers that they could have essentially free (or very close to free) electricity if they moved their production there. The coal there is too low value to export to the coast but is abundant. So most of the plants in the west of the country were gradually decommissioned and shiny new ones built outside Urumqi, each with its own 1GW coal plant. Beijing waited until the plants had been built to sent its own people, who then tore up a good chunk of the environmental permits. Quite amusing.

    But yes, at these PV prices, Australia should definitely be smelting and refining bauxite near the mines. Doubly so if combined with an international PR campaign to make dirty aluminium non regulatory compliant.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,728
    WillG said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    And what do you think the current rate of climate change is going to do to the developing world?
    So you'd support forced deindustrialisation?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,027

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    One thing that was missed in our last debate our oil&gas licenses was what effect the massive tax relief available for O&G investment is having on the demand for those licences.

    This is not my area so don't really understand how the incentives work in this part of the economy. When profit for O&G firms is taxed so heavily until 2029, surely that means it's optimal to invest heavily in new fields and wait for the tax rates to be cut from 2029 onward?
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,456
    edited July 25

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.
    Weight might be an issue with pre-existing warehouses; they are built to cope with the usual dead loads and live loads. Whilst solar panels and their peripherals don't weigh that much, over that sort of area the weight (and hence load) add up.

    I do wonder how panels raised up off an existing roof affects the wind loading; if the wind gets behind them, they could act like a sail.
    Hmm, that's a fair point. I have always wondered about domestic solar panels in high winds although I have done damage surveys after wind incidents and I can't say I've seen any dramatic effects yet.

    You can get flexible panels that install perfectly flat which could work well on a warehouse roof. On a domestic scale they are about 5kg / sq.m.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,713

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    Does "we" mean "the UK" or "the world"?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,027
    Eabhal said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    One thing that was missed in our last debate our oil&gas licenses was what effect the massive tax relief available for O&G investment is having on the demand for those licences.

    This is not my area so don't really understand how the incentives work in this part of the economy. When profit for O&G firms is taxed so heavily until 2029, surely that means it's optimal to invest heavily in new fields and wait for the tax rates to be cut from 2029 onward?
    Also be interested to see how that compares with wind/solar.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    edited July 25

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    Interestingly* June CO2 was higher at Mauna Loa than May CO2, which was up on April CO2. It's only happened once before (In recorded history obvs) in 1979, though the CO2 uplift was ~ 1.2 ppm from 1978 for April, May, June last year. This year it's ~ 3.1 ppm from 2023. Obviously it won't (For many reasons) carry on long term (In the geological sense) like this but we'll look like a gnat's fart in earth's history compared to the actually impressively long dinosaur era if we carry on like this.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542
    edited July 25

    moonshine said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    This is all true. But I am pretty pessimistic to be honest. Big chunks of our economy will be difficult to convert to renewables any time soon, especially while maintaining democratic consent for the cost impact. Then there’s international competitiveness on the harder to abate sectors. Personally I think net zero by 2035/40 etc… is a bust. And politicians need to start being a lot more honest with electorates about what that likely means.
    We're back to the point made in https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/07/17/the-dangers-of-oppositionalism/ All the right wingers here protesting about net zero, for no other reason than that it's associated with the left, so they feel they have to badmouth it.
    As Robert has laid out, there will be massive economic driving factors to clean much of the grid mix but also I think to electrify much of consumption. But it won’t be enough in the timeframe the scientists say is needed. Aviation is the big elephant in the room. You could throw the entirety of global UCO supplies (used cooking oil) at making SAF (sustainable aviation fuel), and that will happen quite fast. But it won’t do more than abate perhaps 2 years of global aviation growth. Maybe there are substitutes, artificially generated biofuel for example. Tolerating biofuel crops. But ultimately it’s the cost. It’s calculated that a 100% SAF fuelled flight would increase a trans Atlantic ticket cost 5X.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,486
    edited July 25
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
    I'm not so sure about that even the small business owners I know have leased rather than bought their cars outright...
    1. The new sales are mostly to lease companies, rather than to businesses directly.
    2. A whole load of business leases are being extended, and personal leases being bought out and refinanced.

    One example, a friend of mine. He has a fancy car that was £80k list price three years ago. He paid £1k a month for a three year lease. The same car now is £100k and £2.5k a month to lease, and his £1k budget gets him the poverty-spec £40k version of the same car rather than the top-of-the-range spec. So he kept the car he has already and refinanced it instead of giving it back.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993
    edited July 25

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Probably no regulatory requirement, and it lets the developer divert some of their capital cost to the future electric bills paid by the purchaser.

    In those circs, only an obvious sale price net benefit or other concrete upfront cost factor will swing it.

    The last Govt would not accept the principle that regulatory requirements should be used to set a higher minimum standard.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,153
    kinabalu said:

    Wahay. This bodes well for a decade of national renewal under a changed Labour Party back in the service of working people.

    "in the service of working people"

    I'll just leave that there...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    Yes, grid storage suddenly doesn't look quite such a blue sky idea.
    I remarked on its sudden growth spurt a few days ago.

    Trump's "drill baby drill" schtick - particularly when the US is already the world's largest fossil fuel producer, and has been self sufficient for a while - is utterly redundant.
    You can't buck the market.
    No, but you can do considerable damage to your country by trying.
    True that.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,884
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    This is all true. But I am pretty pessimistic to be honest. Big chunks of our economy will be difficult to convert to renewables any time soon, especially while maintaining democratic consent for the cost impact. Then there’s international competitiveness on the harder to abate sectors. Personally I think net zero by 2035/40 etc… is a bust. And politicians need to start being a lot more honest with electorates about what that likely means.
    We're back to the point made in https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/07/17/the-dangers-of-oppositionalism/ All the right wingers here protesting about net zero, for no other reason than that it's associated with the left, so they feel they have to badmouth it.
    As Robert has laid out, there will be massive economic driving factors to clean much of the grid mix but also I think to electrify much of consumption. But it won’t be enough in the timeframe the scientists say is needed. Aviation is the big elephant in the room. You could throw the entirety of global UCO supplies (used cooking oil) at making SAF (sustainable aviation fuel), and that will happen quite fast. But it won’t do more than abate perhaps 2 years of global aviation growth. Maybe there are substitutes, artificially generated biofuel for example. Tolerating biofuel crops. But ultimately it’s the cost. It’s calculated that a 100% SAF fuelled flight would increase a trans Atlantic ticket cost 5X.
    SAF is just a daft idea. Especially trying to gasify waste to make FT fuels. Just apply CCS to EfW plants, and then the net negative emissions can offset the emissions from aviation burning conventional Jet-A1.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,197
    viewcode said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wahay. This bodes well for a decade of national renewal under a changed Labour Party back in the service of working people.

    "in the service of working people"

    I'll just leave that there...
    If we work part time do we get part time service? If we are contracted to work but are quite good at mostly avoiding doing any, are we still included as working people?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
    I'm not so sure about that even the small business owners I know have leased rather than bought their cars outright...
    1. The new sales are mostly to lease companies, rather than to businesses directly.
    2. A whole load of business leases are being extended, and personal leases being bought out and refinanced.

    One example, a friend of mine. He has a fancy car that was £80k list price three years ago. He paid £1k a month for a three year lease. The same car now is £100k and £2.5k a month to lease, and his £1k budget gets him the poverty-spec £40k version of the same car rather than the top-of-the-range spec. So he kept the car he has already and refinanced it instead of giving it back.
    Refinancing a car !!!

    Cripes.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287
    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    I'm talking about the fact that (for their own cars), they had much cheaper batteries than the competition because they made them in house very cheaply. Now their competitors are able to buy batteries cheaply, and that advantage has largely subsided.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,479

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.
    Weight might be an issue with pre-existing warehouses; they are built to cope with the usual dead loads and live loads. Whilst solar panels and their peripherals don't weigh that much, over that sort of area the weight (and hence load) add up.

    I do wonder how panels raised up off an existing roof affects the wind loading; if the wind gets behind them, they could act like a sail.
    That's exactly what worries me about my house. It's perfectly angled to the prevailing gales for any panel with a space below to act as a lifting slat. I'm eyeing up the (new) timber shed but it's in just as bad a position - on a raised plinth where the gales are funnelled across its length. It's already screwed and strapped down to its plinth as i tis.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993
    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    I'm probably about to bin Samsung after 10 years for their health-and-safety-risk-to-visually-impaired-people Art Installation put up in the middle of the pavement at the tube station for the Moorfields Eye Hospital, so I am looking.

    I pay about £8, and I have been an Apple-walled-garden refusenik since the 1980s, so I need to have a careful look around.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287

    Looking at https://grid.iamkate.com/ for past year...

    38.1% renewables, of which 4.9% solar

    It's wind that currently dominates at 31.8%, more than any other single source. Followed by gas at 28.8%, then nuclear at 14.5%.

    Do remember that rooftop solar shows up as reduced demand.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422
    Cookie said:

    Thanks Robert, good article.

    My view is that there are other reasons apart from energy prices to think that the next decade might be rather more benign than the last. Though I can't now remember what any of them are!

    Labour government, innit? :wink:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,728
    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993
    Cookie said:

    Thanks Robert, good article.

    My view is that there are other reasons apart from energy prices to think that the next decade might be rather more benign than the last. Though I can't now remember what any of them are!

    Hasn't @TSE just got married, so he'll be having fewer holidays?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287
    moonshine said:

    stjohn said:

    As for stock markets surely this is very good news? Cheaper energy will be of benefit to all businesses who will do better than they were going to do?

    Not discussed yet here is demand. We’re going to need a LOT of power as the energy economy transitions from fossil. And then there’s AI data centres.
    I think the key change is that an increasing proportion of power is going to be delivered in the form of electricity (i.e. indirectly), rather than directly through the burning of fossil fuels.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287

    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
    Thanks to China and the developed world fossil fuel consumption is already peaking: even BP thinks that 2025 is peak world oil demand.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 69,024
    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,542
    Eabhal said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    One thing that was missed in our last debate our oil&gas licenses was what effect the massive tax relief available for O&G investment is having on the demand for those licences.

    This is not my area so don't really understand how the incentives work in this part of the economy. When profit for O&G firms is taxed so heavily until 2029, surely that means it's optimal to invest heavily in new fields and wait for the tax rates to be cut from 2029 onward?
    The Sunak/Hunt taxes meant many of the North Sea independents needed a soft restructure from their banks. Labour’s manifesto proposals have a drastic impact on the modelling forecasts, mainly due to the removal of investment allowances. We’ll no doubt see similar, the last remaining Oil and Gas banks rigging the assumptions in their lending models and hoping prices stay above $70-75 for the next 1-2 years to bail them out the problem until many of them phase out the sector. In short, it is not a friendly investment environment for Uk North Sea.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,486
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
    I'm not so sure about that even the small business owners I know have leased rather than bought their cars outright...
    1. The new sales are mostly to lease companies, rather than to businesses directly.
    2. A whole load of business leases are being extended, and personal leases being bought out and refinanced.

    One example, a friend of mine. He has a fancy car that was £80k list price three years ago. He paid £1k a month for a three year lease. The same car now is £100k and £2.5k a month to lease, and his £1k budget gets him the poverty-spec £40k version of the same car rather than the top-of-the-range spec. So he kept the car he has already and refinanced it instead of giving it back.
    Refinancing a car !!!

    Cripes.
    Faced with replacing a top model with a bottom model of the same car, most of us would keep the fancy one and refinance it too.

    The whole car finance market has been totally mad while interest rates were zero, and has now been knocked back to Earth with a massive bump.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,126
    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    It's fun when a throwaway comment causes you to massively reevaluate what age another poster is. I assumed Nigelb was in his early forties. I don't know why, and it's not as if you get many Nigels in their forties these days.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,383
    Great header Robert, thanks!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,035
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
    Thanks to China and the developed world fossil fuel consumption is already peaking: even BP thinks that 2025 is peak world oil demand.
    Hasn't peak oil been predicted to be next year for the last 20 years or so?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993
    rcs1000 said:

    Looking at https://grid.iamkate.com/ for past year...

    38.1% renewables, of which 4.9% solar

    It's wind that currently dominates at 31.8%, more than any other single source. Followed by gas at 28.8%, then nuclear at 14.5%.

    Do remember that rooftop solar shows up as reduced demand.
    Plus that consumption is reducing in many categories - for example heat energy demand for dwellings is down significantly.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422
    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    I feel like there was an earlier study for a different shingles vaccine (or maybe chicken-pox - would be the same vaccines though, would it?) based on a roll-out in Ireland with similar conclusions - and that was, due to rollout being based on birth date, was able to do a causal analysis with regression discontinuity*.

    I don't recall where I read this, may have been on here and posted by you.

    *compares people just above and below the birth date cut off, who are effectively randomised across that cut-off as a few weeks/months either way shouldn't be linked to outcome other than through the vaccine cut off.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,728
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
    Thanks to China and the developed world fossil fuel consumption is already peaking: even BP thinks that 2025 is peak world oil demand.
    In 2020 they said we had already passed peak oil demand, so their predictions need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Even if they are right, it still means that substantial emissions will continue.

    The idea that we can substantially change the trajectory without making people poorer is a fantasy, even if we succeed in increasing the proportion of renewable energy.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422
    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    It's fun when a throwaway comment causes you to massively reevaluate what age another poster is. I assumed Nigelb was in his early forties. I don't know why, and it's not as if you get many Nigels in their forties these days.
    Nigel Farage is able to say "those of us in our sixties" since April. Coincidence? Hard to say... :lol:
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287
    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
    Thanks to China and the developed world fossil fuel consumption is already peaking: even BP thinks that 2025 is peak world oil demand.
    Hasn't peak oil been predicted to be next year for the last 20 years or so?
    That was peak supply (that was supposed to result in total societal collapse)*.

    This is simply that oil is being outcompeted by other - cheaper - sources of energy.

    * Go back 15 years; the number of hysterical books (like the Battle for Barrels) over the expected oil shortage was extraordinary.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,694
    Selebian said:

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    It's fun when a throwaway comment causes you to massively reevaluate what age another poster is. I assumed Nigelb was in his early forties. I don't know why, and it's not as if you get many Nigels in their forties these days.
    Nigel Farage is able to say "those of us in our sixties" since April. Coincidence? Hard to say... :lol:
    Is that the 1860s or the 1760s?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    The sooner we can get off fossil fuels, the better. So far, every month of this year has set a new record for the global average surface temperature for that month. We need to cut our use of fossil fuels pronto in order to mitigate the risk of climate catastrophe.
    It can't be done in the short term without impoverishing the developing world because they are the reason fossil fuel consumption is still rising.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/fossil-fuel-use-reaches-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
    If we buy fewer fossil fuels, that means that the price of fossil fuels declines, which is good for the developing world.
    But it doesn't reduce the consumption of fossil fuels overall.
    Thanks to China and the developed world fossil fuel consumption is already peaking: even BP thinks that 2025 is peak world oil demand.
    In 2020 they said we had already passed peak oil demand, so their predictions need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Even if they are right, it still means that substantial emissions will continue.

    The idea that we can substantially change the trajectory without making people poorer is a fantasy, even if we succeed in increasing the proportion of renewable energy.
    Here's BP's 2020 Energy Outlook: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/energy-outlook/bp-energy-outlook-2020.pdf

    In one of their scenarios (Net Zero), they predict oil demand has peaked. But it was not their central scenario.

    If you look at this year's Energy Outlook, it is significantly more pessimistic on oil demand than the 2020 piece.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    edited July 25
    I note the strike price for Hinckley C is £92.50 (in 2012 prices - so presumably inflation linked Edit: Currently £128.09 /MWh*) - which looked shit, then amazing and now with falling energy prices looks utterly shit again !

    * https://www.renewable-energy-industry.com/news/press-releases/pm-7986-hinkley-point-c-electricity-from-new-british-nuclear-power-plant-costs-over-15-cents-per-kilowatt-hour#:~:text=The latest data from the,(14.8 ct/kWh).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,287
    Pulpstar said:

    I note the strike price for Hinckley C is £92.50 (in 2012 prices - so presumably inflation linked) - which looked shit, then amazing and now with falling energy prices looks utterly shit again !

    Not only is it utterly shit, but that kind of inflexible energy supply is exactly what the country doesn't need.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993
    edited July 25
    Carnyx said:

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.
    Weight might be an issue with pre-existing warehouses; they are built to cope with the usual dead loads and live loads. Whilst solar panels and their peripherals don't weigh that much, over that sort of area the weight (and hence load) add up.

    I do wonder how panels raised up off an existing roof affects the wind loading; if the wind gets behind them, they could act like a sail.
    That's exactly what worries me about my house. It's perfectly angled to the prevailing gales for any panel with a space below to act as a lifting slat. I'm eyeing up the (new) timber shed but it's in just as bad a position - on a raised plinth where the gales are funnelled across its length. It's already screwed and strapped down to its plinth as i tis.
    There are solutions around if you look, including ground mounting if you have space.

    IIRC my Scottish Building Regs, roofs are strapped down rather than held down by their own mass as in England (?) - so it is about whether that provides enough reserve tiedown security for the extra wind load.

    As an anecdata check, do roofs themselves often blow off in Scotland in Gaels' Gales? If not that often that would suggest robustness.

    I'd have a drive around the area looking for similar installations that catch the wind, and knock to ask them about what they had done, and who did it.

    Buildhub.co.uk (forum where I am a moderator) would also be able to answer. We have lots of Scots, and people who have fled there to be able build a house for less than a King's Ransom.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,383
    rcs1000 said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    A solar panel is not like a barrel of oil. A barrel of oil is consumed, and once it's consumed, you need to buy another one.

    Once a solar panel is installed, it's producing energy... well... indefinitely. So, the makers of panels can "cut off" additional solar production capacity, but every day that becomes less of an issue because more panels are already installed.
    I was already wondering after reading your earlier comments, what is the working life of a solar panel?
    Well, in the first couple of years you'll lose 7-8% of production capacity as you get some surface oxidation. After that annual power losses are typically very small - say 0.25%-0.5% per year. So it'll take a long time before they become worth replacing.
    Anecdotal evidence but here's the annual output from the 4 kW of panels we installed in 2013. No obvious drop-off here:

    2014 - 4,383 kWh
    2015 - 4,123 kWh
    2016 - 4,032 kWh
    2017 - 3,920 kWh
    2018 - 4,215 kWh
    2019 - 4,077 kWh
    2020 - 4,411 kWh
    2021 - 4,017 kWh
    2022 - 4,399 kWh
    2023 - 4,181 kWh
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,675
    Selebian said:

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
    I used to use around 400 GB a month.

    I occasionally go past EE’s fair usage policy of 600 GB per month.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490

    rcs1000 said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    A solar panel is not like a barrel of oil. A barrel of oil is consumed, and once it's consumed, you need to buy another one.

    Once a solar panel is installed, it's producing energy... well... indefinitely. So, the makers of panels can "cut off" additional solar production capacity, but every day that becomes less of an issue because more panels are already installed.
    I was already wondering after reading your earlier comments, what is the working life of a solar panel?
    Well, in the first couple of years you'll lose 7-8% of production capacity as you get some surface oxidation. After that annual power losses are typically very small - say 0.25%-0.5% per year. So it'll take a long time before they become worth replacing.
    Anecdotal evidence but here's the annual output from the 4 kW of panels we installed in 2013. No obvious drop-off here:

    2014 - 4,383 kWh
    2015 - 4,123 kWh
    2016 - 4,032 kWh
    2017 - 3,920 kWh
    2018 - 4,215 kWh
    2019 - 4,077 kWh
    2020 - 4,411 kWh
    2021 - 4,017 kWh
    2022 - 4,399 kWh
    2023 - 4,181 kWh
    I got 3934.6 KwH last year according to my app, at 2221.7 KwH this year - the sunshine has been dreadful here though.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422
    Selebian said:

    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    I feel like there was an earlier study for a different shingles vaccine (or maybe chicken-pox - would be the same vaccines though, would it?) based on a roll-out in Ireland with similar conclusions - and that was, due to rollout being based on birth date, was able to do a causal analysis with regression discontinuity*.

    I don't recall where I read this, may have been on here and posted by you.

    *compares people just above and below the birth date cut off, who are effectively randomised across that cut-off as a few weeks/months either way shouldn't be linked to outcome other than through the vaccine cut off.
    Ah, here's a preprint. Was Wales in fact
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10246135/

    Slightly surprising though that something apparently this significant has not apparently yet made it to full publication yet if the results hold up to scrutiny.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,993

    stjohn said:

    Fascinating and hopeful article. Thanks Robert.

    Due you have any figures for the current UK/world % of energy from solar/renewables and future projections for the same with timescales?

    Also what will it mean for the future of petrol vehicles? Cheaper petrol and less oil dependence means petrol vehicles become cheaper to run and less likely to become redundant? Or Electric vehicles become so cheap to run that petrol vehicles are too expensive a choice comparatively? (Vested interest here. We are thinking of buying a
    diesel campervan soon.)

    https://grid.iamkate.com/ gives the live figures. Currently 34.3% renewables (10.2% solar), 24.3% fossil fuels, 12.6% nuclear, 7.1% biomass, 10% from France, 1.1% pumped storage, etc.
    That's the sort of question that Our World in Data might cover:
    https://ourworldindata.org/
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,422

    Selebian said:

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
    I used to use around 400 GB a month.

    I occasionally go past EE’s fair usage policy of 600 GB per month.
    Crikey, that's an awful lot of tractor videos :wink:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,486
    edited July 25

    Selebian said:

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
    I used to use around 400 GB a month.

    I occasionally go past EE’s fair usage policy of 600 GB per month.
    Are you running your whole company’s pirate media server on that connection?

    I use around 400MB per month.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    FTSE up, sterling down.... smells like expectations for a rate cut might be up a touch
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,053
    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Now this is interesting.
    Especially to those of us in our sixties.

    Study raises hopes that shingles vaccine may delay onset of dementia
    Shingrix linked to substantial reduction in diagnoses in the six years after people received the shot
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/25/shingles-vaccine-shingrix-may-delay-dementia-onset-study

    Available on the NHS when you hit 65.

    It's fun when a throwaway comment causes you to massively reevaluate what age another poster is. I assumed Nigelb was in his early forties. I don't know why, and it's not as if you get many Nigels in their forties these days.
    XTC started to make plans for Nigel in 1979, so there are very few Nigels under 45 in the UK.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,750
    Now we have the “wholetruthtwo” denied a fair trial according to Just Stop Oil.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51y99yrj49o
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,675
    Sandpit said:

    Selebian said:

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
    I used to use around 400 GB a month.

    I occasionally go past EE’s fair usage policy of 600 GB per month.
    Are you running your whole company’s pirate media server on that connection?

    I use around 400MB per month.
    The joys of working away from home.

    Streaming UHD is a joy.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,479
    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Why are not solar panels not automatically fitted to new houses? Three new estates have recently been built near us and not a solar panel in sight!

    Same question re: large warehouses.

    eg: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4830846,-1.102473,690m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

    If they are cheap enough the orientation doesn't matter.
    Weight might be an issue with pre-existing warehouses; they are built to cope with the usual dead loads and live loads. Whilst solar panels and their peripherals don't weigh that much, over that sort of area the weight (and hence load) add up.

    I do wonder how panels raised up off an existing roof affects the wind loading; if the wind gets behind them, they could act like a sail.
    That's exactly what worries me about my house. It's perfectly angled to the prevailing gales for any panel with a space below to act as a lifting slat. I'm eyeing up the (new) timber shed but it's in just as bad a position - on a raised plinth where the gales are funnelled across its length. It's already screwed and strapped down to its plinth as i tis.
    There are solutions around if you look, including ground mounting if you have space.

    IIRC my Scottish Building Regs, roofs are strapped down rather than held down by their own mass as in England (?) - so it is about whether that provides enough reserve tiedown security for the extra wind load.

    As an anecdata check, do roofs themselves often blow off in Scotland in Gaels' Gales? If not that often that would suggest robustness.

    I'd have a drive around the area looking for similar installations that catch the wind, and knock to ask them about what they had done, and who did it.

    Buildhub.co.uk (forum where I am a moderator) would also be able to answer. We have lots of Scots, and people who have fled there to be able build a house for less than a King's Ransom.
    It's not so much the issue of it being mounted but the extra upthrust the mounting can enforce aerodynamically because of the space underneath. Mine is one of the houses that periodically gets ridge tiles missing. And none of the local installations on similar houses look that great. Mind, we haven't had a really bad storm for a few years!

    I'd prefer ground mounting or combining it with a new shed etc if/when we move house to somewhere else.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,694

    Sandpit said:

    Selebian said:

    Eabhal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    I just wanted to memorialise the fact that after 25 years of Vodaphone , I have given them the inverted Winston Churchill salute. I hope my new provider will not let me down.

    Was there an issue? Literally half way through setting up a new contract with them for mobile and broadband.

    All this excited talk of solar panels while fibre and 5g is still infuriatingly inconsistent, even in a big city .
    Remember the "correct price" for a SIM only plan should be about 7 to 8 pounds a month. Mobile telephony is one of the areas of the economy that has happily not been subject to the inflation the rest of it has.
    Yes, bagged that and used it to piggy back a current customer discount on the broadband.
    I am currently paying EE £19 a month and they provide me with unlimited calls, data, and texts, uncapped speeds, and Apple Music which normally costs me £10.99 a month.
    (2nd of 4 Yorkshiremen) Ee lad, I pay £4.90/month and that gives me unlimited calls, texts and all the data* I need.

    *not a lot - 5GB maybe? But I'm rarely away from wifi for long - I've never got near the limit, anyway
    I used to use around 400 GB a month.

    I occasionally go past EE’s fair usage policy of 600 GB per month.
    Are you running your whole company’s pirate media server on that connection?

    I use around 400MB per month.
    The joys of working away from home.

    Streaming UHD is a joy.
    How many stepmoms in 400gb?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,182
    IanB2 said:

    Nadine really laying into Sue Gray and spilling dirt on some of her colleagues on Twitter. Apparently more to come this evening. I’m not going to repost her nonsense but it isn’t pleasant.

    So it's all down to Michael Gove?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,020
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    Here's a good summary

    Solar panels have become cheap due to several factors

    Improvements in the efficiency of converting sunlight to electricity.
    Cheaper manufacturing processes.
    China's solar panel industrial boom.
    Swanson's law, which states that as production and shipment of solar panels double, panel prices drop by 20 percent.

    I think that were going through a similar process with electric car batteries
    Battery prices have dropped 55% since the start of last year. Which is insane.
    As an aside, this is one of the reasons why Tesla has struggled. They got out first with massive battery factories with dramatically lower prices. And then the rest of the world caught up, and they lost the biggest part of their cost advantage.
    Hmm… their battery storage business has a gross margin of 19% and grew 84% last quarter, with a >doubling of production capacity near completion.

    The slowdown in their EV sales has more been one of higher consumer interest rates (and insurance premiums) hasn’t it?
    One reason in the UK for lower EV sales is the expected residue prices (i.e. at the end of the 2/3/4 year lease) are far lower than they were 3 years ago. So a Tesla on lease now costs way more than a lease from 2/3 years ago.
    Two issues.

    1. Most EVs are sold new as company cars primarily for the tax breaks, and there’s very little second-hand market for them.
    2. High interest rates are leading to more people keeping old cars or trading down.
    I'm not so sure about that even the small business owners I know have leased rather than bought their cars outright...
    There's a big tax advantage in getting your employer to set up a salary sacrifice scheme for EVs. The big win is you will be paying the lease on your car out of your pre tax income - similar to your pension contributions. There's a 2% tax rate but it's nothing compared with the rates for ICEs. Your employer gets a smaller win in getting reduced Employer NICs. The downside is that your employer holds the lease on what is effectively your private vehicle. Which means you will need to give it up if you leave your employment, and there may be an early termination penalty to pay in that case.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,383
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Carnyx said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It's quite something to see the fields around Edinburgh Airport, in deepest, darkest Scotland, starting to be covered in solar panels.

    If it makes sense to do it up here...

    We're redoing the frontage of our house, and our builder said to us "do you want me to cover the concrete blocks with solar panels, it's cheaper than wood?"

    Our front doesn't get much direct sunlight, but if it's the cheapest building material, then I mean... why not?
    Is there an underlying reason why they have become cheap, other than Chinese manufacturing going crazy? Are they making them at a loss? Is there a risk they could cut supply and crush western economic growth?
    A solar panel is not like a barrel of oil. A barrel of oil is consumed, and once it's consumed, you need to buy another one.

    Once a solar panel is installed, it's producing energy... well... indefinitely. So, the makers of panels can "cut off" additional solar production capacity, but every day that becomes less of an issue because more panels are already installed.
    I was already wondering after reading your earlier comments, what is the working life of a solar panel?
    Well, in the first couple of years you'll lose 7-8% of production capacity as you get some surface oxidation. After that annual power losses are typically very small - say 0.25%-0.5% per year. So it'll take a long time before they become worth replacing.
    Anecdotal evidence but here's the annual output from the 4 kW of panels we installed in 2013. No obvious drop-off here:

    2014 - 4,383 kWh
    2015 - 4,123 kWh
    2016 - 4,032 kWh
    2017 - 3,920 kWh
    2018 - 4,215 kWh
    2019 - 4,077 kWh
    2020 - 4,411 kWh
    2021 - 4,017 kWh
    2022 - 4,399 kWh
    2023 - 4,181 kWh
    I got 3934.6 KwH last year according to my app, at 2221.7 KwH this year - the sunshine has been dreadful here though.

    2559 kWh so far here. Poor but not as bad as 2016 or 2017 at this stage of the year.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    The GOP come up with a better line than 'Cackling Kamala' yet?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    IanB2 said:

    Nadine really laying into Sue Gray and spilling dirt on some of her colleagues on Twitter. Apparently more to come this evening. I’m not going to repost her nonsense but it isn’t pleasant.

    If it is nonsense is it spilling dirt or throwing muck? Presumably has to be true to be spilling dirt.

  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282

    One thing I have wondered about for some time: Would solar electricity be a good match for properly-designed energy-intensive manufacturing plants? For example, aluminum production. When the sun shines, make aluminum; when it doesn't, stop.

    (I don't doubt that there have been studies of this idea, but I haven't seen anything, yet. In some deserts, it would be a fairly predictable day/night cycle, or so it seems to me.)

    As one who once long ago briefly worked in an aluminum plant, tending to the pots where massive amounts of electricity were deployed converting bauxite into metal, am skeptical that you could actually make the process work on such as start and stop then start again basis.

    BUT my limited experience is now half century behind us. And the plant where I once worked, built in 1940s, is now gone, replaced by large concrete slabs.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,384
    kle4 said:

    The GOP come up with a better line than 'Cackling Kamala' yet?

    They're going hard on one of the old faithfuls - "lyin" - Trump even spelt it out at his latest rally. All feels a bit of a strain. The well is running dry, I think.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,694

    One thing I have wondered about for some time: Would solar electricity be a good match for properly-designed energy-intensive manufacturing plants? For example, aluminum production. When the sun shines, make aluminum; when it doesn't, stop.

    (I don't doubt that there have been studies of this idea, but I haven't seen anything, yet. In some deserts, it would be a fairly predictable day/night cycle, or so it seems to me.)

    As one who once long ago briefly worked in an aluminum plant, tending to the pots where massive amounts of electricity were deployed converting bauxite into metal, am skeptical that you could actually make the process work on such as start and stop then start again basis.

    BUT my limited experience is now half century behind us. And the plant where I once worked, built in 1940s, is now gone, replaced by large concrete slabs.
    That's not a very polite way to refer to your governing elites.

    After all, many large concrete slabs are brighter than Donald Trump.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,002
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nadine really laying into Sue Gray and spilling dirt on some of her colleagues on Twitter. Apparently more to come this evening. I’m not going to repost her nonsense but it isn’t pleasant.

    If it is nonsense is it spilling dirt or throwing muck? Presumably has to be true to be spilling dirt.

    Nadine may be too stupid to resist posting something libellous...
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282
    Kudos to Smithson the Younger for this thread.

    Even IF you do NOT agree with Robert in toto (we're not in Kansas anymore?) his posting AND subsequent comments are yet again proof positive that genuine expertise trumps (!) ideological sophistry ANY day.

    Or rather kicks its sorry ass.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282
    Kudos to Smithson the Younger for this thread.

    Even IF you do NOT agree with Robert in toto (we're not in Kansas anymore?) his posting AND subsequent comments are yet again proof positive that genuine expertise trumps (!) ideological sophistry ANY day.

    Or rather kicks its sorry ass.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282
    Kudos to Smithson the Younger for this thread.

    Even IF you do NOT agree with Robert in toto (we're not in Kansas anymore?) his posting AND subsequent comments are yet again proof positive that genuine expertise trumps (!) ideological sophistry ANY day.

    Or rather kicks its sorry ass.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282
    And we're back, thanks in some measure to RCS and TSE. -thanks!
  • TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 1,405
    Resurrection!!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,522
    Taz said:

    Now we have the “wholetruthtwo” denied a fair trial according to Just Stop Oil.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51y99yrj49o

    Oh no, prison sentence incoming....never mind.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,764
    Leon said:

    Fpt for @Andy_JS

    “The anti-tourism revolt continues.

    https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/portuguese-protesters-battling-tourist-hell-call-for-guerrilla-action-327vp3x7c

    "Portuguese town beloved by Byron turning into ‘amusement park’

    People living in Sintra — once hailed as the most delightful town in Europe — say mass tourism has turned it into a ‘tourist hell’ amid calls for ‘guerrilla action’"”

    This is only going to get worse. Partly for the reasons mentioned in the threader. Wealthier consumers - worldwide - all wanting to travel

    It’s why, professionally, I get excited by a place like Aveyron which is gorgeous and sunny and charming and yet barely touristed. And then I go and ruin it

    And then you write about it and a shit ton of tourists turn up and turn it into a tourist shithole...when will you take responsibility for that
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,282
    Question for Robert - Seeing as how you are a quasi-Arizonan, if Sen. Mark Kelly ends up running for Vice President, in your humble (or not) opinion, what impact is this likely to have on voting intentions and results in the Great Grand Canyon (and Salt River) State?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,001
    Nice bit of positivity from Smithson The Younger.

    Let the good times roll, then? :D
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,396
    Oh, we are back. I haven't been able to log on for an hour or so.

    “The problem with J.D. Vance is he has no convictions,” said Beshear. “But I guess his running mate has 34.”

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037

    Well.

    #New General Election Poll

    🔵 Harris 44% (+1)
    🔴 Trump 43%

    Last poll Trump vs Biden - 🔴 Trump +4

    Change polls #C - 2137 RV - 7/22-24


    https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1816529169817436199

    May the honeymoon period be long and deep.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,526
    GIN1138 said:

    Nice bit of positivity from Smithson The Younger.

    Let the good times roll, then? :D

    StY always has his eye on the ball.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    Taz said:

    Now we have the “wholetruthtwo” denied a fair trial according to Just Stop Oil.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51y99yrj49o

    Same judge as the last lot - an enemy of the people, no doubt.
This discussion has been closed.