Confused and Needing some Advice
Posted: Tue 17 Dec, 2024 2:52 pm
I have a problem which is worrying me somewhat. Perhaps I am wrong and suffer from very confused thinking but I hope by posting this here, others might recognize the faults in my argument and correct my confused conclusions.
It is to do with energy prices and the current enthusiasm for achieving a 'Net Zero' production of electricity.
Bear with me as I lay out my thinking.
In order for a modern economy the thrive and grow it needs energy and the cost of that energy will determine whether the economy is successful or stagnating.
America has loads of cheap available energy and is bombing ahead with growth and innovation. Let's not talk about fossil fuels and climate change yet.
Here in the UK we don't have loads of cheap energy and so growth is always going to be stymied by the expensive price of electricity to industry and commerce.
We do have a lot of untapped sources of energy but we prefer to keep it in the ground.
So instead the government has proposed to produce nearly all our electricity needs by allowing developers to build vast quantities of windmills and solar farms with the promise to buy all the electricity they can produce to power and grow our economy.
And hey, because this renewable electricity costs next to nothing to produce, prices will come down and its a win-win for all concerned.
But we all acknowledge that there must be an alternative source of electricity for when the wind isn't blowing and that might happen over a period of several days or even weeks.
So if we want to 'keep the lights on' and keep industry working, we also need a comprehensive network of gas/oil power stations along with existing nuclear to provide for the entire 100% of the nation's electricity needs.
The guys who run and own these power stations are going to want paid also for the electricity they produce, otherwise why would they bother to build and maintain them and as we know, the electricity they produce can be cripplingly expensive.
But at least it is reliable.
When the wind is blowing and the sun is shining on us all then we can bask in the knowledge that our electricity is coming in from a free and sustainable source.
But - it is only free to the renewable guys who produce it.
The price we buy it at is the same price we have to pay to the gas producers when the wind isn't blowing. So all the wind farmers get to trouser huge profits for selling their 'free' electricity along with the subsidies we give them to build their wind and solar farms.
Why not lower the overall price then to reflect what renewable energy costs to produce?
Well if we did that then the gas plants would be totally unprofitable and would just pack up and leave.
The spot price of electricity must be set at the value demanded by the most expensive but indispensable producer.
They call this the marginal price structure.
So this is the problem I am having.
How can we be told that electricity prices will come down and be more reliable if we switch to renewable sources only?
I'm sure the minister Ed Miliband doesn't want to be seen lying to us but I cannot relate to the delusional fantasy world he seems to believe in.
Has no-one had a quiet word?
And anyway, who really thinks it's a good idea to power up and grow a modern industrial economy with - windmills?
And don't even consider storage. If they built a battery the size of Birmingham, it would only keep the supply going for 5 or 6 hours at most.
And no, we can't just plug into France or Norway when the National Grid goes down.
So what is to be done?
My own solutions are -
First admit that we don't yet have the technology to back up renewable generation and stop pretending to the public that a headlong surge into renewable energy is going to bring prices down and guarantee future supply.
Stop the wasteful subsidies given to the wind and solar farmers and restore the economy to it's full operating potential.
From there create an aggressive climate of research and development into real sustainable energy production for the future.
Sort out nuclear and/or fusion with a sense of real determination that is not being reflected in the current academic curiosity effort.
It needs vastly more money than is being allocated.
America could do all this but because they are not so squeamish about burning gas and oil, their needs are currently being met and so are not that bothered at the moment.
Climate change is real but paupering ourselves over it is an act of defeatism and self flagellation,
Perhaps someone can help me with this please.
It is to do with energy prices and the current enthusiasm for achieving a 'Net Zero' production of electricity.
Bear with me as I lay out my thinking.
In order for a modern economy the thrive and grow it needs energy and the cost of that energy will determine whether the economy is successful or stagnating.
America has loads of cheap available energy and is bombing ahead with growth and innovation. Let's not talk about fossil fuels and climate change yet.
Here in the UK we don't have loads of cheap energy and so growth is always going to be stymied by the expensive price of electricity to industry and commerce.
We do have a lot of untapped sources of energy but we prefer to keep it in the ground.
So instead the government has proposed to produce nearly all our electricity needs by allowing developers to build vast quantities of windmills and solar farms with the promise to buy all the electricity they can produce to power and grow our economy.
And hey, because this renewable electricity costs next to nothing to produce, prices will come down and its a win-win for all concerned.
But we all acknowledge that there must be an alternative source of electricity for when the wind isn't blowing and that might happen over a period of several days or even weeks.
So if we want to 'keep the lights on' and keep industry working, we also need a comprehensive network of gas/oil power stations along with existing nuclear to provide for the entire 100% of the nation's electricity needs.
The guys who run and own these power stations are going to want paid also for the electricity they produce, otherwise why would they bother to build and maintain them and as we know, the electricity they produce can be cripplingly expensive.
But at least it is reliable.
When the wind is blowing and the sun is shining on us all then we can bask in the knowledge that our electricity is coming in from a free and sustainable source.
But - it is only free to the renewable guys who produce it.
The price we buy it at is the same price we have to pay to the gas producers when the wind isn't blowing. So all the wind farmers get to trouser huge profits for selling their 'free' electricity along with the subsidies we give them to build their wind and solar farms.
Why not lower the overall price then to reflect what renewable energy costs to produce?
Well if we did that then the gas plants would be totally unprofitable and would just pack up and leave.
The spot price of electricity must be set at the value demanded by the most expensive but indispensable producer.
They call this the marginal price structure.
So this is the problem I am having.
How can we be told that electricity prices will come down and be more reliable if we switch to renewable sources only?
I'm sure the minister Ed Miliband doesn't want to be seen lying to us but I cannot relate to the delusional fantasy world he seems to believe in.
Has no-one had a quiet word?
And anyway, who really thinks it's a good idea to power up and grow a modern industrial economy with - windmills?
And don't even consider storage. If they built a battery the size of Birmingham, it would only keep the supply going for 5 or 6 hours at most.
And no, we can't just plug into France or Norway when the National Grid goes down.
So what is to be done?
My own solutions are -
First admit that we don't yet have the technology to back up renewable generation and stop pretending to the public that a headlong surge into renewable energy is going to bring prices down and guarantee future supply.
Stop the wasteful subsidies given to the wind and solar farmers and restore the economy to it's full operating potential.
From there create an aggressive climate of research and development into real sustainable energy production for the future.
Sort out nuclear and/or fusion with a sense of real determination that is not being reflected in the current academic curiosity effort.
It needs vastly more money than is being allocated.
America could do all this but because they are not so squeamish about burning gas and oil, their needs are currently being met and so are not that bothered at the moment.
Climate change is real but paupering ourselves over it is an act of defeatism and self flagellation,
Perhaps someone can help me with this please.