Glad to see Major speaking up, whilst Boris’ supporters here circle the wagons.
Yes but remember we support Brexit and that isn't going to change
Brexit trumps everything for you, yes we know.
It does for very many and you should ask why no UK party, ex the SNP and Plaid, support rejoining, unless of course the Lib Dems finally discover honesty and say they will campaign to rejoin, not some silly fudge
Why? Brexit isn’t the key issue for me.
It makes everything a bit harder than it was before, we’re all a bit poorer and seems to be used by its supporters to justify/excuse/deflect from all sorts of poor practices like we saw this week.
Beyond that 🤷♀️
Johnson understands that the British voter does not do gratitude; so having got Brexit 'done' (for low values of done) is not going to be enough at the next GE. The electoral strategy is going to be to depict the oppostion as wanting to reverse Brexit and that it is only secure with the tories.
You can see tories on here already starting to push this line.
Yeah, Boris and his minions want the Brexit wars to continue forever.
I would suggest many on the remain side are doing a good job on that, ensuring that by not accepting we have left it continues ad nfinitum
But, once again, you're on here suggesting a party you won't vote for should adopt a policy you don't like which you also think will be unpopular. It's very strange behaviour, G.
Not really
We all want honesty in politics and the lib dems policy is disingenuous as they want to rejoin
Be honest and say so, they would take quite some seats down south
It's not up to me to "say so" since I'm not a member of the Lib Dems, and probably won't vote for them next time. I think you're attracted to the idea of them adopting a rejoin policy because you think it'll drive votes towards the Conservatives. And you'd be right, but I think you're the one who's being sneaky here, not the Lib Dems.
No I honestly am not
Politics needs frank and honest positions and as a side issue I think they would do quite well
I see that OKC has usefully highlighted the current Lib Dem position.
Can you tell us what is dishonest about it?
Is there anything honest about the LD position on anything?
And here you come with your usual generic post devoid of any content whatsoever just being rude about Lab normally (although in fairness it is the LDs today). Try debating with someone.
And to answer your question without any need of any thought - Constitutional reform.
100%
He is one of the dullest, most nakedly partisan posters on this forum. A sheep.
I am glad you hold me in such high esteem. People seem to get frustrated why I point out some of the truths of the things they write.
I am not nakedly partisan. I dislike Boris and I don't like the direction of the Tory Party. ...but I know I will almost certainly vote Tory because the alternative is too awful to contemplate. Many many people are in the same position as I am. The LDs are hopeless set with a remain.policy , Labour's competely split between boring Starmer and the hard left Corbynistas with Angela Rayner thrown in to.make things even worse.
I advise the left to look at themselves before venting their spleens on me and or on the site. Perhaps I am doing a public service on offering you the opportunity to you vent your frustrations. Dura Ace always feels better after a jizz ridden rant.
You are very much not "doing a public service" . You are the personification of Fox News. Take that as a compliment if you wish.
When Sky had to send an engineer out midweek I was unlucky enough to have my Sky F1 pack upgraded to all Sky Sports channels for -£1 a month. Which means I am watching United vs Citeh.
The demolition of Spurs will be looked back on as the big missed opportunity. Could have sacked Ole and brought in Conte by now. Instead we either get to keep him or hire a megastar replacement like Steve Bruce...
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
Not saying he's an FBPE twit, but does he not know Rory is Paterson's witness?
Matthew Shaddick @shadsy If Labour, LDs & Greens all stood aside to let, say, Rory Stewart run against the Tories in North Shropshire, what would the odds be? I think I'd still take the Tories at 1.5 or better. https://twitter.com/shadsy/status/1456944223501049863
Trying to get a ‘man in a white suit’ to stand against a clean skin Tory in a safe seat, is pretty much doomed to failure - even before we see that all the names put forward are very metropolitan FBPE twits.
Including someone who spoke up for Paterson !
It’s the usual PrOgReSsIvE aLlIaNcE clowns pushing it.
I agree that an Anti-Sleaze candidate wouldn't be the right way to go, as Paterson isn't standing again. Any new Tory candidate would presumably be "clean". The interesting idea would be if Johnson was suspended for 30 days due to his corruption over wallpaper and holidays. If he was recalled and stood again, an anti-sleaze candidate would be ideal. Someone like Rashford?
Late to the thread, but thanks Pip for a very good thread header.
What this means is that the congressional investigations into Trump and 6 January have one more year to get results before they get binned by the new GOP majorities.
When Sky had to send an engineer out midweek I was unlucky enough to have my Sky F1 pack upgraded to all Sky Sports channels for -£1 a month. Which means I am watching United vs Citeh.
The demolition of Spurs will be looked back on as the big missed opportunity. Could have sacked Ole and brought in Conte by now. Instead we either get to keep him or hire a megastar replacement like Steve Bruce...
Mick McCarthy is available now too. Spoilt for choice. Oh and Big Sam... what more could you ask for?
It was a stay in the private home if a friend therefore not disclosable on the MP register
It was a significant gift from one minister to another and therefore disclosed on the ministerial register
That’s actually a reasonable approach
Oh come on. The MPs code of conduct says that ministers are not different to other MPs in requiring them to report on the MPs register (para 16) The code of conduct says that gifts from ministers are no different to gifts from others (para 9) So based on that, he has to declare on the MPs register as well as the ministerial register
The declarable categories include gifts from UK sources (category 3) and visits outside the UK (category 4), both if they're over £300. Johnson, B.'s argument seems to be that as they're from a friend (but see para 9) the value is zero so not declarable. You've gone for a variant, saying that it's not possible to calculate a value. But obviously it is, a point you glossed over from my previous post.
So the reasonable, and indeed lawful approach, is to declare it, and its value. So why won't he?
A value would be made up. I saw the mirror said “up to £25k per week”. *
But actually the specific value really doesn’t matter. It was a lot. A big expense that Boris have had to pay. Goldsmith doesn’t really care since it is only theoretical lost income (the house isn’t rented out anyway) and he’s rich enough not to notice anyway.
The “credit” that Goldsmith would get from lending a friend and her husband the house is exactly the same regardless of the nominal figure.
What matters is the declaration of the gift. And that has been declared.
* for example a friend and client once invited my to join him for lunch at ascot and flew me there from battersea to avoid traffic. I disclosed that, of course, but what is the value of a seat on a chopper that would be flying anyway?
Again, you being disingenuous and hoping people won't notice. It has been declared in one register, but needs to be declared in both. He declared his holiday in Mustique in both registers only last year? What has changed? Nothing.
I find your desire to accuse me of bad acting strange. Im not involved, have no agenda and am just posting what I think on website.
It does not need to be posted on the Mp register of interest as it is a gift from a friend. It does need to be posted on the minister register because it is a gift from one minister to another.
I know you have a specific view on how the rules ought to be interpreted. I don’t have a view, but if the PM has interpreted it incorrectly I am sure that he will correct the error.
The fundamental point is the existence of the gift has been disclosed. That’s actually what matters
Edit: what is different vs mustique is he is staying at the holiday home of a friend vs staying at a rental vacation home that happens to be owned by someone he knows
It was a stay in the private home if a friend therefore not disclosable on the MP register
It was a significant gift from one minister to another and therefore disclosed on the ministerial register
That’s actually a reasonable approach
Oh come on. The MPs code of conduct says that ministers are not different to other MPs in requiring them to report on the MPs register (para 16) The code of conduct says that gifts from ministers are no different to gifts from others (para 9) So based on that, he has to declare on the MPs register as well as the ministerial register
The declarable categories include gifts from UK sources (category 3) and visits outside the UK (category 4), both if they're over £300. Johnson, B.'s argument seems to be that as they're from a friend (but see para 9) the value is zero so not declarable. You've gone for a variant, saying that it's not possible to calculate a value. But obviously it is, a point you glossed over from my previous post.
So the reasonable, and indeed lawful approach, is to declare it, and its value. So why won't he?
A value would be made up. I saw the mirror said “up to £25k per week”. *
But actually the specific value really doesn’t matter. It was a lot. A big expense that Boris have had to pay. Goldsmith doesn’t really care since it is only theoretical lost income (the house isn’t rented out anyway) and he’s rich enough not to notice anyway.
The “credit” that Goldsmith would get from lending a friend and her husband the house is exactly the same regardless of the nominal figure.
What matters is the declaration of the gift. And that has been declared.
* for example a friend and client once invited my to join him for lunch at ascot and flew me there from battersea to avoid traffic. I disclosed that, of course, but what is the value of a seat on a chopper that would be flying anyway?
Again, you being disingenuous and hoping people won't notice. It has been declared in one register, but needs to be declared in both. He declared his holiday in Mustique in both registers only last year? What has changed? Nothing.
I find your desire to accuse me of bad acting strange. Im not involved, have no agenda and am just posting what I think on website.
It does not need to be posted on the Mp register of interest as it is a gift from a friend. It does need to be posted on the minister register because it is a gift from one minister to another.
I know you have a specific view on how the rules ought to be interpreted. I don’t have a view, but if the PM has interpreted it incorrectly I am sure that he will correct the error.
The fundamental point is the existence of the gift has been disclosed. That’s actually what matters
Edit: what is different vs mustique is he is staying at the holiday home of a friend vs staying at a rental vacation home that happens to be owned by someone he knows
LOL, Tories you could not beat them with a stick. Just happened to be a friend who he knighted and made a government minister. Next you will be telling us Owen Patterson was hard done by and is a paragon of virtue.
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
I'd like Rory Stewart to run. I don't care if it's as an 'anti-sleaze' candidate, or as one for the Tories (yeah, right). Unsure where FBPE comes into it.
It'd be interesting to know what Bercow's and Stewart's arguments were - but as they weren't interviewed, we probably won't know them robustly.
Is there any way back for Rory Stewart representing the current manifestation of the Tory party on any level?
I imagine he could find a seat to stand in as a Tory if he wanted to - I don't think he'd be blocked in any way. I'd very much like to see that.
If so he might face the awkward question of why he wants to represent a party led by Liey McLieface. Wanting to bring the party back to its senses and its honour might be viable motives but maybe not great in your interview with a selection panel.
It doesnt help your case to abuse Boris in such a manner.
Yet you are rude about everything and everyone one you don't like which appears to be everything and everyone.
No one can abuse Boris enough , he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
I'd like Rory Stewart to run. I don't care if it's as an 'anti-sleaze' candidate, or as one for the Tories (yeah, right). Unsure where FBPE comes into it.
It'd be interesting to know what Bercow's and Stewart's arguments were - but as they weren't interviewed, we probably won't know them robustly.
Is there any way back for Rory Stewart representing the current manifestation of the Tory party on any level?
I imagine he could find a seat to stand in as a Tory if he wanted to - I don't think he'd be blocked in any way. I'd very much like to see that.
If so he might face the awkward question of why he wants to represent a party led by Liey McLieface. Wanting to bring the party back to its senses and its honour might be viable motives but maybe not great in your interview with a selection panel.
It doesnt help your case to abuse Boris in such a manner.
Yet you are rude about everything and everyone one you don't like which appears to be everything and everyone.
No one can abuse Boris enough , he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town
Flown out of town on a private jet. Collected by a pair of Supercharged Range Rovers at the other end and driven to a men-only club to eat peasant.
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
Johnson believes in nothing other than personal gratification/advancement and Brexit, of any flavour, is no exception to this. He chose Leave because he knew that when he got to run for leader of a heavily Leave party he'd need that badge. When Leave won, which surprised him, he mismanaged his tilt for the crown and May got it. She blew the Con majority in a snap election and rendered herself abject, unable to get Brexit through. Johnson leeched on the chaos and brought her down, telling everyone what they wanted to hear about his intentions in order to secure power. Once installed in Number 10 he lied to the EU to get the Brexit deal he needed for his general election platform and he lied to the voters about the deal in order to win that election. All of this worked for him, it's worked at every stage, and so he continues on his merry way. He breathes, he lies, he breathes, he lies ... until the day comes when enough of the public both see it and decide they care.
My wife is much improved this morning, to the point where she is currently in the kitchen making a cake.
It will be my turn to feel like crap for a day in December. Good to see that the powers that be have realised that it is a good idea to let people book their booster ahead of the due date. Imagine if you weren't allowed to phone the garage until after your MOT had already expired. That's the system for booking your booster.
They have made a total horlicks of the booster campaign so far.
AIUI it was taken out of the hands of the local NHS management, which had run the initial campaign very well indeed.
Other way around, the initial campaign was run by a private company who created the provisioning service, text alerts and online booking system. The NHS is in charge of it this time from end to end and unsurprisingly they've gone back to sending out letters and relying on GPs. My guess is that the Saj has brought back the private company to run the online booking system again.
Locally, certainly, the service back in the early part of the year was largely GP's, or consortia of GPs. Now it's a mish-mash. Locally again, GP's seem to be out of the loop.
It's the online booking system and provisioning service that was the big innovation which the NHS decided not to bother with this time. That decision seems to have been reversed by the Saj because people are now being provisioned a dose in advance of eligibility which is how the old system worked. Relying on letters is also a tell tale sign that it's the same failed NHS thinking involved.
See my earlier post about individual experience. My wife and I are both registered with the same practice. I've had a text from the NHS, she's had no communication whatsoever and when she inquired of the local surgery was told that they 'had no idea'. So we went on line and booked. We've both booked for the same day, which, in the light of comments from other Pb-ers might be a mistake. However, we're going on a Friday so any weekend shopping will have been done!
Yeah that online system was created by a private contractor right at the start along with the provisioning service which allocates doses to areas based on likely need. For some reason there was a decision made not to use it for booster doses but it's been reversed which is why you were both able to book third doses using the online system. My parents couldn't two weeks ago, they had to contact their GP and then a local pharmacy to get an appointment.
So in the end it's been fixed but there was some definite poor decision making at the beginning to not use the existing successful formula and go back to the old style NHS appointment booking service.
Rather different system in Scotland. Notifications out by NHS letter - about 2 weeks before the offered date (which in my case was 6 months plus one daY) but with scope to change date and time by phone or online. But also possible to book in using the details from the first vacs and see what was offered, independently of the letter.
I am beyond 6 months and yet to get my letter, my wife had hers during the week.
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
I'd like Rory Stewart to run. I don't care if it's as an 'anti-sleaze' candidate, or as one for the Tories (yeah, right). Unsure where FBPE comes into it.
It'd be interesting to know what Bercow's and Stewart's arguments were - but as they weren't interviewed, we probably won't know them robustly.
"Mr Paterson did not, in my view, use the meeting to advocate specifically for this company. Instead he approached the conversation as someone with concern for UK tax-funded programs, lab testing, and an interest in improving health care – and an expertise in UK government.
As with any official engagement, we were careful as a department to ensure that officials were present at the meeting, along with the Minister. The Officials would not have permitted the meeting to continue if it breach the rules on Conduct of Members of the House. We listened carefully to the description of the problem and the proposed solution.
..
Owen Paterson was totally clear with me as to his capacity as a consultant, but he was not in my view conducting himself in that particular meeting as a paid advocate for that product. Instead he made arguments about the principle of good laboratory testing, as someone who was concerned to make sure that UK tax money was well spent overseas, and to achieve better healthcare outcomes."
Thanks. An interesting intervention.
Violins playing and find myself rolling about the floor. What a saint, he really was not a greedy grasping no good Tory.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
Johnson believes in nothing other than personal gratification/advancement and Brexit, of any flavour, is no exception to this. He chose Leave because he knew that when he got to run for leader of a heavily Leave party he'd need that badge. When Leave won, which surprised him, he mismanaged his tilt for the crown and May got it. She blew the Con majority in a snap election and rendered herself abject, unable to get Brexit through. Johnson leeched on the chaos and brought her down, telling everyone what they wanted to hear about his intentions in order to secure power. Once installed in Number 10 he lied to the EU to get the Brexit deal he needed for his general election platform and he lied to the voters about the deal in order to win that election. All of this worked for him, it's worked at every stage, and so he continues on his merry way. He breathes, he lies, he breathes, he lies ... until the day comes when enough of the public both see it and decide they care.
Depressingly accurate summary of recent British political history.
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
Not saying he's an FBPE twit, but does he not know Rory is Paterson's witness?
Matthew Shaddick @shadsy If Labour, LDs & Greens all stood aside to let, say, Rory Stewart run against the Tories in North Shropshire, what would the odds be? I think I'd still take the Tories at 1.5 or better. https://twitter.com/shadsy/status/1456944223501049863
Trying to get a ‘man in a white suit’ to stand against a clean skin Tory in a safe seat, is pretty much doomed to failure - even before we see that all the names put forward are very metropolitan FBPE twits.
Including someone who spoke up for Paterson !
It’s the usual PrOgReSsIvE aLlIaNcE clowns pushing it.
I agree that an Anti-Sleaze candidate wouldn't be the right way to go, as Paterson isn't standing again. Any new Tory candidate would presumably be "clean". The interesting idea would be if Johnson was suspended for 30 days due to his corruption over wallpaper and holidays. If he was recalled and stood again, an anti-sleaze candidate would be ideal. Someone like Rashford?
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Perhaps more one for @JosiasJessop - first thing I saw on a few days' holiday exploring nooks and crannies in and around Ironbridge was a pool of water into which a steam engine pumped water to ensure a supply of water to power the ironworks never mind the state of the rivers at the time. No leccy but it was about 1750 I think!
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
That's chemical storage which is extremely expensive. The race for physical storage (potential energy) is already underway, private companies like gravitricity are raising private money to solve these big problems. Canada has got an incredible emerging energy tech fund that is advancing the world's best shots at energy storage, an oversupply of intermittent power with storage will be the short to medium term solution, eventually it will be fusion. There's now serious money going into both from investors rather than relying on slow and, frankly, pointless schemes like ITER.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
There are lots of options. It looks like batteries will have an advantage because there is so much investment, research and development going into the more demanding use of batteries for use in cars, which will also mean there will be lots of second-hand batteries available once their no longer quite good enough for using in cars.
There's also various technologies at a more experimental stage - compressed/liquified air, flywheels, mine weights, pumped hydro - great to see so many good ideas competing to make this work.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
What do you mean now? It’s been going on since day 1.
Having said that, it’s remarkable how varying interpretation of even very recent history can be.
In my view, May deserves a lot of the blame and she needed no help from Remainers…
If she had said "Brexit means Brexit, welcome to Greater Norway" all but the swivel-eyed would be reasonably content.
I don't think she could've got away with keeping FOM. That was totemic. Also a super soft Brexit would imo have seen her ousted by the party. Her deal, for me, was an ok outcome and I wish it'd been passed. Probably would have been if she'd won a good majority at GE17. So, dark irony here, those moderate non-left Remainers who voted for Corbyn to stop a hard Brexit might have been better off voting for May. But they weren't to know, looked sensible at the time. Ditto for the various players in the parliamentary Brexit wars. I don't think any faction "screwed up" as such. They were all working rationally to their own agendas which put together caused the bizarre outcome. Not a "hard" or a "soft" Brexit but a "bad" Brexit and power delivered to Boris Johnson. We've been freakishly unlucky.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
I said at the time, and many occasions since, that pro-EU MPs (primarily Labour but some also Conservative and from other parties) voting the same way as Conservative sceptics meant that someone was screwing up, and it was plainly the pro-EU types. Their advantage would've been in seeking compromise and middle ground. Instead they tried to hardline it, which only shifted things more and more the sceptical way.
This was exemplified by Dominic Grieve, an apparently intelligent man, shrieking it was 'too late' when he got the exact concession he had sought only to still vote against it. Great work, but cui bono?
Likewise those who voted against May's deal. If she went, did they really think the Conservative Party was going to vote for someone perceived as softer than her on the EU? Of course not. And if course they didn't.
Sir John Major: "This government has done a number of things that have concerned me deeply: they have broken the law, the illegal prorogation of parliament. They have broken treaties, I have in mind the Northern Ireland Protocol. They have broken their word on many occasions." https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1456899066604949505
I greatly admire Sir John Major, but any thoughtful analysis of how we got to Brexit, and Boris as the only leader who could get it done, and it only doable by a fair bit of conjuring will have to go back in time.
The top problems were: a SM including FOM; the democratic deficit in the EU; the sense of the EU heading towards a sort of state; the Euro; and the failure over decades to consult the people over great constitutional change.
For this John Major has huge responsibility. He was a key player for many of the crucial years. And by the use of referendums he (and Mrs T and T Blair) could have avoided all this, and created a more modest EU.
This, and not Brexit, is the greatest post war policy failure - the view that the UK population could be taken into an ever closer union without being asked.
Not sure that I agree with that. Maastricht allowed the UK a range of opt outs and different geometry within the EU with its various pillars. Had both his successors and the EU kept that going then we would almost certainly still be in the EU. Unfortunately, the EU zealots both on the continent and in the UK emphasised ever closer union and completely undermined the concept of subsidiarity which could have been useful. Eventually the majority in the UK said, enough, but Major did produce a viable and arguably superior option.
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
What do you mean now? It’s been going on since day 1.
Having said that, it’s remarkable how varying interpretation of even very recent history can be.
In my view, May deserves a lot of the blame and she needed no help from Remainers…
If she had said "Brexit means Brexit, welcome to Greater Norway" all but the swivel-eyed would be reasonably content.
I don't think she could've got away with keeping FOM. That was totemic. Also a super soft Brexit would imo have seen her ousted by the party. Her deal, for me, was an ok outcome and I wish it'd been passed. Probably would have been if she'd won a good majority at GE17. So, dark irony here, those moderate non-left Remainers who voted for Corbyn to stop a hard Brexit might have been better off voting for May. But they weren't to know, looked sensible at the time. Ditto for the various players in the parliamentary Brexit wars. I don't think any faction "screwed up" as such. They were all working rationally to their own agendas which put together caused the bizarre outcome. Not a "hard" or a "soft" Brexit but a "bad" Brexit and power delivered to Boris Johnson. We've been freakishly unlucky.
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
What do you mean now? It’s been going on since day 1.
Having said that, it’s remarkable how varying interpretation of even very recent history can be.
In my view, May deserves a lot of the blame and she needed no help from Remainers…
If she had said "Brexit means Brexit, welcome to Greater Norway" all but the swivel-eyed would be reasonably content.
I don't think she could've got away with keeping FOM. That was totemic. Also a super soft Brexit would imo have seen her ousted by the party. Her deal, for me, was an ok outcome and I wish it'd been passed. Probably would have been if she'd won a good majority at GE17. So, dark irony here, those moderate non-left Remainers who voted for Corbyn to stop a hard Brexit might have been better off voting for May. But they weren't to know, looked sensible at the time. Ditto for the various players in the parliamentary Brexit wars. I don't think any faction "screwed up" as such. They were all working rationally to their own agendas which put together caused the bizarre outcome. Not a "hard" or a "soft" Brexit but a "bad" Brexit and power delivered to Boris Johnson. We've been freakishly unlucky.
If her deal had gone through Parliament on Opposition votes (or even abstentions), the Tories would have been torn to bits and we’d probably have a Labour government now. Oh, and we’d stil be basically in the EU, stuck in the backstop and with the government happy with that position.
But the Oppositon voted against the deal, and now we have “Hard Brexit” and Johnson as PM.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
There are lots of options. It looks like batteries will have an advantage because there is so much investment, research and development going into the more demanding use of batteries for use in cars, which will also mean there will be lots of second-hand batteries available once their no longer quite good enough for using in cars.
There's also various technologies at a more experimental stage - compressed/liquified air, flywheels, mine weights, pumped hydro - great to see so many good ideas competing to make this work.
Although it's very inefficient, there's probably room for the deal JCB did with Oz recently. They have stacks of potential for renewable electricity (wind, solar, a smattering of hydro - the Snowy river Scheme 2.0), but most of the 'best' places for this are hundreds, if not thousands, of miles from any potential large-scale usage. Using that power to convert water to hydrogen seems a good way of storing and transporting that energy - as long as water can be found.
Having said that, there are vast mines in the Oz outback that have their own power stations attached. It'll be interesting to see if these turn to renewables instead - they're certainly doing it for new mines.
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
I'd like Rory Stewart to run. I don't care if it's as an 'anti-sleaze' candidate, or as one for the Tories (yeah, right). Unsure where FBPE comes into it.
It'd be interesting to know what Bercow's and Stewart's arguments were - but as they weren't interviewed, we probably won't know them robustly.
Is there any way back for Rory Stewart representing the current manifestation of the Tory party on any level?
I imagine he could find a seat to stand in as a Tory if he wanted to - I don't think he'd be blocked in any way. I'd very much like to see that.
If so he might face the awkward question of why he wants to represent a party led by Liey McLieface. Wanting to bring the party back to its senses and its honour might be viable motives but maybe not great in your interview with a selection panel.
It doesnt help your case to abuse Boris in such a manner.
Yet you are rude about everything and everyone one you don't like which appears to be everything and everyone.
No one can abuse Boris enough , he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town
Boris is the only person he is not rude about and complains when others are, yet he also claims to hate Boris also (we don't believe him). He hates everyone and everything. He doesn't even wait until the heat of an argument to be rude, it is straight off with the first post.
I was about to say he is unique to this site but then I forgot about you @malcolmg. But you are not the same. You do it with panache.
Wow. Boris's admirers are now blaming Remainers for Boris's ultra-hard Brexit.
Johnson believes in nothing other than personal gratification/advancement and Brexit, of any flavour, is no exception to this. He chose Leave because he knew that when he got to run for leader of a heavily Leave party he'd need that badge. When Leave won, which surprised him, he mismanaged his tilt for the crown and May got it. She blew the Con majority in a snap election and rendered herself abject, unable to get Brexit through. Johnson leeched on the chaos and brought her down, telling everyone what they wanted to hear about his intentions in order to secure power. Once installed in Number 10 he lied to the EU to get the Brexit deal he needed for his general election platform and he lied to the voters about the deal in order to win that election. All of this worked for him, it's worked at every stage, and so he continues on his merry way. He breathes, he lies, he breathes, he lies ... until the day comes when enough of the public both see it and decide they care.
Depressingly accurate summary of recent British political history.
I settle myself down by saying "but at least he's not a monster like Trump" and it works - but that's in itself a bit depressing when you think about it. Talk about your warped metrics!
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
AIUI it's precisely the gas stations wehich are turned off and on to adjust for any shortfall in wind etc. It's the nukes and the coal stations that are happier with a more permanent load. But I will no doubt be corrected if I am wrong.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
If you can find evidence for that in the gas/coal consumption statistics then please do share it, otherwise you are sharing a falsehood. It is absolutely the case that we burn less gas when there is more electricity from wind.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Perhaps more one for @JosiasJessop - first thing I saw on a few days' holiday exploring nooks and crannies in and around Ironbridge was a pool of water into which a steam engine pumped water to ensure a supply of water to power the ironworks never mind the state of the rivers at the time. No leccy but it was about 1750 I think!
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
I think I've walked past Cruachan. The West Highland Way descends into Kinlochleven beside massive pipes that carry water down from the ?Blackwater? reservoir. The pipes go to a power station that used to provide power for the aluminium smelter. As I've passed, I've wondered what'd happen if one of the pipes sprung a leak ...
This has been discussed and debated on here in the past, but I'm unsure we have much unrealised potential for pump-storage in the UK. You need a large vertical height difference, preferably without much horizontal (to reduce the distance the water has to go), and a large area at the top and bottom for the reservoirs. The geology has to be good, as well. Ideally, it needs to be near existing power lines or power stations, and not in an environmentally sensitive area.
There are a few sites, and a few prospective schemes, but nowhere near enough. It'd be a helpful small part of the solution, rather then the full solution.
Not a bad view, more proper fans here and fewer prawn sandwich brigade no-shows.
You really are in the middle east aren't you? You must be having fun - hope it's not too dry for you.
Had there been some doubt? I spent one of the matches @Sandpit attended looking closely at everyone in a red England shirt, his self proclaimed attire for the day.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
AIUI it's precisely the gas stations wehich are turned off and on to adjust for any shortfall in wind etc. It's the nukes and the coal stations that are happier with a more permanent load. But I will no doubt be corrected if I am wrong.
Yep the specific advantage of gas power stations is that they are so responsive to sudden demand changes. It is one of the arguments for retaining them as a backup to a primary renewable system.
Not a bad view, more proper fans here and fewer prawn sandwich brigade no-shows.
You really are in the middle east aren't you? You must be having fun - hope it's not too dry for you.
Had there been some doubt? I spent one of the matches @Sandpit attended looking closely at everyone in a red England shirt, his self proclaimed attire for the day.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Perhaps more one for @JosiasJessop - first thing I saw on a few days' holiday exploring nooks and crannies in and around Ironbridge was a pool of water into which a steam engine pumped water to ensure a supply of water to power the ironworks never mind the state of the rivers at the time. No leccy but it was about 1750 I think!
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
I think I've walked past Cruachan. The West Highland Way descends into Kinlochleven beside massive pipes that carry water down from the ?Blackwater? reservoir. The pipes go to a power station that used to provide power for the aluminium smelter. As I've passed, I've wondered what'd happen if one of the pipes sprung a leak ...
This has been discussed and debated on here in the past, but I'm unsure we have much unrealised potential for pump-storage in the UK. You need a large vertical height difference, preferably without much horizontal (to reduce the distance the water has to go), and a large area at the top and bottom for the reservoirs. The geology has to be good, as well. Ideally, it needs to be near existing power lines or power stations, and not in an environmentally sensitive area.
There are a few sites, and a few prospective schemes, but nowhere near enough. It'd be a helpful small part of the solution, rather then the full solution.
I thought that the pipes went into Loch Awe in the brilliantly named and looking Pass of Brander.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Perhaps more one for @JosiasJessop - first thing I saw on a few days' holiday exploring nooks and crannies in and around Ironbridge was a pool of water into which a steam engine pumped water to ensure a supply of water to power the ironworks never mind the state of the rivers at the time. No leccy but it was about 1750 I think!
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
I think I've walked past Cruachan. The West Highland Way descends into Kinlochleven beside massive pipes that carry water down from the ?Blackwater? reservoir. The pipes go to a power station that used to provide power for the aluminium smelter. As I've passed, I've wondered what'd happen if one of the pipes sprung a leak ...
This has been discussed and debated on here in the past, but I'm unsure we have much unrealised potential for pump-storage in the UK. You need a large vertical height difference, preferably without much horizontal (to reduce the distance the water has to go), and a large area at the top and bottom for the reservoirs. The geology has to be good, as well. Ideally, it needs to be near existing power lines or power stations, and not in an environmentally sensitive area.
There are a few sites, and a few prospective schemes, but nowhere near enough. It'd be a helpful small part of the solution, rather then the full solution.
Thanks - that's interesting.
BTW I think the Kinlochleven pipes must be Loch Treig - IIRC not a pumped system but fed by waters from Laggan and Spey, on the other side of the watershed, through long tunnels.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
AIUI it's precisely the gas stations wehich are turned off and on to adjust for any shortfall in wind etc. It's the nukes and the coal stations that are happier with a more permanent load. But I will no doubt be corrected if I am wrong.
You are right about nuclear. Coal is currently 0% of the electricity supply: this website shows how it changes with time.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
The biggest battern storage in the world is 1600MWh, which is enough to power the UK for 2 minutes. We are so far from wind being a viable solution on its own it's laughable, and yet people keep making misleading claims about how good the economics are whilst ignoring that it requires an entire parallel generation option to be subsidised and kept ready for the inevitable cold, windless days (i.e. Tuesday) when it generates nothing of note and demand is at peak.
Sure, there's not much battery, or other storage now but it's the nature of such a major transition as we are seeking to make that this will change dramatically, just as the proportion of our electricity generated by coal has also changed dramatically, something that many people said would never happen.
Until we get some serious storage built isn't the wind power largely eco-virtue signalling (greenwashing?) How much less gas and biomass do we actually burn when the wind is blowing?
Scotish Power website (for instance) says 40% renewable averaged out over 2020-2021. So a good chunk. Obviously more at times when it is really windy; less, when less.
Yes, but the percentage of energy production counts even when there's a massive surplus being produced - so if particularly windy at night, wind could be producing 90% of the total energy produced, but the gas stations won't get turned off.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
AIUI it's precisely the gas stations wehich are turned off and on to adjust for any shortfall in wind etc. It's the nukes and the coal stations that are happier with a more permanent load. But I will no doubt be corrected if I am wrong.
Yep the specific advantage of gas power stations is that they are so responsive to sudden demand changes. It is one of the arguments for retaining them as a backup to a primary renewable system.
I was aware that they could be turned on and off more easily than coal or nuclear, but I didn't realise that they actually are being turned on and off depending on the wind.
Are there times when it's so windy that we don't need/use gas at all? Or if not, do you know how much less gas we use when the wind is blowing as hard as it can?
That's surely a more pertinent stat than what percentage of total generation, including that wasted, is wind..
Not a bad view, more proper fans here and fewer prawn sandwich brigade no-shows.
You really are in the middle east aren't you? You must be having fun - hope it's not too dry for you.
This last week it’s noticeable cooler, about 30°C during the day. We have six months of lovely weather to come, after the horrible hot and humid of the summer. Plenty of events on too, after a year off for the pandemic.
Looks like there is excess wind generation on the Irish grid again today, that they're not using because they want to keep a minimum level of thermal plant operating (presumably for doing the frequency balancing). This sort of thing will happen more and more often and provides an opportunity for storage or other intermittent uses of cheap excess electricity.
It's not really an opportunity when storage scale is so comically small compared to the requirement, and windfarms are all built on contracts which pay out regardless of the electricity is needed. Just means consumers are paying twice, once for green tech pretending to now be economic, and a 2nd time for the necessary gas turbines to actually provide certainty of supply.
There is excess electricity. This provides an opportunity for people to store it and sell it when the grid price of electricity is higher.
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
How is electricity stored?
Batteries, which will become increasingly relevant with the millions of moving batteries in the next decades. Also things like pumped storage, flywheels.
Perhaps more one for @JosiasJessop - first thing I saw on a few days' holiday exploring nooks and crannies in and around Ironbridge was a pool of water into which a steam engine pumped water to ensure a supply of water to power the ironworks never mind the state of the rivers at the time. No leccy but it was about 1750 I think!
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
I think I've walked past Cruachan. The West Highland Way descends into Kinlochleven beside massive pipes that carry water down from the ?Blackwater? reservoir. The pipes go to a power station that used to provide power for the aluminium smelter. As I've passed, I've wondered what'd happen if one of the pipes sprung a leak ...
This has been discussed and debated on here in the past, but I'm unsure we have much unrealised potential for pump-storage in the UK. You need a large vertical height difference, preferably without much horizontal (to reduce the distance the water has to go), and a large area at the top and bottom for the reservoirs. The geology has to be good, as well. Ideally, it needs to be near existing power lines or power stations, and not in an environmentally sensitive area.
There are a few sites, and a few prospective schemes, but nowhere near enough. It'd be a helpful small part of the solution, rather then the full solution.
I thought that the pipes went into Loch Awe in the brilliantly named and looking Pass of Brander.
Yeah, sorry, I was unclear. I've walked past the Cruachan scheme in the past. I then went on to talk about a very different scheme - the Blackwater / Kinlochleven scheme, which provided power for the aluminium smelter there (and now for the grid).
Having been quite surprised to learn yesterday that Bercow supports Paterson, I'm equally intrigued to learn today that Rory Stewart is one of the witnesses who corroborated his non-lobbying claims and that the standards' committee refused to interview.
That's two of the FBPE twits' favourites to run as their "anti-sleaze" candidate..
I'd like Rory Stewart to run. I don't care if it's as an 'anti-sleaze' candidate, or as one for the Tories (yeah, right). Unsure where FBPE comes into it.
It'd be interesting to know what Bercow's and Stewart's arguments were - but as they weren't interviewed, we probably won't know them robustly.
Is there any way back for Rory Stewart representing the current manifestation of the Tory party on any level?
I imagine he could find a seat to stand in as a Tory if he wanted to - I don't think he'd be blocked in any way. I'd very much like to see that.
If so he might face the awkward question of why he wants to represent a party led by Liey McLieface. Wanting to bring the party back to its senses and its honour might be viable motives but maybe not great in your interview with a selection panel.
It doesnt help your case to abuse Boris in such a manner.
Yet you are rude about everything and everyone one you don't like which appears to be everything and everyone.
No one can abuse Boris enough , he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town
Boris is the only person he is not rude about and complains when others are, yet he also claims to hate Boris also (we don't believe him). He hates everyone and everything. He doesn't even wait until the heat of an argument to be rude, it is straight off with the first post.
I was about to say he is unique to this site but then I forgot about you @malcolmg. But you are not the same. You do it with panache.
Anyone know how to work out what run rate England need to stay ahead of either Australia or South Africa is they lose this match, given that SA look at scoring today at 9 per over?
Comments
You are very much not "doing a public service" . You are the personification of Fox News. Take that as a compliment if you wish.
Having said that, it’s remarkable how varying interpretation of even very recent history can be.
In my view, May deserves a lot of the blame and she needed no help from Remainers…
It doesn't matter what your views are about Brexit. Corruption is Corruption and the Tory Party is corrupt. Brexit has nothing to do with it.
The demolition of Spurs will be looked back on as the big missed opportunity. Could have sacked Ole and brought in Conte by now. Instead we either get to keep him or hire a megastar replacement like Steve Bruce...
"Can I interest you in a 1000 litre IBC of duty free Chateau Neuf Du Pap squire?"
What this means is that the congressional investigations into Trump and 6 January have one more year to get results before they get binned by the new GOP majorities.
http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/#all/wind
The nature of an opportunity is that it is not currently being served, so the fact that there currently isn't the storage capacity to make use of this excess electricity is implied in the use of the word "opportunity".
At some point there will be enough excess wind energy available for storage that the economics will mean there is a rapid increase in the amount of storage capacity to shift that electricity to times when the wind isn't blowing. Every extra bit of wind capacity added to the grid brings us closer to that point.
https://twitter.com/Everton/status/1456691960664760323?s=20
I think he's still the only professional footballer to do time for on-pitch activity.
PS and nice pic of the rather more modern pumped storage system at Cruachan:
https://canmore.org.uk/collection/1045121
There's also various technologies at a more experimental stage - compressed/liquified air, flywheels, mine weights, pumped hydro - great to see so many good ideas competing to make this work.
They know they not only need to win, but need to win with a very good net run rate.
I said at the time, and many occasions since, that pro-EU MPs (primarily Labour but some also Conservative and from other parties) voting the same way as Conservative sceptics meant that someone was screwing up, and it was plainly the pro-EU types. Their advantage would've been in seeking compromise and middle ground. Instead they tried to hardline it, which only shifted things more and more the sceptical way.
This was exemplified by Dominic Grieve, an apparently intelligent man, shrieking it was 'too late' when he got the exact concession he had sought only to still vote against it. Great work, but cui bono?
Likewise those who voted against May's deal. If she went, did they really think the Conservative Party was going to vote for someone perceived as softer than her on the EU? Of course not. And if course they didn't.
But the Oppositon voted against the deal, and now we have “Hard Brexit” and Johnson as PM.
Right, enough politics, back to the cricket.
And I suspect that that's the energy that green energy bill providers buy to get their certificates. Completely wasted "green" energy.
Until we have the storage it's rather illusory.
Having said that, there are vast mines in the Oz outback that have their own power stations attached. It'll be interesting to see if these turn to renewables instead - they're certainly doing it for new mines.
I was about to say he is unique to this site but then I forgot about you @malcolmg. But you are not the same. You do it with panache.
This has been discussed and debated on here in the past, but I'm unsure we have much unrealised potential for pump-storage in the UK. You need a large vertical height difference, preferably without much horizontal (to reduce the distance the water has to go), and a large area at the top and bottom for the reservoirs. The geology has to be good, as well. Ideally, it needs to be near existing power lines or power stations, and not in an environmentally sensitive area.
There are a few sites, and a few prospective schemes, but nowhere near enough. It'd be a helpful small part of the solution, rather then the full solution.
Thanks - that's interesting.
BTW I think the Kinlochleven pipes must be Loch Treig - IIRC not a pumped system but fed by waters from Laggan and Spey, on the other side of the watershed, through long tunnels.
https://canmore.org.uk/site/277888/loch-treig-dam
As David says the Cruachan system is related to Loch Awe IIRC.
Edit: six more…
Coal is currently 0% of the electricity supply: this website shows how it changes with time.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
Are there times when it's so windy that we don't need/use gas at all? Or if not, do you know how much less gas we use when the wind is blowing as hard as it can?
That's surely a more pertinent stat than what percentage of total generation, including that wasted, is wind..
This thread is now the Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5kvxb79E3Y
Oh, and here's what happens if hydropower fails:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfW5MqT7CSA