To return to the topic of this thread , I am saddened by the Education Secretary's doctrinal attitude to private schools for special needs pupils. She would do better to ask why parents are sending their children to these schools. When I lived in north Hampshire, two parents with special needs children (One was deaf, the other had hemiplegia) sent their child to a private school because the private school had a positive attitude whereas the head teachers in the state sector were either indifferent or hostile. My son has hemiplegia and when we tried to explain his disability to the head of the local primary school, she just dismissed our comments by saying: "But some of the pupils here come from a house with no books. That's a disability."
I belong to a parents' support group and I have heard some heart-breaking stories where was was the teacher who was the main bully of the disabled pupil. You can put all the systems in place but if a teacher is hostile, it won't work.
The other angle is that apparently “Private school = BAD!” but “Individual tuition = Good”
So employing @ydoethur to individually tutor children is completely different to employing an aggregated teaching facility (aka school)
For example, I know one place that does exactly this kind of schooling. Their max class size is 8, IIRC. Sometimes they do 1-1 - varies by subject and pupil. Many of their staff are actually self employed teachers who also do… 1-1 tuition. As another job.
In a separate farce - a number of local parents have decided that 6th form private is unnecessary. So they send their children for A levels to a good state school and spend the money on tuition. So the school gets pupils who are already highly trained academically, have lots of support and don’t bother the teachers. The parents save money. The kids get to claim they aren’t privately educated - “I got ‘me A levels at St Stabingtons. I is a state skool oil” - so they get (potentially) preferential treatment on some university entrance.
The final touch - one dad realised that his daughter’s friends were doing some of the same A levels. So, for tuition, why not share? So he set up the garden office with 4 tables facing the big screen (for the online tuition session). Now what does that remind you of?
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
Simon Dudley said “everyone dies in the end” and “fires happen”.
So at 5pm, Farage will be resolving the issue by burning him at the stake...
Whoops!
He has half a point about reactions to single incidents leading to a load of bad law or regulation, but one needs to be a little more careful about one’s language when referring to a fire in which dozens of people actually died.
Of course, as we have discussed here many times before, the required mountain of paperwork to certify Grenfell Tower’s cladding as fireproof was all in place. It was perfect, except for the fact that the tower’s cladding wasn’t actually fireproof.
He wasn’t wrong with his point about regulation leading to bad outcomes.
I’ve not looked into it in too much detail, but it does appear to now be prohibitively expensive to build blocks of apartments, even in London. AIUI prices are now falling because banks are reluctant to mortgage apartment properties not up to the current fire code, leading to reduced demand.
The seller of the flat needs to find a buyer before the bank gets involved and a lot of people take one look at the service charges and run a mile.
There are an awful lot of flats where the service charge can be shown to be impacting the price - the Rightmove history of a lot of flats hitting auction houses are horror histories
Lots of examples of flat prices falling in London and service charges impacting prices. Mainly newer builds.
I follow this feed.
Flats in this block have a service charge of £6,801. I’ve seen some at £10,000.
People would be nuts to take on an uncapped liability like this.
Its a grade II listed building with swimming pool, lifts and concierge. As a London flat resident 7k here sounds reasonable to me!
Yep, and most developments have residents' associations, which does allow some accountability for the SC. It's the ground rent that is the true con, and it looks like the government is doing something about that: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0ypn29yg8o
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
Very late to this and thanks for the header. I have no idea if over diagnosis is real but I find it astonishing that at a top ten UK university one quarter of students have a disability action plan. This normally grants them extra time in exams, for instance. That's a clear incentive right there. In general our exams are not meant to be time restricted (in the sense that time pressure affects marks) and usually some students will happily leave early. But I cannot shake the impression that some of those on DAPs have worked the system.
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
The Lib Dems are getting close to losing me over this. Very disappointing.
Even if we drill all the North Sea oil it’s eventually going to run out. So we’re going to have to use something else.
Surely we should produce and use as much of our own energy as possible?
That is the solution almost everyone across the political spectrum here is recommending. As well as a few politicians like Kemi to be fair.
Invest in renewables AND extract our oil and gas.
It is not either/or.
You've said yourself that we will need oil and gas for centuries to come for purposes like chemicals and fertilizer production. Why, then, the determination to extract and burn our finite reserves as quickly as possible? It seems so short-sighted as well as environmentally unwise.
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
Simon Dudley said “everyone dies in the end” and “fires happen”.
So at 5pm, Farage will be resolving the issue by burning him at the stake...
Whoops!
He has half a point about reactions to single incidents leading to a load of bad law or regulation, but one needs to be a little more careful about one’s language when referring to a fire in which dozens of people actually died.
Of course, as we have discussed here many times before, the required mountain of paperwork to certify Grenfell Tower’s cladding as fireproof was all in place. It was perfect, except for the fact that the tower’s cladding wasn’t actually fireproof.
He wasn’t wrong with his point about regulation leading to bad outcomes.
I’ve not looked into it in too much detail, but it does appear to now be prohibitively expensive to build blocks of apartments, even in London. AIUI prices are now falling because banks are reluctant to mortgage apartment properties not up to the current fire code, leading to reduced demand.
The seller of the flat needs to find a buyer before the bank gets involved and a lot of people take one look at the service charges and run a mile.
There are an awful lot of flats where the service charge can be shown to be impacting the price - the Rightmove history of a lot of flats hitting auction houses are horror histories
Lots of examples of flat prices falling in London and service charges impacting prices. Mainly newer builds.
I follow this feed.
Flats in this block have a service charge of £6,801. I’ve seen some at £10,000.
People would be nuts to take on an uncapped liability like this.
Shared ownership is more often than not a con. Service charges are open to abuse but it isn't really open ended - if it gets extreme the residents can group together and change providers. It needs reform/simplification or even the never arriving switch to commonhold, but it being expensive doesnt mean its a rip off.
Standard London Service charge for basic 2 bed £2-3k Concierge - Add £1k Grade II listed - Add £2k Lifts - Add £1k Swimming Pool - Add £1-2k
These things cost and will do whether leasehold or any other form of sharing the costs.
If you had sight of Trump's speech in advance, you could have largely predicted that.
The subtext was "this shit-show has at least 2-3 weeks more to run. And may end with Iran's infrastructure in ruins. And consequently, that of the Gulf states too."
Brent was up about 6% by the time he had sat down.
I said very confidently on here that Iran wouldn't be in the headlines by Easter - not one of my best predictions!
I'd note that we've been hearing that the war will be over in days, or at most 2-3 weeks, for a while now, and it hasn't happened yet. I'm sure that, when the US got involved in the Vietnam War, they always expected it to be over in 12-18 months, but it never turned out that way.
So 6 hours later, mainly on the phone and the live chat and the email, I have my emergency gas engineer appointment from Utilita for an engineer to (I hope) change the faulty Smart Meter in 3-4 hours' time. The one last night from the Distribution Company cadent said up to 2 hours, and arrived in 30 minutes.
Then the next one is to see if my own gas engineer can find time to come back in and do a complete test on the boiler (which could not be completed with no gas supply in the house) in time for BH weekend.
It's a good job it is only the heating and hot water that is in jeopardy.
If not, it will be round to mine or down to the gym if the T needs a shower.
I do not need or deserve money off my energy bills.
If it’s a public service like transport then I can more so see the logic but ultimately costs have gone up. The government can’t subsidise things every time something happens, otherwise where do you stop?
The reason the last energy subsidy was universal was down to keeping the suppliers viable not whether consumers deserved it or not. Off current prices that is unlikely to be the case this time but if we returned to 2022 prices then we will do similar again, whoever is in charge or what they currently think best.
Stupid idea.
If the suppliers go bust they should go bust. Assets and shareholders wiped out and continuity of operations via bankruptcy proceedings, including a newco if need be that could be privatised in the future.
Private companies should not be bailed out.
This form of circular bankruptcy did for the private sector abattoir sector in the 1980s and 1990s and it wasn't until the government was prepared to buy the bankrupt abattoirs off the market that the madness ended.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
I do not need or deserve money off my energy bills.
If it’s a public service like transport then I can more so see the logic but ultimately costs have gone up. The government can’t subsidise things every time something happens, otherwise where do you stop?
The reason the last energy subsidy was universal was down to keeping the suppliers viable not whether consumers deserved it or not. Off current prices that is unlikely to be the case this time but if we returned to 2022 prices then we will do similar again, whoever is in charge or what they currently think best.
Stupid idea.
If the suppliers go bust they should go bust. Assets and shareholders wiped out and continuity of operations via bankruptcy proceedings, including a newco if need be that could be privatised in the future.
Private companies should not be bailed out.
This form of circular bankruptcy did for the private sector abattoir sector in the 1980s and 1990s and it wasn't until the government was prepared to buy the bankrupt abattoirs off the market that the madness ended.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
I do not need or deserve money off my energy bills.
If it’s a public service like transport then I can more so see the logic but ultimately costs have gone up. The government can’t subsidise things every time something happens, otherwise where do you stop?
The reason the last energy subsidy was universal was down to keeping the suppliers viable not whether consumers deserved it or not. Off current prices that is unlikely to be the case this time but if we returned to 2022 prices then we will do similar again, whoever is in charge or what they currently think best.
Stupid idea.
If the suppliers go bust they should go bust. Assets and shareholders wiped out and continuity of operations via bankruptcy proceedings, including a newco if need be that could be privatised in the future.
Private companies should not be bailed out.
This form of circular bankruptcy did for the private sector abattoir sector in the 1980s and 1990s and it wasn't until the government was prepared to buy the bankrupt abattoirs off the market that the madness ended.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
So the system worked.
Bad firms with bad debts failed, the taxpayer did not end up on the hook for that, and unproductive firms assets were put to more productive use. And the industry continued.
Y Doethur - You might want to read about the "Mississippi Miracle":
The Mississippi Miracle is the rapid improvement of K–12 student performance in Mississippi since 2013, widely attributed to a series of policy, curriculum, and pedagogical changes initiated at the state level. The term can also be used to generally refer to improvements in student test scores in other southern states that implemented similar changes, which has also been dubbed the "Southern surge".[1] The positive changes followed decades of low academic performance in the state and likely helped minimize some of the negative educational impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
One of the problems with reducing class size in the US is that the teachers added are often not as skilled as the teachers already there. (Partly that's because intelligent women in the US now have many more choices of careers than they did in, say, the 1950s.)
( For the record: In order to avoid the draft, I taught for several years in a slum school on the west side of Chicago. Since the school only went up to 6th grade, we had only one full-time policeman at the school; a nearby high school had four.
I was only mugged once, and might not have been, if I had been driving to and from the school, rather than commuting by light rail.)
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
The Lib Dems are getting close to losing me over this. Very disappointing.
I'm off to deliver some leaflets shortly. I hope I don't end up chatting with anyone and having to defend this crap. It is incredibly demotivating.
Even if we drill all the North Sea oil it’s eventually going to run out. So we’re going to have to use something else.
Surely we should produce and use as much of our own energy as possible?
That is the solution almost everyone across the political spectrum here is recommending. As well as a few politicians like Kemi to be fair.
Invest in renewables AND extract our oil and gas.
It is not either/or.
You've said yourself that we will need oil and gas for centuries to come for purposes like chemicals and fertilizer production. Why, then, the determination to extract and burn our finite reserves as quickly as possible? It seems so short-sighted as well as environmentally unwise.
Leave it to the market to decide unless there is a national security issue. It’s all very complicated too - we need our resident O&G expert but you can only pick and choose which bits to extract to a very limited extent. You might as well eat the whole cow.
My difficulty with Badenoch is the pledge to exploit 100% of North Sea O&G. That’s just as crazy as blocking production entirely. Probably more so given the costs involved. I sincerely hope she means “economically viable”, snd is aware it’s going to be a rather rapid decline in whatever scenario.
Even if we drill all the North Sea oil it’s eventually going to run out. So we’re going to have to use something else.
Surely we should produce and use as much of our own energy as possible?
Yes, and this is why a blended energy plan should have been obvious: Make extracting remaining oil & gas as tax-efficient as possible Continued investment into renewables and the grid Investment into SMR nuclear
Problem is that zealots insist one is Bad and should stop immediately.
Trouble is that we all disagree on which one is Bad.
(FWIW, my take is that SMR isn't so much Bad, as overtaken by events. Renewables plus batteries is better on cost for 90-95% of the year, and it doesn't seem to make much sense to run nuclear for the remaining 5%, when gas can cover that more cheaply. For now, Net 0.05 looks close enough to Net Zero to be a sort-of-solved problem, albeit one that needs returning to.)
My view is that Britain should do everything: big nukes, small nukes, wind, solar, batteries, tidal, store excess renewables as methane for use in CCGTs.
It's quite likely one of them will be a mistake, but who can be sure which one? If you spread the load around then you minimise the impact of one technology not working out as well as hoped.
Also, aim for an energy surplus*, even after electrifying transport and heating - this implies you need a lot of everything (including grid upgrades) because you need to double or treble grid capacity. This is another reason to do everything, as it reduces the deployment bottlenecks if you're not relying on one technology.
* This has the benefit of energy being cheaper, plus covers you if a technology really doesn't work at all, and there are bound to be countries that fumble the transition and which you can export energy to (Ireland is one candidate, but there's are others).
"With all the noise about energy policy, it is worth boiling the arguments down to these essentials.
British people use energy. We are worse off when there is an energy shock. Labour wants everyone to pay except the poor. The Conservatives and Reform UK want private investors to pay. The Lib Dems and Greens want the country’s children to pay. It really is that simple."
Thankfully, the moves that we have already made towards net zero mean that the bill is a lot lower than it would otherwise have been.
No they don't. Even at its elevated levels, it would still be cheaper if we were fully powered by gas with no renewables.
Bollocks. As RCS1000 pointed out yesterday, energy tends to be cheaper in those countries that use more renewable sources. If we were fully powered by gas, we'd be completely hamstrung now and looking into an even bleaker future.
I'm sorry, it is not bollocks.
Here is David Turver's chart again - and before anyone says that RCS 'debunked' this - he didn't. He offered a mild reproach at how the gas MWH price was simplified. He gave no objections to the broad figures, and if he wishes to do so, let him do so now.
The table is obviously out of date, ChatGPT's current estimate for gas generation is £120–140 per MWh, including £15–25/MWh of carbon offsetting costs.
That makes solar under CFD the only renewable source that is competitive with gas, even at its current Hormuz-related spike. The rest are all costing us considerably more.
The fundamental flaw with that table is it compares the marginal cost of gas with the total cost of renewables. A like-for-like comparison would be to drop (almost) all the CfD costs from renewables, given almost all of them are incurred from the initial investment. This is why LCOE is the better measure - particularly looking into the future, with the cost of non-wind renewables and batteries dropping so quickly.
There are also huge costs associated with uncertainty and lack of energy security. A fixed price CfD contract which Iran, Putin and Trump can't fuck up is worth additional £10s of billions to the UK economy, even if the LCOE is actually higher than it is for gas (which it isn't).
That chart reminds me of one that used to claim that EVs generated more C02 than ICE - by assuming all electricity was generated from brown coal and using the full “well-to-wheels” for EVs and only the C02 from actually burning the petrol for ICE.
So it's wrong because 'it reminds you of something'. That's the shittest argument against it yet.
It reminds me, because it uses the same kind of bad faith arguments and bad comparisons.
I think the bad faith lies in dismissing something out of hand on the basis of zero evidence. You've shown yourself to be utterly intellectually incurious.
The flaw has been explained to you, calmly and clearly, repeatedly.
It is dishonest to contrast the full cost of one (including capital outlay) with the marginal cost of the other.
Either compare full cost with full cost, or marginal cost with marginal cost.
Unfortunately for you, it also isn't true. Turver included Capex for gas-fired generation in his overall figure at around £7 - he states so in the comments.
Had he not done so, it would have been an ommission, but clearly not a terribly significant one in the broader context. When I asked for RCS's estimate of what adding the costs he implied were missing to the gas-fired column would do, he didn't respond. I concluded (I think rightly) that it would not significantly alter the overall figure, even if it had been excluded, which it wasn't.
Even if we drill all the North Sea oil it’s eventually going to run out. So we’re going to have to use something else.
Surely we should produce and use as much of our own energy as possible?
That is the solution almost everyone across the political spectrum here is recommending. As well as a few politicians like Kemi to be fair.
Invest in renewables AND extract our oil and gas.
It is not either/or.
You've said yourself that we will need oil and gas for centuries to come for purposes like chemicals and fertilizer production. Why, then, the determination to extract and burn our finite reserves as quickly as possible? It seems so short-sighted as well as environmentally unwise.
Because as @Richard_Tyndall has explained, patiently and repeatedly, plugging the wells is not leaving them accessible for the future.
And the whole x years left thing is a fallacy that we should have passed many times over already.
Extract it and invest in alternatives so we no longer need to burn it. Win/win.
Even if we drill all the North Sea oil it’s eventually going to run out. So we’re going to have to use something else.
Surely we should produce and use as much of our own energy as possible?
That is the solution almost everyone across the political spectrum here is recommending. As well as a few politicians like Kemi to be fair.
Invest in renewables AND extract our oil and gas.
It is not either/or.
You've said yourself that we will need oil and gas for centuries to come for purposes like chemicals and fertilizer production. Why, then, the determination to extract and burn our finite reserves as quickly as possible? It seems so short-sighted as well as environmentally unwise.
Because as @Richard_Tyndall has explained, patiently and repeatedly, plugging the wells is not leaving them accessible for the future.
And the whole x years left thing is a fallacy that we should have passed many times over already.
Extract it and invest in alternatives so we no longer need to burn it. Win/win.
Sorry, but it simply defies logic to suppose that there is no way to control the rate at which the North Sea reserves are exploited.
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
We had our UK employment law update seminar today, what a snoozefest. The new changes around sexual harassment will become a liars charter for getting paid out in tribunals. Someone can simply claim they felt sexually harassed and no amount of evidence can disprove this feeling. The unintended consequence of this is not going to end well.
"With all the noise about energy policy, it is worth boiling the arguments down to these essentials.
British people use energy. We are worse off when there is an energy shock. Labour wants everyone to pay except the poor. The Conservatives and Reform UK want private investors to pay. The Lib Dems and Greens want the country’s children to pay. It really is that simple."
Thankfully, the moves that we have already made towards net zero mean that the bill is a lot lower than it would otherwise have been.
No they don't. Even at its elevated levels, it would still be cheaper if we were fully powered by gas with no renewables.
Bollocks. As RCS1000 pointed out yesterday, energy tends to be cheaper in those countries that use more renewable sources. If we were fully powered by gas, we'd be completely hamstrung now and looking into an even bleaker future.
I'm sorry, it is not bollocks.
Here is David Turver's chart again - and before anyone says that RCS 'debunked' this - he didn't. He offered a mild reproach at how the gas MWH price was simplified. He gave no objections to the broad figures, and if he wishes to do so, let him do so now.
The table is obviously out of date, ChatGPT's current estimate for gas generation is £120–140 per MWh, including £15–25/MWh of carbon offsetting costs.
That makes solar under CFD the only renewable source that is competitive with gas, even at its current Hormuz-related spike. The rest are all costing us considerably more.
The fundamental flaw with that table is it compares the marginal cost of gas with the total cost of renewables. A like-for-like comparison would be to drop (almost) all the CfD costs from renewables, given almost all of them are incurred from the initial investment. This is why LCOE is the better measure - particularly looking into the future, with the cost of non-wind renewables and batteries dropping so quickly.
There are also huge costs associated with uncertainty and lack of energy security. A fixed price CfD contract which Iran, Putin and Trump can't fuck up is worth additional £10s of billions to the UK economy, even if the LCOE is actually higher than it is for gas (which it isn't).
That chart reminds me of one that used to claim that EVs generated more C02 than ICE - by assuming all electricity was generated from brown coal and using the full “well-to-wheels” for EVs and only the C02 from actually burning the petrol for ICE.
So it's wrong because 'it reminds you of something'. That's the shittest argument against it yet.
For anyone who wishes to read the full post (obviously if you prefer to dismiss the facts because they remind you of something ydy), it is here:
One of the problems for someone who wishes to engage with this argument from a relatively low knowledge base is that someone like David Turver is quoted as a reliable source.
It is clear from a gently perusal of his substack that his views on renewables and net zero were formed long before that table was.
I don't wish to play the man and not the ball, but the problem I find is that a long article full of facts can do as much to obscure as it can to illuminate.
On the other side many repeat unquestionably the claim that renewables are now cheaper than gas but inflated by the way we price electricity.
As with many things it is hard to know what to believe. It would be nice if fewer people were disingenuous in their substack or.podcast pronouncements...doesn't seem an unreasonable thing to wish for.
I suggest you read the comment thread that follows the article, where someone (using ChatGPT) attempts a point by point takedown of Turver's argument. Very informative.
I do not need or deserve money off my energy bills.
If it’s a public service like transport then I can more so see the logic but ultimately costs have gone up. The government can’t subsidise things every time something happens, otherwise where do you stop?
The reason the last energy subsidy was universal was down to keeping the suppliers viable not whether consumers deserved it or not. Off current prices that is unlikely to be the case this time but if we returned to 2022 prices then we will do similar again, whoever is in charge or what they currently think best.
Stupid idea.
If the suppliers go bust they should go bust. Assets and shareholders wiped out and continuity of operations via bankruptcy proceedings, including a newco if need be that could be privatised in the future.
Private companies should not be bailed out.
This form of circular bankruptcy did for the private sector abattoir sector in the 1980s and 1990s and it wasn't until the government was prepared to buy the bankrupt abattoirs off the market that the madness ended.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
So the system worked.
Bad firms with bad debts failed, the taxpayer did not end up on the hook for that, and unproductive firms assets were put to more productive use. And the industry continued.
Don't see a downside.
From an animal welfare and farmer welfare point of view it didn't work
I do not need or deserve money off my energy bills.
If it’s a public service like transport then I can more so see the logic but ultimately costs have gone up. The government can’t subsidise things every time something happens, otherwise where do you stop?
The reason the last energy subsidy was universal was down to keeping the suppliers viable not whether consumers deserved it or not. Off current prices that is unlikely to be the case this time but if we returned to 2022 prices then we will do similar again, whoever is in charge or what they currently think best.
Stupid idea.
If the suppliers go bust they should go bust. Assets and shareholders wiped out and continuity of operations via bankruptcy proceedings, including a newco if need be that could be privatised in the future.
Private companies should not be bailed out.
This form of circular bankruptcy did for the private sector abattoir sector in the 1980s and 1990s and it wasn't until the government was prepared to buy the bankrupt abattoirs off the market that the madness ended.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
So the system worked.
Bad firms with bad debts failed, the taxpayer did not end up on the hook for that, and unproductive firms assets were put to more productive use. And the industry continued.
Don't see a downside.
From an animal welfare and farmer welfare point of view it didn't work
If you were to take a narrow free trade approach to agriculture then little of our domestic production would be viable.
A vaguely similar thought occurred to me when I heard a pilot discussing the difficulties of shooting down a relatively low speed drone in a fast jet. There seems to be a lot of very expensive tech being used to counter $40k drones.
‘There's a real irony that one of the worst aircraft of WWII would be ideal for shooting down Shahed drones today. The Boulton-Paul Defiant was 90 years ahead of its time’
Bit unfair on the Defiant. There were lots of worse aircraft.
The Shahed drones fly at 100kts, it’s really difficult to shoot them down with a fast jet which doesn’t like anything below about 300kts.
The Ukranians are doing things like flying around in light aircraft with a shotgun hanging out of the window, chasing them with helicopters, or shooting at them from the ground with guns. The best option so far appears to be small $2,000 quadcoptor drones, a fast version of a hobby DJI-type with a small explosive charge.
The Vietnam-era Bronco can be fitted with shotgun/machine-gun pods, can loiter from several hours, and can take off and land from a Queen-Elizabeth class aircraft carrier without arrestor gear/catapult
There’s apparently only a dozen of them left serviceable, will be very expensive per hour and really bad news to lose any to the war.
Build new ones. They are rugged, uncomplicated and very servicable. Provided the contractor is beaten heavily with a stick it shouldn't be too difficult nor too expensive.
It you want a cheap-to-run turboprop for low end military operations, there are plenty around. Some in current production.
Look at COIN aircraft.
I have. But I don't think they can do the QE flight deck of 280 m/920 ft. Yes, I know a Hercules did in in the 70s, but that was exceptional. A General Atomics STOL drone can do it. Bronco can do it. Shield AI's X-BAT can do it. Heck, we could even buy and refurb the remaining Harriers. But other than that there are precious few that can, and unless we commit to retrofitting arrestor/catapults, that's what we're stuck with.
Crude Oil is higher than Brent at the moment. Has that ever happened before?
Well spotted. That’s certainly the guest time I’ve seen it. Suggests that perhaps the grades of crude most affected by the Hormuz closure are those similar to WTI.
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
This is Badenoch Tory Party.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
This is Badenoch Tory Party.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
They're not as bad as Reform. Honest Bob pretends he's never heard of the Conservative Party. Conservative Party who?
A vaguely similar thought occurred to me when I heard a pilot discussing the difficulties of shooting down a relatively low speed drone in a fast jet. There seems to be a lot of very expensive tech being used to counter $40k drones.
‘There's a real irony that one of the worst aircraft of WWII would be ideal for shooting down Shahed drones today. The Boulton-Paul Defiant was 90 years ahead of its time’
Bit unfair on the Defiant. There were lots of worse aircraft.
The Shahed drones fly at 100kts, it’s really difficult to shoot them down with a fast jet which doesn’t like anything below about 300kts.
The Ukranians are doing things like flying around in light aircraft with a shotgun hanging out of the window, chasing them with helicopters, or shooting at them from the ground with guns. The best option so far appears to be small $2,000 quadcoptor drones, a fast version of a hobby DJI-type with a small explosive charge.
The Vietnam-era Bronco can be fitted with shotgun/machine-gun pods, can loiter from several hours, and can take off and land from a Queen-Elizabeth class aircraft carrier without arrestor gear/catapult
There’s apparently only a dozen of them left serviceable, will be very expensive per hour and really bad news to lose any to the war.
Build new ones. They are rugged, uncomplicated and very servicable. Provided the contractor is beaten heavily with a stick it shouldn't be too difficult nor too expensive.
It you want a cheap-to-run turboprop for low end military operations, there are plenty around. Some in current production.
Look at COIN aircraft.
I have. But I don't think they can do the QE flight deck of 280 m/920 ft. Yes, I know a Hercules did in in the 70s, but that was exceptional. A General Atomics STOL drone can do it. Bronco can do it. Shield AI's X-BAT can do it. Heck, we could even buy and refurb the remaining Harriers. But other than that there are precious few that can, and unless we commit to retrofitting arrestor/catapults, that's what we're stuck with.
If it’s not built for naval operations it will corpse away fairly quickly anyway.
For something as simple as drone hunting, a drone aircraft is probably cheaper anyway.
A vaguely similar thought occurred to me when I heard a pilot discussing the difficulties of shooting down a relatively low speed drone in a fast jet. There seems to be a lot of very expensive tech being used to counter $40k drones.
‘There's a real irony that one of the worst aircraft of WWII would be ideal for shooting down Shahed drones today. The Boulton-Paul Defiant was 90 years ahead of its time’
Bit unfair on the Defiant. There were lots of worse aircraft.
The Shahed drones fly at 100kts, it’s really difficult to shoot them down with a fast jet which doesn’t like anything below about 300kts.
The Ukranians are doing things like flying around in light aircraft with a shotgun hanging out of the window, chasing them with helicopters, or shooting at them from the ground with guns. The best option so far appears to be small $2,000 quadcoptor drones, a fast version of a hobby DJI-type with a small explosive charge.
The Vietnam-era Bronco can be fitted with shotgun/machine-gun pods, can loiter from several hours, and can take off and land from a Queen-Elizabeth class aircraft carrier without arrestor gear/catapult
There’s apparently only a dozen of them left serviceable, will be very expensive per hour and really bad news to lose any to the war.
Build new ones. They are rugged, uncomplicated and very servicable. Provided the contractor is beaten heavily with a stick it shouldn't be too difficult nor too expensive.
It you want a cheap-to-run turboprop for low end military operations, there are plenty around. Some in current production.
Look at COIN aircraft.
I have. But I don't think they can do the QE flight deck of 280 m/920 ft. Yes, I know a Hercules did in in the 70s, but that was exceptional. A General Atomics STOL drone can do it. Bronco can do it. Shield AI's X-BAT can do it. Heck, we could even buy and refurb the remaining Harriers. But other than that there are precious few that can, and unless we commit to retrofitting arrestor/catapults, that's what we're stuck with.
A vaguely similar thought occurred to me when I heard a pilot discussing the difficulties of shooting down a relatively low speed drone in a fast jet. There seems to be a lot of very expensive tech being used to counter $40k drones.
‘There's a real irony that one of the worst aircraft of WWII would be ideal for shooting down Shahed drones today. The Boulton-Paul Defiant was 90 years ahead of its time’
Bit unfair on the Defiant. There were lots of worse aircraft.
The Shahed drones fly at 100kts, it’s really difficult to shoot them down with a fast jet which doesn’t like anything below about 300kts.
The Ukranians are doing things like flying around in light aircraft with a shotgun hanging out of the window, chasing them with helicopters, or shooting at them from the ground with guns. The best option so far appears to be small $2,000 quadcoptor drones, a fast version of a hobby DJI-type with a small explosive charge.
The Vietnam-era Bronco can be fitted with shotgun/machine-gun pods, can loiter from several hours, and can take off and land from a Queen-Elizabeth class aircraft carrier without arrestor gear/catapult
There’s apparently only a dozen of them left serviceable, will be very expensive per hour and really bad news to lose any to the war.
Build new ones. They are rugged, uncomplicated and very servicable. Provided the contractor is beaten heavily with a stick it shouldn't be too difficult nor too expensive.
It you want a cheap-to-run turboprop for low end military operations, there are plenty around. Some in current production.
Look at COIN aircraft.
I believe the US still has OV-1 Mohawks in service.
My favourite old aircraft still in service (not turboprops) are probably NASA's Canberra Bombers and the Gloster Meteors used by Martin-Baker for testing ejection seats.
Off topic: Credit where due: The WaPo just published a piece arguing that the Kobo e-readers are better than Amazon’s Kindles.
First, the test drive. I kicked the wheels on Kobo’s black-and-white Clara ($139). Kobo’s technology shines by disappearing into the book experience itself. The deep customization (fonts, margins, line spacing, justification), library management, attention to aesthetics and details (warm tones for night reading!), and uncluttered, ad-free user interfaces are refreshing. Screen, battery life and user interface on its four e-reader devices (Clara BW, Clara Colour, Libra Colour and Elipsa 2E) are all comparable or better than almost every Kindle on the market — with no third-party ads.
I’ve enjoyed using my Kindle for years, but am considering getting a Kobo, after reading that piece. One reason: Better access to the Gutenberg Project.
(Yes, I will be checking from time to time to see whether the author of the piece is still being published by the WaPo.)
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
The Lib Dems are getting close to losing me over this. Very disappointing.
I'm off to deliver some leaflets shortly. I hope I don't end up chatting with anyone and having to defend this crap. It is incredibly demotivating.
Sorry, but I think it's bordering on delusional to imagine this would be a problem!!! Firstly, you rarely meet or talk to anyone while delivering leaflets. Secondly, I suspect most of the public will think a cut in fuel duty is a good idea. Thirdly, in the unlikely event that you do talk to someone and they think it's a bad policy, they're not going to think it's such a bad policy that they're going to have a go at you about it.
On King Charles' visit to the USA, I wonder how he will get the politics into his speech to the joint houses of Congress.
When the House speaker was visiting Westminster for the 250th Anniversary Celebration of the USA, and presaging it's possible funeral, he made a nakedly political speech. Though over there he is also essentially the 'Leader of the House'.
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
This is Badenoch Tory Party.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
It is so amusing just how the conservatives are winding you up, and for all your protestations it is not working
Kemi -9 leads in approval of all the leaders with Starmer wallowing at -42
Once again, Nigel is a pro surrounded by nasty idiots. The question of why Nigel is surrounded by nasty idiots is left as an exercise for the reader.
His comments could have been worded better, but they're absolutely spot on. This country is being brought to a halt by single issues not being addressed and weighed in the balance with other issues, but being given overriding importance and addressed with knee jerk legislation with legal teeth, piling another straw on the camel's back. Example: Covid, when the whole country went into the service of people not dying of covid. See also bat tunnels. See also equality legislation that means administrators must be paid the same as binmen. To be convulsed by knee jerk reactions to single issues is no way to run a country - it runs the country into the ground, and long term will cause more misery and suffering than it avoids.
"Many, many more people die on the roads driving cars, but we're not making cars illegal, so why are we stopping houses being built?" is a completely idiotic comment only makeable by someone who has practically no understanding of social issues.
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
The Lib Dems are getting close to losing me over this. Very disappointing.
I'm off to deliver some leaflets shortly. I hope I don't end up chatting with anyone and having to defend this crap. It is incredibly demotivating.
Sorry, but I think it's bordering on delusional to imagine this would be a problem!!! Firstly, you rarely meet or talk to anyone while delivering leaflets. Secondly, I suspect most of the public will think a cut in fuel duty is a good idea. Thirdly, in the unlikely event that you do talk to someone and they think it's a bad policy, they're not going to think it's such a bad policy that they're going to have a go at you about it.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
I'm with Eabhal on this. Universal subsidy is nuts. Targeted support, uncoupled from fuel/energy consumption, maybe (everything will be getting more expensive and will hit poorer households hardest anyway).
Otherwise we just hide what should be another clear signal to those who can afford them that there are benefits to EVs over ICEVs.
ETA: I've defined myself as a liberal for a long time and I feel further and further away from the lib Dems - it used to be I'd lend my vote to other parties, now my vote is looking for a home
I’m also with Eabhal on this.
I cannot see why everyone should get a bail out simply because shit happens.
It's worse than that, it's tantamount to burning money.
Prices are high because supply is constrained. If you cut the tax you will increase demand. With no more supply then prices will simply increase.
Now the new equilibrium will be at a slightly lower price, because the higher demand will have increased prices in other countries, and decreased demand there, but it's really the most wasteful intervention I can think of.
I agree. We need to be looking at some demand destruction rather than simply pushing prices higher.
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
The Lib Dems are getting close to losing me over this. Very disappointing.
I'm off to deliver some leaflets shortly. I hope I don't end up chatting with anyone and having to defend this crap. It is incredibly demotivating.
Sorry, but I think it's bordering on delusional to imagine this would be a problem!!! Firstly, you rarely meet or talk to anyone while delivering leaflets. Secondly, I suspect most of the public will think a cut in fuel duty is a good idea. Thirdly, in the unlikely event that you do talk to someone and they think it's a bad policy, they're not going to think it's such a bad policy that they're going to have a go at you about it.
To return to the topic of this thread , I am saddened by the Education Secretary's doctrinal attitude to private schools for special needs pupils. She would do better to ask why parents are sending their children to these schools. When I lived in north Hampshire, two parents with special needs children (One was deaf, the other had hemiplegia) sent their child to a private school because the private school had a positive attitude whereas the head teachers in the state sector were either indifferent or hostile. My son has hemiplegia and when we tried to explain his disability to the head of the local primary school, she just dismissed our comments by saying: "But some of the pupils here come from a house with no books. That's a disability."
I belong to a parents' support group and I have heard some heart-breaking stories where was was the teacher who was the main bully of the disabled pupil. You can put all the systems in place but if a teacher is hostile, it won't work.
The other angle is that apparently “Private school = BAD!” but “Individual tuition = Good”
So employing @ydoethur to individually tutor children is completely different to employing an aggregated teaching facility (aka school)
For example, I know one place that does exactly this kind of schooling. Their max class size is 8, IIRC. Sometimes they do 1-1 - varies by subject and pupil. Many of their staff are actually self employed teachers who also do… 1-1 tuition. As another job.
In a separate farce - a number of local parents have decided that 6th form private is unnecessary. So they send their children for A levels to a good state school and spend the money on tuition. So the school gets pupils who are already highly trained academically, have lots of support and don’t bother the teachers. The parents save money. The kids get to claim they aren’t privately educated - “I got ‘me A levels at St Stabingtons. I is a state skool oil” - so they get (potentially) preferential treatment on some university entrance.
The final touch - one dad realised that his daughter’s friends were doing some of the same A levels. So, for tuition, why not share? So he set up the garden office with 4 tables facing the big screen (for the online tuition session). Now what does that remind you of?
Crude Oil is higher than Brent at the moment. Has that ever happened before?
Well spotted. That’s certainly the guest time I’ve seen it. Suggests that perhaps the grades of crude most affected by the Hormuz closure are those similar to WTI.
I think it's a technical issue:
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 1h As some of you are asking:
Brent (physical) trading prompt delivery: >$125 a barrel
WTI (paper) trading **May** futures: $112 a barrel
Brent (paper) trading **June** futures: $109 a barrel
(Again: WTI futures front-month is *May*; but Brent futures front-month is now *June*)
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
No it is not, anymore than the Ukraine spike but it is the government of the day that takes the flak
It is not a good sign for house prices or sales and depending on how long a stagnant property market
Crude Oil is higher than Brent at the moment. Has that ever happened before?
Well spotted. That’s certainly the guest time I’ve seen it. Suggests that perhaps the grades of crude most affected by the Hormuz closure are those similar to WTI.
I think it's a technical issue:
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 1h As some of you are asking:
Brent (physical) trading prompt delivery: >$125 a barrel
WTI (paper) trading **May** futures: $112 a barrel
Brent (paper) trading **June** futures: $109 a barrel
(Again: WTI futures front-month is *May*; but Brent futures front-month is now *June*)
It is worth remembering at this point that the American voters who are most reliant on their cars to get around are primarily Republicans in red states.
Similarly, although I haven't got the figures to prove it, I would not be at all surprised if Reform voters tended to be more car dependent than say, Green voters, who are younger and more concentrated in cities.
Therefore, should we be expecting that Trump's act of total insanity and Farage's equally stupid reflexive support of it will be damaging to them?
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
"With all the noise about energy policy, it is worth boiling the arguments down to these essentials.
British people use energy. We are worse off when there is an energy shock. Labour wants everyone to pay except the poor. The Conservatives and Reform UK want private investors to pay. The Lib Dems and Greens want the country’s children to pay. It really is that simple."
Thankfully, the moves that we have already made towards net zero mean that the bill is a lot lower than it would otherwise have been.
No they don't. Even at its elevated levels, it would still be cheaper if we were fully powered by gas with no renewables.
Bollocks. As RCS1000 pointed out yesterday, energy tends to be cheaper in those countries that use more renewable sources. If we were fully powered by gas, we'd be completely hamstrung now and looking into an even bleaker future.
I'm sorry, it is not bollocks.
Here is David Turver's chart again - and before anyone says that RCS 'debunked' this - he didn't. He offered a mild reproach at how the gas MWH price was simplified. He gave no objections to the broad figures, and if he wishes to do so, let him do so now.
The table is obviously out of date, ChatGPT's current estimate for gas generation is £120–140 per MWh, including £15–25/MWh of carbon offsetting costs.
That makes solar under CFD the only renewable source that is competitive with gas, even at its current Hormuz-related spike. The rest are all costing us considerably more.
A couple of non expert comments on that table.
The Contract for Difference (CFD) price for offshore wind currently is about £70 per MWH - so that fits the £75 Market Rate line item. CFD is the price actually given to the supplier, it isn't the market rate. Most of the time the bid price for offshore wind will be lower than CFD and will be topped up to that amount; sometimes it will be higher in which case the supplier returns the difference. The "subsidy" is therefore contained within CFD as the bid price is mostly lower.
Given that I don't know what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. Suspect it may be double counting.
Grid balancing applies to 1. Short term blasts of gas generation to meet peak demand. This is also a feature in gas only generation 2. Curtailment due to lack of grid capacity. The UK Grid is creaking. It will need upgrading whatever generation source. 3. Curtailment due to oversupply of energy relative to demand. This does need to be included in the renewables columns, but hardly features at the moment as long as we are still consuming gas.
Capacity market is fixed payments for redundant availability mostly paid to gas generators and interconnectors. This shouldn't be in the renewables columns.
We should get rid of renewables obligations.
Currently gas generation is £100+ per MWH and costs more than the renewables listed. A month ago it was cheaper at about £60. Will it still cost as much in ten years - who knows? Later CFD rounds have higher strike prices due to the increase in the cost of capital. but in ten years the first projects will be coming off CFD and providing actually cheap marginal costs energy as the all important capital costs are paid off.
And the point @Eabhal was making. If you stick with gas you will need to invest in new plant and the capital costs for those have increased massively too.
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
This is Badenoch Tory Party.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
It is so amusing just how the conservatives are winding you up, and for all your protestations it is not working
Kemi -9 leads in approval of all the leaders with Starmer wallowing at -42
Thats because 90% of the population don't know who she is.
Name recognition very low Facial even lower Relevance zero
We had our UK employment law update seminar today, what a snoozefest. The new changes around sexual harassment will become a liars charter for getting paid out in tribunals. Someone can simply claim they felt sexually harassed and no amount of evidence can disprove this feeling. The unintended consequence of this is not going to end well.
Thanks, Matt. You warned me that they’d come at me. They already had come at me. I will not be cowed. They have picked on the wrong person. I will not be bullied. My dad was a very proud @RMTunion assistant general secretary. He would say “do right, fear nobody”. I will."
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Thanks for that Horse. That is incredible from Coutinho. She has absolutely no shame.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
This is Badenoch Tory Party.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
It is so amusing just how the conservatives are winding you up, and for all your protestations it is not working
Kemi -9 leads in approval of all the leaders with Starmer wallowing at -42
Thats because 90% of the population don't know who she is.
Name recognition very low Facial even lower Relevance zero
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Yes, full blown ongoing regional war in the Middle East with global energy and food supplies under mortal threat has hit the gilts market about half as much as Liz Truss's minibudget.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
No it is not, anymore than the Ukraine spike but it is the government of the day that takes the flak
It is not a good sign for house prices or sales and depending on how long a stagnant property market
We want lower house prices. Preferably by building more but still, you take what you can get.
Lol, King Charles is the head of the Church of England. Where do they find these people?
It's all over the US RIght, especially Evangelical Right.
It's right up there with the Eurabia (as was), "Civisational Erasure" (per Trump's National Security Strategy) and Londonistan conspiracy theories.
I think it's a particular porcupine-up-the-fundament for Natcons and Christian Nationalists that the State Church in the UK (which they think should be lead by some sort of bloodthirsty Jesus-Ayatollah) is actually inclusive, tolerant and liberal, not some sort of fear-driven Medievallist war machine dedicated to causing chaos.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
No it is not, anymore than the Ukraine spike but it is the government of the day that takes the flak
It is not a good sign for house prices or sales and depending on how long a stagnant property market
We want lower house prices. Preferably by building more but still, you take what you can get.
The problem is a stagnant market will directly affect growth prospects
Lol, King Charles is the head of the Church of England. Where do they find these people?
It's all over the US RIght, especially Evangelical Right.
It's right up there with the Eurabia (as was), "Civisational Erasure" (per Trump's National Security Strategy) and Londonistan conspiracy theories.
I think it's a particular porcupine-up-the-fundament for Natcons and Christian Nationalists that the State Church in the UK (which they think should be lead by some sort of bloodthirsty Jesus-Ayatollah) is actually inclusive, tolerant and liberal, not some sort of fear-driven Medievallist war machine dedicated to causing chaos.
We need to set Ehud on some of these Yanks.
Tell me - is Charlie’s conversion to Jediism voluntary or something to do with space lasers?
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Not really. The Truss budget was entirely self inflicted. This isn’t.
One of the first things a Reform government needs to do is get rid of the awful Malicious Communications Act.
Making rude and/or obnoxious comments should never be a legal matter.
This is eerily similar to people wanting Trump because he'd kick transwomen out of women's sport and bathrooms. I'd rather just not have a Reform government.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Surprisingly I sort of agree with this - if you take the credit for the fair weather then you have to take the blame for the foul.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Surprisingly I sort of agree with this - if you take the credit for the fair weather then you have to take the blame for the foul.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
Actually I am not excusing the idiotic Truss, but this situation today compares to the spike in inflation at the time of the Ukraine war under Johnson
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Well quite. SKS was quite happy to dispense kickings at the time.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Surprisingly I sort of agree with this - if you take the credit for the fair weather then you have to take the blame for the foul.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
Actually I am not excusing the idiotic Truss, but this situation today compares to the spike in inflation at the time of the Ukraine war under Johnson
Fair enough - I misunderstood, sorry.
As I recall it during the Ukraine related spike the opposition gave the Conservative government flack for not doing enough (and they ended up with a very expensive energy cap policy). Current Government seems to be getting away with specific interventions and not hosing all with cash. A touch of hypocrisy perhaps - although personally regardless of the Government i tend to think targeted interventions are better in the event of a supply shock. As they say you can’t beat city hall and you can’t buck the market.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Yes, full blown ongoing regional war in the Middle East with global energy and food supplies under mortal threat has hit the gilts market about half as much as Liz Truss's minibudget.
Oh, and of course, none of the problems of the gilt markets is down to the govt. No sireeeee. 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Surprisingly I sort of agree with this - if you take the credit for the fair weather then you have to take the blame for the foul.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
Actually I am not excusing the idiotic Truss, but this situation today compares to the spike in inflation at the time of the Ukraine war under Johnson
The loss of Tory support pre-Truss was almost entirely down to sleaze and scandals, starting with Owen Paterson and culminating in Chris Pincher, with a sandwich filling of partygate.
Johnson actually had pretty decent approval scores on his handling of the Ukraine war.
The loss of Tory support over the economy happened during and after the Truss debacle.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Not exactly fixable though is it - interest rates are being driven by sharply higher inflation forecasts which is being driven by a lack of oil supply
Big G loves nothing more than to hloat when global issues affect UK economy under a non Tory Government.
It's all a bit ghoulish
Not gloating - just reminding those who celebrated the conservatives demise over the same crisis in 2022 that the ball is now in Starmer and labour's court
What goes around comes around
Surprisingly I sort of agree with this - if you take the credit for the fair weather then you have to take the blame for the foul.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
Actually I am not excusing the idiotic Truss, but this situation today compares to the spike in inflation at the time of the Ukraine war under Johnson
Fair enough - I misunderstood, sorry.
As I recall it during the Ukraine related spike the opposition gave the Conservative government flack for not doing enough (and they ended up with a very expensive energy cap policy). Current Government seems to be getting away with specific interventions and not hosing all with cash. A touch of hypocrisy perhaps - although personally regardless of the Government i tend to think targeted interventions are better in the event of a supply shock. As they say you can’t beat city hall and you can’t buck the market.
Starmer's problem is Starmer
The crisis has not hit him yet but it is coming like an express train and he has no idea how he should deal with it
We had our UK employment law update seminar today, what a snoozefest. The new changes around sexual harassment will become a liars charter for getting paid out in tribunals. Someone can simply claim they felt sexually harassed and no amount of evidence can disprove this feeling. The unintended consequence of this is not going to end well.
We need to get back to evidence-based everything.
so you gonna stop posting daily telegraph stories?
Comments
So employing @ydoethur to individually tutor children is completely different to employing an aggregated teaching facility (aka school)
For example, I know one place that does exactly this kind of schooling. Their max class size is 8, IIRC. Sometimes they do 1-1 - varies by subject and pupil. Many of their staff are actually self employed teachers who also do… 1-1 tuition. As another job.
In a separate farce - a number of local parents have decided that 6th form private is unnecessary. So they send their children for A levels to a good state school and spend the money on tuition. So the school gets pupils who are already highly trained academically, have lots of support and don’t bother the teachers. The parents save money. The kids get to claim they aren’t privately educated - “I got ‘me A levels at St Stabingtons. I is a state skool oil” - so they get (potentially) preferential treatment on some university entrance.
The final touch - one dad realised that his daughter’s friends were doing some of the same A levels. So, for tuition, why not share? So he set up the garden office with 4 tables facing the big screen (for the online tuition session). Now what does that remind you of?
Of course, the Lib Dem’s want to cut fuel duty and subsidise.
I’d also keep the fuel duty increase later in the year.
In general our exams are not meant to be time restricted (in the sense that time pressure affects marks) and usually some students will happily leave early. But I cannot shake the impression that some of those on DAPs have worked the system.
A title granted by the Pope which he kept even after breaking with the Church, having the title rescinded by the Pope and being excommunicated.
Giuliani is batshit crazy, and wrong, but its far from unprecedented for heads, even Kings, to breach with the faith they are supposed to be with.
Its just not true here.
Service charges are open to abuse but it isn't really open ended - if it gets extreme the residents can group together and change providers. It needs reform/simplification or even the never arriving switch to commonhold, but it being expensive doesnt mean its a rip off.
Standard London Service charge for basic 2 bed £2-3k
Concierge - Add £1k
Grade II listed - Add £2k
Lifts - Add £1k
Swimming Pool - Add £1-2k
These things cost and will do whether leasehold or any other form of sharing the costs.
I'd note that we've been hearing that the war will be over in days, or at most 2-3 weeks, for a while now, and it hasn't happened yet. I'm sure that, when the US got involved in the Vietnam War, they always expected it to be over in 12-18 months, but it never turned out that way.
Trump's Folly could have a long way to go yet.
So 6 hours later, mainly on the phone and the live chat and the email, I have my emergency gas engineer appointment from Utilita for an engineer to (I hope) change the faulty Smart Meter in 3-4 hours' time. The one last night from the Distribution Company cadent said up to 2 hours, and arrived in 30 minutes.
Then the next one is to see if my own gas engineer can find time to come back in and do a complete test on the boiler (which could not be completed with no gas supply in the house) in time for BH weekend.
It's a good job it is only the heating and hot water that is in jeopardy.
If not, it will be round to mine or down to the gym if the T needs a shower.
So what happened ? An abattoir went bankrupt. It was then bought up and then competed with the non-bankrupt abattoirs but without any capital overheads. So that drove another abattoir which should have been profitable bankrupt, and so on and so on. End result, they all went bankrupt and only the very largest chains survived and they closed down most of the local abattoirs and so animals have to travel great distances to be killed because there are no local abattoirs. Curiously very few local council candidates put saving the local abattoir in their election leaflets.
I believe Swift's Abattoir in Kendal is now private housing. The developers always claim a strong commitment to heritage and recognising what the land was previously used for but sadly did not follow up on that by calling their new cul de sac Slaughterhouse Row, I wonder why ?
The closure of Grangemouth refinery was announced in 2023 when Claire Coutinho was the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero! She did nothing to save the refinery or protect our energy security. You couldn't make this up. It's incredibly brazen.
So when will they apologise and say they got it wrong?
Bad firms with bad debts failed, the taxpayer did not end up on the hook for that, and unproductive firms assets were put to more productive use. And the industry continued.
Don't see a downside.
One of the problems with reducing class size in the US is that the teachers added are often not as skilled as the teachers already there. (Partly that's because intelligent women in the US now have many more choices of careers than they did in, say, the 1950s.)
It is possible to compare different state policies in the US through what is often called the "Nation's Report Card": https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/
Which is not perfect, but is still " the best-available national barometer of American education."
https://www.aei.org/articles/the-national-assessment-of-educational-progress-gold-standard-or-lead-anchor/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22312010316&gbraid=0AAAAADwVl0iKM3_zAq_YLq_tAHg4BWzmq&gclid=Cj0KCQjwp7jOBhDGARIsABe7C4fQEZBvXUEtazIXB6Mfm7RZSBnqCYKGK1InZFID2xC6uTAYDhBeNd4aAiHzEALw_wcB
( For the record: In order to avoid the draft, I taught for several years in a slum school on the west side of Chicago. Since the school only went up to 6th grade, we had only one full-time policeman at the school; a nearby high school had four.
I was only mugged once, and might not have been, if I had been driving to and from the school, rather than commuting by light rail.)
My difficulty with Badenoch is the pledge to exploit 100% of North Sea O&G. That’s just as crazy as blocking production entirely. Probably more so given the costs involved. I sincerely hope she means “economically viable”, snd is aware it’s going to be a rather rapid decline in whatever scenario.
It's quite likely one of them will be a mistake, but who can be sure which one? If you spread the load around then you minimise the impact of one technology not working out as well as hoped.
Also, aim for an energy surplus*, even after electrifying transport and heating - this implies you need a lot of everything (including grid upgrades) because you need to double or treble grid capacity. This is another reason to do everything, as it reduces the deployment bottlenecks if you're not relying on one technology.
* This has the benefit of energy being cheaper, plus covers you if a technology really doesn't work at all, and there are bound to be countries that fumble the transition and which you can export energy to (Ireland is one candidate, but there's are others).
“One Trump administration official said the following on Wednesday night: “It reminded me of listening to Joe Biden speak.”
In Trumplandia, that is perhaps the worst possible thing you could say about anyone, much less the sitting president and leader of the GOP.”
https://bsky.app/profile/swin24.bsky.social/post/3mij7a7hnys2x
Had he not done so, it would have been an ommission, but clearly not a terribly significant one in the broader context. When I asked for RCS's estimate of what adding the costs he implied were missing to the gas-fired column would do, he didn't respond. I concluded (I think rightly) that it would not significantly alter the overall figure, even if it had been excluded, which it wasn't.
And the whole x years left thing is a fallacy that we should have passed many times over already.
Extract it and invest in alternatives so we no longer need to burn it. Win/win.
Milford Haven has been on its arse for decades. It was Esso, then it was something else, then it was Murphy and now it's Valero. I may be wrong but I believe it has been baled out before.
That is just brazen from Coutinho. Effective, but shameless.
She is the future of the Conservative Party. A consummate bullshitter.
Fortunately we do not take such an approch.
Deny and lie about the past.
Deny and lie about the present.
And then have the fucking cheek to ask us to believe anything about the future.
A shame he was very effective as Mayor of New York about 25 years ago.
For something as simple as drone hunting, a drone aircraft is probably cheaper anyway.
It's a bit of a kludge for now, but something along these lies would be far cheaper and usable off our carriers.
https://x.com/boris_beissner/status/2039031733375410409
I’ve enjoyed using my Kindle for years, but am considering getting a Kobo, after reading that piece. One reason: Better access to the Gutenberg Project.
(Yes, I will be checking from time to time to see whether the author of the piece is still being published by the WaPo.)
When the House speaker was visiting Westminster for the 250th Anniversary Celebration of the USA, and presaging it's possible funeral, he made a nakedly political speech. Though over there he is also essentially the 'Leader of the House'.
Kemi -9 leads in approval of all the leaders with Starmer wallowing at -42
It's reminiscent of Prince Philip saying after the Dunblane massacre words to the effect of "You wanna ban handguns, then why don't you ban cricket bats". Absolutely beneath contempt. Not "spot on" at all, or a question of suboptimal word choice. Everybody knows resources are limited. The country is not being brought to a halt by lack of recognition of that fact.
It's your knee that's jerking here. Next you'll be blaming trendy vicars or social workers.
This kind of thing makes me think there may be sense in laying Reform at their current price. They may find that the pond of Stupid Sociopathic Knuckledragger in which they fish isn't as deep as they believe.
There's further polling on fuel duty from YouGov: https://yougov.com/en-gb/trackers/how-fair-is-tax-on-petrol-and-diesel
Making rude and/or obnoxious comments should never be a legal matter.
Biggest shock to mortgage market since Truss mini-budget
The Iran war has triggered the sharpest shock to the UK mortgage market since the 2022 mini-budget delivered by Liz Truss, analysis by Moneyfacts has revealed.
Mortgage rates have soared in recent weeks, with the average two-year fixed deal jumping 100 basis points (bps) from 4.84% to 5.84% in March.
Typical five-year fixes have jumped from 4.96% to 5.75%.
Rates have not risen this sharply since autumn 2022.
Javier Blas
@JavierBlas
·
1h
As some of you are asking:
Brent (physical) trading prompt delivery: >$125 a barrel
WTI (paper) trading **May** futures: $112 a barrel
Brent (paper) trading **June** futures: $109 a barrel
(Again: WTI futures front-month is *May*; but Brent futures front-month is now *June*)
https://x.com/JavierBlas/status/2039688849484386337
It is not a good sign for house prices or sales and depending on how long a stagnant property market
Similarly, although I haven't got the figures to prove it, I would not be at all surprised if Reform voters tended to be more car dependent than say, Green voters, who are younger and more concentrated in cities.
Therefore, should we be expecting that Trump's act of total insanity and Farage's equally stupid reflexive support of it will be damaging to them?
It's all a bit ghoulish
The Contract for Difference (CFD) price for offshore wind currently is about £70 per MWH - so that fits the £75 Market Rate line item. CFD is the price actually given to the supplier, it isn't the market rate. Most of the time the bid price for offshore wind will be lower than CFD and will be topped up to that amount; sometimes it will be higher in which case the supplier returns the difference. The "subsidy" is therefore contained within CFD as the bid price is mostly lower.
Given that I don't know what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. Suspect it may be double counting.
Grid balancing applies to
1. Short term blasts of gas generation to meet peak demand. This is also a feature in gas only generation
2. Curtailment due to lack of grid capacity. The UK Grid is creaking. It will need upgrading whatever generation source.
3. Curtailment due to oversupply of energy relative to demand. This does need to be included in the renewables columns, but hardly features at the moment as long as we are still consuming gas.
Capacity market is fixed payments for redundant availability mostly paid to gas generators and interconnectors. This shouldn't be in the renewables columns.
We should get rid of renewables obligations.
Currently gas generation is £100+ per MWH and costs more than the renewables listed. A month ago it was cheaper at about £60. Will it still cost as much in ten years - who knows? Later CFD rounds have higher strike prices due to the increase in the cost of capital. but in ten years the first projects will be coming off CFD and providing actually cheap marginal costs energy as the all important capital costs are paid off.
And the point @Eabhal was making. If you stick with gas you will need to invest in new plant and the capital costs for those have increased massively too.
Name recognition very low
Facial even lower
Relevance zero
Most of the boffins seem to think it'll be a fairly close contest between LDs and Reform.
https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19915/prediction-competition-april-2026?page=1&scrollTo=1728204
"@KarlTurnerMP
Thanks, Matt. You warned me that they’d come at me. They already had come at me. I will not be cowed. They have picked on the wrong person. I will not be bullied. My dad was a very proud @RMTunion assistant general secretary. He would say “do right, fear nobody”. I will."
https://x.com/KarlTurnerMP/status/2039707495669649598
Will the winner be celebrating with a Campari and lemonade?
For those who have no idea what I'm on about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaEjIlZsuTg
What goes around comes around
It's right up there with the Eurabia (as was), "Civisational Erasure" (per Trump's National Security Strategy) and Londonistan conspiracy theories.
I think it's a particular porcupine-up-the-fundament for Natcons and Christian Nationalists that the State Church in the UK (which they think should be lead by some sort of bloodthirsty Jesus-Ayatollah) is actually inclusive, tolerant and liberal, not some sort of fear-driven Medievallist war machine dedicated to causing chaos.
We need to set Ehud on some of these Yanks.
I'd rather just not have a Reform government.
Although I would like to believe that folks realise that a self-inflicted unfunded budget with little effort bring the folks who buy UK debt along for the ride (albeit amplified by a crunch in an obscure bit of the pension fund world) is a touch different from a significant regional war impacting fossil fuels and supply chains.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
I just read The Devils, by Joe Abercrombie, featuring a Church locked in permanent and devastating Holy War, against the Elves. Hegseth would read that as a blueprint.
Karma.
As I recall it during the Ukraine related spike the opposition gave the Conservative government flack for not doing enough (and they ended up with a very expensive energy cap policy). Current Government seems to be getting away with specific interventions and not hosing all with cash. A touch of hypocrisy perhaps - although personally regardless of the Government i tend to think targeted interventions are better in the event of a supply shock. As they say you can’t beat city hall and you can’t buck the market.
Johnson actually had pretty decent approval scores on his handling of the Ukraine war.
The loss of Tory support over the economy happened during and after the Truss debacle.
The crisis has not hit him yet but it is coming like an express train and he has no idea how he should deal with it
This weeks Find Out Now has Reform back up a little like MiC
Ref 26 (+2)
Green 20 (=)
Con 18 (=)
Lab 15 (-1)
LD 10 (-2)
SNP 3 (=)
Others 7 (=)
1-2 April, changes from 26-27 March