Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
Confusing situation now inside the parliament building in Seoul as special forces are deployed inside the building after the parliament voted against the martial law of the president. https://x.com/goLoko77/status/1863983738931019811
Does anyone have a view on where annuity rates are going over the short and medium term?
I currently have a smallish fund (well under £100k) left over from when I opted out of the State Second Pension scheme around 1991, and I am of an age to take it now. Ironcially it's still with whoever took over Equitable Life, as I could never find anywhere else sensible to put such a small amount.
(Clearly I need some professional advice, especially as I will get a Type I Diabetes enhancement of some sort, and potentially a Leukemia one as well. Apparently I'm supposed to die early; not my intention.)
Aside: I think I note that the age at which pensions can be taken is increasing from 55 to 57 in 2028, so for some it may be worth looking now if you reach 55 between now and then, and don't want to find the start line has suddenly moved away waspishly.
Do you have another fund to combine it with to get lower charge percentages? Why convert to an annuity? Why not go for a drawdown (although by itself under £100k isn't a lot).
Obviously if you can get enhancements on an annuity and then stuff them by living to 120 that seems a good plan, but I like the control of a drawdown. I have good genes (I hope) so an annuity should be attractive, but I have still gone for a drawdown for the control even though I don't have any other income to fall back on. However I do have quite a bit in savings and a lot in our properties to compensate.
Cheers for the reply.
I have other stuff in place in various amounts - a self-managed pension pot, State Pension with a few years needed to be bought back due in a bit less than a decade, savings as per usual (ISAs etc), a Final Salary pension from the first 15 years of my career where I was employed by a big engineering company, and the small property portfolio I chat about on PB sometimes.
So there's enough to be at least comfortable, and probably more. In total it feels like half property, and half all the rest.
So this one I would be inclined to take as an index linked or part index linked annuity, unless I was to burn it early and treat it as cover for now to state pension age.
Minus some tax that is to crystallise, and other expenses which will come up.
I think I need a conversation with my accountant, and a pension adviser.
I've just been to a local consultation for East-West rail, a new proposed rail line from Bedford to Cambridge, to link up with the currently-reopening Oxford to Bedford route. It was held in a hotel in the village, and I sauntered in on time. It became very busy, curtailing my examination of the large printed detailed maps. Darn them!
A few points: *) People were genuinely inquisitive. A couple of people were concerned that it was going to run close to their homes; in one case "at the bottom of my garden". That lady was very relieved to learn that, as her garden was not over half a kilometre long, it was not true. People seem to believe the impact would be greater than it is. Having the land/line profile on the maps helped people to see if it would be visible from their homes or gardens.
*) The maps (which I had already viewed online) are surprisingly detailed, though it is clear that it is only broad detail. A great deal of time, effort and money has gone into refining the route for a project that might still be cancelled. But I guess this work will all be needed for the official planning process.
*) Many people cannot read maps / cannot orientate themselves on maps, which made some of the work of the staff more difficult - especially as they were not local themselves.
*) A couple of dozen people were waiting to come in as I left. It felt genuinely popular, though that might just have been an opening rush (they are open for five hours this afternoon and evening).
*) My main concerns are access from the village, which seems to be rather poor for what will probably be quite a busy route.
*) A group of half a dozen anti-EWR people had set up outside the hotel as I left. They appeared to be talking to themselves.
I know it might seem an unnecessary step in the process, but from talking to people there, I think it did a lot of good. Certainly a couple of people seemed less fearful of the project afterwards.
"Many people cannot read maps".
Another terrible inditement of our glorious education system.
Ahem. Indictment.
LOL.
Whoops.
Sorry, couldn't resist in the context of 'inditement of our glorious education system'!
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
It's like he was reading from the same script as william.
...Yoon, a former prosecutor, accused opposition lawmakers of cutting “all key budgets essential to the nation’s core functions, such as combatting drug crimes and maintaining public security... turning the country into a drug haven and a state of public safety chaos.”
The president went on to label the opposition, which holds a majority in the 300-member parliament, as “anti-state forces intent on overthrowing the regime”.
Yoon described the imposition of martial law as “inevitable to guarantee the continuity of a liberal South Korea,” adding that it would not impact the country’s foreign policy.
“I will restore the country to normalcy by getting rid of anti-state forces as soon as possible,” he said, without elaborating further other than the martial law in place.
He described the current situation as South Korea “on the verge of collapse, with the national assembly acting as a monster intent on bringing down liberal democracy”...
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
I've never had house cats before, so I've just come across a weird scientific phenomena.
When a cat is asleep on your arm or lap, it is impossible to get up. You have to stay there, however much you need to get up to pee. You can only get up when the cat finally moves.
Have any papers ever been written on this phenomena?
However, the cat can be enticed to move first by an enthusiastic and energetic reciting of the word "biscuits!".
I've never had house cats before, so I've just come across a weird scientific phenomena.
When a cat is asleep on your arm or lap, it is impossible to get up. You have to stay there, however much you need to get up to pee. You can only get up when the cat finally moves.
Have any papers ever been written on this phenomena?
However, the cat can be enticed to move first by an enthusiastic and energetic reciting of the word "biscuits!".
Our kittens haven't learnt that yet. They do respond to the shaking of the biscuit bag, but that's no good if it's in another room...
I've never had house cats before, so I've just come across a weird scientific phenomena.
When a cat is asleep on your arm or lap, it is impossible to get up. You have to stay there, however much you need to get up to pee. You can only get up when the cat finally moves.
Have any papers ever been written on this phenomena?
Er ... yes.
85037 academic articles (nearly all may not have been published). One involved testing cats ability to land on their feet by dropping them out of windows - the author is now an ex-parrot, since their colleagues found out. 9274053 newspaper columns in the Guardian and Mail Woman. 92374056873274360 blog articles. 82367905726254506032725456039482625640568326549272646 tweets.
You need to install a catflap on the shed, and put the cat out night.
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
Agreed, with fingers crossed. The only thing that gives me pause is that it has happened before - and in Seoul (though the most brutal events took place in the provinces).
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
"The turning point of a career In Korea, being insincere"
Kang Won-taek, a professor of political science at Seoul National University, said South Koreans were shocked and “bewildered” by President Yoon’s declaration of martial law. “It’s not going to succeed,” he said in an interview. “We will see people taking to the streets tomorrow. How can the military control them? By shooting them?” That was unlikely, Kang said.
On the whole I agree. The current efforts to cut CO2 emissions are, on a worldwide scale, barely working at all. Setting import tariffs or similar on goods produced by high CO2-emitting countries makes sense and is something that I've always advocated.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
And the problem is back to the old one with subsidies and taxes - addiction.
Kang Won-taek, a professor of political science at Seoul National University, said South Koreans were shocked and “bewildered” by President Yoon’s declaration of martial law. “It’s not going to succeed,” he said in an interview. “We will see people taking to the streets tomorrow. How can the military control them? By shooting them?” That was unlikely, Kang said.
NY Times live blog
According to BBC, troops are now leaving the parliament building. They have been told by the opposition leader not to obey the president as parliament has suspended martial law. I think the leader hasn't been able to gain entry to the parlaiment buiding. Maybe he can now. I suspect this coup is going to fail.
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
But in 20th century history more often the army is willing to suppress the people. Not sure I would bet against human deference to power and institutional hierarchy especially as SK is such a young democracy.
The Americans could be about to give us another lesson in democratic values.
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
Agreed, with fingers crossed. The only thing that gives me pause is that it has happened before - and in Seoul (though the most brutal events took place in the provinces).
Yep, I'm not saying there will not be blood spilled, just that I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure for the President. Hopefully, enough of the military will see the futility of backing a doomed project to prevent things getting too serious.
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
Agreed, with fingers crossed. The only thing that gives me pause is that it has happened before - and in Seoul (though the most brutal events took place in the provinces).
Yep, I'm not saying there will not be blood spilled, just that I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure for the President. Hopefully, enough of the military will see the futility of backing a doomed project to prevent things getting too serious.
If the army is indeed leaving parliament, then it might well be over. I was worried for a while that they'd just mass arrest assembly members. That they didn't suggests you're right.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
The frustration with this kind of thing is too many people will use it as excuse to give up, when in reality holding fossil fuels to 80% of energy consumption is itself a major achievement given the increasing size of the world's economies and populations. It could be a lot worse.
It's bizarre to drop this at the feet of Ed Miliband. He appears to be actually attempting to do something about it. Good on him, and the Conservative and Lib Dem ministers who came before. It's why of all countries, the UK looks damned impressive, falling from 505g per kWh in 2012 to 125g now.
And the "give up" position is not so rosy for the UK. - if we really think emissions and temperatures will spiral out of control, then we need to divert vast resources towards adaptation. Best get on with it - the Thames Barrier took 10 years to build.
Sounds like the Parliament has been able to meet and vote to reject the declaration.
All hinges on what happens next. What does the military do.
The Korean people will not meekly accept a coup, for that is what it will be now that the Parliament has rejected martial law. They will demonstrate in very large numbers right across the country. I may be wrong but I think a lot of the Korean army - which is very big - is made up of young men doing national service. They will be facing off against friends and family, if that's what it comes to. They will not like it one bit. I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure. The only question is how much blood will be spilled first.
A lot of the South Korean correspondents on the BBC seem quite assured that this is going to rebound on the President and isn't going to lead to a military crackdown now that the parliament has rejected the declaration. I hope that is right.
It's really hard to see how it won't end with the President gone and the military leaders who backed him out of their jobs and quite possibly in prison. It's a small country and a largely urban one. If you want to subdue Seoul you are going to have to use a lot of troops who grew up in Seoul and its environs to do it and you will be asking them to potentially shoot at people who they know. It seems entirely unfeasible to me. This is not a backward country in which being in the military is a ticket out of poverty. It's a country where being in the military means putting a hold on your life and career development. You'll do it to keep foreign enemies at bay but not so a corrupt President can stay in office.
Agreed, with fingers crossed. The only thing that gives me pause is that it has happened before - and in Seoul (though the most brutal events took place in the provinces).
Yep, I'm not saying there will not be blood spilled, just that I do not see how this ends in anything other than failure for the President. Hopefully, enough of the military will see the futility of backing a doomed project to prevent things getting too serious.
If the army is indeed leaving parliament, then it might well be over. I was worried for a while that they'd just mass arrest assembly members. That they didn't suggests you're right.
It very much felt that there might have been something else at play when Parliament was blockaded. But it does look now like it was just a desperate power-grab from the President.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
On the whole I agree. The current efforts to cut CO2 emissions are, on a worldwide scale, barely working at all. Setting import tariffs or similar on goods produced by high CO2-emitting countries makes sense and is something that I've always advocated.
That’s what the CBAM is, in effect. An import tariff that levels the playing field.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
I think that's simply a market thing that arises because of the dispatchability of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels generators are pretty much the only ones that can respond to demand, so they set the price. The only ways I can think of to move away from this are to build out other sources such that fossil fuels are rarely needed or to manage demand to a much greater degree. To some extent, though, both of these approaches are stymied somewhat by our insatiable thirst for energy as I mentioned in my reply to RCS1000.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
I think that's simply a market thing that arises because of the dispatchability of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels generators are pretty much the only ones that can respond to demand, so they set the price. The only ways I can think of to move away from this are to build out other sources such that fossil fuels are rarely needed or to manage demand to a much greater degree. To some extent, though, both of these approaches are stymied somewhat by our insatiable thirst for energy as I mentioned in my reply to RCS1000.
The price is always set at the margin. That is the nature of economics.
If there's lots of solar and wind at any given moment, then the marginal source of power won't be gas.
On the other hand, during periods of higher demand and lower supply from renewables, then the marginal source could be pumped storage or batteries or natural gas.
Looking into some annuity estimators, and I have been dropped into medical questionnaires which will need 90-120 minutes to fill in.
Diabetes treatment and it's like 1995. "What dose of insulin have you been prescribed ?". "How many times a day do you check blood glucose level ?".
FFS I've been calculating a variable dose in my head for each food based on its carbohydrate content and ingredient type mix item since 4 weeks after diagnosis in 2001 ! I'm on Continuous Glucose Monitoring as all Type !s will be able to be soon, so every 5 minutes !
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Isn't the rail network nationalised? It's only the train operator we are dealing with here?
Yes. Rail stuff is a good instance of relative collapse of ideology. Most people no longer think it is obvious how best to run something - whether it should be state or private, but care very much about competence. There is absolutely zero ideological interest, even from the proper left, in the state running Lidl or Tesco.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
I think that's simply a market thing that arises because of the dispatchability of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels generators are pretty much the only ones that can respond to demand, so they set the price. The only ways I can think of to move away from this are to build out other sources such that fossil fuels are rarely needed or to manage demand to a much greater degree. To some extent, though, both of these approaches are stymied somewhat by our insatiable thirst for energy as I mentioned in my reply to RCS1000.
It's also a guaranteed revenue for renewables investors thing.
We used to have Feed in Tariffs for domestic installations doing the same thing - and they reduced over ten years then were cut entirely.
For LLs one party trick is to buy a house with early install of solar panels which get 40p or more per unit generated, guaranteed index linked for 25 years (ie installed in iirc 2011), which around here will give approximately an extra 1% return on investment until 2035 on top of the rent.
There aren't a lot of them around, but they do exist - though there is more paperwork involved.
There is also the benefit that T electricity bills will be lower at no cost to the LL, so they will stay for longer.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The switch that is needed now afaics is decoupling renewable generated electricity from the striking price set by fossil fuels.
I think that's simply a market thing that arises because of the dispatchability of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels generators are pretty much the only ones that can respond to demand, so they set the price. The only ways I can think of to move away from this are to build out other sources such that fossil fuels are rarely needed or to manage demand to a much greater degree. To some extent, though, both of these approaches are stymied somewhat by our insatiable thirst for energy as I mentioned in my reply to RCS1000.
The price is always set at the margin. That is the nature of economics.
If there's lots of solar and wind at any given moment, then the marginal source of power won't be gas.
On the other hand, during periods of higher demand and lower supply from renewables, then the marginal source could be pumped storage or batteries or natural gas.
That's the market working as it should work.
I'd like to believe that that is how it will play out, but I just don't see it. I think that if the use of fossil fuels isn't banned or heavily penalised, they will remain economical for a long time yet simply because our energy use will expand sufficiently to stymie any great price drops no matter how many solar panels are deployed. Look at our record to date: the current deployment of renewables has barely dented the price of fossil fuels, and there are large areas of the world that will happily use a lot more energy, given the chance. And then you've got future data centres, EVs, heat pumps, etc.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
Fx: starts wondering how my brother makes his living...
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Isn't the rail network nationalised? It's only the train operator we are dealing with here?
Yes, it's just imprecise reporting. The network has been in public hands (de jure) since 2014. For the 13 years prior to that it was de facto nationalised – although the government repeatedly denied it to keep it off the books.
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Feel sorry for Louise Haigh to be honest. She was a good transport secretary who actually demonstrated a genuine interest in transport, warded off several strikes and had a clear vision for the long overdue renationalisation of the railway.
Now, the first franchise comes back into public hands (save the six or seven that have already been renationalised because the privateers were absolutely useless) and she's not around to own the announcement.
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
Isn't the rail network nationalised? It's only the train operator we are dealing with here?
Yes. Rail stuff is a good instance of relative collapse of ideology. Most people no longer think it is obvious how best to run something - whether it should be state or private, but care very much about competence. There is absolutely zero ideological interest, even from the proper left, in the state running Lidl or Tesco.
Indeed. By contrast, even a majority of Tory voters favour a nationalised railway – I think that might also be the case with certain utilities such as water?
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/ @pickardje.bsky.social
I've never had house cats before, so I've just come across a weird scientific phenomena.
When a cat is asleep on your arm or lap, it is impossible to get up. You have to stay there, however much you need to get up to pee. You can only get up when the cat finally moves.
Have any papers ever been written on this phenomena?
Comments
https://x.com/goLoko77/status/1863983738931019811
I have other stuff in place in various amounts - a self-managed pension pot, State Pension with a few years needed to be bought back due in a bit less than a decade, savings as per usual (ISAs etc), a Final Salary pension from the first 15 years of my career where I was employed by a big engineering company, and the small property portfolio I chat about on PB sometimes.
So there's enough to be at least comfortable, and probably more. In total it feels like half property, and half all the rest.
So this one I would be inclined to take as an index linked or part index linked annuity, unless I was to burn it early and treat it as cover for now to state pension age.
Minus some tax that is to crystallise, and other expenses which will come up.
I think I need a conversation with my accountant, and a pension adviser.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
...Yoon, a former prosecutor, accused opposition lawmakers of cutting “all key budgets essential to the nation’s core functions, such as combatting drug crimes and maintaining public security... turning the country into a drug haven and a state of public safety chaos.”
The president went on to label the opposition, which holds a majority in the 300-member parliament, as “anti-state forces intent on overthrowing the regime”.
Yoon described the imposition of martial law as “inevitable to guarantee the continuity of a liberal South Korea,” adding that it would not impact the country’s foreign policy.
“I will restore the country to normalcy by getting rid of anti-state forces as soon as possible,” he said, without elaborating further other than the martial law in place.
He described the current situation as South Korea “on the verge of collapse, with the national assembly acting as a monster intent on bringing down liberal democracy”...
85037 academic articles (nearly all may not have been published). One involved testing cats ability to land on their feet by dropping them out of windows - the author is now an ex-parrot, since their colleagues found out.
9274053 newspaper columns in the Guardian and Mail Woman.
92374056873274360 blog articles.
82367905726254506032725456039482625640568326549272646 tweets.
You need to install a catflap on the shed, and put the cat out night.
Do not get into the Fred Flintsone relationship.
https://youtu.be/GJu8RreAGnM?t=23
The only thing that gives me pause is that it has happened before - and in Seoul (though the most brutal events took place in the provinces).
In Korea, being insincere"
NY Times live blog
They have been told by the opposition leader not to obey the president as parliament has suspended martial law.
I think the leader hasn't been able to gain entry to the parlaiment buiding.
Maybe he can now.
I suspect this coup is going to fail.
The Americans could be about to give us another lesson in democratic values.
@philgeorgiadis.bsky.social
The government will take South Western Railway into public ownership in May, in Labour's first nationalisation of the passenger rail network. Plans set to be announced as early as Wednesday. Story w/
@pickardje.bsky.social
https://bsky.app/profile/philgeorgiadis.bsky.social/post/3lcfvkffqjs2p
I was worried for a while that they'd just mass arrest assembly members. That they didn't suggests you're right.
It's bizarre to drop this at the feet of Ed Miliband. He appears to be actually attempting to do something about it. Good on him, and the Conservative and Lib Dem ministers who came before. It's why of all countries, the UK looks damned impressive, falling from 505g per kWh in 2012 to 125g now.
And the "give up" position is not so rosy for the UK. - if we really think emissions and temperatures will spiral out of control, then we need to divert vast resources towards adaptation. Best get on with it - the Thames Barrier took 10 years to build.
..
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If there's lots of solar and wind at any given moment, then the marginal source of power won't be gas.
On the other hand, during periods of higher demand and lower supply from renewables, then the marginal source could be pumped storage or batteries or natural gas.
That's the market working as it should work.
Looking into some annuity estimators, and I have been dropped into medical questionnaires which will need 90-120 minutes to fill in.
Diabetes treatment and it's like 1995. "What dose of insulin have you been prescribed ?". "How many times a day do you check blood glucose level ?".
FFS I've been calculating a variable dose in my head for each food based on its carbohydrate content and ingredient type mix item since 4 weeks after diagnosis in 2001 ! I'm on Continuous Glucose Monitoring as all Type !s will be able to be soon, so every 5 minutes !
*headdesk*
But, on a different 'Korea', could try the North, I guess, if democracy is not really to his liking
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
NEW THREAD
We used to have Feed in Tariffs for domestic installations doing the same thing - and they reduced over ten years then were cut entirely.
For LLs one party trick is to buy a house with early install of solar panels which get 40p or more per unit generated, guaranteed index linked for 25 years (ie installed in iirc 2011), which around here will give approximately an extra 1% return on investment until 2035 on top of the rent.
There aren't a lot of them around, but they do exist - though there is more paperwork involved.
There is also the benefit that T electricity bills will be lower at no cost to the LL, so they will stay for longer.
Now, the first franchise comes back into public hands (save the six or seven that have already been renationalised because the privateers were absolutely useless) and she's not around to own the announcement.
I hope she comes back to the role at some point.
That's all you need to know.