That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Only the Irish electorate would happily pay millions of pounds for a retirement home for crap politicians!
Don't be so bitter. How much did you lose?
Not a penny - I didnt have a firm enough view on any of the related markets to bet any money.
It was a bonkers decision. There can hardly be a more useless house of parliament in the western world.
Sorry ! Two houses better than one anytime. Last thing you need is elected dictatorships. It can happen, even in Ireland. FF had a majority not so long ago, I think.
It's as transparent as Osborne inventing a Libor conspiracy during his Omnishambles
"divert attention from"
Oh come on, that's ridiculous, even from PB's biggest tinfoil-hatter.
Hunt wasn't trying to divert attention away from anything; or if he was, then it was a very lacklustre attempt. He didn't make a speech or a briefing; he released a tweet that hardly set off an earthquake. It was hardly noted on here, afaicr.
Burnham turned the tweet into a story. It'll be interesting to see where this goes ...
As an amateur investor I am not planning to put my money in this one. There is the possibility of short term gains, but I am not convinced by the longer term, and the entire market is very uncertain at present. Add in the possibility of a Miliband price freeze and trade union militancy, and i would give it a miss.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
I have no idea whether Hunt has "gone too far" or not and frankly cannot be bothered to look up the details of such a non story.
What is clear from the e-mails in the Labour List article, however, is that something had gone seriously wrong at the CQC. Their concerns about liaising with the DH, ensuring that their message was consistent and was not "political" all show an organisation that regards itself as a cheerleader for the NHS rather than an independent regulator.
This may not be Burnham's fault of course and does indicate far more problems at the CQC than at the DH. But it is somewhat alarming that he thinks these e-mails vindicate his position rather showing the underlying problem.
Assuming he didn't sanction this whole Burnham circus, Miliband must be livid. My hunch is that Burnham will be forced to back down, but he's demeaned himself and left Labour's status as the 'party of health' teetering on the brink. I'm struggling to think how Ed can sort this mess out cleanly if at all.
Don't be silly ! Do you think the public follow this ?
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
It's as transparent as Osborne inventing a Libor conspiracy during his Omnishambles
"divert attention from"
Oh come on, that's ridiculous, even from PB's biggest tinfoil-hatter.
Hunt wasn't trying to divert attention away from anything; or if he was, then it was a very lacklustre attempt. He didn't make a speech or a briefing; he released a tweet that hardly set off an earthquake. It was hardly noted on here, afaicr.
Burnham turned the tweet into a story. It'll be interesting to see where this goes ...
And I suppose you think Osborne's invention of a criminal conspiracy involving Labour politicians in the Libor rigging during the Omnishambles was coincidental too?
Be interesting to see if Osborne is still blocking Andrea Leadsom's career today, after poor Chloe the human shield had to go
That's a totally different matter. You're in your pathetic "look: squirrel" mode again.
You are keen to invent conspiracies and nasty motives about anything to do with Conservative ministers or MPs. You do it repeatedly, as you did above. Accusing ministers of doing it when you are doing it yourself is rather stupid.
So I repeat: I seriously doubt that the contentious tweet was an attempt to divert attention from anything. If it had been, there would have been much better ways of doing it.
Of course it is just ordinary people's pension funds that will make the profits.
"City speculators" in the main invest on behalf of other people, not themselves.
If George gave 100% of GDP to hedge funds just imagine how wealthy pensioners would be.
How are they guaranteeing a 6%+ dividend?
It's not guaranteed: it what management think they will pay this year divided by the price of the shares. They have also said that they will run a progressive dividend policy (i.e. increasing in absolute terms).
The yield will fall though, if the share price rises.
Assuming he didn't sanction this whole Burnham circus, Miliband must be livid. My hunch is that Burnham will be forced to back down, but he's demeaned himself and left Labour's status as the 'party of health' teetering on the brink. I'm struggling to think how Ed can sort this mess out cleanly if at all.
Don't be silly ! Do you think the public follow this ?
I don't think the public are following this. And I don;t know in detail what's going on. But if Andy Burnham's legal move thwarts a plan to move him on from Health in the shadow cabinet., the story starts to have real-world implications. Andy Burnham stays in Health, and he's bad at it because of his baggage.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
They are expecting to sell at the top end of the range.
It's fairly typical that all IPOs are priced at around a 5-10% discount (need to let the incoming investors make some money). This is probably priced at a 15-20% discount to make sure it is successful.
But, fundamentally, this is about putting money into private sector pension funds.
As an amateur investor I am not planning to put my money in this one. There is the possibility of short term gains, but I am not convinced by the longer term, and the entire market is very uncertain at present. Add in the possibility of a Miliband price freeze and trade union militancy, and i would give it a miss.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
They are expecting to sell at the top end of the range.
It's fairly typical that all IPOs are priced at around a 5-10% discount (need to let the incoming investors make some money). This is probably priced at a 15-20% discount to make sure it is successful.
But, fundamentally, this is about putting money into private sector pension funds.
Your idea of "successful" is sell it cheap, so that the *ankers can rake in some more.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
So, you have three choices:
1. Pay child benefit to everyone. Why should the poor pay so that I get a nice £83 per month?
2. Pay child benefit to no one. At least that's consistent, but I doubt it is Labour policy.
3. Make child benefit fully taxable: see point 1.
This is not an ideal policy, and any policy is going to have anomalies (especially if you don't have joint tax filing). Can you tell us what your solution is?
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
So, you have three choices:
1. Pay child benefit to everyone. Why should the poor pay so that I get a nice £83 per month?
2. Pay child benefit to no one. At least that's consistent, but I doubt it is Labour policy.
3. Make child benefit fully taxable: see point 1.
This is not an ideal policy, and any policy is going to have anomalies (especially if you don't have joint tax filing). Can you tell us what your solution is?
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
They are expecting to sell at the top end of the range.
It's fairly typical that all IPOs are priced at around a 5-10% discount (need to let the incoming investors make some money). This is probably priced at a 15-20% discount to make sure it is successful.
But, fundamentally, this is about putting money into private sector pension funds.
Your idea of "successful" is sell it cheap, so that the *ankers can rake in some more.
You are missing the point.
Let's take a simple example. Are you sitting comfortably?
(1) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £1,000. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is happy. OAP Surbition is not. Banker is not happy because deal is perceived as a flop.
(2) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £900. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money. Banker is happy (even though his fees are lower because they are calculated as % of the placing price) because deal is perceived as a success.
Mears does a good job of separating the facts from his opinions, and in doing so creates a better story.
I've had a look at Rothbury on Google maps. It's not an area I'd choose to go to ground in. A large area of woodland surrounded by moorland and a river valley. Then again, he probably didn't have much of a choice.
From an engineering POV, I see it's near Cragside, Armstrong's home.
Senior Labour MPs are wondering whether a campaign built around a leader whose poll rating recently touched minus 35 points can actually work. But it’s a strategy of necessity rather than choice. Miliband’s inner circle now concede they simply cannot go into the election carrying huge negatives on both the economy and leadership. And given the economy is out of their hands, the only chance is to shift perceptions of Miliband himself.
That’s a big task. According to Anthony Wells of YouGov: “Once people form an opinion of someone it’s very difficult to change. Perceptions are pretty much set. It’s almost impossible to change them.”
Senior Labour MPs are wondering whether a campaign built around a leader whose poll rating recently touched minus 35 points can actually work. But it’s a strategy of necessity rather than choice. Miliband’s inner circle now concede they simply cannot go into the election carrying huge negatives on both the economy and leadership. And given the economy is out of their hands, the only chance is to shift perceptions of Miliband himself.
That’s a big task. According to Anthony Wells of YouGov: “Once people form an opinion of someone it’s very difficult to change. Perceptions are pretty much set. It’s almost impossible to change them.”
The problem is of course he needs to deliver perfection between now and the GE. One slip and the other parties supported by a pissed off press will be running "same old Ed" stories. Still at least we can have some more Ed is crap threads.
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
@Tim "The polling evidence is that David Cameron and Andrew Lansley/Jeremy Hunt have trashed their party's reputation on health since the election, themselves the facts."
Labour have had a lead in Health for a long time. It is priced in. However, the continuing presence of Andy Burnham means they can't expand it or exploit it properly. They are (he is) distracted by defending his own past.
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
Well maybe, but an issue which would still have a bit of a discount would simply become "tories bankroll city mates ". There's no easy logic in politics.
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
Members of the Unite trade union will work to rule and stage an overtime ban at the Grangemouth plant on the Firth of Forth. They have also not ruled out staging a walkout.
Negotiations are under way to avert an all-out strike at the site, which supplies fuel to Scotland, Northern Ireland and North East England. A strike could also threaten the BP Forties pipeline, which carries around half North Sea oil production.
The row centres on the treatment by Ineos, the plant’s operator, of Stevie Deans, a Unite convener who was embroiled in the vote-rigging scandal over Labour’s selection of a general election candidate in Falkirk. ....
According to a Treasury assessment, published in Sunday newspapers, even a two-day strike could lead to power cuts, harm supplies to petrol forecourts and affect long-haul flights from Scotland
Ineos said it was taking the threat “extremely seriously” and warned the refinery was losing £10 million per month and in danger of permanent closure by 2017 without further investment. It has asked UK and Scottish ministers for grants and loan guarantees worth £150 million.
“Given this stark reality, it is incredibly disappointing that Unite continues to pursue action to self-inflict yet more damage to the Grangemouth site,” a spokesman for the company said.
I support IDS policy of smoothing out marginal rates of tax benefits so that there are no anomolies. This is the background to his benefit reforms. I am glad that you and tim have been converted to this goal, and want an end to the high withdrawal rates there were under Labour.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
@Tim "The polling evidence is that David Cameron and Andrew Lansley/Jeremy Hunt have trashed their party's reputation on health since the election, themselves the facts."
Labour have had a lead in Health for a long time. It is priced in. However, the continuing presence of Andy Burnham means they can't expand it or exploit it properly. They are (he is) distracted by defending his own past.
This is factually incorrect. The Conservatives caught up on health in the polls, and have now gone back to a large deficit. That's IMO more to do with people forming views about the interest of the respective parties in the NHS than with any views on Lansley or Burnham, both of whom I suspect 80% of voters would struggle to identify.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
They are expecting to sell at the top end of the range.
It's fairly typical that all IPOs are priced at around a 5-10% discount (need to let the incoming investors make some money). This is probably priced at a 15-20% discount to make sure it is successful.
But, fundamentally, this is about putting money into private sector pension funds.
Your idea of "successful" is sell it cheap, so that the *ankers can rake in some more.
You are missing the point.
Let's take a simple example. Are you sitting comfortably?
(1) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £1,000. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is happy. OAP Surbition is not. Banker is not happy because deal is perceived as a flop.
(2) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £900. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money. Banker is happy (even though his fees are lower because they are calculated as % of the placing price) because deal is perceived as a success.
And why not? We would like you to stay locked up in your Scottish dump, and stay there.
You seem to have forgotten the title and meaning of the party you support - United Kingdom Independence Party.
I havent forgotten, but many Scots want independence for themselves and by my lights they should have it. No doubt YOU will be voting to stay locked to Engand.
"Four years ago, when I drew attention to the poor performance of Britain's healthcare system relative to other industrialised states, Andy Burnham, then Health Secretary, called me "unpatriotic". He was, as I recall, cheered on by many of the same people who now say, "How dare the Daily Mail presume to arbitrate what constitutes patriotism?" but leave that aside. We now know that, at the very moment he was uttering those words, Burnham was presiding over the atrocities at Mid Staffs and other hospitals." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100239886/nhs-cover-ups-are-not-a-failure-of-the-system-they-are-the-system/
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
A good salesman always leaves his customer happy.
A bad salesman leaves his customer unhappy.
The reasons are obvious.
It's the same PB Tory logic that says
"Bob Crow shouldn't have a council flat, Bob Crows discount on buying his council flat should be increased to £100k"
And why not? We would like you to stay locked up in your Scottish dump, and stay there.
You seem to have forgotten the title and meaning of the party you support - United Kingdom Independence Party.
I havent forgotten, but many Scots want independence for themselves and by my lights they should have it. No doubt YOU will be voting to stay locked to Engand.
On that logic since many of the english want to stay in the EU shouldn't UKIP just disband ?
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
1. Pay child benefit to everyone. Why should the poor pay so that I get a nice £83 per month?
2. Pay child benefit to no one. At least that's consistent, but I doubt it is Labour policy.
3. Make child benefit fully taxable: see point 1.
This is not an ideal policy, and any policy is going to have anomalies (especially if you don't have joint tax filing). Can you tell us what your solution is?
Anomolies ? You put it so nicely. A couple with kids , each earning £48k gets full CB. One partner earns £ 60k, another looks after the kids [ family values, remember ? ], gets zero.
On Saturday, when it was in the news, my wife was upset that she was losing the £1000 she used to get. [ our son is severly autistic. ]But the Tories fairness agenda is weird. Paying to working mothers [ which I support ] but to couples earning upto £ 300k pa ?
One partner stays at home and no CB if the other earns £60k. If both work and earns upto £300k, they get child support costs.
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
A good salesman always leaves his customer happy.
A bad salesman leaves his customer unhappy.
The reasons are obvious.
This is obviously not true in the case of a very liquid asset the price of which will go up or down unpredictably after being sold. If the seller had to be sure not to leave their customer unhappy they'd have to sell it at a humungous discount. In reality, if "happy" is defined by the value of the asset going up or down (as opposed to whether the salesman was friendly and honest or whatever), the buyer should end up unhappy in almost half the outcomes, which is what rational alternative buyers would accept.
This guy Burnham has an ego the size of a house, if reports are true he has been offered a job swap with Cooper he should take it for the good of the leader and the party. If he doesn't comply Miliband should get rid completely, he really would be no great loss.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
From the report:
About 30 staff still work on the site which halted output in April after bosses turned down its megawatt (MW) capacity to zero, due to weak market conditions and the relative inefficiency of the 20-year-old plant compared to newer facilities.
I know energy markets are complex and rcs2000 or someone can correct me if I'm wrong but "due to weak market conditions" sounds like a way of saying, "we're doing OK for gas generation capacity".
"A question arose about the Government’s welfare reforms and specifically David Cameron’s proposal to restrict the benefits of those under 25 who were neither in education, employment or training, and who also spurned community work.
The opinion polls consistently suggest welfare reform is the single most popular aspect of the Government’s programme. Yet when McLoughlin advocated it, there was not a single clap to be heard, let alone applause. Instead he got the bird.
Yet Ilkley, part of rural Yorkshire, is one of the few remaining northern Tory redoubts.
Now you might think that the boos for the welfare reforms were generated by a disproportionately noisy claque within an otherwise supportive audience. As if to address this question among those of us listening at home, the programme’s host Jonathan Dimbleby called for a show of hands. He then pronounced the audience to be ‘overwhelming’ in its opposition.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
I support IDS policy of smoothing out marginal rates of tax benefits so that there are no anomolies. This is the background to his benefit reforms. I am glad that you and tim have been converted to this goal, and want an end to the high withdrawal rates there were under Labour.
That's ruined pb for the next decade -- it was bad enough when HMG sold gold at the bottom of the market -- posters will be furious at George selling the family silver at 25 per cent *below* the bottom. Seething.
Many. When the 50% rate was cut to 45% , it got rave reviews in PBTory land. When the CB was cut and even massaged to put the ceiling higher, that also got rave reviews.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
Well, start with Nabavi, Fitalass, Plato...............you ?
Are you pretending no PBTory supported the cut to 45% from 50% ? or, are you pretending no PBTory supported the cuts to Child Benefit ?
Not an energy expert (and never been involved in building a power station), but one imagines if the lights start going out the reaction from greenists will be reminiscent of the soft liberals when the London looting happened and they suddenly all discovered just how in favour of tough law enforcements and rubber bullets they were.
And why not? We would like you to stay locked up in your Scottish dump, and stay there.
You seem to have forgotten the title and meaning of the party you support - United Kingdom Independence Party.
I havent forgotten, but many Scots want independence for themselves and by my lights they should have it. No doubt YOU will be voting to stay locked to Engand.
On that logic since many of the english want to stay in the EU shouldn't UKIP just disband ?
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
And why not? We would like you to stay locked up in your Scottish dump, and stay there.
You seem to have forgotten the title and meaning of the party you support - United Kingdom Independence Party.
I havent forgotten, but many Scots want independence for themselves and by my lights they should have it. No doubt YOU will be voting to stay locked to Engand.
On that logic since many of the english want to stay in the EU shouldn't UKIP just disband ?
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Not an energy expert (and never been involved in building a power station), but one imagines if the lights start going out the reaction from greenists will be reminiscent of the soft liberals when the London looting happened and they suddenly all discovered just how in favour of tough law enforcements and rubber bullets they were.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
And German industry is squealing like stuck pigs that Merkel's energy policy is killing them now and about to get an awful lot worse.
Mr. Bobajob, no. D'you remember the tweets that Simon Hughes (I believe) and some others sent, calling for rubber bullets to be used? There were also calls for water cannon and for the army to be put on the streets.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
And German industry is squealing like stuck pigs that Merkel's energy policy is killing them now and about to get an awful lot worse.
They are squealing by...............voting for her !
"A question arose about the Government’s welfare reforms and specifically David Cameron’s proposal to restrict the benefits of those under 25 who were neither in education, employment or training, and who also spurned community work.
The opinion polls consistently suggest welfare reform is the single most popular aspect of the Government’s programme. Yet when McLoughlin advocated it, there was not a single clap to be heard, let alone applause. Instead he got the bird.
Yet Ilkley, part of rural Yorkshire, is one of the few remaining northern Tory redoubts.
Now you might think that the boos for the welfare reforms were generated by a disproportionately noisy claque within an otherwise supportive audience. As if to address this question among those of us listening at home, the programme’s host Jonathan Dimbleby called for a show of hands. He then pronounced the audience to be ‘overwhelming’ in its opposition.
"Labour has one quite legitimate grouse about the way Question Time panels are constructed. Despite the formation of a Coalition Government between Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, the panel is still based on a pre-Coalition parliamentary arrangement, with one of each from the Tories and the Lib Dems and one from Labour.
"What this tends to mean in practice is that the two members of the Coalition (especially if one or more has a government job) agree with each other on the central issues and gang up on the Labour representative.
"I gather that the Labour Party has formally complained about this, arguing that the Government should have one representative (as in the winding up of a Commons debate). It received a complete brush-off from the BBC."
Surely not Lawson's call to check audience members against membership lists of political parties, since that would mean publishing membership lists of political parties.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
That will be the Germany which has built / is building about 15 new coal power stations.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
How much do Germans pay for their energy?
Is German industry more or less successful than "cheap energy" Britain ?
State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money.
On this logic the government may as well go right ahead and give away money to wealthy voters. They'll be happy because they get free money, and the state is happy because it's less likely to have to pay them benefits. Genius, everybody wins!
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
A good salesman always leaves his customer happy.
A bad salesman leaves his customer unhappy.
The reasons are obvious.
This is obviously not true in the case of a very liquid asset the price of which will go up or down unpredictably after being sold. If the seller had to be sure not to leave their customer unhappy they'd have to sell it at a humungous discount. In reality, if "happy" is defined by the value of the asset going up or down (as opposed to whether the salesman was friendly and honest or whatever), the buyer should end up unhappy in almost half the outcomes, which is what rational alternative buyers would accept.
It is still true, because: *) 'happiness' is predicated on more than what might be temporary blips in price. If you feel like you've had a bad deal, you might even rue a profit. ("It could have been larger; I was screwed."). *) People are not rational. *) Even if the price depresses, people are aware that it often rises again over time.
A good salesman explains the fact the price may go up and/or down, then sucks through his teeth and gives a small discount. The customer is happy with a discount, and the sale still goes through. The customer feels as though they have a little insurance against price decreases, and more chance of a profit.
A customer treated in this manner is much more likely to feel satisfied about the deal, and also do more business with the salesman in future.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
And German industry is squealing like stuck pigs that Merkel's energy policy is killing them now and about to get an awful lot worse.
They are squealing by...............voting for her !
Energy is currently one of the hottest topics in Germany, Merkel has a real weak spot on the subject especially since she accelerated the shutdown of nuclear. The "success" of Germany's alternative energy porgramme can be judged below.
Mr. Bobajob, no. D'you remember the tweets that Simon Hughes (I believe) and some others sent, calling for rubber bullets to be used? There were also calls for water cannon and for the army to be put on the streets.
When Simon Hughes called for water cannons, I was gobsmacked.
Utterly OT, but I find it interesting: 'food addiction' being used as an excuse [NB this is a separate and more widespread idea than bing eating disorder]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24402163
It's important politically for a few reasons. Obviously a horde of fat people claiming cake is like crack will increase pressure on the NHS. In addition, if you over-feed kids (and one suspects those incapable of restricting their own diet would have difficulty doing it for anyone else) then they end up with more fat cells which permanently increases their baseline 'fat level'. That'll then increase the rate of diabetes (I forget which type) and lead to increased health costs down the line, as well as increasing the likelihood of issues in school from bullying and self-esteem (which tends to be tricky during adolescence for many people anyway).
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
From the report:
About 30 staff still work on the site which halted output in April after bosses turned down its megawatt (MW) capacity to zero, due to weak market conditions and the relative inefficiency of the 20-year-old plant compared to newer facilities.
I know energy markets are complex and rcs2000 or someone can correct me if I'm wrong but "due to weak market conditions" sounds like a way of saying, "we're doing OK for gas generation capacity".
It may well be in the interest of the power companies to have power shortages rather than to operate marginal capacity at a loss.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
How much do Germans pay for their energy?
Is German industry more or less successful than "cheap energy" Britain ?
German industry's success is based on good technical products and an cheap Euro. If you followed what's happening in Germany you'd accept that energy intensive industries such as steelmaking or chemicals are lobbying hard to get market reforms or else they will offshore future investment. The rest of German industry is also paying more attention to energy since the forecast price increases from energy taxes will be a major hit to profits.
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
It's a big problem. I can't help but feel that the market now favours green energy by too great a degree, which basically means we are absolutely stuffed wrt baseload.
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Turbines mate ! Solar panels. Last year the world capacity of solar energy went up by 102%. In one day in July, Germany generated 5.1TWh, a new world record.
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
What was the cost of that provided energy, taking into account subsidies and other items?
And solar power does not depend on 'warmth'; it is light intensity. There is a difference. Indeed, some types of solar panel perform better when cooler. ISTR one large scale desert system that pumps water behind the panels to cool them, and the warm water was then used for other purposes. So they generated both electricity *and* hot water (not steam).
Although there are so many different types of tech in solar panels nowadays, that's probably changed.
Again, I suggest people thinking we can provide all our energy from such means, should read the following and perform their own calculations. http://www.withouthotair.com/c27/page_203.shtml
I think many on here would favour Plan G. But then you need to think of the implications. ;-)
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
From the report:
About 30 staff still work on the site which halted output in April after bosses turned down its megawatt (MW) capacity to zero, due to weak market conditions and the relative inefficiency of the 20-year-old plant compared to newer facilities.
I know energy markets are complex and rcs2000 or someone can correct me if I'm wrong but "due to weak market conditions" sounds like a way of saying, "we're doing OK for gas generation capacity".
It may well be in the interest of the power companies to have power shortages rather than to operate marginal capacity at a loss.
Especially if governments are likely to interfere in price setting.
I wonder if we'll see more inefficent capacity removed before 2015.
Will he extend it to smokers, drug users, owners of tattoos and breast enhancement?
So if you have say cancer - you have to lose weight first? What a stupid idea. Then we go down the whole undeserving sick tunnel - if you can't be undeserving poor, surely being sick is a free pass no matter how much you've abused yourself [I accept that being an alcoholic and killing a donated liver make you a poorer outcome prospect a la George Best].
Tim Reid @TimReidBBC Scot Secretary Michael Moore has been sacked in a libDem reshuffle. He is to be replaced by the LibDem chief whip Alistair Carmichael.
Usual bollocks from someone who has no clue. Given we have nothing from oil at present we can only improve our position. Given OPEC will never force prices down , what impact will any of their decisions make to North Sea. manufactured bull shit as ever. How is it possible that only Scotland in the whole world would be cursed by having valuable natural resources.
Members of the Unite trade union will work to rule and stage an overtime ban at the Grangemouth plant on the Firth of Forth. They have also not ruled out staging a walkout.
Negotiations are under way to avert an all-out strike at the site, which supplies fuel to Scotland, Northern Ireland and North East England. A strike could also threaten the BP Forties pipeline, which carries around half North Sea oil production.
The row centres on the treatment by Ineos, the plant’s operator, of Stevie Deans, a Unite convener who was embroiled in the vote-rigging scandal over Labour’s selection of a general election candidate in Falkirk. ....
According to a Treasury assessment, published in Sunday newspapers, even a two-day strike could lead to power cuts, harm supplies to petrol forecourts and affect long-haul flights from Scotland
Ineos said it was taking the threat “extremely seriously” and warned the refinery was losing £10 million per month and in danger of permanent closure by 2017 without further investment. It has asked UK and Scottish ministers for grants and loan guarantees worth £150 million.
“Given this stark reality, it is incredibly disappointing that Unite continues to pursue action to self-inflict yet more damage to the Grangemouth site,” a spokesman for the company said.
Will he extend it to smokers, drug users, owners of tattoos and breast enhancement?
Absolutely sick , when will they be starting selection of the undeserving poor to get put on death lists as punishment for crimes against health. You could not make it up.
Comments
Oh come on, that's ridiculous, even from PB's biggest tinfoil-hatter.
Hunt wasn't trying to divert attention away from anything; or if he was, then it was a very lacklustre attempt. He didn't make a speech or a briefing; he released a tweet that hardly set off an earthquake. It was hardly noted on here, afaicr.
Burnham turned the tweet into a story. It'll be interesting to see where this goes ...
Do your own research etc.
Have you not applied yet? It's all about the prospective yield - like many other privatisations before it.
We all have.
We would like you to stay locked up in your Scottish dump, and stay there.
What is clear from the e-mails in the Labour List article, however, is that something had gone seriously wrong at the CQC. Their concerns about liaising with the DH, ensuring that their message was consistent and was not "political" all show an organisation that regards itself as a cheerleader for the NHS rather than an independent regulator.
This may not be Burnham's fault of course and does indicate far more problems at the CQC than at the DH. But it is somewhat alarming that he thinks these e-mails vindicate his position rather showing the underlying problem.
Which PB poster ever made that claim?
I am sure that with your customary concern for accuracy that you can provide chapter and verse.
Converting full CB at £50k to zero at £60k can equate to 70% MRT. With 4 kids even higher.
You are keen to invent conspiracies and nasty motives about anything to do with Conservative ministers or MPs. You do it repeatedly, as you did above. Accusing ministers of doing it when you are doing it yourself is rather stupid.
So I repeat: I seriously doubt that the contentious tweet was an attempt to divert attention from anything. If it had been, there would have been much better ways of doing it.
The yield will fall though, if the share price rises.
And it could all go horribly wrong.
Andy Burnham stays in Health, and he's bad at it because of his baggage.
It's fairly typical that all IPOs are priced at around a 5-10% discount (need to let the incoming investors make some money). This is probably priced at a 15-20% discount to make sure it is successful.
But, fundamentally, this is about putting money into private sector pension funds.
I haven't made up my mind whether to apply myself though.
1. Pay child benefit to everyone. Why should the poor pay so that I get a nice £83 per month?
2. Pay child benefit to no one. At least that's consistent, but I doubt it is Labour policy.
3. Make child benefit fully taxable: see point 1.
This is not an ideal policy, and any policy is going to have anomalies (especially if you don't have joint tax filing). Can you tell us what your solution is?
Mr. Eagles, I knew Saul was also Inigo Montoya but didn't see that line on the pad. That's quite cool.
Blame Thatcher. :-)
Problem solved.
Let's take a simple example. Are you sitting comfortably?
(1) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £1,000. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is happy. OAP Surbition is not. Banker is not happy because deal is perceived as a flop.
(2) State has an asset worth £900-£1,000. State sells it to OAP Surbiton for £900. After the IPO, the market values the company at £950. State is ok - it has received £900 plus OAP Surbiton's pension is worth £50 more, meaning that he is less likely to claim benefits in future. OAP Surbiton is happy because he has made money. Banker is happy (even though his fees are lower because they are calculated as % of the placing price) because deal is perceived as a success.
IMV, (2) is a better outcome than (1)
A fascinating interview with Ray Mears about the hunt for Raoul Moat.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24335309
Mears does a good job of separating the facts from his opinions, and in doing so creates a better story.
I've had a look at Rothbury on Google maps. It's not an area I'd choose to go to ground in. A large area of woodland surrounded by moorland and a river valley. Then again, he probably didn't have much of a choice.
From an engineering POV, I see it's near Cragside, Armstrong's home.
That’s a big task. According to Anthony Wells of YouGov: “Once people form an opinion of someone it’s very difficult to change. Perceptions are pretty much set. It’s almost impossible to change them.”
Labour believe they can. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100240015/to-be-presidential-you-need-to-be-popular/
Meanwhile in the land of non-bonkers economics, the state should get as much money out of Surbiton in exchange for its asset as Surbiton is willing to pay, and if he's unhappy later then that's his problem.
"The polling evidence is that David Cameron and Andrew Lansley/Jeremy Hunt have trashed their party's reputation on health since the election, themselves the facts."
Labour have had a lead in Health for a long time. It is priced in.
However, the continuing presence of Andy Burnham means they can't expand it or exploit it properly. They are (he is) distracted by defending his own past.
"Disappointing" standards in maths among 14 to 16-year-olds in Wales must be tackled, says an education watchdog.
Estyn's report said maths was the lowest performing core subject at key stage four - when pupils work towards GCSEs - and the lowest in the UK.
Last year the proportion of students in Wales achieving C grade and above at GCSE lagged well behind England."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24419852
A bad salesman leaves his customer unhappy.
The reasons are obvious.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/japan-early-discussion.html
Members of the Unite trade union will work to rule and stage an overtime ban at the Grangemouth plant on the Firth of Forth. They have also not ruled out staging a walkout.
Negotiations are under way to avert an all-out strike at the site, which supplies fuel to Scotland, Northern Ireland and North East England. A strike could also threaten the BP Forties pipeline, which carries around half North Sea oil production.
The row centres on the treatment by Ineos, the plant’s operator, of Stevie Deans, a Unite convener who was embroiled in the vote-rigging scandal over Labour’s selection of a general election candidate in Falkirk. ....
According to a Treasury assessment, published in Sunday newspapers, even a two-day strike could lead to power cuts, harm supplies to petrol forecourts and affect long-haul flights from Scotland
Ineos said it was taking the threat “extremely seriously” and warned the refinery was losing £10 million per month and in danger of permanent closure by 2017 without further investment. It has asked UK and Scottish ministers for grants and loan guarantees worth £150 million.
“Given this stark reality, it is incredibly disappointing that Unite continues to pursue action to self-inflict yet more damage to the Grangemouth site,” a spokesman for the company said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10359142/Industrial-action-starts-at-Scotlands-only-oil-refinery.html
I support IDS policy of smoothing out marginal rates of tax benefits so that there are no anomolies. This is the background to his benefit reforms. I am glad that you and tim have been converted to this goal, and want an end to the high withdrawal rates there were under Labour.
"Four years ago, when I drew attention to the poor performance of Britain's healthcare system relative to other industrialised states, Andy Burnham, then Health Secretary, called me "unpatriotic". He was, as I recall, cheered on by many of the same people who now say, "How dare the Daily Mail presume to arbitrate what constitutes patriotism?" but leave that aside. We now know that, at the very moment he was uttering those words, Burnham was presiding over the atrocities at Mid Staffs and other hospitals." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100239886/nhs-cover-ups-are-not-a-failure-of-the-system-they-are-the-system/
But will both the tax break and the pension contribution still apply in the nanny is not a UK national ?
Weren't we promised that the whole tax system was to be simplified ?
On Saturday, when it was in the news, my wife was upset that she was losing the £1000 she used to get. [ our son is severly autistic. ]But the Tories fairness agenda is weird. Paying to working mothers [ which I support ] but to couples earning upto £ 300k pa ?
One partner stays at home and no CB if the other earns £60k. If both work and earns upto £300k, they get child support costs.
Where's the logic ?
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/10/05/i-thought-he-would-be-no-good-but-actually-he-has-surprised-me-a-bit/
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/business/news/10719298.Power_station_to_be_demolished/
Only 20 years old and once the largest gas power station in the world.
Looks like the gas power stations are now joining the coal, oil and nuclear stations on the scrap heap.
What we need is a method to generate electricity from all the hot air politicians produce on the subject.
"A question arose about the Government’s welfare reforms and specifically David Cameron’s proposal to restrict the benefits of those under 25 who were neither in education, employment or training, and who also spurned community work.
The opinion polls consistently suggest welfare reform is the single most popular aspect of the Government’s programme. Yet when McLoughlin advocated it, there was not a single clap to be heard, let alone applause. Instead he got the bird.
Yet Ilkley, part of rural Yorkshire, is one of the few remaining northern Tory redoubts.
Now you might think that the boos for the welfare reforms were generated by a disproportionately noisy claque within an otherwise supportive audience. As if to address this question among those of us listening at home, the programme’s host Jonathan Dimbleby called for a show of hands. He then pronounced the audience to be ‘overwhelming’ in its opposition.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2447357/DOMINIC-LAWSON-My-question-panel-DOES-BBC-partisan-audiences.html#ixzz2h1HevUIh
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
It's sad to see a power station you helped (in a very, very small way) build being stripped and the plant taken abroad because it still has good working life in it.
Are you pretending no PBTory supported the cut to 45% from 50% ? or, are you pretending no PBTory supported the cuts to Child Benefit ?
What an intellectually dishonest person you are .
Germany is not a very warm place.
In one January day, Germany produced 5 TWH from wind power alone.
Angela Merkel also balances budgets.
Was it this bit?
"Labour has one quite legitimate grouse about the way Question Time panels are constructed. Despite the formation of a Coalition Government between Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, the panel is still based on a pre-Coalition parliamentary arrangement, with one of each from the Tories and the Lib Dems and one from Labour.
"What this tends to mean in practice is that the two members of the Coalition (especially if one or more has a government job) agree with each other on the central issues and gang up on the Labour representative.
"I gather that the Labour Party has formally complained about this, arguing that the Government should have one representative (as in the winding up of a Commons debate). It received a complete brush-off from the BBC."
Surely not Lawson's call to check audience members against membership lists of political parties, since that would mean publishing membership lists of political parties.
http://www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/london/analysis-german-4-gw-new-coal-plants-in-testing-26170384
Labour supporter demolished by energy facts. Again.
*) 'happiness' is predicated on more than what might be temporary blips in price. If you feel like you've had a bad deal, you might even rue a profit. ("It could have been larger; I was screwed.").
*) People are not rational.
*) Even if the price depresses, people are aware that it often rises again over time.
A good salesman explains the fact the price may go up and/or down, then sucks through his teeth and gives a small discount. The customer is happy with a discount, and the sale still goes through. The customer feels as though they have a little insurance against price decreases, and more chance of a profit.
A customer treated in this manner is much more likely to feel satisfied about the deal, and also do more business with the salesman in future.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/high-costs-and-errors-of-german-transition-to-renewable-energy-a-920288.html
It got as far as Oz http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2835178.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24402163
It's important politically for a few reasons. Obviously a horde of fat people claiming cake is like crack will increase pressure on the NHS. In addition, if you over-feed kids (and one suspects those incapable of restricting their own diet would have difficulty doing it for anyone else) then they end up with more fat cells which permanently increases their baseline 'fat level'. That'll then increase the rate of diabetes (I forget which type) and lead to increased health costs down the line, as well as increasing the likelihood of issues in school from bullying and self-esteem (which tends to be tricky during adolescence for many people anyway).
It may well be in the interest of the power companies to have power shortages rather than to operate marginal capacity at a loss.
And solar power does not depend on 'warmth'; it is light intensity. There is a difference. Indeed, some types of solar panel perform better when cooler. ISTR one large scale desert system that pumps water behind the panels to cool them, and the warm water was then used for other purposes. So they generated both electricity *and* hot water (not steam).
Although there are so many different types of tech in solar panels nowadays, that's probably changed.
Again, I suggest people thinking we can provide all our energy from such means, should read the following and perform their own calculations.
http://www.withouthotair.com/c27/page_203.shtml
I think many on here would favour Plan G. But then you need to think of the implications. ;-)
Especially if governments are likely to interfere in price setting.
I wonder if we'll see more inefficent capacity removed before 2015.
Mark Drakeford said people needed to understand the consequences of becoming obese or drinking too much.
He backed one Welsh health board's policy of making overweight people attend health courses before being put on treatment waiting lists."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24421275
Will he extend it to smokers, drug users, owners of tattoos and breast enhancement?
Tim Reid @TimReidBBC
Scot Secretary Michael Moore has been sacked in a libDem reshuffle. He is to be replaced by the LibDem chief whip Alistair Carmichael.