Energy Cap

Shortly after the current Mrs. Lard moved into Ivory Towers, I caught her in the kitchen with the back door wide open & the boiler nearly exploding in trying to keep up with the heat loss.

She was having one of her 'hot flush' moments & instead of simply turning down the thermostat she decided instead to heat the entire atmosphere . . . At my expense.

She won't do that again. I don't know & I cannot imagine anyone I know ever doing that again.

I want to so dearly, to sit down & discuss the energy saving tactics with anyone who thinks the people who will be most affected by the current enormous cost of energy can do to reduce their energy bills.

This winter, a few people who belong to a very large group of people are going to die because a very small group of people think it's OK to charge enormous amounts of £money for energy.
Perhaps as Lord and master you could help out t'serfs in t'village out of your £120,000,000 fortune?
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
Not the producers. No point in nationalising your supplier - they have to buy the stuff at the going rate.
the govt could leverage energy producers

dont forget some energy suppliers are also producers: Centrica (which owns British gas) also owns gas and oil exploration and production assets
 
If they could harvest the gas you spout, that'd be half the problem solved in one swift stroke!
why do you Trust Truss?

Truss is an ERG puppet
Truss worked for Shell
Tory party is funded by energy producers

can you guess why she is against a windfall tax??



oh look Steve baker, ERG leader is connected to fossil fuels and climate change deniers


oh look Tory party have their snouts in the trough
 
Sponsored Links
the energy cap is based on 2,900kwh electric and 12,000 kwh of gas per year. Use more than that and you will pay more..
 
Truss correctly is anti heavy use of solar as it will use up productive land. It's attractive as can be installed quickly. A big problem really - it only produces power for a limited period.

Solar on roofs is a different area but has the same time limitation. If some one has the cash the payback time may be better due to interest rates being lower than inflation. :) I also wonder what happens when every house in the country dumps power into the grid.
I keep looking on Google Earth at the huge swathes of industrial buildings with huge white roofs reflecting all that sun light.

There is surely scope to use those roofs for solar energy. Obviously I realise that there are structural implications to installing solar panels on industrial building roofs, but it does save land that is in short supply in this country.

Of course, crops can still be grown beneath solar panels (low growing crops that like shaded conditions), so the land doesn't have to be completely useless as regards agriculture, but whether those crops are as economically viable is another matter.
 
This winter, a few people who belong to a very large group of people are going to die because a very small group of people think it's OK to charge enormous amounts of £money for energy.
Not really. Free market. The buyers bid for the stuff. Pure supply and demand. The suppliers do not set the price but have forced it up on purpose in the past by restricting supply. That is not the current reason the prices have increased.

While it's not a comfortable thing to think about shutting off Russia has a significant effect. Especially in Europe. One of the reasons for the increase in value of the USD is thought to be that they are producers. Even they are having oil price problems as they do not produce as much as they use. They have been ~ importing twice as much as they export.
 
All the pundits for this and that in the interviews - I feel like saying Read my lips, the current problem is people and businesses being able to pay their power bills.

Now it seems crops grow well in shade. Maybe go a bit further and grow mushrooms or use solar to force rhubarb. Rhubarb is an appropriate word.

The cap - it seems the most likely mechanism is effectively an indirect loan to users. The basic idea is that when prices of gas falls the price we pay will be higher until the loan has been repaid.

So it seems more lng gets shipped around. More ships needed. More capability at the collection and production end of things probably actual delivery points as well. Then the ports to receive it at the other end. None of this comes for free so chances are gas prices will never get back to where they were. That make more N Sea a good option. The reason given for ceasing to look for more there was not enough money in it.

Times scales - only thing I could quickly find.
The drilling of a modern shale well can take two to four weeks. Drilling efficiencies in recent years have generally resulted in longer laterals rather than shorter drilling times amid an industry-wide shift to horizontal wells.
Pioneer Natural Resources Company (PXD), a leading Permian Basin producer, was reportedly taking 14 to 25 days to drill wells 10,000 feet deep with a 20,000 foot horizontal lateral by 2018.6
Drilling an offshore well can take three to four months and cost $120 million to $160 million per well, with the most complex drilling projects taking as long as a year.78 Offshore wells are significantly costlier than those on land, with wells off the coast of West Africa costing up to 30 times more than those drilled into U.S. shale.



:) Info may be from some source that is very keen on shale sources.
 
Truss correctly is anti heavy use of solar as it will use up productive land. It's attractive as can be installed quickly. A big problem really - it only produces power for a limited period.

Solar on roofs is a different area but has the same time limitation. If some one has the cash the payback time may be better due to interest rates being lower than inflation. :) I also wonder what happens when every house in the country dumps power into the grid.
Newer systems tend to combine battery storage, there is no benefit in dumping power to the grid. The Feed in Tariffs are worthless now. The game now is to integrate your generation to your storage and consumption.
 
Apparently plenty left under the North Sea, we need to get this out in the short term and use the savings against imported fuel to fund a long term renewable strategy.
Personally I'm not convinced that microgeneration is the best approach (it just seems easy, visible and gets well off individuals willing to contribute (along with the forced contribution from poorer bill payers in society) - for relatively inefficient panels on their own roof - rather than a share of an unseen, super efficient solar farm or wind farm 30 miles away).
We're not drilling for gas in our gardens and running little generators - it's like a 3rd world approach.

Although it does make me wonder, with the current electricity prices, how the cost of running a small diesel generator stacks up!

Screenshot_20220908-110233.png
 
Perhaps as Lord and master you could help out t'serfs in t'village out of your £120,000,000 fortune?
If you were to match me £ for £ on charity . . . . You'd need to sell your house & cash in your pension.
 
I keep looking on Google Earth at the huge swathes of industrial buildings with huge white roofs reflecting all that sun light.

There is surely scope to use those roofs for solar energy. Obviously I realise that there are structural implications to installing solar panels on industrial building roofs, but it does save land that is in short supply in this country.

Of course, crops can still be grown beneath solar panels (low growing crops that like shaded conditions), so the land doesn't have to be completely useless as regards agriculture, but whether those crops are as economically viable is another matter.
I would have thought that it is not beyond the realms of modern science to install panels on the sides of buildings also.
Obviously care would be needed in deciding which buildings and which sides.
 
Truss wont tax energy producers for the excess profits

she dishonestly tried to claim tax stops growth -but these are excess profits on top of their normal operating profit, for which theyve done nothing to generate

but then Truss worked for Shell and Truss is a puppet for the ERG who are bankrolled by fossil fuels as are the Tory party.


the old adage: follow the money
It does seem to be absurd that she refuses to consider a tax on windfall profits (profits which were not expected) in preference to borrowing money payable in the future by increases in taxation. She is tying up the hands of future governments ability to use those taxes also.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top