4 ms·

> Have you looked at the government subsidies for nuclear in the UK and the massive lifetime cost? In terms of offshore wind - initially it was subsidized to ge

> Have you looked at the government subsidies for nuclear in the UK and the massive lifetime cost? In terms of offshore wind - initially it was subsidized to get it up and running - but now it's established those have dropped and dropped. I said I don't know. I said had heard the argument and these are examples of better arguments against wind IMO if they are true. I don't know what to believe. I am dubious of any reporting on these issues. > Sure - but no-one is claiming 100% wind is the target - total strawman argument. The UK goverments own net zero plan actually still includes gas generation! Neither are they claiming wind is 100% the target. > One of the more bonkers arguments in the UK was when there was a massive fossil fuel price shock a couple of years ago due to wars and rising global demand - the fossil fuel lobby blamed rewnewables for the high prices! I don't remember this. I am sure people will point the finger elsewhere rather than themselves. I blame the high prices on fuel duty and taxes. Fuel Duty is 52.95 pence per litre and then you have to add VAT. The current diesel price is ~£1.40 per litre at the local Tesco filling station. So that is ~50% of the cost if I am understanding this correctly. https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-shopping/fuel-duty https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-shopping/fuel-duty

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
zekrioca 1y ago
> I said I don't know. I said had heard the argument and these are better arguments against wind IMO if they are true. > I don't know what to believe. I am dubious of any reporting on these issues. The person didn’t ask if you know, they asked if you had looked at reports. You cannot for once believe there weren’t subsidies as these endeavors are very time consuming with hundreds of regulations that need to be met. > Neither are they claiming wind is 100% the target. What do you perceive when they say wind is not reliable and increase electricity costs? I mean, it is free electricity, with minimal impact. The way you understand about gas prices, while dismissing some arguments in favor of renewables is a bit telling.
- extraisland 1y ago
  > The person didn’t ask if you know, they asked if you had looked at reports. Obviously not. I said as much. I've listened to good arguments for and against it and I don't know what to believe. My comments were simply about the fact that you could make better arguments than the ones that were presented. > What do you perceive when they say wind is not reliable and increase electricity costs? I mean, it is free electricity, with minimal impact. It isn't free electricity. There is a cost to constructing them, maintaining them and decommissioning them when they become EOL. If the wind doesn't blow, they don't generate electricity. This means that there is more demand on other sources. So price is driven by supply and demand. All of this the energy company will factor into your tariff. So obviously it is going to affect the price of electricity. > The way you understand about gas prices, while dismissing some arguments in favor of renewables is a bit telling. Understanding a basic tax calculation that is listed on a government website is relatively easy and took a few seconds for me to guestimate. It is much more difficult for layman (like myself) to understand the Total Cost of Ownership of a Wind Turbine, it ROI and understanding whether that maybe a good investment. I wasn't arguing for or against wind. I was saying there are arguments against wind that might be better than the ones are often highlighted. You are mistaking me highlighting there are potentially better arguments, with agreeing with those arguments.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

zekrioca 1y ago

> I said I don't know. I said had heard the argument and these are better arguments against wind IMO if they are true. > I don't know what to believe. I am dubious of any reporting on these issues. The person didn’t ask if you know, they asked if you had looked at reports. You cannot for once believe there weren’t subsidies as these endeavors are very time consuming with hundreds of regulations that need to be met. > Neither are they claiming wind is 100% the target. What do you perceive when they say wind is not reliable and increase electricity costs? I mean, it is free electricity, with minimal impact. The way you understand about gas prices, while dismissing some arguments in favor of renewables is a bit telling.

extraisland 1y ago
> The person didn’t ask if you know, they asked if you had looked at reports. Obviously not. I said as much. I've listened to good arguments for and against it and I don't know what to believe. My comments were simply about the fact that you could make better arguments than the ones that were presented. > What do you perceive when they say wind is not reliable and increase electricity costs? I mean, it is free electricity, with minimal impact. It isn't free electricity. There is a cost to constructing them, maintaining them and decommissioning them when they become EOL. If the wind doesn't blow, they don't generate electricity. This means that there is more demand on other sources. So price is driven by supply and demand. All of this the energy company will factor into your tariff. So obviously it is going to affect the price of electricity. > The way you understand about gas prices, while dismissing some arguments in favor of renewables is a bit telling. Understanding a basic tax calculation that is listed on a government website is relatively easy and took a few seconds for me to guestimate. It is much more difficult for layman (like myself) to understand the Total Cost of Ownership of a Wind Turbine, it ROI and understanding whether that maybe a good investment. I wasn't arguing for or against wind. I was saying there are arguments against wind that might be better than the ones are often highlighted. You are mistaking me highlighting there are potentially better arguments, with agreeing with those arguments.