It's not clear that some kind of true real-time zonal market will accelerate decarbonization. It's a neo-liberal hope. Wind project developers fear it leads to more risk, higher interest rates, higher kWh costs, project delays and cancellation.
A few notes. Onshore wind development was paused by Conservatives, at the behest of many those Lords with their Estates. Not sure if "everybody hates wind." Also only shut down in England, not in Wales or Scotland. Interesting thang: No flashing aviation lights on onshore wind in the UK. Turbines are lit with IR, under the assumption that if you are flying low at night you are are military or emergency response and equipped with night vision goggles. The retail "fan club" referred to, allows folks living near wind turbines to get very low prices during high windspeeds.
English offshore wind is being built at under $3/W and 45% capacity factors, vs. almost $10/W in NE US, though Coastal Virginia is still looking at $4ish/W. UK's Hinkley nuke, built with supposedly competent French help, $18/kW! No wonder Chris Wright needs to dis' UK wind.
Undersea transmission hither and yon. 14% imports. Cables to Norway, France, Denmark.
51% of generation from wind, solar and biomass in 2024.
Some interesting large scale water source HP projects, pumped hydro, cheapish residential AWHPs. And all those London Black Cabs. PHEVs from Geely now.
There are of course all number of reasons why Net Zero is unachievable, unnecessary and unjustifiably costly. But the chasm between the amount of carbon capture the CCC says is needed to hit the target and the amount the Government actually thinks it will have available at the time means Net Zero is unachievable even on the Government’s own terms. It means that it doesn’t matter how much the Government cripples UK industry and drives it overseas, how successful it is in replacing dependable fossil fuels with intermittent renewables, it will never hit Net Zero by 2050 or anywhere close to it and has no credible plan to do so.
Do MPs and ministers realise this? The danger is that once they are alerted to the issue they will see it as a reason to redouble efforts to slash emissions and accelerate the building of carbon storage capacity. Of course, what they should do is add it to the ever-growing list of why Net Zero is a terrible idea that needs replacing with a proper energy policy that prioritises prosperity and security for the long term
It's not clear that some kind of true real-time zonal market will accelerate decarbonization. It's a neo-liberal hope. Wind project developers fear it leads to more risk, higher interest rates, higher kWh costs, project delays and cancellation.
A few notes. Onshore wind development was paused by Conservatives, at the behest of many those Lords with their Estates. Not sure if "everybody hates wind." Also only shut down in England, not in Wales or Scotland. Interesting thang: No flashing aviation lights on onshore wind in the UK. Turbines are lit with IR, under the assumption that if you are flying low at night you are are military or emergency response and equipped with night vision goggles. The retail "fan club" referred to, allows folks living near wind turbines to get very low prices during high windspeeds.
English offshore wind is being built at under $3/W and 45% capacity factors, vs. almost $10/W in NE US, though Coastal Virginia is still looking at $4ish/W. UK's Hinkley nuke, built with supposedly competent French help, $18/kW! No wonder Chris Wright needs to dis' UK wind.
Undersea transmission hither and yon. 14% imports. Cables to Norway, France, Denmark.
51% of generation from wind, solar and biomass in 2024.
Some interesting large scale water source HP projects, pumped hydro, cheapish residential AWHPs. And all those London Black Cabs. PHEVs from Geely now.
There are of course all number of reasons why Net Zero is unachievable, unnecessary and unjustifiably costly. But the chasm between the amount of carbon capture the CCC says is needed to hit the target and the amount the Government actually thinks it will have available at the time means Net Zero is unachievable even on the Government’s own terms. It means that it doesn’t matter how much the Government cripples UK industry and drives it overseas, how successful it is in replacing dependable fossil fuels with intermittent renewables, it will never hit Net Zero by 2050 or anywhere close to it and has no credible plan to do so.
Do MPs and ministers realise this? The danger is that once they are alerted to the issue they will see it as a reason to redouble efforts to slash emissions and accelerate the building of carbon storage capacity. Of course, what they should do is add it to the ever-growing list of why Net Zero is a terrible idea that needs replacing with a proper energy policy that prioritises prosperity and security for the long term