Shale Gas

[Raja Clavata]

Totally aligned with the need for energy independence but not at the cost of going back to the dark ages, we should be accelerating the realisation of net zero.

Farage is great at highlighting problems, he's not so great at providing a solution to them...

Screams of attention seeking in my book.

[B725]

We can't afford net zero it's just a dream by the wealthy but the poorest end up paying, the wind turbines make a lovely picture to our countryside don't you think, they don't work with no wind and turned off if it's too windy. 

Invest in shale gas to give us cheap energy and then some of the profits can go towards so called green energy. 

It's a bit like electric cars no one factor's in the huge energy cost's of production but expect the people with less or little money to just jump on board that simply cannot afford it. 

[JohnfromUK]

15 minutes ago, B725 said:

Invest in shale gas to give us cheap energy

There was a man from Centrica on the radio (R4) this morning and he was asked about this and asked specifically why if this is working (fairly) well in the USA, we can't go ahead here?  His reply was that the gas here is much harder to extract than in the USA and much more costly.  Rock structure is different apparently.  The gas here would (have been) more costly to extract than to buy (pre present prices crisis).

This looked an interesting idea though.  I'm not sure how 'real' it is as a possibility?

https://newatlas.com/energy/quaise-deep-geothermal-drilling-questions/?fbclid=IwAR0xF_1lxPYHUHEF2t_2VAWP4nC8NEARlSuSastDxGX1tPgGnBT35fTfeGo

[Newbie to this]

38 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

There was a man from Centrica on the radio (R4) this morning and he was asked about this and asked specifically why if this is working (fairly) well in the USA, we can't go ahead here?  His reply was that the gas here is much harder to extract than in the USA and much more costly.  Rock structure is different apparently.  The gas here would (have been) more costly to extract than to buy (pre present prices crisis).

This looked an interesting idea though.  I'm not sure how 'real' it is as a possibility?

https://newatlas.com/energy/quaise-deep-geothermal-drilling-questions/?fbclid=IwAR0xF_1lxPYHUHEF2t_2VAWP4nC8NEARlSuSastDxGX1tPgGnBT35fTfeGo

Sounds like the things of Science Fiction.

Hopefully it is actually viable and not just another scheme to get investors money.

[Yellow Bear]

4 hours ago, B725 said:

We can't afford net zero it's just a dream by the wealthy but the poorest end up paying, the wind turbines make a lovely picture to our countryside don't you think, they don't work with no wind and turned off if it's too windy. 

Invest in shale gas to give us cheap energy and then some of the profits can go towards so called green energy. 

It's a bit like electric cars no one factor's in the huge energy cost's of production but expect the people with less or little money to just jump on board that simply cannot afford it. 

Exactly👍

[discobob]

18 hours ago, B725 said:

It's a bit like electric cars no one factor's in the huge energy cost's of production but expect the people with less or little money to just jump on board that simply cannot afford it.

The same for Air Source Heat Pumps - retrofitting it estimated between £20-40K on average houses if there is such a thing - I know - we will give grants - but generally the only ones who can afford to fit it are the wealthy so the wealthy get grants (ne public money).

In the future - councils will start to fit them to their estates - with public money

Joe 'in the middle' Blogs - gradually being stripped of what he has worked hard to achieve - also known as a cash cow

[Mungler]

I have a client who is an energy assessor - big boy stuff like stadiums and nationwide chains of shops.

Before Ukraine kicked off he was talking of a lesser national chain of shops having their energy bill increase by just under £1m. I underline that that was before Ukraine.

He also says that nobody properly understands ‘net zero’, least of all the politicians and says it can’t be done inside of a 50 year plan (including massive nuclear power station expansion) and any attempt at it without a proper long term plan will do more harm than good. 

In the short term - it’s ‘needs must’ when the devil drives. We can’t have people freezing to death next winter and if that means digging for coal, then so be it.

[B725]

44 minutes ago, discobob said:

The same for Air Source Heat Pumps - retrofitting it estimated between £20-40K on average houses if there is such a thing - I know - we will give grants - but generally the only ones who can afford to fit it are the wealthy so the wealthy get grants (ne public money).

In the future - councils will start to fit them to their estates - with public money

Joe 'in the middle' Blogs - gradually being stripped of what he has worked hard to achieve - also known as a cash cow

I had a M& E design engineer friend have a look at solar and a hybrid air sourse / gas system and the published figures where so far off reality that it was not cost effective. In a brand new house maybe but not in older house's it's just another green energy con. 

[discobob]

20 minutes ago, Mungler said:

any attempt at it without a proper long term plan

that is the whole issue here - soundbite and populist policies from our elected (from a very limited pool) politicians who want to be the big 'IAM' on the world political stage - more than likely so they increase what they can charge at the after-dinner speeches they do - and again totally disconnected from reality of ordinary people - and if they wanted to could build a net zero house costing millions - and then have an increasing asset in their portfolio... Oh - and more than likely be able to charge interest payments to expenses 😞

[ditchman]

mate rents a housing ***' 2 bedroom bungalow...had air souce pump put in..he did tell me how much the Housing asso' paid and it was very expensive......

 

it works...bear in mind it hasnt been really cold since it was put in last spring...its on full chat to keep the bungalow warm..as soon as it gets really cold...they will suffer..

no end of complaints about the noise of the pump from their neighbor next door

[derbyduck]

41 minutes ago, Mungler said:

I have a client who is an energy assessor - big boy stuff like stadiums and nationwide chains of shops.

Before Ukraine kicked off he was talking of a lesser national chain of shops having their energy bill increase by just under £1m. I underline that that was before Ukraine.

He also says that nobody properly understands ‘net zero’, least of all the politicians and says it can’t be done inside of a 50 year plan (including massive nuclear power station expansion) and any attempt at it without a proper long term plan will do more harm than good. 

In the short term - it’s ‘needs must’ when the devil drives. We can’t have people freezing to death next winter and if that means digging for coal, then so be it.

unfortunately its not that easy to open a coal mine, it takes years to sink a shaft, then there needs to be the coal prep plant, rail links and the mines that Michael  & Margret closed down where destroyed and not capped off for further use ,pumps where turned off and under ground workings and shafts have been flooded, opencast mines would be cheaper but the Nimbeis would not like that, peat could be used to fire power stations as in Ireland , but Monty Don would be against that !

[old man]

On 07/03/2022 at 09:28, discobob said:

Any thoughts on Nigel Farage - launching a movement for a referendum on the Politico Green Agenda etc...

Screaming Lord Sutch would do?

Someone with the ability needs to do something to curb this insanity before the wheels really come off?

[Raja Clavata]

If nobody properly understands net zero then I'm not readily sure how anyone can conclude that nobody properly understands net zero, but anyway, I digress...

There are a number of papers that illustrate the benefits in ROI of post COVID investment in renewable energy compared to fossil fuels, including a decent one from McKinsey.

Part of the Getting Brexit Done manifesto was that we'd become world leaders in the roll-out of new sustainable tech but let's not politicise the issue - it's just plain the right thing to do.

The obvious counter to the "we can't afford to do it" brigade is that we actually can't afford to take the gamble on not doing it.

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Raja Clavata
but not by

[B725]

As I'm in the can't afford it brigade I adjust my thoughts. 

At this moment in time we cannot afford it therefore shale gas will give us cheaper energy therefore off setting some of the profits that then can be used for cleaner energy. 

Don't forget that there is a terrific amount of people who do not earn a lot of money but keep having to contribute to the green energy regardless. 

Let the wealthy who keep harping on have their own green energy at whatever it cost's and the poorer people have cheap energy until the green energy is affordable for all.

[Raja Clavata]

Are you sure about Shale as a cheaper option - there are established cost/MWh for all energy sources?

Then there is the conversion from cost/MWh to price/MWh...

[discobob]

1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said:

If nobody properly understands net zero then I'm not readily sure how anyone can conclude that nobody properly understands net zero, but anyway, I digress...

There are a number of papers that illustrate the benefits in ROI of post COVID investment in renewable energy compared to fossil fuels, including a decent one from McKinsey.

Part of the Getting Brexit Done manifesto was that we'd become world leaders in the roll-out of new sustainable tech but let's not politicise the issue - it's just plain the right thing to do.

The obvious counter to the "we can't afford to do it" brigade is that we actually can't afford to take the gamble on not doing it.

 

The thing is though - it is all being done as PFI basically - you build this and we will guarantee you xxxx (which is way above what the market is/was) and I have heard that they get paid if there is no wind/sun as well....

Same going on for the Nuclear Plant that is being built - unit costs far in excess of the market - and again - this will be a minimum - I bet there are escalators within the contracts for these things so they can maintain their shareholders - and I know that pension plans etc are shareholders - but that is just setting up a pyramid scheme for power....

I suppose it all comes back to what our government actually does for us. They seem to think that they are some sort of broker for all of our money. They don't invest in any long term strategy - I think that it is only a year or so ago that a load of gas storage was retired with no replacement - leaving us with 3 days and totally at the will of the market because they only have 3 days till the heat/lights/.... go off/out

[Raja Clavata]

On 09/03/2022 at 13:58, discobob said:

The thing is though - it is all being done as PFI basically - you build this and we will guarantee you xxxx (which is way above what the market is/was) and I have heard that they get paid if there is no wind/sun as well....

Same going on for the Nuclear Plant that is being built - unit costs far in excess of the market - and again - this will be a minimum - I bet there are escalators within the contracts for these things so they can maintain their shareholders - and I know that pension plans etc are shareholders - but that is just setting up a pyramid scheme for power....

I suppose it all comes back to what our government actually does for us. They seem to think that they are some sort of broker for all of our money. They don't invest in any long term strategy - I think that it is only a year or so ago that a load of gas storage was retired with no replacement - leaving us with 3 days and totally at the will of the market because they only have 3 days till the heat/lights/.... go off/out

I agree on the point about the government and lack of long term vision, but the net zero targets are an exception yet many are throwing rocks at it, including yourself?

[Mungler]

On 09/03/2022 at 12:25, Raja Clavata said:

If nobody properly understands net zero then I'm not readily sure how anyone can conclude that nobody properly understands net zero, but anyway, I digress...

Errrr it’s not that difficult. Nobody actually understands net zero, and in this mix they don’t have a full understanding of what is required or the incumbent and punitive costs, or indeed what those costs now look like post covid and post Ukraine.

We are but a drop in the global pollution bucket.

Try and explain to someone who is at risk of freezing / starving that they need to be worried for the next generation, and all the while 99% of the rest of the planet gives net zero two fingers. 

Cloud cuckoo land. In the here and now, we are shuffling deckchairs on the titanic.

.

Edited March 10, 2022 by Mungler

[old man]

10 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Errrr it’s not that difficult. Nobody actually understands net zero, and in this mix they don’t have a full understanding of what is required or the incumbent and punitive costs, or indeed what those costs now look like post covid and post Ukraine.

We are but a drop in the global pollution bucket.

Try and explain to someone who is at risk of freezing / starving that they need to be worried for the next generation, and all the while 99% of the rest of the planet gives net zero two fingers. 

Cloud cuckoo land. In the here and now, we are shuffling deckchairs on the titanic.

.

Net zero is a pure myth invented by the deluded for consumption by the gullible allowing insiders to flourish at the cost of the deluded?

[Westward]

33 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Errrr it’s not that difficult. Nobody actually understands net zero, and in this mix they don’t have a full understanding of what is required or the incumbent and punitive costs, or indeed what those costs now look like post covid and post Ukraine.

We are but a drop in the global pollution bucket.

Try and explain to someone who is at risk of freezing / starving that they need to be worried for the next generation, and all the while 99% of the rest of the planet gives net zero two fingers. 

Cloud cuckoo land. In the here and now, we are shuffling deckchairs on the titanic.

.

Excellent post.

The real meaning of Nett Zero  is that we will impoverish every working household in the land in order to achieve almost "Nett Zero" difference to global emissions.

Nett Zero is gesture politics at it's absolute worst and it's by far the most costly.

China's emissions alone increase every 18 months or so by an amount equal to our overall total. Add in the rest of the far east along with India, Brazil, America and of course Russia and all we can do is spend trillions in tax money trying to set an example for the above nations to sneer at. 

The National Grid has calculated that just the network upgrades needed to meet the Nett Zero targets will cost £3 trillion and that's already about double the governments estimate for the total cost of the whole ridiculous stunt.  Anyone care to guess who will have to pay for it?

Edited March 10, 2022 by Westward

[discobob]

1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said:

but the net zero targets are an exception yet many are throwing rocks at it, including yourself?

Yep - and @Westward @Mungler and @old man have hit the nail on the head. If you compare our emissions to what they were years ago (50 to 150) we are far along the way towards net zero - excluding emissions from vehicles which is the only thing that has increased really.

They want everyone to rush to Electric vehicles - basically robbing Peter to pay Paul - you have just moved your pollution to a power plant - yes I know there is Solar and Wind - but they are not constant - this country needs a base load to just keep the lights on - and the generation from these 'green' sources has been severely down.

Lets talk about DRAX - Lets convert it to pellets which is (or was) thought of to be green - but they have large ships going backwards and forwards to get the pellets from USA where it is blighting their landscape.

Lets talk about the North Sea where our government is paying subsidies to companies to not extract oil and gas - so we import from elsewhere - hey - not our emissions to produce these.

What is happening is that Governments are trying to force a stupid policy in (just like they did with Diesel - look what happened there) without actually understanding what it will cause for 70% of people (at least) within the country - to quote "The operation was a success but the patient died" - well the operation is Net Zero, and we, the ordinary people, are the patient.

Hat's off to Nigel Farage - the only real opposition to the government in this country.

[Raja Clavata]

18 hours ago, Mungler said:

Errrr it’s not that difficult. Nobody actually understands net zero, and in this mix they don’t have a full understanding of what is required or the incumbent and punitive costs, or indeed what those costs now look like post covid and post Ukraine.

We are but a drop in the global pollution bucket.

Try and explain to someone who is at risk of freezing / starving that they need to be worried for the next generation, and all the while 99% of the rest of the planet gives net zero two fingers. 

Cloud cuckoo land. In the here and now, we are shuffling deckchairs on the titanic.

.

I just find it a very broad sweeping statement to say nobody understands net zero, it's pretty meaningless unless the real intention is to dismiss the whole sustainability movement.

It's also a very limited view regarding us being a drop in the bucket, there is huge economic opportunity associated with the development of relevant technologies. 

Fully aligned with the current needs must and all that but we shouldn't be dropping the whole thing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a proper petrol head but we have to move on. I'm assuming you at least know the basics of the natural carbon cycle and I suspect, deep down, you might actually have even pondered the logic of extracting fossil fuel and burning it.

[Raja Clavata]

17 hours ago, discobob said:

Yep - and @Westward @Mungler and @old man have hit the nail on the head. If you compare our emissions to what they were years ago (50 to 150) we are far along the way towards net zero - excluding emissions from vehicles which is the only thing that has increased really.

They want everyone to rush to Electric vehicles - basically robbing Peter to pay Paul - you have just moved your pollution to a power plant - yes I know there is Solar and Wind - but they are not constant - this country needs a base load to just keep the lights on - and the generation from these 'green' sources has been severely down.

Lets talk about DRAX - Lets convert it to pellets which is (or was) thought of to be green - but they have large ships going backwards and forwards to get the pellets from USA where it is blighting their landscape.

Lets talk about the North Sea where our government is paying subsidies to companies to not extract oil and gas - so we import from elsewhere - hey - not our emissions to produce these.

What is happening is that Governments are trying to force a stupid policy in (just like they did with Diesel - look what happened there) without actually understanding what it will cause for 70% of people (at least) within the country - to quote "The operation was a success but the patient died" - well the operation is Net Zero, and we, the ordinary people, are the patient.

Hat's off to Nigel Farage - the only real opposition to the government in this country.

Again, limited view - vehicles, I assume you mean cars - they are just one small part of it.

No comment on Farage in this context.

[Westward]

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Again, limited view 

I find this a somewhat patronising comment which is like the we know better than you mentality of the climate alarmists who sneeringly use expressions like "Climate change denier".

Most people of my age group agree that the climate is different today from when we were kids. Winters are milder and wetter, whereas summers are dryer and about a month or so longer and there's a lot more wind.

But I have to insist that my view is most certainly not "limited" and I suggest you get a copy of "There is no climate crisis" by David Craig. It's available in book form or on Kindle. As far as I know it's the only information source that uses real data and real analysis over real time scales rather than the "adjusted" figures and highly selective data from the likes of NASA and the IPCC, as well as deliberate data manipulation by some scientists due to confirmation bias. It's worth noting that of the 140 or so climate models developed by scientists over the last 20 years, not one has ever produced an accurate prediction.

In my opinion the above book should be compulsory reading for the government, for the hysterics like XR, the IPCC and all school children over the age of eleven. Maybe that would open a few peoples minds to the greatest and most costly misconception the modern world has ever seen.

[B725]

43 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I just find it a very broad sweeping statement to say nobody understands net zero, it's pretty meaningless unless the real intention is to dismiss the whole sustainability movement.

It's also a very limited view regarding us being a drop in the bucket, there is huge economic opportunity associated with the development of relevant technologies. 

Fully aligned with the current needs must and all that but we shouldn't be dropping the whole thing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a proper petrol head but we have to move on. I'm assuming you at least know the basics of the natural carbon cycle and I suspect, deep down, you might actually have even pondered the logic of extracting fossil fuel and burning it.

I agree with you but as I have said before at this moment in time we simply cannot afford to do it, self sustained cheap gas is what we need now and use some of the profits to expand the relevant greener industries