We haven't adequate electricity production and won't have for the foreseeable future, therefore there will eventually be blackouts. Can anyone suggest an easier way of forcibly limiting domestic power consumption than a smart meter? I wouldn't think anyone is being particularly paranoid to foresee their usage for this.
Not only have EV's been in the pipeline for years but the Nuclear Industry have been telling the government for over 10 years that their ageing fleet of power stations would be winding down generation in 10 years time and replacements should be planned and contruction started. Alas the government response was "10 years you say, well we don't need to worry about that yet"
Fast forward 10 years and we see one power station under construction, one in design and I believe 6 current stations which are now being wound down for decommissioning. Suddenly the Government wants to moan at EDF and say "but why didn't you tell us" and "here's £700M. What do you mean it takes 10 years to design plan and construct a nuclear power station, can't we get them built any quicker ?"
Last week there was a report in the Daily Mail of a lady who had been put on a different tariff where she had to pay up front. All without her knowledge. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit and they can cut your supply remotely. Don’t worry we won’t have anything soon so that the elite can have everything. Watched a video on YouTube yesterday where it was explained we cannot produce more energy as the green renewable(cough!) only replace dwindling supplies of other fuels. Therefore if the population increases we run out of power and the elites won’t be able to keep flying to parties and eating what they wish, so we are going to be made poor or killed off.Been reading about the potential for rolling blackouts this winter and one thing struck me. They talk about different blocks being temporarily shut off but also about how certain places will be exempt e.g. care homes, hospitals and people with specific needs.
I may well be wrong but from my limited understanding you can't just turn off a substation/section in an area without it affecting everyone in that area. The only conceivable way I can think of (other than manually disconnecting everyone) is to use smart meters!
Whilst I'm not in to peddeling conspiracies, it does seem to me that we are seeing more and more that smart meters aren't there for the benefit of the user and instead to provide more control to the electricity providers.
I don't have one as so far I have not been convinced that there is any benefit to me. I have a perfectly good non-smart digital one and I know how much elec I use as I have a separate display that monitors the incoming cable. I still cook my dinner for the same amount of time though.
So am I completely off the mark with this assumption?
I think that's what's been happening over the last few years already. They are apparently no longer maintainable due to age and expected life span of certain elements etc.Can they be recertified like they are here? It's not safety that takes them offline here, it's competitiveness due to the enormous employee costs (huge staff, usually with very robust benefits).
People who are getting into debt are being put on prepay tariffs by suppliers; which is rightly getting some attention at the moment. That said, if it was in the Daily Fail I'd be highly suspicious that story was probably made up - given that factual journalism is a complete unknown to them.Last week there was a report in the Daily Mail of a lady who had been put on a different tariff where she had to pay up front. All without her knowledge. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit and they can cut your supply remotely. Don’t worry we won’t have anything soon so that the elite can have everything. Watched a video on YouTube yesterday where it was explained we cannot produce more energy as the green renewable(cough!) only replace dwindling supplies of other fuels. Therefore if the population increases we run out of power and the elites won’t be able to keep flying to parties and eating what they wish, so we are going to be made poor or killed off.
That's privatisation for you. No profit in customer service, all that matters is return for the owners and shareholders. And to add insult to injury, much of that profit goes overseas now.. I’d never have an unsmart meter, they are only there for their benefit
That one power station is already three billion over budget and years behind schedule along with an agreed price per unit that is just eyewatering. You cannot build these things very easily, problems start on day one because you need to find investors willing to risk millions of pounds for many years without any guarantee of returns. Then where do you build them, you don't want coastal due to rising sea levels and no one wants them anywhere near where they live because it devalues property and do you want to live near a potential Fujishima so another big issue. Then what about the waste, you cannot just keep stockpiling the waste because it is lethal for thousands of years and cost millions of pounds to baby sit for generations so the Germans have the right idea in getting rid of the nuclear plants as they are just such a risk to humanity. We need to invest heavily in renewables, windfarms at sea where you can build big and have huge concentrations rather than on land and start looking into tidal, but like everything we have just got greedy and people don't invest unless there are big returns.Fast forward 10 years and we see one power station under construction, one in design and I believe 6 current stations which are now being wound down for decommissioning. Suddenly the Government wants to moan at EDF and say "but why didn't you tell us" and "here's £700M. What do you mean it takes 10 years to design plan and construct a nuclear power station, can't we get them built any quicker ?"
Or the answer could be SMRs - small nuclear reactors like the ones Rolls-Royce have been building for nuclear submarines since the 60s. Up to around 500MW, proven safety record, made in the UK, a fraction of the cost of a nuclear power station. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.That one power station is already three billion over budget and years behind schedule along with an agreed price per unit that is just eyewatering. You cannot build these things very easily,
I think that's what's been happening over the last few years already. They are apparently no longer maintainable due to age and expected life span of certain elements etc.
There may be nothing really wrong with them but our thankfully cautious nuclear industry can only bend, reasses and rewrite so many of their own rules and regulations before some sort of incident causes the inevitable finger pointing. Trouble is when things do go wrong the powers that be will line up with the rest of us pointing and saying "well why did you do that" & "Why wasn't this plant decommissioned years ago"
I think it's a pretty risk averse industry so if 30/40 years ago people designed & signed off on a generation plant that was deemed good to run for 30/40 years then it would be somewhat of an admission to suggest that they were wrong and the plant is good for 50/60 years.
That's privatisation for you. No profit in customer service, all that matters is return for the owners and shareholders. And to add insult to injury, much of that profit goes overseas now.
As I understand it Phil the problem isn't a lack of electricity generating capacity but a potential lack of gas for the gas driven generators. Years ago, despite producing gazillions of gas from the North Sea our government took the monumentally stupid decision to stop storing it. Instead, they did a deal with Yerp to ship excess over over there in the summer and buy it back in the winter. Then along came rootin tootin Pootin and sent that little scheme all to **** in a hand cart...We haven't adequate electricity production and won't have for the foreseeable future, therefore there will eventually be blackouts. Can anyone suggest an easier way of forcibly limiting domestic power consumption than a smart meter? I wouldn't think anyone is being particularly paranoid to foresee their usage for this.
Still an expensive option, all nuclear plants must have a site license and this involves huge cost because of the conditions set out in that license, safety case, maintenance and inspection, training and the list goes on not to mention the cost of the CNP to provide security so nuclear can never be cost effective unless we want to compromise on safety. The one major advantage the submarine has over land based SMR's is the abundance of cooling water which greatly reduces the size.Or the answer could be SMRs - small nuclear reactors like the ones Rolls-Royce have been building for nuclear submarines since the 60s. Up to around 500MW, proven safety record, made in the UK, a fraction of the cost of a nuclear power station. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.
They do do apparently work against your EPC because of it.Every time I research air and ground source heat pumps, I discover that their energy usage, when being grid powered is comparatively eye watering.
So, if you pay to charge your (EV) batteries, they then use your battery capacity to supply your neighbours, and then you have to charge your batteries again, will that mean you have to pay again to then recharge your EV?They won't be prioritised over keeping people's lights on; again - that's the whole point of 15118-20 and OCPP 2.0; communication between the car, the charger, and the network operators, in order to schedule charging. A specific point of that system is that the EV charger "loses out" and must drop its power delivery when the available supply is low.
Few people drive overnight, so it doesn't matter if your car is charged at 8pm, 1am, or 5am (i.e. spreading the load over 24 hours).
Also, the amount of energy in an EV battery (compared to what's used in a home) is huge; so effectively having a distributed set of batteries all over the country means that with V2G (Vehicle to Grid) technology you've got a huge reservoir from which to draw power at peak demand.
As a rough example; UK households average around 10kWh of electric use per day. A single EV car with a 40kWh battery could therefore power 4 houses for the whole day. That's an extreme example; but the point is that you'd only need a handful of cars in a street with V2G technology to cover the whole street's load during peak hours, and those cars could then recharge overnight.
One assumes you will get paid for feeding back from your car into the grid. Whether this payment would be in parity with what you pay to charge is another matter!So, if you pay to charge your (EV) batteries, they then use your battery capacity to supply your neighbours, and then you have to charge your batteries again, will that mean you have to pay again to then recharge your EV?
Enter your email address to join: