From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
According to Boris Johnson:
“Overall, if you look at what we have done with renewables it has helped to reduce bills over the last few years and will continue to do so. That’s why one of the things I want to do is use this moment to really drive towards more offshore wind turbines.”
Perhaps he should read what the Office for Budget Responsibility have to say. According to their annual Medium Term Forecasts, subsidies for renewable energy have cost the public £78 billion in the last ten years. This equates to about £3000 per household.
Nearly all of this has been added to energy bills, although a small part, the RHI scheme, is funded out of general taxation. As domestic users only consume about a third of total electricity generation, their bills reflect about a third of this cost. However, the public end up paying for the other two thirds one way or another, whether through higher prices and fares, higher taxation and lower public spending.
The split of this subsidy is :
| Type | £bn |
| RO | 46.0 |
| CfD | 5.6 |
| CRC | 4.2 |
| CM | 4.1 |
| FIT | 12.7 |
| RHI | 5.4 |
Note that the OBR no longer include the cost of FITs, even they still exist. I have therefore included estimated costs of £1.6bn a year for the last four years.
I am firing off a FOI to the government, asking for details of their claimed “reduced bills”!
The annual tables are below:
Damn the cost! It’s saving the planet, right? Right?? Right???
No. Planet’s fine.
Of course the customer/taxpayer pays for the subsidies. Anyone not realize that?
I’d like to see the costs in the U.S.
Most sheeple haven’t a clue.
Quite so: I saw a cartoon of sheep the other day with the caption (approximately) ‘Sheep spend their lives terrified of the wolf, only to end up eaten by the shepherd’!
Just throw a few more trillion on the blazing pile of debts. The effect on inflation is something to behold, stealing wages from the old, young and unborn alike.
On one hand, politicians want to raise the minimum wage, with the other they steal labor and savings with the other. The above cartoon model is one of the most accurate.
I think my UK workmates might not agree that their energy costs have gone down. One of them was literally sitting there with coat and gloves on in a teleconference a while back because his heating costs so much to run.
We’ve only just begun this net zero insanity haven’t we? Imagine what things will be like in another decade if our leaders keep inflicting this pain on us.
Keeping warm is one reason why public libraries are popular with seniors.
Here’s another, on your way out you can collect free remaindered books to burn at home /sarc
Here in the southwest US it Walmart.
Time to change our ‘leaders’ ( employees ).
Politicians are the problem,not the solution!
BOJO lies! Who’d a thunk it?
Carrie is very persuasive!
Most Londoners
BoJo hasn’t any discernible knowledge of science; he is repeating what he has been told, by his good lady, or by his ‘advisers’ [Civil Servants].
BoJo himself has not a blind idea about carbon – with or without oxygen.
I’m not convinced he can understand the principle of return on investment, though he probably can calculate the change on a £99 bottle of bubbly, if he flashed two £50 notes.
And, of course, his track record isn’t exactly stuffed chock full of veracity.
And, as fretslider indicates, not a few Londoners think so, too.
Auto, inside the M25.
Net Zero:
When you haven’t got any money left.
Its the latest form of Mass Psychogenic Illness.
The only way to account for it.
Let’s wait for griff to explain how this is a good deal. Waiting…..waiting…..waiting…
Weren’t renewables supposed to be “too cheap to meter”?
https://insidestory.org.au/too-cheap-to-meter/
But now we are at the point in the UK where new wind and solar comes in without subsidy… and the contracts only grant a ‘strike price’ for 15 years, so next time round existing stuff comes in at lower price.
and of course when renewables get more for their electricity than their strike price, they have to pay it back.
No, we are not at that point.
To get to that point the renewable operators would have to bid on the open market to supply with no coerced purchases.
No renewable obligation, no CFD, none of it. Just make your product sellable (ie eliminate intermittency, meet the same delivery standards as conventional or nuclear), include the transmission cost, and bid at a competitive price.
Give an example of an installation that has done that.
You cannot.
If the IPCC started offering Kool-Aid, griff would be amongst the early adopters.
I suspect he’d even offer to pay for his dose.
Your promised land must be the reason that several European wind turbine producers told the recent Wind Europe conference in Bilbao that
“We’re all in trouble” because the state of the supply chain “is ultimately unhealthy now” and raw material costs are rising fast and we “are selling at a loss”
Dave, does Griff understand the most nuclear power plants are fueled for years and the supply chain problem today are moot to them.
The cartoon is incomplete. Don’t forget the double dipping of the government. First, its overhead costs and then the campaign donations received from the renewable industry.
Boris seems to have adopted “newspeak” as his official language of communication to the proletariat.
Why is there a picture of Euro banknotes at the top of this British story ?
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Are-wind-turbines-a-mafia-windfall-The-unintended-Deiana-Geraci/61d2d959eba1962e489aee385b75a85fff986d76
Has anyone done thorough investigations into the real possibility that these subsidies attract criminals?
My best guess is you are off by a factor of a hundred it not billion it is trillions. The hidden cost are far beyond way show up on the surface.
The simple way to expose the myth of cheap wind and solar power would be to mandate a tendering process for all supply.
All you need to do is specify that the response to the request for proposal must deliver supply to certain parameters:
A wind or solar farm would then have to include in its bid the costs of delivering the power to the specified location, and the costs of making its supply parameters the same, that is as consistent, as those of conventional, and therefore usable without more expense by the buyer. In addition it would have to meet the usual standards for uptime.
You would get no bids from so called ‘alternative’ generators. Or if you did, they would be several times the conventional bids.
The green lobby pretends that all electricity supply is the same. But the problem is that the key parameters of the product are completely different between wind/solar and conventional. The former are unable to meet the simple standard of consistent and usable supply when its needed.
Make wind and solar deliver to the same parameters as is both necessary and routinely achieved by conventional, and you would expose the whole scam.
This used to be called a racket. The US has RICO laws …
Paul,
THis could be the basis for a question in the House. Can you confirm how it is derived. I will put you in touch with the question designer. Can you PM me somehow? Brian RL Catt can be found with little effort on google