Friday 31 March 2023

Green Energy Day. Eventually.

Oh, what sport!  Is it to be Green Energy Day in a field somewhere?  No, it's to be Energy Security Day in industrial Aberdeen.  Oh, no wait, it's Green Energy again - in a nuclear fusion lab.

But are nukes green, as the French desperately (really desperately) want the EU to declare, or are they nasty old 20th century heavy industry?  HMG itself is out to consult on that question too: ministers are hoping a lot of ESG money will come swinging in if it's *serendipitously* concluded nukes are green.  Meanwhile, maybe nuclear fusion seemed suitably whizzy-hi-tech-future-ish and, well, green-ish, for the purpose.

Ironically, it's also a rather good metaphor for something costly that never actually arrives ... 

I haven't had a chance to read yesterday's monster documentation, so I'm afraid the usual C@W precis service is somewhat delayed.  Have a good weekend, all.



Don Cox said...

Helion Energy are trying hard to build a demonstration fusion power device this year.

If they succeed, it will still be a few years before such devices become routine and practical. However, they should be encouraged.

I think Zap Energy are also near to success.


Anonymous said...

If anyone gets through the document, is it true that a "green carbon tax" will be levied on imports with a high energy input, to prevent (way after that horse has bolted) the UK "exporting its pollution"?

The tax will apply to frivolous, luxury imports like steel, cement, fertiliser, all of which I'm sure we can do without.

rwendland said...

Roils-Royce is bang off message today though. Its new CEO has seemingly fired Rolls-Royce SMR (mid sized new nuc) head and finance officers yesterday according to the Telegraph, though RR are saying "by mutual consent":

The other blot on the SMR scene is the increased costings of the first proposed US SMR build of Nuscale SMRs, gone up to $119/MWh (£96/MWh) [*] not including the $1.4 US govt billion construction subsidy and possibly free land at the Idaho National Laboratory. That's Hinkley Point C levels of pricing, rather than the new dawn of nuclear costs we were promised a decade ago for SMRs. A common nuclear story:

Makes you wonder if the wonderful Rolls-Royce SMR cost claims are way off-beam as well, not helped by the rapid inflation of the last year.

[*] $119/MWh is $30/MWh subsidy from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act + $89/MWh they hope to charge some regulated/state electricity companies

Bill Quango MP said...

P.j. O’Rourke.
On healthcare. But he could have been talking about nuclear and solar/wind energy too cheap to meter.

“If you think it is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free.'

Just because it’s true.

“A penny will not buy a penny postcard or a penny whistle or a single piece of penny candy. It will not even, if you're managing the U.S. Mint, buy a penny.”

dearieme said...

"5 years away for 50 years now."

More like forty and sixty.

E-K said...

In the meantime what are the BRICs doing ?

OK. China might be experimenting with Green but this is like a forty-a-day smoker taking up vaping whilst still smoking forty-a-day.

UK's is 1% of global carbon emissions and we've already been told by Remainers (who also seem to be very Green) that we have no influence anymore - which rather puts down their "we must lead by example" argument.

E-K said...

PS, Outsourcing our emissions by outsourcing our work has the two-fold effect of increasing consumption whilst reducing productivity. The natural brake on consuming stuff (CO2 emissions) has been loosened by lax credit and the exploitation of labour abroad whilst our own sits idle on welfare.

Why are we even talking about fusion power stations ? Is an idle population even a good thing ?

E-K said...

Off topic. You know my circumstances. Mum living with us (infirm and on lots of meds) We can't sell her house in Lincs. Or let's put it this way - we can't sell it for enough to buy even a modest flat here, yet if we combine wealth we get taxed to buggery on her death.



The other end of the family. Son No 2 intends to train as a brain surgeon. He qualifies after 13 years of study (six unpaid - seven on 40-ish) to a salary of £105k pa - at which he hits the high tax and childcare cliff edge which means he does not recover earnings until £145k.

So his fiancee (a doctor too) will delay children even further.

This is reverse Darwinism. For 13 years the Tories have been encouraging the wrong people to breed whilst discouraging the most intelligent.

Clive said...

@ E-K 10:41

Continuing off topic (but an interesting one!)

I hate to break it to you, but someone, either son, or daughter in law (to be) isn’t being entirely honest with you (and/or with themselves). I can tell you categorically, a woman who really wants children will find a way — any way, no matter what the compromises or consequences are — to have a child.

The lady concerned may want to put her career first. Or not be entirely sure she’s ready to make a serious commitment to the relationship. Or some other substantive reason. Or your son also may have reasons for not wanting a child right now. But whatever it is, there is a reason and it’s nowt to do with money.

Handy hint: kids don’t always tell their parents the truth. Parents who might be angling for grandchildren but aren’t going to be given them, doubly so.

Anonymous said...

E-K - to be fair, the prudent have been subsidising the feckless for many a year now, and the middle classes have been subsidising the poor.

In 2005 I was on around 45k, stay at home wife and 4 kids, being taxed at exactly the same 40% rate as if I had no kids and a wife earning the same.

Anonymous said...

Clive - up to a point. But it does make having babies a lot easier when your other half comes with a house attached and a secure job. No worry about landlords, you can put up shelves... right up to the 1980s houses were affordable, it's since then that they've gone crazy.

"a woman who really wants children will find a way — any way, no matter what the compromises or consequences are ..."

True, but the consequences frequently involve divorce/separation and screwed up kids. My kids know of at least 4 suicides in their school peer groups, I knew of none.

Don Cox said...

Suicides of children or of parents ?


Caeser Hēméra said...

@Clive - women are choosing to delay motherhood ever more, and also reducing the number of children they'd like. A few years back the only age grouping where birth rates were increasing was in the 40-49 bracket.

The general reasons provided are childcare costs, career and waiting for the right partner.

It would be interesting to see the costs to the NHS of the higher probabilities of more complex births and health issues with mother and child. Of course there are hidden costs - a falling birth rates introduces dependencies on migration in order to support the industrial and tax bases.

And whilst older mothers are nothing new, they used to also have had several children in their younger year, the ones born during their 40's being their last children, not their first.

Anonymous said...

Caesar - and "childcare costs" puts us back to house prices again. How many women would rather be at home were it financially doable?

Bill Quango MP said...

George Osborne has the best quote.

Nigel Lawson

‘Every Tory chancellor since him has asked “am I being as bold as Lawson” and answered “no”.’

E-K said...

RIP Nigel Lawson and no. We haven't been allowed Conservatism since Thatcher.

Instead we get the Tory Equalities Act of which Sunak is being praised for out-equality-ing Sturgeon on Trans, Leftism defeating Leftism. Badenoch is now *begging* the Equalities Commission (which they created) to *consider* if a woman can be identifiable as a woman.

13 years of Tory rule, mind you.

The same out-lawing of Conservatism in America since Reagan. If only they spent as much energy addressing why Trump was elected rather than going for the man himself. The same for Johnson and Brexit (which is what Partygate is really about.)

E-K said...

Baby farming (childcare) is a deliberate marxist policy in thrall to feminists who deem mothering to be a dirty trade.

The Tories subsidise anti Tory politics through childcare support for jobs which are otherwise uneconomic to do as a mother - they have also forced through accommodated shifts with their Equalities Act which means no equality at all. It usually means blokes copping all the horrible start and finish times and the weekend work.