Anyone on here fully versed in the employment / employee laws?

[otherclive]

Not sure how that is going to help the thousands of people loses their livelihood and at the same time having an environmental impact on the land and sea? Never mind the fact that at some point in the future our kids and their grand kids will need to find a way fo disposing of solar panels, wind turbines etc. Sadly all meant to be for our own good and save the planet.

This gives some idea of the number of jobs required by 2030, and 2050 in order to support the drive for a low carbon economy. So as oil ramps down new opportunities are increasing in the drive for a low carbon economy. I’m sure the eventual disposing of wind turbines and solar is no more of a challenge than disposing of redundant oil and gas infrastructure.

Clean energy jobs

 

[Buckman]

This gives some idea of the number of jobs required by 2030, and 2050 in order to support the drive for a low carbon economy. So as oil ramps down new opportunities are increasing in the drive for a low carbon economy. I’m sure the eventual disposing of wind turbines and solar is no more of a challenge than disposing of redundant oil and gas infrastructure.

Clean energy jobs

There may be a hint of truth in it for post 2050 but I doubt it , but in the meantime they are destroying the natural environment never mind the matter of disposal as neither solar panels or wind farms have an infinite life. Anyway I truly believe that they are not the answer, but we will find a better environmentally friendly source of power.

 

[Dustydog]

Let’s not lose sight of the considerable investments in renewables such as wind and solar power, new transmission infrastructure, energy storage facilities, north -south electric interconnecters, plus new nuclear at Sizewell C and SMRs funding for development by RollsRoyce etc. Periodic reports reveal that some of these developments are being held up by lack of skilled workers. So adding more licences to offshore oil could only exacerbate the shortage of workers for the low carbon economy. Plus despite the oil being in UK waters it’s sold on the global market at world prices and does nothing to support our self sufficiency in energy. Detaching electric from the price of oil should lead to reductions in bills once someone gets a handle on the contracting regime associated with renewables or nuclear.

When do you think all this tax payer investment will result in reduced power charges for the “working person”?😉

 

[Tobes]

When do you think all this tax payer investment will result in reduced power charges for the “working person”?😉

When we either stop using gas, or we change the market model, or the "working person" changes the way they consume electricity ( with a time of use tariff and time shifting). The first option is commercial. The second is legislative. The third is individual, but requires effort and potentially investment.

 

[RogerL]

When we either stop using gas, or we change the market model, or the "working person" changes the way they consume electricity ( with a time of use tariff and time shifting). The first option is commercial. The second is legislative. The third is individual, but requires effort and potentially investment.

We also need to move away from the business model where the cost of gas/oil is used to determine the price paid for renewable electricity.

 

[Buckman]

When we either stop using gas, or we change the market model, or the "working person" changes the way they consume electricity ( with a time of use tariff and time shifting). The first option is commercial. The second is legislative. The third is individual, but requires effort and potentially investment.

Hilarious and gave me a good laugh on this dismal morning. In other words never in our life time or in the lifetime of our grand children! Very recently didn't they have to revert to fossil fuel when there was no wind or sunshine?

 

[otherclive]

When do you think all this tax payer investment will result in reduced power charges for the “working person”?😉

Why just the “ working person” and not all “persons”, plus businesses too. It’s not all taxpayer investment is it?

 

[Buckman]

Why just the “ working person” and not all “persons”, plus businesses too. It’s not all taxpayer investment is it?

I would have thought that by now you would have realised by now that only the working person counts. If you have your own business or are a MP you are no longer a working person. Go figure!

 

[otherclive]

I would have thought that by now you would have realised by now that only the working person counts. If you have your own business or are a MP you are no longer a working person. Go figure!

“Working person” sounds like a sound bite from a TUC conference speech. What about the “pensioners” who spend disproportionately more on their energy eh? 😂😂😂

 

[Dustydog]

Why just the “ working person” and not all “persons”, plus businesses too. It’s not all taxpayer investment is it?

Surely by now you realise reference to "working person" is a tic laugh at HMG😉

 

[otherclive]

Some serious Fred Drift here.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Oh dear ! The same unresearched nonsense about renewables producing mountains of waste solar panels and turbine blades and how they are so much more dangerous. Compared to what? How about considering the issues caused by prospecting ,extracting, refining and then burning fossil fuels, which also diminishes the reserves. Once the fossil fuel is used apart from its polluting poisonous emissions its gone.... You can never get it back and use it again, its lost forever.

As for having to use fossil fuels to fill in for the periods when renewables are unavailable, Yes that has happened, but what is a better way of looking at it, is that look at how much less fossil fuel generation is needed to day compared to 10 or more years ago thus renewables are preserving the drain of fossil fuels. And then there's the how much lower the cost is generating with renewables, You don't have to keep paying to extract the fuel to burn and destroy it.

 

[Hutch]

You have to remember that, fossil fuel is not only used to power IC engines, it is used to make solar panels, wind turbine blades , paint , medicines, detergent,,food items, and many many other things, so we cannot just stop the drilling for gas and oil.

 

[otherclive]

You have to remember that, fossil fuel is not only used to power IC engines, it is used to make solar panels, wind turbine blades , paint , medicines, detergent,,food items, and many many other things, so we cannot just stop the drilling for gas and oil.

I would think that the quantity of fossil fuels used to produce the items listed is very small compared to its use as a burnt energy source. So, yes drilling would continue at a much reduced intensity but the product would not be burnt and so not contribute to any great extent to increased CO2 levels.

 

[Tobes]

Hilarious and gave me a good laugh on this dismal morning. In other words never in our life time or in the lifetime of our grand children! Very recently didn't they have to revert to fossil fuel when there was no wind or sunshine?

I have pointed at it before, and will do so again now. My average electricity cost for last month (4th Aug to 4th Sept) was just 7.31p per kWh + VAT (at 5%) so 7.67p all in. That is achieved by using solar and batteries to allow load shifting to a low cost night time tariff, which is accessed through use of an EV.

While the reduction in use of gas will take some time (it is happening, and the more renewables we have the less we need gas for the last kW generation). The change in market is also a long way off (the government recently rejected the idea of zonal pricing). But individual action is available today. The issue I have with this is it is not accessible for all in the same way. Simple time shifting is open to all, but the savings are small. To maximise, you need batteries and access to an EV tariff which is a barrier for entry.