Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Confusion of VIs

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Confusion of VIs

  1. That was an aberration made a good story for a week or two then forgotten. You picked up on it because it suited your prejudiced view. The true reason for Ireland's success is as I posted. Ireland’s Top 10 Exports 2021 Pharmaceuticals: US$67.5 billion (35.5% of total exports) Organic chemicals: $37.3 billion (19.6%) Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $16.9 billion (8.9%) Electrical machinery, equipment: $15.4 billion (8.1%) Machinery including computers: $9.6 billion (5%) Perfumes, cosmetics: $5.4 billion (2.9%) Dairy, eggs, honey: $3.91 billion (2.1%) Other chemical goods: $3.9 billion (2.1%) Meat: $3.86 billion (2%) Aircraft, spacecraft: $3.4 billion (1.8%)
  2. What discussion? you throwing slurs around hardly constitutes a discussion. I have a suggestion. When you don't know something, rather than make up stuff that reflects your predudices try looking it up. In this case a quick look at Wikipedia would have told you
  3. Any thoughts about the UK and its dominions being the global tax-evasion central. I expect the EU/US will put a stop to that at the same time as corporate tax dodging is tackled.
  4. It's looking like Oct review will increase prices by another 50%, as that's the most the gov dare pass on in one go. As before the excess will be picked up by the energy companies as a debt to be recovered at some future point when prices fall back. As plans go this one is looking pretty dodgy.
  5. That's the sort of comment only someone with no legal experience would make. Do you think top lawyers are paid +£1,000 per hour to point out where things are in a document. When Davis stated that we did not agree to pay a single pound that we were not legally obliged to he also said that our best lawyers had been through every item and confirmed this was the case. What you think about topics you know nothing about is pretty irrelevant, especially when the people who do say otherwise .
  6. That was just reality defying Leave campaign propaganda. The reality re Scotland is that they are not liable for the debt. I cannot see any Scottish leader volunteering to pay the UK £200bn. So no problem then. So we are leaving the WTO now are we?
  7. David Davis confirmed to parliament that in leaving deal the UK only paid what it was legally obliged to stating that we paid "not a single pound more" Because unlike the UK (in the EU) it did not vote to approve that spending? and because the UK gov has said it is not liable for the UK debt.
  8. There is no legal liability so nothing to repudiate. You are suggesting that the Scots will voluntarily offer to pay the UK £200bn. Can you imagine any Scottish leader doing that? A deal would be done but it would need to reflect both the debt and defence issues which means a very generous agreement for Scotland.
  9. Two different issues. The UK had no EU debt. However, it was legally liable for spending commitments entered into while an EU member.
  10. Except this is factually correct not a Brexit lie. What UK debts are Scotland's? - BBC News No doubt a deal would be done but it would reflect the far stronger position Scotland v the UK is in compared to the UK v the EU (no legal liability for debt and the UK's reliance on Scotland for naval and air bases are pretty big cards).
  11. The problem with that is Scotland is not leally liable for any of the UK debt.
  12. Maybe it was just more obvious bunk. Here it is 2030 Solar Cost Targets | Department of Energy You do understand that just because something is possible doesn't make it magically happen. Cameron's cutting the green crap, which I imagine you approved of, has put us years behind where we need to be. As a result our electricity prices are still set based on the price of gas.
  13. Not likely. They refused to do an economic assessment of Brexit because that would have forced them to accept reality and come clean to the public. The same logic will prevent them doing this.
  14. Nuclear is multiples of nuclear by the time it arrives +10yrs late. I have no problem with nuclear as a technology it's the implementation and competition from rapidly declining in cost renewables that are the problem. If the private sector wants to invest tens of billions to compete for electricity supply contracts against renewables that's fine but I wouldn't risk my money on it. The other side of the problem is reducing investment in fossil fuels. As most investments have a very long pay back period (e.g. a major new oil field takes on average 30yrs to pay for itself) so fewer and fewer are viable given the move to net zero. There is no way nuclear can be ramped up anything like fast enough to make any real impact on what will be a rapidly emerging supply shortfall but wind/solar can.
  15. 😁 You seem to be channelling Rollover, have you managed to get yourself on the payroll? Putin's regime has no place in a liberal, democratic world. I doubt he cares what individual Russians think.
  16. Yes. Also how many people replace a 1.0 petrol Fiesta with a Tesla. More typically the trade in will rather less efficient premium German car. I replaced a 9mpg BMW M5 with a 100empg Tesla Model S. So after 25,000 miles the EV has paid for itself and is in profit. You seem to have made the case for switching. NB For me that would have been about 4,500 or about 4 months motoring.
  17. Wind turbines are now huge money generators so its hard to see them being left to rust. I don't know about France but in Germany lots of the initial backers have gone bust but that is because their "old tech" is now completely uneconomic. However the sites still have value and in the event of bankruptcy are being sold to new owners that can afford to replace the turbines. Its not clear it is upsetting people, beyond the ancient relics that make up the Tory party membership. in the UK they are the most popular power source. The North West coast from Southport to the lake district has hundred of turbines that you can see on a clear day and the tourists seem to quite like them.
  18. I cannot recall which of your posts you are referring to, I have debunked several for you. If i did dismiss it out of hand it is only because I had got so used to seeing you repeatedly post fossil fuel lobby disinformation. Here is a US gov document containing the information you need. Solar plus storage 9.5 cents per kwh in 2020 with a target of 5 cents by 2030. Worth noting that this forecast is already looking pessimistic, given recent advances in energy conversion efficiency and reduced degradation.
  19. I did read your post, solar is now so cheap that even factoring in storage, in most of the world, a new system using today's technology can undercut even a new coal based power plant. By the end of the decade the costs will have reduced to the level where building/running a new solar plant is cheaper than just running an existing fossil fuel plant. None of your posts give any indication that you are following where the technology is heading, instead you are quoting backwards looking figures that the fossil fuel and legacy automotive industries spend hundreds of millions a year on lobbyists to promote. All wind and storage plants in operation today are effectively prototypes, as by the time each installation is deployed it is has already been overtaken by new more efficient and cost effective prototypes. This is what new technology at the start of an S curve implementation always looks like.
  20. Obviously all Russians are not evil but the regime is and given that Russia is a dictatorship that's all that matters.
  21. You need to read up on the history of Russian occupation of states its considers it should rightfully control. If Ukraine had been passive genocide and Russification would now be well under way. They have already got started in the liberated Eastern occupied regions. Every male between 18 and 65 are being conscripted and are sent to the front line, untrained and minimally equipped, to soak up Ukrainian artillery fire. Casualty rates are huge but as far as Russia is concerned this is a win win, as it uses up Ukrainian resources and helps with the depopulation/Russification of Eastern Ukraine.
  22. The thing that is killing nuclear power is its cost and lead time. Of course there is always the promise of a new generation of cheaper faster stations around the corner. Unfortunately this has been promised for over 50yrs now and every time the new generation costs more and takes even longer to deliver, 4x over budget and +10yrs late being pretty much the recent norm. Only an irrational optimist would take the current nuclear promises seriously, and even in the unlikely case they were met they still would arrive too late and wouldn't be cost competitive. Meanwhile wind and especially solar have consistently exceeded their forecast cost reductions. The UK offshore wind pipeline alone is now 86GW far ahead of government targets drawn up less than 12 months ago. Grid scale energy storage is reducing in cost even more rapidly than wind and solar. The many competing technologies are evolving so fast it is not yet possible to say which will win out but there will be plenty of options that will allow renewables plus wind to undercut fossil fuels. If you are going off EIA graphs, you posted out of date backward looking information. Not really relevant when prices have rapidly fallen over the past decade and are continuing to fall. The global weighted-average cost of electricity of new onshore wind farms in 2019 was USD 0.053/kWh with country/region values of between USD 0.051 and USD 0.099/kWh depending on the region. Costs for the most competitive projects are now as low USD 0.030/kWh, without financial support. Costs are set to continue to decline, with no slowing in wind turbine price declines yet in evidence; continuing advancements in wind turbine technology (resulting in higher energy yields and thus capacity factors), economies of scale and O&M cost reductions. I doubt it, cost alone would rule it out. One of the largest costs associated with running any nuclear site is security. Not such a problem on an aircraft carrier or submarine, which tend to be quite secure places, but possibly a bit tricky on a cruise ship. Also good luck with getting insurance for it. The greenies would probably ask what are you going to do with all the waste, one of the downsides of small reactors is they produce an inordinate amount of waste per kwh well over 10x that produced by large reactors. NB This and the security costs are two reasons why SMRs have not taken off.
  23. France is committed to a huge increase in renewables, by 2030 they plan to reach 100GW. If anything, in light of the Ukraine war and the now huge gulf in prices between fossil fuel and renewable power this target will be brought forward. I don't know where you got the idea people aren't in favour of windfarms, polling shows a consistent high level of support for both solar and wind.
  24. This winters £3-4,000 energy bills will do quite a bit of the demand reduction work for him.
  25. Real interest rates are now 8% negative and not likely to go positive any time soon.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.