Richard Tice’s firm broke law by failing to pay £91,000 taxes
The deputy leader of Reform UK owns a property investment company which did not pay tax on dividends before sending profits to a trust registered in Jersey
Richard Tice’s company broke the law by failing to pay tens of thousands of pounds in tax on dividends that were paid to him and his offshore trust.
Reform UK’s deputy leader, who is also the business, trade and energy spokesman for Nigel Farage’s party, received at least £91,000 in excess payments as a result of the failure.
Quidnet REIT Ltd, the property investment company he founded, owned and ran as chief executive, did not pay a required 20 per cent levy on the dividends, known as a “withholding tax”, before channelling profits to Tice and his trust registered in Jersey.
Tice, the Boston & Skegness MP, implied the failure amounted to a “technicality” and appeared to suggest it did not matter as he ultimately paid income tax on the dividends he received. He said: “I have paid all tax at the highest rate on all dividends received. HMRC has been paid in full.”
Dan Neidle of Tax Policy Associates said: “The rules are fairly simple and understood by everyone in the property world. Failure to pay the tax looks careless. We don’t get to choose who pays tax and when we pay tax, and the law required that the company paid the tax when the dividends were paid.”
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
Carbon taxes or ETS charges are currently levied by all 27 EU member states, China, Japan, Korea, Canada and various other countries. Most of our industrial peers in other words. China’s recalcitrant ETS regime is being significantly reformed this year bringing it close to EU levels.
If by “most of our industrial competitors” you mean the USA then, well, yes. Thankfully the world economy isn’t just the US or we’d be more fucked than we already are.
The US would love to think it’s immune from the externalities it’s imposing on the world, but it certainly isn’t. Rather like its assumptions about the Hormuz blockage.
Reading between the lines, China's carbon taxes are negligible (we will see how your confident predictions that they will be 'more like' Europe's following the forthcoming 'reforms' turns out), and India isn't mentioned. These are the two economies that happen to produce most of the world's stuff.
The gap is why we have the CBAM, which presumably you oppose. The CBAM is why China is upping its ETS price. That, and the fact their renewables boom means it’s now increasingly in their competitive interest to start imposing stricter emissions controls on imported products just like us.
As for India, not only does it have the most polluted air on the planet and I doubt even you would choose to breathe that stuff, but its manufacturing output last year was just over half that of Germany (and largely in basic industries).
Huge day in European politics tomorrow as Hungary goes to the polls.
Massively important.
The external ideological lens probably distorts what is going on. If Magyar wins, it will be more of a changing of the guard to a younger generation and will provide a boost to the European right overall.
Could be a very important day for Ukraine if the 90bn Euro loan is released from the EU after Orban's removal. Could be a real game changer in a war already swinging Ukraine's way.
Magyar is a bit of an unknown quantity. He may stop blocking the EU funds to Ukraine in order to unlock EU funds for Hungary. He also seems keen on cracking down on corruption* but that is pretty standard for insurgent challengers. Otherwise he seems to the right of Orban, albeit pro EU.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
sounds horrific
Have you tried it @malcolmg ? Sweetbreads are delicious. Offal generally has great flavours. Liver and kidney are brilliant if prepared well. Stuffed heart, again if prepared well is gorgeous. Ox Tongue and Oxtail are other favourites of mine. Foods with great flavours.
Used to be able to get Heart from Morrisons.
Kidney and liver are both superb.
Pigs cheeks, and for that matter ox cheeks, are also worthy of mention, cooked nice and slow in a nice sauce. We had pigs cheeks tonight.
I’d agree on sweetbreads. Cooked properly they’re very nice.
Definitely an omission on my part to leave cheeks off the list.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
Carbon taxes or ETS charges are currently levied by all 27 EU member states, China, Japan, Korea, Canada and various other countries. Most of our industrial peers in other words. China’s recalcitrant ETS regime is being significantly reformed this year bringing it close to EU levels.
If by “most of our industrial competitors” you mean the USA then, well, yes. Thankfully the world economy isn’t just the US or we’d be more fucked than we already are.
The US would love to think it’s immune from the externalities it’s imposing on the world, but it certainly isn’t. Rather like its assumptions about the Hormuz blockage.
Reading between the lines, China's carbon taxes are negligible (we will see how your confident predictions that they will be 'more like' Europe's following the forthcoming 'reforms' turns out), and India isn't mentioned. These are the two economies that happen to produce most of the world's stuff.
The gap is why we have the CBAM, which presumably you oppose. The CBAM is why China is upping its ETS price. That, and the fact their renewables boom means it’s now increasingly in their competitive interest to start imposing stricter emissions controls on imported products just like us.
As for India, not only does it have the most polluted air on the planet and I doubt even you would choose to breathe that stuff, but its manufacturing output last year was just over half that of Germany (and largely in basic industries).
India has hit a major nuclear milestone. At Kalpakkam, the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) has attained criticality — a key step before full power generation.
But why does this matter?
In this video, we explain how fast breeder reactors work, how they create more fuel than they consume, and why this technology is central to India’s long-term energy strategy.
With limited uranium and vast thorium reserves, India is using this approach to boost energy security and generate clean, reliable power.
We also look at how India compares globally with countries like Russia and China.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
Now that I have become a net exporter of energy from our new house, I say: let 'em spiral.
That's nice. Glad we've dropped all that pretence about 'helping the poor' from the soft-left agenda. Let the fuckers freeze.
Glad to have it confirmed that irony is indeed lost on you.
Huge day in European politics tomorrow as Hungary goes to the polls.
Massively important.
The external ideological lens probably distorts what is going on. If Magyar wins, it will be more of a changing of the guard to a younger generation and will provide a boost to the European right overall.
Could be a very important day for Ukraine if the 90bn Euro loan is released from the EU after Orban's removal. Could be a real game changer in a war already swinging Ukraine's way.
Magyar is a bit of an unknown quantity. He may stop blocking the EU funds to Ukraine in order to unlock EU funds for Hungary. He also seems keen on cracking down on corruption* but that is pretty standard for insurgent challengers. Otherwise he seems to the right of Orban, albeit pro EU.
Huge day in European politics tomorrow as Hungary goes to the polls.
Massively important.
The external ideological lens probably distorts what is going on. If Magyar wins, it will be more of a changing of the guard to a younger generation and will provide a boost to the European right overall.
Could be a very important day for Ukraine if the 90bn Euro loan is released from the EU after Orban's removal. Could be a real game changer in a war already swinging Ukraine's way.
Magyar is a bit of an unknown quantity. He may stop blocking the EU funds to Ukraine in order to unlock EU funds for Hungary. He also seems keen on cracking down on corruption* but that is pretty standard for insurgent challengers. Otherwise he seems to the right of Orban, albeit pro EU.
By rights Hungary should be a political footnote in the continent’s life. Its population is relatively tiny. The fact we all know who Orban is, rather like Fico in Slovakia, shows how unusual and dangerous his position as a Russian asset in the EU is.
If Magyar can return Hungary to geopolitical obscurity and concentrate on their domestic issues (and they have many - they’re lagging most other regional economies) then whether he’s right or left, clean or corrupt, we’ll all be able to breathe a sigh of relief.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
I know. It’s quite odd given the insane foods I have eaten. From rat to bear to whale to tarantula to puffin to ants to maggots to dog
But somehow never goat? And it turns out it’s delish (if cooked right)
I ate a lot of goat over two weeks riding across Rajasthan - every day we would stop for lunch and the Maharajh chap who ran the ride had his team laying out a big curry lunch (just what you need bouncing arounfpd on a horse all afternoon) and there was always the choice of the vegetarian baby aubergine curry or goat. Having ridden for four hours each morning the need for meat was strong so first day I tucked in and would never have a problem eating it more. Bit like chicken. Bit seriously it’s perhaps an underused meat, maybe because they don’t really make much meat like a cow or sheep but more difficult to raise than chicken.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
Now that I have become a net exporter of energy from our new house, I say: let 'em spiral.
That's nice. Glad we've dropped all that pretence about 'helping the poor' from the soft-left agenda. Let the fuckers freeze.
Glad to have it confirmed that irony is indeed lost on you.
I have something of a sense of humour failure on this issue.
ANDY BESHEAR on 2028 run: “I will tell you I walked off the stage in 2023 having won re election by 5 points in Ky, which is like winning by 30 anywhere else. And I looked at my wife, & I said, whooo, we’ll never have to run a campaign again. And I'm not sure that's true today.”
ANDY BESHEAR on 2028 run: “I will tell you I walked off the stage in 2023 having won re election by 5 points in Ky, which is like winning by 30 anywhere else. And I looked at my wife, & I said, whooo, we’ll never have to run a campaign again. And I'm not sure that's true today.”
I understand that some politicians will genuinely be weighing things up as to whether to run again, or for another role, but so often the standard tropes and cliches as people do their best to say they are without openly saying they are, can just be frustrating and tiresome.
It's like the phony shit talking and squaring up that boxing promoters still force the competitors to go through much of the time. Save that crap faux-dramatics for professional wrestling.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
Yes, as I get older and wiser - ahem - I like my food to be ever simpler and purer. Fuck off with gels and foams (and I have to eat a lot of this crap in my job). I don’t want cauliflower “three ways”. What’s the fucking point? Just serve it one way but make it good
It’s just one reason I love seafood. It’s hard to successfully tart up seafood and generally it makes it worse, even idiots realise this
If you have good oysters, you don’t do anything. Just serve fresh and cold on ice with mignonette and great crusty bread. If you have great fresh fish just grill or fry it as quickly and simply as possible, a squeeze of lemon, done. Do that and the world is happy
I eat a lot of seafood as it’s here on the doorstep, simple is best. But I absolitely agree with your first sentence. I have recently started refusing dinners and lunches at Michelin Restos and the like. I’m at a point where I’ve had every sort of foam and similar and frankly want to sit with friends and drink lashings of good wine with hearty steaks and similar and talk and enjoy and feel sated and happy. I did the poncy crap so much I have now regressed and happier for it.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
Yes, as I get older and wiser - ahem - I like my food to be ever simpler and purer. Fuck off with gels and foams (and I have to eat a lot of this crap in my job). I don’t want cauliflower “three ways”. What’s the fucking point? Just serve it one way but make it good
It’s just one reason I love seafood. It’s hard to successfully tart up seafood and generally it makes it worse, even idiots realise this
If you have good oysters, you don’t do anything. Just serve fresh and cold on ice with mignonette and great crusty bread. If you have great fresh fish just grill or fry it as quickly and simply as possible, a squeeze of lemon, done. Do that and the world is happy
I eat a lot of seafood as it’s here on the doorstep, simple is best. But I absolitely agree with your first sentence. I have recently started refusing dinners and lunches at Michelin Restos and the like. I’m at a point where I’ve had every sort of foam and similar and frankly want to sit with friends and drink lashings of good wine with hearty steaks and similar and talk and enjoy and feel sated and happy. I did the poncy crap so much I have now regressed and happier for it.
I've noticed catering sandwiches have gotten a bit simpler again, after a period when the companies (or purchasers) seemed to be trying to indicate quality by having unconventional options or unnecessary additions to classic fare.
Turns out people are quite happy with basic ham and cheese and that's it.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
Yes, as I get older and wiser - ahem - I like my food to be ever simpler and purer. Fuck off with gels and foams (and I have to eat a lot of this crap in my job). I don’t want cauliflower “three ways”. What’s the fucking point? Just serve it one way but make it good
It’s just one reason I love seafood. It’s hard to successfully tart up seafood and generally it makes it worse, even idiots realise this
If you have good oysters, you don’t do anything. Just serve fresh and cold on ice with mignonette and great crusty bread. If you have great fresh fish just grill or fry it as quickly and simply as possible, a squeeze of lemon, done. Do that and the world is happy
I eat a lot of seafood as it’s here on the doorstep, simple is best. But I absolitely agree with your first sentence. I have recently started refusing dinners and lunches at Michelin Restos and the like. I’m at a point where I’ve had every sort of foam and similar and frankly want to sit with friends and drink lashings of good wine with hearty steaks and similar and talk and enjoy and feel sated and happy. I did the poncy crap so much I have now regressed and happier for it.
I've noticed catering sandwiches have gotten a bit simpler again, after a period when the companies (or purchasers) seemed to be trying to indicate quality by having unconventional options or unnecessary additions to classic fare.
Turns out people are quite happy with basic ham and cheese and that's it.
Maybe the British are just really boring?
Sandwiches will be banned under a future Tory Government.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
Yes, as I get older and wiser - ahem - I like my food to be ever simpler and purer. Fuck off with gels and foams (and I have to eat a lot of this crap in my job). I don’t want cauliflower “three ways”. What’s the fucking point? Just serve it one way but make it good
It’s just one reason I love seafood. It’s hard to successfully tart up seafood and generally it makes it worse, even idiots realise this
If you have good oysters, you don’t do anything. Just serve fresh and cold on ice with mignonette and great crusty bread. If you have great fresh fish just grill or fry it as quickly and simply as possible, a squeeze of lemon, done. Do that and the world is happy
I eat a lot of seafood as it’s here on the doorstep, simple is best. But I absolitely agree with your first sentence. I have recently started refusing dinners and lunches at Michelin Restos and the like. I’m at a point where I’ve had every sort of foam and similar and frankly want to sit with friends and drink lashings of good wine with hearty steaks and similar and talk and enjoy and feel sated and happy. I did the poncy crap so much I have now regressed and happier for it.
I've noticed catering sandwiches have gotten a bit simpler again, after a period when the companies (or purchasers) seemed to be trying to indicate quality by having unconventional options or unnecessary additions to classic fare.
Turns out people are quite happy with basic ham and cheese and that's it.
Maybe the British are just really boring?
Sandwiches will be banned under a future Tory Government.
??
Seems like market forces are doing their work sufficiently here.
ANDY BESHEAR on 2028 run: “I will tell you I walked off the stage in 2023 having won re election by 5 points in Ky, which is like winning by 30 anywhere else. And I looked at my wife, & I said, whooo, we’ll never have to run a campaign again. And I'm not sure that's true today.”
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I've definitely had goat - at least three times in the last six months, there is an excellent stall.selling it in Piccadilly Gardens - but never knowingly had mutton.
You’ve never had mutton! You’ve missed a treat if it’s cooked long and slow. Your nearest halal butcher will probably sell it.
Some farm shops too. I get it from a local one. There is also a Cumbrian butchers that comes to Jesmond Dene bridge market and sells it.
Best mutton I ever had was at The Goat Inn in Bedgellert, very ironic.
ANDY BESHEAR on 2028 run: “I will tell you I walked off the stage in 2023 having won re election by 5 points in Ky, which is like winning by 30 anywhere else. And I looked at my wife, & I said, whooo, we’ll never have to run a campaign again. And I'm not sure that's true today.”
The Dems need to avoid Newsom and not become self indulgent and pick Buttigieg .
I like him and in an ideal world why couldn’t he win but to be blunt the US isn’t going to vote for a gay candidate .
The Simpsons predicted a Gay Republican might win in 2084, when Buttegieg will be 102. With increases in life expectancy and an ageing political class that might be equivalent to a Biden/Trump candidacy today.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
My son posted a picture of himself on a horse somewhere near Almaty today. Riding rather than dinner, I think, but I’ll quiz him on the cuisine.
He’s about to set off on a trip which he's keeping secret from us but says we’ll find interesting, and can follow on find-my iPhone. I know it’s not Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan or Tajikistan as that’s happening later, and not the Aral Sea as that was already planned, so I’m intrigued. I’m wondering if it’s a trip across the border to Xinjiang. Or he’s somehow got a visa for Turkmenistan.
The fermented mare's milk is as bad as it sounds according to Fox jr2
I had just a sip and yeeeeeuchh
Not as bad as the beer I had in Iquitos in the Amazon jungle which was literally made by old women chewing maize then spitting it into a bucket, with the enzymes in the old lady’s spit speeding the fermentation process
Old Lady Spit Beer
I might open a pop up in Borough Market. Serve it with dog
Reminds me of a scene in one of my favourite movies; Hombre, starring Paul Newman
Audra Favor: I can't imagine eating a dog and not thinking anything of it.
John Russell: You even been hungry, lady? Not just ready for supper. Hungry enough so that your belly swells?
Audra Favor: I wouldn't care how hungry I got. I know I wouldn't eat one of those camp dogs.
John Russell: You'd eat it. You'd fight for the bones, too.
Audra Favor: Have you ever eaten a dog, Mr. Russell?
John Russell: Eaten one and lived like one.
Audra Favor: Dear me.
Hunger is perhaps the most powerful motivator of all, there's little humans won't do when it hits hard.
There is a restaurant in Edinburgh that has a quotation from Brecht on the door:
"First comes food, then morals."
You've reminded me of this quite remarkable performance by Alex Harvey I came across on youtube.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
He still doesn't explain what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. This all he says about it: £83/MWh or 52% of revenue coming from subsidies in April 2025. It doesn't include constraint payments as these are part of balancing costs, which are a separate line item in his table. CFD subsidies outwith the CFD strike price is not something I have heard of from anyone else slightly knowledgeable about energy generation.
1. The balancing market works in 30 minute tranches. The power provided to the grid by the wind and sun is entirely predictable over that timespan.
2. Maybe. My simple view is you want the grid to have sufficient capacity to handle all likely generation sources, whether these are gas powered, solar, wind, nuclear or interconnector. Once you decide you need to support all likely sources, the additional cost of supporting more wind rather than other sources is incremental. The grid needs investment in any generation scenario. It is the weak link in the UK generation system.
3. This as far as I know is incorrect, but having delved a bit deeper what I said earlier about capacity agreements is also incorrect. Probably best to view this video explainer about the capacity market: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xStiUvubq6k. Its effect on energy costs is complex because it is a lower cost substitute for energy derived from the normal balancing market during winter peak demand periods. Capacity agreement costs are coming down as more renewable energy is available to cover peaks.
4. I agree part of constraint costs are attributable to renewables, but not the full £19 per MWh for the reasons I gave in my original comment. Your article says this about balancing costs: In 2024 the cost of grid balancing was some £2,529m and backup from the capacity market cost some £1,256m. The vast majority of these costs should be attributed to intermittent renewables. Before the rapid increase in renewables, grid balancing cost about £500m per year.. The link he helpfully provides explains the reason why these have increased: The last few years have seen considerable increases in balancing costs. The most notable drivers of the rise in costs are associated with the procured ancillary services, higher wholesale prices of electricity, and higher bids and offer prices submitted in the BM. ie mainly the cost of gas is a lot higher now.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
He still doesn't explain what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. This all he says about it: £83/MWh or 52% of revenue coming from subsidies in April 2025. It doesn't include constraint payments as these are part of balancing costs, which are a separate line item in his table. CFD subsidies outwith the CFD strike price is not something I have heard of from anyone else slightly knowledgeable about energy generation.
1. The balancing market works in 30 minute tranches. The power provided to the grid by the wind and sun is entirely predictable over that timespan.
2. Maybe. My simple view is you want the grid to have sufficient capacity to handle all likely generation sources, whether these are gas powered, solar, wind, nuclear or interconnector. Once you decide you need to support all likely sources, the additional cost of supporting more wind rather than other sources is incremental. The grid needs investment in any generation scenario. It is the weak link in the UK generation system.
3. This as far as I know is incorrect, but having delved a bit deeper what I said earlier about capacity agreements is also incorrect. Probably best to view this video explainer about the capacity market: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xStiUvubq6k. Its effect on energy costs is complex because it is a lower cost substitute for energy derived from the normal balancing market during winter peak demand periods. Capacity agreement costs are coming down as more renewable energy is available to cover peaks.
4. I agree part of constraint costs are attributable to renewables, but not the full £19 per MWh for the reasons I gave in my original comment. Your article says this about balancing costs: In 2024 the cost of grid balancing was some £2,529m and backup from the capacity market cost some £1,256m. The vast majority of these costs should be attributed to intermittent renewables. Before the rapid increase in renewables, grid balancing cost about £500m per year.. The link he helpfully provides explains the reason why these have increased: The last few years have seen considerable increases in balancing costs. The most notable drivers of the rise in costs are associated with the procured ancillary services, higher wholesale prices of electricity, and higher bids and offer prices submitted in the BM. ie mainly the cost of gas is a lot higher now.
I should add a further point about countrerfactuals. This is the expected cost curve of the energy transition. Basically we're moving into renewables, where capital investments come upfront while we still have to pay for costly fuel extracted from the ground but will benefit down the line once the investments are paid down and we are no longer paying for the fuel we don't need any more. Now you may despise all this but there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point because the investments are either been made or are committed to. People may blame "Mad Miliband" for these high energy costs in the meantime and maybe he gets replaced in three years time by a Farage acolyte. This guy doesn't have to do anything, prices will come down of their own accord.
Given this there is no point talking about an alternative where we need to make the big investments in gas supply as an alternative to renewables. It is simply not going to happen. The numbers in your analysis for gas are the numbers for gas use in a renewables context.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
He still doesn't explain what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. This all he says about it: £83/MWh or 52% of revenue coming from subsidies in April 2025. It doesn't include constraint payments as these are part of balancing costs, which are a separate line item in his table. CFD subsidies outwith the CFD strike price is not something I have heard of from anyone else slightly knowledgeable about energy generation.
1. The balancing market works in 30 minute tranches. The power provided to the grid by the wind and sun is entirely predictable over that timespan.
2. Maybe. My simple view is you want the grid to have sufficient capacity to handle all likely generation sources, whether these are gas powered, solar, wind, nuclear or interconnector. Once you decide you need to support all likely sources, the additional cost of supporting more wind rather than other sources is incremental. The grid needs investment in any generation scenario. It is the weak link in the UK generation system.
3. This as far as I know is incorrect, but having delved a bit deeper what I said earlier about capacity agreements is also incorrect. Probably best to view this video explainer about the capacity market: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xStiUvubq6k. Its effect on energy costs is complex because it is a lower cost substitute for energy derived from the normal balancing market during winter peak demand periods. Capacity agreement costs are coming down as more renewable energy is available to cover peaks.
4. I agree part of constraint costs are attributable to renewables, but not the full £19 per MWh for the reasons I gave in my original comment. Your article says this about balancing costs: In 2024 the cost of grid balancing was some £2,529m and backup from the capacity market cost some £1,256m. The vast majority of these costs should be attributed to intermittent renewables. Before the rapid increase in renewables, grid balancing cost about £500m per year.. The link he helpfully provides explains the reason why these have increased: The last few years have seen considerable increases in balancing costs. The most notable drivers of the rise in costs are associated with the procured ancillary services, higher wholesale prices of electricity, and higher bids and offer prices submitted in the BM. ie mainly the cost of gas is a lot higher now.
I should add a further point about countrerfactuals. This is the expected cost curve of the energy transition. Basically we're moving into renewables, where capital investments come upfront while we still have to pay for costly fuel extracted from the ground but will benefit down the line once the investments are paid down and we are no longer paying for the fuel we don't need any more. Now you may despise all this but there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point because the investments are either been made or are committed to. People may blame "Mad Miliband" for these high energy costs in the meantime and maybe he gets replaced in three years time by a Farage acolyte. This guy doesn't have to do anything, prices will come down of their own accord.
Given this there is no point talking about an alternative where we need to make the big investments in gas supply as an alternative to renewables. It is simply not going to happen. The numbers in your analysis for gas are the numbers for gas use in a renewables context.
Sorry, you may be absolutely right about current costs etc. I don't know enough about the detail and the mechanisms to make any comment on that on one side or another.
What I do know is that anyone making graphs like that predicting costs 20, 30 or 40 years in the future is just producing bullshit. The factors involved in all these things, whther it is raw material costs, shortages or gluts of key components or changes in energy usage mean that such predictions are utterly useless and are only created to promote one view against another with little or no basis in fact.
One thing is almost certain and that is that if we come back in 2050 and look at what actually happened it will bear little or no relationship to that graph.
We are currently producing 112% of our electricity needs, with the excess 12% being sent via connectors or to pumped storage.
Of the 112%, only 7% is gas power. So over 100% renewable or nuclear.
The Irish grid appears to be taking more than a GW from Britain and turning off its own wind turbines.
I'm assuming there's some sort of arbitrage going on whereby it makes sense to do this because the Irish pay wind farms less to turn off when there's excess wind energy.
We have 14 years of coalition and conservative governments to thank for that investment
What Lost Password is describing isn't a good thing for pity's sake. It means effectively that British billpayers are subsidising power that they aren't receiving - because the British subsidy regime is so much more generous than Ireland's, it's cheaper for them to use dumped power, kindly discounted by grannies in the UK, and constrain their own supply.
That isn't something to be celebrated, it's an epic farce.
I mean, sure, but the 'epic farce' subsidy price is much, much lower than what we would pay for gas powered electricity at current prices.
I think your anger is misdirected.
No it is not.
I posted a breakdown of what the various renewable sources are costing us vs. gas last week. Only one type of solar generation was remotely competitive with gas, even with gas at crisis prices. As gas inevitably gets cheaper, even if it's only a bit cheaper, it will be cheaper than CFD solar, and it was already cheaper than all wind.
We cannot maintain the polite fallacy that renewable energy (caveat - renewable energy the way that the UK has implemented it) is cheap or even 'free', when the cost of energy for businesses and domestic users continues to rise. Join the dots.
I'd be interested to see you share again with sources. It's not in line with what I've seen, but always open to new data.
Note: A discussion ensued about whether David Turver's figures for gas generation included maintance and capex, as this is not pulled out in his table - he comments in the thread under his Substack piece that it is included.
Note 2: The price of gas rose considerably after I made this initial post, but last time I looked it was still cheaper than all others bar CFD solar - and it was at the lower end of that.
Note 3: If you have time, read the comments below Turver's piece where a detailed attempt to rebut his conclusions is made, but the commentor (who is using AI by the way) is forced to admit that their figures only work when carbon taxes are assumed as an inalienable cost of gas. But of course they aren't - they are a policy choice that we don't need to levy and aren't a factor in most of our industrial competitors.
My admittedly non expert take on this "analysis". It looks to be nonsense based on what I do know
I would suggest you read the full piece linked above, which I should also have added (I did so later) in the second discussion to which you responded.
It is fairly obvious to me what the subsidy line is - it is what we have actually paid wind farms less the power we've bought at the CFD rate. Constraint payments being the major factor - which many renewables suppliers make more money from than generating power.
Furthermore.
1. Peaks in energy demand can be predicted fairly easily in all but a few cases. What is not predictable is the power provided to the grid by the wind and sun. It's entirely reasonable to apportion the cost of switching gas on and off on a hair trigger to renewables, and completely untrue to pile their cost in the gas column.
2. 'Curtailment due to grid capacity' has nothing to do with general upgrading of the grid, it is the cost of the grid trying to catch up with wind farms in locations with low connectivity, because the alternative is to fork out for eye-watering constraint payments.
3. Capacity Agreements exist because they support intermittent renewable power generation by ensuring there's always power. They are a direct result of renewables generation, and didn't exist before 2014. Trying to exclude them from the renewables column is absurd.
4. Constraint payment figures aren't itemised by reason (to my knowledge) so I will take your word for it, but their ballooning cost is reaching epidemic proportions:
2025 Total: £1.46 billion (£380m for wind curtailment + £1.08bn for replacement gas). 2024 Total: £1.23 billion (with 8.3 TWh of wind energy curtailed). 2023 Total: Approximately £780 million in constraint costs. 2020 (Jan-Feb): £72 million, which was nearly four times the amount for the same period in the previous year. Record Weekend (July 2018): £7.12 million paid over a single weekend.
(AI)
I'm afraid your post amounts to well-meaning sophistry.
It is patently absurd to look at energy bills that have spiralled as more renewable capacity has been added, and try and pin the blame for those prices on the gas that remains in the system.
He still doesn't explain what the "CFD subsidy" line item is. This all he says about it: £83/MWh or 52% of revenue coming from subsidies in April 2025. It doesn't include constraint payments as these are part of balancing costs, which are a separate line item in his table. CFD subsidies outwith the CFD strike price is not something I have heard of from anyone else slightly knowledgeable about energy generation.
1. The balancing market works in 30 minute tranches. The power provided to the grid by the wind and sun is entirely predictable over that timespan.
2. Maybe. My simple view is you want the grid to have sufficient capacity to handle all likely generation sources, whether these are gas powered, solar, wind, nuclear or interconnector. Once you decide you need to support all likely sources, the additional cost of supporting more wind rather than other sources is incremental. The grid needs investment in any generation scenario. It is the weak link in the UK generation system.
3. This as far as I know is incorrect, but having delved a bit deeper what I said earlier about capacity agreements is also incorrect. Probably best to view this video explainer about the capacity market: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xStiUvubq6k. Its effect on energy costs is complex because it is a lower cost substitute for energy derived from the normal balancing market during winter peak demand periods. Capacity agreement costs are coming down as more renewable energy is available to cover peaks.
4. I agree part of constraint costs are attributable to renewables, but not the full £19 per MWh for the reasons I gave in my original comment. Your article says this about balancing costs: In 2024 the cost of grid balancing was some £2,529m and backup from the capacity market cost some £1,256m. The vast majority of these costs should be attributed to intermittent renewables. Before the rapid increase in renewables, grid balancing cost about £500m per year.. The link he helpfully provides explains the reason why these have increased: The last few years have seen considerable increases in balancing costs. The most notable drivers of the rise in costs are associated with the procured ancillary services, higher wholesale prices of electricity, and higher bids and offer prices submitted in the BM. ie mainly the cost of gas is a lot higher now.
I should add a further point about countrerfactuals. This is the expected cost curve of the energy transition. Basically we're moving into renewables, where capital investments come upfront while we still have to pay for costly fuel extracted from the ground but will benefit down the line once the investments are paid down and we are no longer paying for the fuel we don't need any more. Now you may despise all this but there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point because the investments are either been made or are committed to. People may blame "Mad Miliband" for these high energy costs in the meantime and maybe he gets replaced in three years time by a Farage acolyte. This guy doesn't have to do anything, prices will come down of their own accord.
Given this there is no point talking about an alternative where we need to make the big investments in gas supply as an alternative to renewables. It is simply not going to happen. The numbers in your analysis for gas are the numbers for gas use in a renewables context.
Sorry, you may be absolutely right about current costs etc. I don't know enough about the detail and the mechanisms to make any comment on that on one side or another.
What I do know is that anyone making graphs like that predicting costs 20, 30 or 40 years in the future is just producing bullshit. The factors involved in all these things, whther it is raw material costs, shortages or gluts of key components or changes in energy usage mean that such predictions are utterly useless and are only created to promote one view against another with little or no basis in fact.
One thing is almost certain and that is that if we come back in 2050 and look at what actually happened it will bear little or no relationship to that graph.
The investment costs are mainly contracted for in the next ten years or so, while fuel costs should disappear over time and we know what they are now. The broad shape of the line should be OK I think, but it may stretch a bit on the X axis.
EXCL: Labour MP Afzal Khan claimed he "briefly" attended event — but left upon realising Lord Ahmed, jailed for child sex crimes against girl as young as 4, was there. Now video shows the pair smiling walking down red carpet and sitting next to each other
Gabriel Pogrund seems to be doing a lot of legwork past few months on stories.
Most of it complete bollox
Usually racially motivated bollox
Wouldn't be on the payroll of Mossad by any chance??
Throwing out comments of that nature can cause problems for the site
You do seem to like threatening posters you don't approve of or who disagree with your narratives with the looming spectre of sanctions.
I am not threatening anyone
Do you agree with his comment
It isn't a comment I would have made. A question does not constitute a direct allegation. You do this quite a lot with particular posters you don't seem to like. I am sure the mods can decide when posters have crossed the line without advice shouted from the touchline.
Nobody has tried more on this forum to have Leon sanctioned than you, and you have admitted to multiple times flaging posts
I have never flagged a post but will comment on something that I consider may go over the line
Leon sometimes needs flagging, which he'd probably admit himself.
Only if you take him seriously. Most of the time his tongue is so firmly in his cheek it’s sticking out of his ear.
Ah, but is it?
I don’t mind being flagged. It’s a badge of honour because flagging is so passively aggressively pathetic
Constantly asking via hints, or outright demands, for someone to be banned - eg me - genuinely IS a bit annoying. It’s mainly @Mexicanpete and @bondegezou and dweebs like that. I’ve noticed there is a 100% overlap between these people and people I have publicly humiliated on the site
Hey ho. The PB pub is still open and life rocks on. And today I ate - I think - ny first ever plate of goat meat (which surprises me) and it was absolutely delicious. Better than lamb maybe. Very very very slowly cooked in a huge Turkish roasting dish up in the Taurus mountains. Yummy
Wait.
You've never had goat before? Did you never go to a music festival in the 1990s
We’ve all surely eaten goat, without realising. “Mutton”. Actual goat is very cheap down Deptford Market so I get it when I want a sort of stewy Middle Eastern thing.
I ate horse once. It was on the lunch canteen menu at a techy conference I went to in Spain in early 1990s. All perfectly normal out there apparently. Or was then.
I am now a vegetarian.
I've had horse. Kind of meh to be honest.
I had it in Almaty in Kazakhstan where it is said to be the best horsemeat in the world. This being where horses kicked off, of course
It was quite nice. Not bad. Like fairly flavourless beef. Not enough fat to make it exciting. Notably better than dog which is way too bony and gristly (but you totally would if starving)
It’s probably great as a protein vehicle for wilder flavours, eg in curry or goulash or whatever
The goat today was gorgeous. I’d put it above most lamb I’ve had - and I often love lamb (but it’s so easy to overcook)
At the same conference my boss - a hard core northern with a long flame-orange beard - found he could get tripe on the menu and was in seventh heaven.
I guess this was basic lunch food for the ordinary working guy in Barcelona in 1991??
I love andouilettes with chips and mustard. Proper peasant food. The very very basic ingredients keep it honest. Eat it with rough red wine after a long walk through the countryside near, say, Lille or maybe Clermont Ferrand
One is tempted sometimes to wonder whether the peasants didn't have the best food.
Agree with you and Leon. For instance a basic red wine, cheese and bread and fruit is a lovely meal
I had kidney and pancreas tonight. Enjoyed it, but I struggle to finish it as it is so rich.
sounds horrific
Have you tried it @malcolmg ? Sweetbreads are delicious. Offal generally has great flavours. Liver and kidney are brilliant if prepared well. Stuffed heart, again if prepared well is gorgeous. Ox Tongue and Oxtail are other favourites of mine. Foods with great flavours.
I like liver but would not be brave enough to try any other offal knowingly.
Comments
As for India, not only does it have the most polluted air on the planet and I doubt even you would choose to breathe that stuff, but its manufacturing output last year was just over half that of Germany (and largely in basic industries).
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/10/peter-magyar-leading-polls-hungary-election-tisza-opposition?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
*though it is rare to find a politician as open to corruption as this one:
https://youtu.be/WWCLI7lXEdI?si=CPbtiz_XPzp5bkje
But why does this matter?
In this video, we explain how fast breeder reactors work, how they create more fuel than they consume, and why this technology is central to India’s long-term energy strategy.
With limited uranium and vast thorium reserves, India is using this approach to boost energy security and generate clean, reliable power.
We also look at how India compares globally with countries like Russia and China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0B2qO48R1Y
If Magyar can return Hungary to geopolitical obscurity and concentrate on their domestic issues (and they have many - they’re lagging most other regional economies) then whether he’s right or left, clean or corrupt, we’ll all be able to breathe a sigh of relief.
https://x.com/MarioAndersonTV/status/2043004754767339856
It's like the phony shit talking and squaring up that boxing promoters still force the competitors to go through much of the time. Save that crap faux-dramatics for professional wrestling.
Turns out people are quite happy with basic ham and cheese and that's it.
Maybe the British are just really boring?
NEW THREAD
Seems like market forces are doing their work sufficiently here.
I like him and in an ideal world why couldn’t he win but to be blunt the US isn’t going to vote for a gay candidate .
Welsh Mutton slow cooked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E8bHdJ9_4k
"Alex Harvey - Next (BBC OGWT) 1982 rebroadcast"
A standard basic explainer on how CFD works including implied subsidies:
https://www.empireengineering.co.uk/contracts-for-difference-what-are-they-and-how-do-they-work/
Addressing your further points.
1. The balancing market works in 30 minute tranches. The power provided to the grid by the wind and sun is entirely predictable over that timespan.
2. Maybe. My simple view is you want the grid to have sufficient capacity to handle all likely generation sources, whether these are gas powered, solar, wind, nuclear or interconnector. Once you decide you need to support all likely sources, the additional cost of supporting more wind rather than other sources is incremental. The grid needs investment in any generation scenario. It is the weak link in the UK generation system.
3. This as far as I know is incorrect, but having delved a bit deeper what I said earlier about capacity agreements is also incorrect. Probably best to view this video explainer about the capacity market: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xStiUvubq6k. Its effect on energy costs is complex because it is a lower cost substitute for energy derived from the normal balancing market during winter peak demand periods. Capacity agreement costs are coming down as more renewable energy is available to cover peaks.
4. I agree part of constraint costs are attributable to renewables, but not the full £19 per MWh for the reasons I gave in my original comment. Your article says this about balancing costs: In 2024 the cost of grid balancing was some £2,529m and backup from the capacity market cost some £1,256m. The vast majority of these costs should be attributed to intermittent renewables. Before the rapid increase in renewables, grid balancing cost about £500m per year.. The link he helpfully provides explains the reason why these have increased: The last few years have seen considerable increases in balancing costs. The most notable drivers of the rise in costs are associated with the procured ancillary services, higher wholesale prices of electricity, and higher bids and offer prices submitted in the BM. ie mainly the cost of gas is a lot higher now.
Given this there is no point talking about an alternative where we need to make the big investments in gas supply as an alternative to renewables. It is simply not going to happen. The numbers in your analysis for gas are the numbers for gas use in a renewables context.
What I do know is that anyone making graphs like that predicting costs 20, 30 or 40 years in the future is just producing bullshit. The factors involved in all these things, whther it is raw material costs, shortages or gluts of key components or changes in energy usage mean that such predictions are utterly useless and are only created to promote one view against another with little or no basis in fact.
One thing is almost certain and that is that if we come back in 2050 and look at what actually happened it will bear little or no relationship to that graph.