Longstanding PBer, DavidL, gives his forecasts for the new year – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Also, hypothetical Andrew is more than countered by actual jfk, Clinton and Trump in the monarch vs president debate.LostPassword said:
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.Theuniondivvie said:
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passe?kle4 said:
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.0 -
Is that like motorcycle emptiness?CorrectHorseBattery said:Railway austerity on the cards
0 -
tbh I thought it was claptrap and I'm generally critical of old school tie government.OnlyLivingBoy said:This is an excellent piece by John Harris, easily the Guardian's best writer.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/27/history-britain-ruling-class-created-crisis-boris-johnson-brexit-covid
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.0 -
"It's not for the likes of us"kle4 said:
And sometimes there really is a wolf. Sure, I should deal with that nail and that wolf if they are indeed there, but I don't think it unreasonable for there to be a degree of confusion when people are always going on about nails and wolves, even when they are not there.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Sometimes it is a nail though.kle4 said:
I get very wary of any analysis that hinges upon a vision of the country as implacably locked in some cap doffing culture and the like. Like a lot of things where the answer is class issues, it seems like people are acting the hammer looking for a nail.OnlyLivingBoy said:This is an excellent piece by John Harris, easily the Guardian's best writer.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/27/history-britain-ruling-class-created-crisis-boris-johnson-brexit-covid
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
Sometimes it is a nail. But it often isn't, but people insist on it regardless.
On our political culture, I don't know, people talk about class too much in this country for it to be meaningless, but it feels too simplistic to me.
It's an interesting question as to why. I've seen it close up -
One of my daughters went to a state primary school - other one to the local free school.
One of those up-with-private-schools places. People prosecuted for lying about their location to get into the catchment area etc
It pretty much shares it catchment area with a failing, no-hoper of a primary. Always being reformed/rebuilt/recreated.
As in much of London (and the UK) the poor and the well off live cheek-by-jowl. The super successful primary has council houses literally next to it. The intake is nearly all middle class or above. Some of the people from the poor estates chose to send their children there. Their comments over a beer, on how their neighbours tried to dissuade them from sending their children there are interesting.
- "It's not a school for us."
- "They're pushy about homework and reading."
- "They won't like you or your kids."
I heard much the same from parent at the free school where my other daughter went.
So everyone from the estates goes to the shockingly bad school..
Most of the middle class parent involved were shocked at the idea they would be anything other than happy to have kids from the estates at the school.
In fact I had to persuade them to make an extra effort - for example, that they needed to explain about the clothing/toy freecyle thing. For those who don't have kids, you end up with box after box of clothes and toys they rapidly grow out of. In the age of Primark this stuff is basically worthless, so parents simply pass it on. While it is worthless second hand, the price of buying it all new adds up. Even from Primark.
So you get stuff given to you by people with older kids and it is an unwritten rule that in turn you pass your stuff down the age ladder.
Some of the mums and dads from the less well off backgrounds were a bit suspicious - wondered if they were being treated as charity cases. Once they saw the joy with which a box of clothes went in the back of the Porsche 4x4...0 -
I think mini-Boris has just added the brown messy smears to someone else's work. A chip off the old block...williamglenn said:
It's very artistic. Like a cross between a reindeer and Edvard Munch's The Scream.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=219 -
Quite - like a lot of people I know, I am an anti-anti-monarchist.IshmaelZ said:
Also, hypothetical Andrew is more than countered by actual jfk, Clinton and Trump in the monarch vs president debate.LostPassword said:
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.Theuniondivvie said:
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passe?kle4 said:
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
It's not that we like the Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but the thought of President FailedPolitician is even worse. And the certain knowledge that within 5 years, the cost of the Presidency would exceed that of the Monarchy. probably by an order of magnitude
So we would end up with worse people at the top, costing more money.2 -
Thin story to say the least. More upping of tiers on Wednesday.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Falls into the No Shit Sherlock category.0 -
-
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)2 -
My position to a T.Malmesbury said:
Quite - like a lot of people I know, I am an anti-anti-monarchist.IshmaelZ said:
Also, hypothetical Andrew is more than countered by actual jfk, Clinton and Trump in the monarch vs president debate.LostPassword said:
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.Theuniondivvie said:
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passe?kle4 said:
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
It's not that we like the Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but the thought of President FailedPolitician is even worse. And the certain knowledge that within 5 years, the cost of the Presidency would exceed that of the Monarchy. probably by an order of magnitude
So we would end up with worse people at the top, costing more money.0 -
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:3 -
If people really want to vote for failed politicians as President I would let them.Malmesbury said:
Quite - like a lot of people I know, I am an anti-anti-monarchist.IshmaelZ said:
Also, hypothetical Andrew is more than countered by actual jfk, Clinton and Trump in the monarch vs president debate.LostPassword said:
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.Theuniondivvie said:
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passe?kle4 said:
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
It's not that we like the Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but the thought of President FailedPolitician is even worse. And the certain knowledge that within 5 years, the cost of the Presidency would exceed that of the Monarchy. probably by an order of magnitude
So we would end up with worse people at the top, costing more money.
And, also, if our democracy cannot control the cost of a Presidency then we have no chance of preventing corruption of the public purse more generally - i.e. we have bigger problems.
I think accepting a Monarchy as the best we can manage betrays a debilitating lack of self-respect and belief.
And I like to remind people that we're part of the way there already, given that we exercise a veto on the identity of the Monarch.0 -
That gave me quite a fillip until i noticed 'via Daily Express'.CorrectHorseBattery said:2 -
The idea is a continual scaling up, to 3-4 million per week.LostPassword said:
1 million a week is too slow. Argh.Scott_xP said:
It worth noting that there are 3.2 million over 80s, who make up 54% of the deaths from COVID. Something like 17% of them have had their first job.0 -
Woops, didn't know this was up until I got a text message from a friend. Last time around we had years of paralysis and chaos in a never ending referendum campaign. This time around it has to be sharper.Luckyguy1983 said:Predicting that there will be another indyref, based on Boris's cowardy-custardness - or to put it more neutrally, his fondness for ease, is hard to argue with. But I wonder on what basis you think he'll propose to have one in 2022. I suspect for a number of reasons he'd want to push the date back, and he'd have a very good case for doing so (whether or not a delay is desirable).
0 -
Well...it is the Daily Express.RobD said:
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
However. Here we are again.
Overpromising.1 -
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:Surely the idea Remain will win an Indy Ref with Johnson as PM is quite unlikely, am I wrong?
1 -
Although a republican, it is not something I feel too strongly about and you put a good argument for the status quo.Malmesbury said:
Quite - like a lot of people I know, I am an anti-anti-monarchist.IshmaelZ said:
Also, hypothetical Andrew is more than countered by actual jfk, Clinton and Trump in the monarch vs president debate.LostPassword said:
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.Theuniondivvie said:
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passe?kle4 said:
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.Theuniondivvie said:Kneel down mere mortals before this evidence of a genetic powerhouse. You royalists will be well accustomed to assuming the position.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
It's not that we like the Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but the thought of President FailedPolitician is even worse. And the certain knowledge that within 5 years, the cost of the Presidency would exceed that of the Monarchy. probably by an order of magnitude
So we would end up with worse people at the top, costing more money.2 -
Utter nonsense.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
No chance Feb. Maybe Easter if a. the Oxford is approved now and b. the vaccination programme is appropriately resourced and prioritised.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
CorrectHorseBattery said:
It is possible, albeit unlikely. Refusing a further referendum guarantees independence when the nextDavidL said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:Surely the idea Remain will win an Indy Ref with Johnson as PM is quite unlikely, am I wrong?
0 -
I guess ultimately it comes down to practilities. Latest polling in Scotland has economy as number 1..DavidL said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:Surely the idea Remain will win an Indy Ref with Johnson as PM is quite unlikely, am I wrong?
0 -
One of the classic "The word 'could' is doing a lot of work in that sentence" lines.RobD said:
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I suppose the death rate might be down to the point that it 'looks' like restrictions could be eased, but with nowhere near enough vaccinated it would seem way to early to open up completely.1 -
The newspapers keep on using the 1 million a week figure as though it's impressively high, but it really isn't. Hopefully it's the newspapers being crap.Malmesbury said:
The idea is a continual scaling up, to 3-4 million per week.LostPassword said:
1 million a week is too slow. Argh.Scott_xP said:
It worth noting that there are 3.2 million over 80s, who make up 54% of the deaths from COVID. Something like 17% of them have had their first job.
The limiting factor isn't deaths, as such, but hospitalizations. There are too many people in their 40s and 50s who need hospital treatment to open things up before they've been vaccinated. Our current age-profile of death rates is dependent on everyone being able to receive hospital care if they need it.4 -
-
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:4 -
Reporting things happening still technically counts as news even when it is unsurprising of course, though the problem with the media is they simply cannot help frame things in such a way as to appear surprising even when they are not. Places are 'plunged' into a situation, 'hit' with new measures, that kind of thing. I don't think it entirely intentional even when something is done entirely according to plan, which obviously will not always be the case.dixiedean said:
Thin story to say the least. More upping of tiers on Wednesday.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Falls into the No Shit Sherlock category.1 -
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.0 -
I think this point really sums up where we are.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/13432505957597429881 -
Any focus groups of 2014 No voters that can be asked about the practilities?Razedabode said:
I guess ultimately it comes down to practilities. Latest polling in Scotland has economy as number 1..DavidL said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:Surely the idea Remain will win an Indy Ref with Johnson as PM is quite unlikely, am I wrong?
0 -
To be fair, she's a despicable human being who - even more than Jeremy Corbyn - celebrated the murder of British civilians by terrorists.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:2 -
If the over 80s are done by then - which seems possible - then the death rate would be halved, pretty much.kle4 said:
One of the classic "The word 'could' is doing a lot of work in that sentence" lines.RobD said:
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I suppose the death rate might be down to the point that it 'looks' like restrictions could be eased, but with nowhere near enough vaccinated it would seem way to early to open up completely.
0 -
Express stories are best treated with incredulitylondonpubman said:
No chance Feb. Maybe Easter if a. the Oxford is approved now and b. the vaccination programme is appropriately resourced and prioritised.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
My best guess is not before June and for Europe as a whole much later
And that is not anti Europe just I cannot see them vaccinating the numbers by then1 -
Reasonable analysis as ever Big GBig_G_NorthWales said:
Express stories are best treated with incredulitylondonpubman said:
No chance Feb. Maybe Easter if a. the Oxford is approved now and b. the vaccination programme is appropriately resourced and prioritised.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
My best guess is not before June and for Europe as a whole much later
And that is not anti Europe just I cannot see them vaccinating the numbers by then0 -
"Poised" always gets me.kle4 said:
Reporting things happening still technically counts as news even when it is unsurprising of course, though the problem with the media is they simply cannot help frame things in such a way as to appear surprising even when they are not. Places are 'plunged' into a situation, 'hit' with new measures, that kind of thing. I don't think it entirely intentional even when something is done entirely according to plan, which obviously will not always be the case.dixiedean said:
Thin story to say the least. More upping of tiers on Wednesday.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Falls into the No Shit Sherlock category.
As if a tiger about to pounce.
Rather than put somewhere in Tier 4, announce a new policy on the bins, or sign a clapped out right back on a free transfer.0 -
People will head out once they've had the vaccine. Can see flights full of 80+ off to Barbados in Feb...Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.1 -
I forget, do we still have to believe that she was raised to the HoL by some nameless deity or did BJ finally take responsibility for something in his sorry ass existence?rcs1000 said:
To be fair, she's a despicable human being who - even more than Jeremy Corbyn - celebrated the murder of British civilians by terrorists.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
I thought I was pretty bullish, but February is ridiculous.RobD said:
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
That being said... I would hope that tier four will be a thing of the past by the end of February. And tier three by end March.1 -
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.0 -
If Barbados will have themPulpstar said:
People will head out once they've had the vaccine. Can see flights full of 80+ off to Barbados in Feb...Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There will have to be Covid vaccine certificates, the same way we have vaccine visas for Yellow Fever, etc,
It's a massive dilemma for any sunny little country dependant on tourism. The Maldives, the Seychelles, Mauritius, The Caribbean as a whole will be utterly destitute and desperate for US/European tourists by late Feb, but they will be risking their own public health if they allow it,
There will be vaccine passports.1 -
My aged aunt was joking about taking over the dance floors at the abandoned night clubs, for over-80s only raves.Pulpstar said:
People will head out once they've had the vaccine. Can see flights full of 80+ off to Barbados in Feb...Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
"Drugs are *mandatory* in this house....."3 -
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?0 -
It all depends on Astra-Zeneca, methinks. If this works well, then Yes. Britain could be through the worst by the end of Feb (not clear, that's insane, but palpably in a better place)rcs1000 said:
I thought I was pretty bullish, but February is ridiculous.RobD said:
That seems unlikely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
That being said... I would hope that tier four will be a thing of the past by the end of February. And tier three by end March.
There isn't enough Pfizer to go round to do this, and Moderna is also problematic0 -
Plenty of people will still get sick and/or die who are not in the most vulnerable group. A couple of months extra won't mean everyone is covered, but would surely be better than just throwing it open the instant the most vulnerable are covered.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?0 -
0
-
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?0 -
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS3 -
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.0 -
Melania’s turned I hear.rcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?0 -
YBarddCwsc said:
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
That appears to have been not the most difficult quiz question ever asked on PB.YBarddCwsc said:
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?0 -
I know people want to see the back of the virus - I get that - but some of the hyperbole being spouted is delusional.Pulpstar said:
People will head out once they've had the vaccine. Can see flights full of 80+ off to Barbados in Feb...
On a day when it's clear the emergency services in London and the South-East are struggling to cope with the demand all we get is nonsense about how it will all be over by February. It is of course not just the very old who get seriously ill with the virus though they do disproportionately die from it.
It now seems the Mail and the Express have finally thrown aside whatever tatters of objectivity they once possessed and have become full-throated cheerleaders for Boris Johnson and the Government.1 -
We can get most 65+ and vulnerable people vaccinated by end Feb, that takes away most of the death exposurekle4 said:
Plenty of people will still get sick and/or die who are not in the most vulnerable group. A couple of months extra won't mean everyone is covered, but would surely be better than just throwing it open the instant the most vulnerable are covered.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We also need to vaccinate 50 to 65 by end March as that will largely eliminate hospitalisations
So we can't really relax significantly before end March - the impact of vaccinating 65+ by end Feb will take a further month to fully flow through on deaths.
Also this is why a good idea to keep schools closed until Feb to protect 50+ during this period.
0 -
Agreed.Peter_the_Punter said:YBarddCwsc said:
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
That appears to have been not the most difficult quiz question ever asked on PB.YBarddCwsc said:
Eleanor Rooseveltrcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
Presumably rcs has only just discovered it
0 -
Interestingly, people are able to buy the Pfizer vaccine in Mexico....0
-
Yes, and we do not yet know how effective any of the vaccines is at stopping asymptomatic spread.AlwaysSinging said:
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS0 -
I don't normally buy politicians' biographies -- or the biographies of their spouses.Theuniondivvie said:
Melania’s turned I hear.rcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
But, I'd be willing to pay a bit of money to buy a reasonably honest account by Melania of the story of her married life.0 -
The SNP voting for No Deal is really something Labour should be making hay out of0
-
One could almost say that he was furious that not enough was going to stick to him and his colleagues.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
0 -
My friend, who has very well connected connections, told me that Melanie had forced Trump to agree a “post-nup” when he had Covid.YBarddCwsc said:
I don't normally buy politicians' biographies -- or the biographies of their spouses.Theuniondivvie said:
Melania’s turned I hear.rcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
But, I'd be willing to pay a bit of money to buy a reasonably honest account by Melania of the story of her married life.
0 -
How many weeks does it take to deliver the 14m annual flu jabs?LostPassword said:
The newspapers keep on using the 1 million a week figure as though it's impressively high, but it really isn't. Hopefully it's the newspapers being crap.Malmesbury said:
The idea is a continual scaling up, to 3-4 million per week.LostPassword said:
1 million a week is too slow. Argh.Scott_xP said:
It worth noting that there are 3.2 million over 80s, who make up 54% of the deaths from COVID. Something like 17% of them have had their first job.
The limiting factor isn't deaths, as such, but hospitalizations. There are too many people in their 40s and 50s who need hospital treatment to open things up before they've been vaccinated. Our current age-profile of death rates is dependent on everyone being able to receive hospital care if they need it.
I'd have thought the vast majority are delivered in about 6-8 weeks at over 2m per week at peak, but I'm guessing a bit - anyone know the true rate?0 -
If you have several hours free, Ken Burns’s documentary on the Roosevelts is really well worth watching.YBarddCwsc said:
I don't normally buy politicians' biographies -- or the biographies of their spouses.Theuniondivvie said:
Melania’s turned I hear.rcs1000 said:Quiz question:
Who was the first (and as far as we know, only) lesbian First Lady of the United States?
But, I'd be willing to pay a bit of money to buy a reasonably honest account by Melania of the story of her married life.0 -
Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Age, COVID-19 Deaths, Number
85 years and over, 30,287, 1.6 million
75 to 84 years,23,809, 3.8 million
65 to 74 years,10,986, 6.4 million
45 to 64 years, 6,706, 16.8 million
15 to 44 years, 750, 25.3 million
1 to 14 years, 6, 10.9 million
Under 1 year, 2, 0.8 million0 -
If the Oxford vaccine is approved before Thursday we will have a good example of when 'a week is a long time in politics'.
Johnson will end the year in a much stronger position than seemed likely only a few weeks ago.0 -
Mrs Roosevelt was not a lesbian. She was a happily married (to a man) woman, who had multiple children.
To help with this, it is worth mentioning that said First Lady headed of to Rome to shack up with her girlfriend after her time as First Lady was up.0 -
Quite. It's why the concept of "vaccine passport" is probably wishful thinking. Unless one of the vaccines massively reduces asymptomatic transmission (it doesn't much matter whether it stops asymptomatic infection) those vaccinated are not safe and should not put others at risk.Foxy said:
Yes, and we do not yet know how effective any of the vaccines is at stopping asymptomatic spread.AlwaysSinging said:
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS
Having said that, it seems likely that vaccines might be better at reducing asymptomatic transmission -- by reducing viral load, coughing, and days shedding viable virus -- than asymptomatic infection.
--AS0 -
I thought the Oxford vaccine trial tested regularly for asymptomatic cases and included asymptomatic positives in its results (in contrast to Pfizer and Moderna). Or am I mistaken?Foxy said:
Yes, and we do not yet know how effective any of the vaccines is at stopping asymptomatic spread.AlwaysSinging said:
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS0 -
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”MattW said:
One could almost say that he was furious that not enough was going to stick to him and his colleagues.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.4 -
Massive, detailed reports have been prepared for Swansea as a template.Malmesbury said:
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.0 -
Rose Cleveland.rcs1000 said:Mrs Roosevelt was not a lesbian. She was a happily married (to a man) woman, who had multiple children.
To help with this, it is worth mentioning that said First Lady headed of to Rome to shack up with her girlfriend after her time as First Lady was up.
But, what is the rationale for this line of questioning?0 -
They did test (in some jurisdictions) for asymptomatic cases. However, all their efficacy data refers only to symptomatic CV19.Benpointer said:
I thought the Oxford vaccine trial tested regularly for asymptomatic cases and included asymptomatic positives in its results (in contrast to Pfizer and Moderna). Or am I mistaken?Foxy said:
Yes, and we do not yet know how effective any of the vaccines is at stopping asymptomatic spread.AlwaysSinging said:
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS0 -
That is correct: as President Grovenor Cleveland was unmarried, his (lesbian) sister Rose stepped in as First Lady. A role she fulfilled until Grovenor married 15 months into his Presidency.YBarddCwsc said:
Rose Cleveland.rcs1000 said:Mrs Roosevelt was not a lesbian. She was a happily married (to a man) woman, who had multiple children.
To help with this, it is worth mentioning that said First Lady headed of to Rome to shack up with her girlfriend after her time as First Lady was up.
But, what is the rationale for this line of questioning?1 -
Ah right. Thanksrcs1000 said:
They did test (in some jurisdictions) for asymptomatic cases. However, all their efficacy data refers only to symptomatic CV19.Benpointer said:
I thought the Oxford vaccine trial tested regularly for asymptomatic cases and included asymptomatic positives in its results (in contrast to Pfizer and Moderna). Or am I mistaken?Foxy said:
Yes, and we do not yet know how effective any of the vaccines is at stopping asymptomatic spread.AlwaysSinging said:
Hospital capacity will be the limiting factor, and unfortunately those in hospital are not nearly as old as those who die. Letting it rip after vaccinating all the, say, over 65s would certainly lead to hospital collapse as the virus would tear through the rest leaving too many middle-aged (and young, even) seriously ill. Even over 60s. I'm not sure about over 50s, even that might be not enough.Andy_JS said:
Isn't it the case that once elderly and vulnerable people have been vaccinated the number of deaths from Covid-19 will be extremely low since they're heavily concentrated in those groups? So it won't be necessary to vaccinate 100% of the population to get life back to normal.Foxy said:
Totally delusional if you ask me. Even the summer may be optimistic if further mutations pop up.turbotubbs said:
Seems optimistic. Lovely if it happens, but I’m thinking summer more likely.CorrectHorseBattery said:
And that doesn't count the cost of long COVID in the younger. For getting back to normal I imagine we'd need to vaccinate half the population at least.
--AS0 -
No - the Mail and Express are selling hope.stodge said:
I know people want to see the back of the virus - I get that - but some of the hyperbole being spouted is delusional.Pulpstar said:
People will head out once they've had the vaccine. Can see flights full of 80+ off to Barbados in Feb...
On a day when it's clear the emergency services in London and the South-East are struggling to cope with the demand all we get is nonsense about how it will all be over by February. It is of course not just the very old who get seriously ill with the virus though they do disproportionately die from it.
It now seems the Mail and the Express have finally thrown aside whatever tatters of objectivity they once possessed and have become full-throated cheerleaders for Boris Johnson and the Government.
Look up the extremely sordid history of "cancer cure" stories. The original click bait.0 -
Any links?MarqueeMark said:
Massive, detailed reports have been prepared for Swansea as a template.Malmesbury said:
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.0 -
Leave it with me - I'll mail you.Malmesbury said:
Any links?MarqueeMark said:
Massive, detailed reports have been prepared for Swansea as a template.Malmesbury said:
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.0 -
I agree. For me the ultimate argument is that I don't give a damn what those lying, deluded buffoons in the SNP said about generations. If the majority of the people of Scotland vote for parties committed to an early referendum then a referendum we will have with all the economic damage, division and chaos that comes with it. This is not the SNP's gift or Boris's. It is the choice of the Scottish people and I can only hope, somewhat forlornly, that they are not so stupid as to vote for this in the first place. But they probably will.Foxy said:CorrectHorseBattery said:
It is possible, albeit unlikely. Refusing a further referendum guarantees independence when the nextDavidL said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:Surely the idea Remain will win an Indy Ref with Johnson as PM is quite unlikely, am I wrong?
1 -
@MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark said:
Leave it with me - I'll mail you.Malmesbury said:
Any links?MarqueeMark said:
Massive, detailed reports have been prepared for Swansea as a template.Malmesbury said:
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.
The initial Welsh scheme proposal seemed to want a subsidy for nearly 100 years.
Is it the same for Workington?
My other serious question is whether we can remove that demand from our system entirely by simply investing in upgrading inefficient housing stock to near-zero energy use, which is a greener solution.0 -
0
-
You are making a number of assumptions in assuming that Rose Cleveland was the only lesbian first lady.rcs1000 said:Mrs Roosevelt was not a lesbian. She was a happily married (to a man) woman, who had multiple children.
To help with this, it is worth mentioning that said First Lady headed of to Rome to shack up with her girlfriend after her time as First Lady was up.0 -
Two issues with shipping containers full of batteries.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
1) They don't actually create any electricity, just fairly inefficiently time-shift fairly small quantities.
2) The fire problem. When the burn (and they do) it's seriously nasty - they end up full of unstable explosive gas which tends to go bang when you open the doors and let some oxygen in. There was a near miss (as in the explosion didn't kill anyone, entirely by luck and good fortune) in Liverpool recently which generated surprisingly little publicity, also a nastier episode in the US where a firefighter got blown through a chain link fence on opening the door to a supposedly "out" container fire (and remarkably survived).
I think that some form of building regs in going to discourage people from building stacks of shipping containers full of batteries (certainly at the sorts of scales which might make a difference) after a few nasty incidents (which are inevitable as things are going) get publicised.0 -
Not happening tonight. Good night to all and thanks for the comments.Theuniondivvie said:0 -
Anyone know what is going on here ?
https://twitter.com/JimmyRagosa/status/13412936116825538560 -
That's quite a courthouse they have for this.Nigelb said:Anyone know what is going on here ?
https://twitter.com/JimmyRagosa/status/13412936116825538560 -
No idea how reliable the data I've found is, but for 2019-20 the best I can work out is:Benpointer said:
How many weeks does it take to deliver the 14m annual flu jabs?LostPassword said:
The newspapers keep on using the 1 million a week figure as though it's impressively high, but it really isn't. Hopefully it's the newspapers being crap.Malmesbury said:
The idea is a continual scaling up, to 3-4 million per week.LostPassword said:
1 million a week is too slow. Argh.Scott_xP said:
It worth noting that there are 3.2 million over 80s, who make up 54% of the deaths from COVID. Something like 17% of them have had their first job.
The limiting factor isn't deaths, as such, but hospitalizations. There are too many people in their 40s and 50s who need hospital treatment to open things up before they've been vaccinated. Our current age-profile of death rates is dependent on everyone being able to receive hospital care if they need it.
I'd have thought the vast majority are delivered in about 6-8 weeks at over 2m per week at peak, but I'm guessing a bit - anyone know the true rate?
September-October: 7.6 million flu vaccinations.
November: 2.8 million
December: 600k
So the vaccinations are, as you'd expect, concentrated in the early months, at around the 1 million a week level.
We should be able to manage faster (if we have the doses to give).0 -
There are new technologies in phase change heat batteries around for a few years now, which have also been looking at that scale.theProle said:
Two issues with shipping containers full of batteries.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
1) They don't actually create any electricity, just fairly inefficiently time-shift fairly small quantities.
2) The fire problem. When the burn (and they do) it's seriously nasty - they end up full of unstable explosive gas which tends to go bang when you open the doors and let some oxygen in. There was a near miss (as in the explosion didn't kill anyone, entirely by luck and good fortune) in Liverpool recently which generated surprisingly little publicity, also a nastier episode in the US where a firefighter got blown through a chain link fence on opening the door to a supposedly "out" container fire (and remarkably survived).
I think that some form of building regs in going to discourage people from building stacks of shipping containers full of batteries (certainly at the sorts of scales which might make a difference) after a few nasty incidents (which are inevitable as things are going) get publicised.
Do (eg) Sunamps catch fire?0 -
0
-
A few tweaks to battery chemistry (some of which have already happened) should sort that.theProle said:
Two issues with shipping containers full of batteries.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
1) They don't actually create any electricity, just fairly inefficiently time-shift fairly small quantities.
2) The fire problem. When the burn (and they do) it's seriously nasty - they end up full of unstable explosive gas which tends to go bang when you open the doors and let some oxygen in. There was a near miss (as in the explosion didn't kill anyone, entirely by luck and good fortune) in Liverpool recently which generated surprisingly little publicity, also a nastier episode in the US where a firefighter got blown through a chain link fence on opening the door to a supposedly "out" container fire (and remarkably survived).
I think that some form of building regs in going to discourage people from building stacks of shipping containers full of batteries (certainly at the sorts of scales which might make a difference) after a few nasty incidents (which are inevitable as things are going) get publicised.0 -
I hope it is, but we will have to see.Benpointer said:If the Oxford vaccine is approved before Thursday we will have a good example of when 'a week is a long time in politics'.
Johnson will end the year in a much stronger position than seemed likely only a few weeks ago.
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/13432306990635048970 -
LinkLostPassword said:
No idea how reliable the data I've found is, but for 2019-20 the best I can work out is:Benpointer said:
How many weeks does it take to deliver the 14m annual flu jabs?LostPassword said:
The newspapers keep on using the 1 million a week figure as though it's impressively high, but it really isn't. Hopefully it's the newspapers being crap.Malmesbury said:
The idea is a continual scaling up, to 3-4 million per week.LostPassword said:
1 million a week is too slow. Argh.Scott_xP said:
It worth noting that there are 3.2 million over 80s, who make up 54% of the deaths from COVID. Something like 17% of them have had their first job.
The limiting factor isn't deaths, as such, but hospitalizations. There are too many people in their 40s and 50s who need hospital treatment to open things up before they've been vaccinated. Our current age-profile of death rates is dependent on everyone being able to receive hospital care if they need it.
I'd have thought the vast majority are delivered in about 6-8 weeks at over 2m per week at peak, but I'm guessing a bit - anyone know the true rate?
September-October: 7.6 million flu vaccinations.
November: 2.8 million
December: 600k
So the vaccinations are, as you'd expect, concentrated in the early months, at around the 1 million a week level.
We should be able to manage faster (if we have the doses to give).
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/seasonal-flu-vaccine-uptake-in-gp-patients-monthly-data-2019-to-20200 -
The initial Swansea Bay proposal is for a testbed project of 16 turbines. By its very nature, the electricity price was around that of Hinkley C nuclear (c£92.50). However the working assumptions for Cardiff with 160 turbines are £50-55. Swansea only required a couple of years of subsidy in practice - it would then get rolled into Cardiff. You were talking maybe £40m of Govt money to get a new technology up and running. After that, it is private capital all the way.MattW said:
@MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark said:
Leave it with me - I'll mail you.Malmesbury said:
Any links?MarqueeMark said:
Massive, detailed reports have been prepared for Swansea as a template.Malmesbury said:
Is there any detailed paperwork on the proposals available - how are they proposing to get round the silting issue? Tidal scour? How much power does that sacrifice? etc etcMarqueeMark said:
I'm saying that there is no particular difference in the planning process for the size of lagoons, for 16 or 160 turbines. Bridgewater would be a more challengingproject, because there are a bunch of complex overlapping issues there that might cause a lengthier process. But 5 years should get you planning approvals from start to finish. It's mostly building sea walls.Malmesbury said:
I meant minimum spend/size - the problem with mega projects is the planning enquiries. My theory is that shipping containers of batteries will win - simply because they would be very, very hard to stop.MarqueeMark said:
About five years covers it. Was enough for Swansea Bay but much of that is in standard environmental impact assessments for fish, birds etc. as well as things such as dredging studies. Planning work has already commenced for Cardiff, which would be nuclear-plant scale in power production. The Cardiff tidal lagoon would also open up the development of a significant area to the east of the city that is currently subject to flooding. The land value uplift of a tidal lagoon there is massive.Malmesbury said:
A serious question - what effort has been made on looking at the minimum viable size? 7 billion gets you in to the territory where some people believe that the planning enquiry *must* take 20 years. As a moral right.MarqueeMark said:
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.Cyclefree said:
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞MarqueeMark said:
Uh-huh.Leon said:
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the NorthCyclefree said:
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?MarqueeMark said:
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?turbotubbs said:
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!CorrectHorseBattery said:
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
Planning and construction should come in within 10 -12 years to first power for Cardiff. Zero carbon, zero waste, 85% domestic content power. Staggered development means that, for example, the first 4 of 16 turbines in Swansea could be producing by 2025 - if work started next year. The remaining 12 would be 2026. Each turbine powers c.10,000 homes.
Cardiff by contrast would be two sets of 80 turbines. Some 1.6 million homes.
I think I mentioned my encounter with an eco-lawyer - he regarded the fast tracking of offshore wind farms as positively evil. Not because of short cuts - but between the industry and the government, they have all the data on shipwrecks, fishing, birds, radar coverage organised, so the the list of questions just gets answered then and there. Not quite overlaying maps of the various no-go areas and building in the bits left over, but close.
He believed that if billions are to be spent it was a moral duty that the planning process *should* take time.
Edit - to add, it sounds like Cardiff would also stir up the "let the sea reclaim it" types.
Bear in mind, if you go talk to the councillors in Maryport, they are not going to be putting blocks in the way of a £20 billion local spend, for zero carbon zero waste that gives their area huge regeneration project. The people blocking them would the nuclear indusrty. Build one tidal lagoon and the economics of new nuclear will patently make no sense whatsoever.
The initial Welsh scheme proposal seemed to want a subsidy for nearly 100 years.
Is it the same for Workington?
My other serious question is whether we can remove that demand from our system entirely by simply investing in upgrading inefficient housing stock to near-zero energy use, which is a greener solution.1 -
Plenty of "weeks" between now and the next GE for the lustre to fade.Benpointer said:If the Oxford vaccine is approved before Thursday we will have a good example of when 'a week is a long time in politics'.
Johnson will end the year in a much stronger position than seemed likely only a few weeks ago.
Next week, and the remaining weeks in January could be very problematic for the NHS. Let's hope that is another bullet Johnson dodges.0
This discussion has been closed.