ENERGY MATTERS

[Stanley]

Her CV appears to be a 'work in progress'. It has been edited a couple of times in the last few days....
Old Sparky has some interesting things to say about the effects of Brexit on Hinkley Point in this week's PE. He points out that the one thing that definitely won't be affected by Brexit is the gas market in Europe and all the signs are that despite the negative effects on CO2 emissions, gas becomes more and more attractive as a base fuel. Could the contract with EDF be one of the first casualties?

[Tizer]

It also becomes more and more attractive as a displacement activity instead of getting on with development of renewable energy sources.

[Tizer]

`Major gas store shutdown prolonged' LINK
Wholesale gas prices have jumped after British Gas owner Centrica said it had been forced to shut a major storage facility for the winter. The Rough facility accounts for about 70% of all UK gas storage. Tom Marzec-Manser, an analyst at market information provider ICIS, said the gas price "rocketed" to 12-month highs after the announcement. "To ensure security of supply is maintained... companies are going to have to pay a premium," he said. They will will be "reliant on storage on the European mainland", he added. "Technical problems have been ongoing at Rough for a while, but the market clearly did not anticipate this."

[Stanley]

Angela will sort it out..... My consolation is my stove and Tilley Lamps.....

[Tizer]

At last, what we all knew has just become official...
`Green Deal energy loans had 'abysmal' take-up: MPs' LINK
"The government's energy efficiency loan scheme had an "abysmal" take-up rate because it had not been tested with consumers, MPs have said. The "Green Deal" ended last year after providing just £50m in 14,000 loans to households to boost energy efficiency. That was far less than the £1.1bn predicted by the government, with each loan costing taxpayers £17,000. In a highly critical report, the Public Accounts Committee said projections for the scheme were "wildly optimistic". The MPs said the Department of Energy and Climate Change's figures gave a completely misleading picture of the scheme's prospects to Parliament."

[chinatyke]

Lets get this right: they made 14,000 loans with each one costing £17000, that's £238 million, and they only lent 50 million quid. And we pay these "no-marks" to run the country. Unbelievable.

[Tripps]

Another quote - different figures but perhaps nearer to the actuality?

"[i]The Department for Energy spent £240m on the scheme, including £25m in loans to the Green Deal. "[/i]

I agree with your sentiment, but actual money lent was not the only cost of the scheme to be averaged out between the number of loans made. Who would pay interest at 10% in the current interest rate environment?

Also I don't think the Labour Party have convinced me that they can run the country well, when they seem to be having such a problem challenge running their own organisation.

[Stanley]

David, I agree with you about the present state of Labour.... I am hopeful that when they have eventually held the election we might get a bit of clarity. Until then I think it's too early to make any judgements.... Looking at the way they have handled the matter so far I see no signs that would justify any optimism.
As for decisions on energy..... I have no grounds for optimism there either. Could 'Energy Policy' have been any worse?

[Tizer]

`EDF investors agree 4bn euros Hinkley Point fundraising' LINK
"Shareholders at French energy giant EDF have approved plans to issue new shares to raise 4bn euros (£3.4bn) to help pay for the nuclear plant at Hinkley Point. The move comes ahead of Thursday's board meeting where the firm is expected to finally approve the project in Somerset - Britain's first new nuclear power plant in decades. The French state, which owns 85% of EDF, will buy 3bn euros-worth of new shares in the fundraising."

[Stanley]

But have we seen the satisfactory completion and commissioning of any of their similar schemes under construction at the moment? This decision will not be made on commercial considerations but political, I have no confidence in it....
Latest news coming in is that I may not be alone.... (LINK)

[Stanley]

Worth reading this BBC REPORT on the unexpected government delay to signing up for Hinkley Point. I welcome it as it may mean that someone is actually looking at the business case rather than the political necessity to 'Do Something!' as a result of successive governments ducking the question of energy for so long. Even the original decision under the Blair government had more than a whiff of kicking the can down the road.
Look at the facts, there is no certainty that the design will work, all the similar stations are bogged down in problems and massive overspend. There is no guarantee there will not be an overrun on budget. There is no certainty about a finish date. The EDF engineers have asked for extra time. EDF itself is in dire financial straits. There is increasing doubt about the 20th century technology, there are some compelling arguments for smaller and more flexible units.
If this scheme goes forward, all our eggs are in one basket and apart from this there is increasing uncertainty about our ability to keep the lights on next winter, never mind when Hinkley might come on stream.
The bottom line is that we have made a complete Horlicks of Energy Policy and the pigeons are coming home to roost. The worst possible decision would be to kick the can again and accept the contract for political reasons.

[Tizer]

I wouldn't want them to accept the contract for political reasons but they might have to accept it for practical reasons, i.e. if there is no better alternative. The government abandoned investment in renewable energy and, anyway, that can only be part of the solution at best. Smaller, mobile units sound attractive but have their own problems of security and safety due to distributing radioactive material more widely. Fossil fuels might have to be abandoned even earlier than we thought because atmospheric warming is happening faster than expected (see: Debate needed on 1.5C temperature target) As someone on the radio said this morning, Hinckley C has become another example of `too big to fail'. We don't have time to wait for new, better alternatives to be developed. I agree, the whole thing is a dog's breakfast...but what are we going to do to ensure the lights stay on?

[Tripps]

Get fracking.

[Stanley]

I have argued for thirty years that profligacy and inefficiency in the use of energy are the real enemies....

[Tizer]

Regardless of the effects on Hinkley C and power supply I'm pleased to see that the new government is being more wary of letting China have so much control over our infrastructure and supplies. Vince Cable said on the radio this morning he recalls that when he was in government May opposed Osborne's being chummy with the Chinese.

If the government can come up with a viable and timely alternative to Hinckley C then I'd be as happy as anyone to ditch nuclear fission but I don't see anything on the table at present. An obvious answer would be to cut back dramatically on energy use but I can't see that ever happening, especially if we're into allowing the public to run the country instead of the government.

If Hinkley C doesn't go ahead there will be consequences for more than just the power supply. There's been big investment in money, time and human energy, especially in this part of Somerset, all based on a big influx of workers. Housing estates have been built, the college has set itself up as a nuclear technology centre, many businesses have been started or expanded in readiness to cope with the big jump in demand. We've had years of traffic disruption as new roads have been built and old ones widened and strengthened. Road junctions have been closed for months while corners were cut back, traffic lights moved etc so that the big lorries could negotiate them. The list is endless...and it could all be for nothing. One of the contractors this morning was talking about 25,000 workers expecting to take part in the Hinkley project being left stranded. Of course, Vince Cable pointed out that there's plenty of scope for the government to fund other big projects...

[PanBiker]

Does the wind blow at Hinkley? Turbine farm combined with massive Tesla battery storage.

[Tizer]

It would help if they made a decision for a suitable Severn Barrage!

[Whyperion]

I'm still arguing (but no one of influence is listening) All air-con systems to be powered by Solar Panels.

Triple Glaze all new build properties. Solar Panels or Piping on all new buildings + wind turbines.

If one is digging holes in ground for new build anything, then install ground source heat pumps , for hot water systems.

Efficiency should be designed in from the start.

Perhaps more of note is that probably domestic residences are more (electric if not heating) efficient and use less than some years ago, with the likes of led illumination and similar, but there are more residences and a greater population leading to gross increase in demand.

[chinatyke]

Efficiency should be designed in from the start.

[Tizer]

I'd agree in general with Whippy's comments but have a few reservations learnt from when we tried to do a self-build home a few year ago (but were prevented by planners). Wind turbines are not much use (and may cause problems) in many typical domestic situations where the wind is turbulent. Solar hot water is OK for families with a large demand but for singles or couples only may be overkill - for example much of the hot water use in our house if filled by electric heating on demand. One big problem area is people building (or adding) conservatories that are completely and permanently open to the rest of the house. Even with the best performance glazing they still lose much more heat than a well-insulated wall and yet people use them as rooms all year round instead of conservatories.

[Tripps]

These are the people we are possibly about to go into partnership with. China

The headline is -

WE MUST TAKE REVENGE' China calls for WAR with Australia after it opposed Beijing’s territory claims in the South China Sea

What could possibly go wrong?

[Stanley]

See THIS for a BBC report on the latest moves to put pressure on Theresa May to get on with approving the contract for Hinkley Point. Understandable that EDF want to go ahead, they are in deep trouble not only with unfinished and untested similar installations but huge maintenance and de-commissioning costs heading down the tracks towards them for French installations. The question is whether this decision taken many years ago is the right one in view of the changing world? I would add that the big question for me is why invest in a technology that is already in trouble with similar designs running over budget and unfinished?

[Tizer]

I think the biggest problem now might be within EDF itself - the unions don't like Hinckley and nor do some of the company's senior staff. You've got to ask whether the company as a whole (not just the CEO) is sufficiently committed to the project and sound enough to carry it out. My feeling is that the answer is becoming increasingly negative. Meanwhile prevarication holds up alternatives. We need a final decision quickly.

[Stanley]

"The commanding heights of the economy'. Time we had more control over them, not less!

[Pluggy]

The way battery technology is evolving, it will be more than viable to do renewable and storage by the time Hinkley Point is on-line. I reckon by the time my first pension kicks in in 18 months (I don't regret my time in the armed forces ), home storage for my panels will be cost effective, particularly if the cost of electric goes up in the meantime.