Reply to post:

Electric cars can't cut UK carbon emissions while only the wealthy can afford to own one

Jellied Eel Silver badge

Really, so the fact that the strike price is almost at a level where there wouldn't even need subsidy (most of the year it doesn't) would suggest the costs are pretty reasonable and way, way cheaper than nuclear.

Soo.. How do you work that out? I realise this is Green stuff, and that generally ignores evidence that goes against the consensus, but..

https://www.lowcarboncontracts.uk/cfds/hornsea-phase-1

Current strike price

158.75£/MWh

versus £92.50/MWh for Hinkley C, and that reduces a little if Sizewell C goes ahead. Ok, so some new 'renewables' contracts have a lower strike price, and Hinkley was a bit of an EDF bail-out project & overly generous.. Especially compared to the prices other countries are paying for new reactors.

Then of course there's coal. So the UK had a bunch of old coal power stations. Greens decided these were 'dirty' because of photogenic* steam clouds coming from cooling towers. So ban coal! So there was a proposal to replace old Kingsnorth coal plant with new, modern, supercritical systems that were more efficient and reduced CO2 emissions by around 30% compared to the units being replaced.

So Greens objected, called a judicial review & flew in a US expert (James Hansen) to save puppies from drowning due to climate change.. And they won, and the 'renewables' industry was pleased, and donated generously. But that's how the Green Blob works. Lobby to add additional costs onto traditional power generation and divert money to their sponsors. Except Germany. For various reasons, they decided to shut down their nuclear plant due to tsunami fears, and are now building coal because they're experiencing the cost/reliability problems that come with 'renewables'.

Wow, talk about edge cases. It is easier and safer to continue to heat an EV than a fuel car (less risk of Carbon Monoxide poisoning). The extreme weather where cars need to be rescued is a pretty rare event.

Nope, which shows you don't understand how EV's work. Like the need to keep battery temperatures stable, so requiring energy to warm/cool them vs taking waste heat from an engine. It also shows you don't understand how ICEs work either because CO poisoning became a thing of the past ever since catalytic convertors. And speaking of past things, one David Viner once famously said 'snowfalls would be a thing of the past' and kids wouldn't know what snow looked like.

Of course it's snowed a lot since then, and the Telegraph had to disappear Viner's original article. Greens have a bad habit of erasing inconvenient data.

So ok, it may be a bit of an edge case. Far more likely is congestion/disruption caused by broken down EVs that can't be jump-started or jerry canned. But the snow example will lead to deaths, if it can't be managed effectively.

Oh.. and has anyone announced the electric fire engine yet? Or will emergency vehicles get EV exemptions?

No point in being a world leader, developing technologies for a multi-trillion pound market that can then be used in other countries.

Few countries have gone full-retard the way we have. Which is perhaps suprising given our role in the Industrial Revolution, when steam replaced sail. This time, of course, it's different. We can build ginormous windmills! But they're still rather useless when winds are too low, or too high. If only those original millers had stuck it out, and not modernised. So we 'need' batteries, or CCGT plant, or <something> for those calm days, especially if they're the usual winter ones that kill people.

But the only reason there's a 'multi-trillion pound' market is due to idiocracy and regulatory capture. We knew the vagueries of wind from using it centuries ago. But this is a faith-driven industry. If you want technical solutions, here's a modest proposal-

Carbon's a handy fuel source. Carbon's 1/3rd of a CO2 molecule. So extract that carbon (CCS!), seperate it, and bake multi-million pound yachts from it. Or, for something more innovative. If you heat and compress that carbon, we can produce ultra-dense carbon pellets that could then be burned using clean oxygen. That would produce heat + CO2, which can then be recycled in a clean, Green alternative to those other nasty breeders. All possible using off-the shelf products today! Not sure if General Electric's patent for pellet production has expired though.

*St Greta apparently believed she could see CO2 pouring out of power stations. Can't think why she may have formed that belief, but it's one her PR team is trying to disappear from her book and previous interviews. But such is the power of propaganda.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019