OneGuyFromBarlick

I thought of you yesterday Tiz when I came across the report on the Congo dam and meant to post but forgot. Not a cheerful prognosis, especially the destination for most of the power. Your link makes the same point.

THIS Guardian article is the latest news I can find on the Toshiba contract to build the Moorside Plant in Cumbria.
This morning we have confirmation that they have withdrawn from the contract and a government spokes person says that it is doubtful whether the scheme will go forward.

This the latest on the Toshiba story...
`Toshiba's UK withdrawal puts Cumbria nuclear plant in doubt' LINK

We are going to have one of these instead...
`Climate change: Bug covered 'bionic mushroom' generates clean energy' LINK

The 'bionic mushroom'. What a fascinating avenue of research! I wish them well.
I got one piece of good news yesterday (very welcome.....) A letter from the Pensions people to say my Winter Fuel Payment of £300 would be in my account within 2 weeks. Very reassuring......

It's coincidence time again.

I spoke to my son earlier in the week, and asked how his new company (hybrid) car was performing. "I haven't charged the battery up for over six months " was the surprising reply. "It only has a range of about thirty miles, and the cost to charge it is about the same as the fuel, so I just use the engine. I only got it because the 'benefit in kind' terms made it financially attractive".

This morning on BBC Radio Four news, was an item saying that most fleet users of these highly subsidised vehicles were doing exactly the same.

I think that's the law of unintended consequences.

Tripps wrote: ↑10 Nov 2018, 10:27 the cost to charge it is about the same as the fuel, so I just use the engine.

The consultancy that did the study said that the companies and drivers were paying out much more than they needed to by using petrol instead of electricity.

I see that the government are removing the original subsidy and replacing it with one that only applies to pure electrics and Hydrogen cells.
Damart vest is working well, the government should subsidise them as well!

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... l-science/

Tizer , is there any prospect in this, ?

The chemistry is well known and has been used in various ways to make fuels. Electricity splits water to release hydrogen and this is combined with carbon dioxide by heating in the presence of a catalyst. This yields hydrocarbons - chains of carbon atoms with two hydrogen atoms sprouting from each carbon (three at the end carbons). Petrol, diesel, jet fuel are all hydrocarbons, as are the feedstocks for plastics production. The technology is available to do this but the limiting factors are the economics and efficiency. Also the need for electricity will have to compete with increasing demand from electric cars. (I notice the article, published in June, says “We will need a trillion-dollar industry to keep warming below 2 degrees C." Things have moved on and we now know we've got to get below 1.5 degrees C.)

Making fuel form the carbon dioxide in air is feasible but only with lots of zero carbon electricity. Its not very efficient. If you were making electricity from fossil fuel power stations it would be counter productive, producing much more CO2 than it removed. It needs cheap zero carbon electricity and lots of it. Running an electic car from the electricity is far, far more efficient than converting CO2 to fuel and running the car on the fuel.

My emissions are zero from my car........

Fusion development speeds up...
`How 'miniature suns' could provide cheap, clean energy' LINK

That's encouraging Tiz. I have always said that the long term saviour of the world could be successful harnessing of fusion. 40 years ago I saw laser generators big enough to drive a double decker bus through the case at Berkeley California. They were for surrounding the reaction and containing the process by laser bombardment. That seems to have been a dead end and electro magnetic force is favourite now. Good luck to them!
The thought does strike me that successful fusion could be achieved before Hinkley Point goes online as the biggest and most expensive white elephant in the world. Why aren't we abandoning this project as even wind power makes it hopelessly uneconomical?

In a modern world coal as an energy source has become a dirty word largely because of its contribution to pollution and global warming.
There is another side to the story apart from the enormous contribution of coal as an energy source to drive the Industrial Revolution. The use of coal to make Town's Gas was also a major contribution to raising living standards but we often forget the fact that the process of cleaning the gas produced many by-products. These were used by chemists to make very useful substances, Aspirin, Dyes, Phenols that enabled the early disinfectants which saved many lives, creosote for wood preservation and many other chemicals I know nothing about. So, while we quite rightly abandon coal burning for energy we should not lose sight of the fact that it is a useful starting point for the production of many useful products, now mainly supplied from oil.

Gas CH is of course part of the load we are putting on the atmosphere but I have to admit that it is a godsend on a day like yesterday. I never worry about the bill, it's such a good protection and as you get older I suspect it's even more beneficial.

Two of the smaller energy suppliers have gone bust in the last couple of days, Extra and Spark. It's a volatile business.

I got wind of that Kev. You're right, it's a tough business and that's why I never switch to chase a better price. In the end they are all selling the same gas and nobody can pull a rabbit out of the hat and sell at lower prices and survive. I reckon they all just about level out in the long run and switching can lead to unforeseen circumstances like your Smart Meter not working. You will have seen the recent report about that subject by the NAO. It's a bit of a dog's breakfast!

More than a million smart meters are now `dumb' due to householders switching to a different supplier. And why did they switch? The government told them to do so.

I switched to get a much better deal, nowt to do with being told by the government. The reason that the first generation smart meters don't work properly is that they are not smart enough and were rolled out before they were properly fit for purpose, that was the governments fault.

They will be 'smart enough' soon, it's just the software and security certs. The physical side of things is all there

Big Kev wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 17:21 They will be 'smart enough' soon

Then if there's a big demand at tea time when you are brewing up they will put the prices up. All to do with global warming nothing at all to do with profits.

plaques wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 18:18 a big demand at tea time when you are brewing up they will put the prices up

That's why I will resist having one.

I copied this from the Diamond Geezer website a while ago - ring of truth?

From Diamond Geezer Nov 2 2018
But I've been holding back because there are two kinds of smart meter - SMETS1 and SMETS2. Almost all of the 12 million smart meters installed so far have been first generation SMETS1, which don't necessarily continue working if you switch to a new supplier, deterring early adopters from exiting a duff contract. SMETS2 meters use better technology so avoid such drawbacks, but are being rolled out painfully slowly. Only 2000 SMETS2 devices had been installed by the end of June, and at the end of September that total had only risen to 47000. [more]

The switchover from SMETS1 to SMETS2 was originally intended to take place in 2014, then 2015, so you can see how incredibly behind schedule this rollout is. Issues with a lack of trained installers slowed things down, as did delays to the secure data network which SMETS2 uses to communicate. Eventually the government set a deadline of 13th July 2018, after which SMETS1 would be mothballed and only SMETS2 meters could be installed. In January this year they pushed the deadline back to 5th October, and then at the very last minute extended it again to 5th December. It's no wonder I've been receiving letters with increasing urgency. [more]

Many energy companies, mine included, have a large stock of SMETS1 smart meters which they had hoped to have installed by now, and which will suddenly become entirely redundant after 5th December. Sending repeated mass mailouts to their unsmart customers may be expensive, and mostly unproductive, but it's still cheaper than having to bin a warehouse full of SMETS1 devices in five weeks time. I'm expecting at least a couple more letters before then, which I shall be disregarding because I don't want to be palmed off with the old version merely to hit a target. They need us at the moment more than we need them. Great News!

There's little doubt Tiz that the first generation of smart meters have faults and they were rolled out too quickly Tiz and Ian's right, that was down to the government pushing the energy suppliers and the public.
P is correct as well, there is the possibility of 'flexible tariffs' embedded in the concept.
David, Diamond Geezer is spot on.
Having said all that, mine works OK and on the whole I am glad I have it but then I'm a funny old bugger. My energy supply now is very undemanding, no bum meter readings and all I do is pay each month for what I have used. That suits me. It may well be that I could get a better deal than BG if I devoted time and effort to it but there again, I hate the hassle. So, warm house, stable bank balance and a quiet life.....

Wait til they start charging you for kVAh rather than KWh, some cheap LED lamps won't look so cheap to run then.........

Explain the difference Pluggy?