Energy Crisis

mapj1: 
 

Well, when it becomes clear that the political types are indeed talking through their hats,  if not through something less appealing, then perhaps dispassionate  engineering judgement will be respected. 

The current energy situation in the UK is not an engineering problem. It is a political and policy problem. Here is proof. Spot prices for fossil-fuel energy are what they are. But other countries in Europe are not suffering in the same way the UK is at the moment, which they would be if the spot price of gas were the decisive factor.

Let me give an example. I live in Germany. I pay a monthly charge for gas and electricity which is fixed in July of each year and reconciled the next July. The supplier sets the price once per year, in advance (not necessarily in July).  That is the contract, and the way it is done, by law, all over the country. So no suddenly finding out you can't afford to heat your house over the winter.

If you rent, the charge for heating (and other costs) is fixed by your rental contract as a monthly charge to be paid with the rent, and it is reconciled once a year. The landlord has the same contract with the energy supplier as I do above. 

Obviously all the costs eventually get passed on, but the cycle is very long. And booting someone out of accommodation, or turning their energy supply off, is not something a supplier or landlord can just do. There are legal processes involved with a long resolution time, more than a year, regarded as long enough for a renter to find alternative, cheaper accommodation, and the courts generally allow arrears to be paid off relatively slowly, adjusted to the income situation.

I am not saying the situation is perfect, or even good. I am just using this example to show that engineering/lack of engineering is not the decisive issue. It is not as if electrons or gas molecules behave differently this side of the English Channel/North Sea.

"We should of course be building nuclear plant, 

You can only make that case if you ignore the externals, I think. 

One of the externals with nuclear power is what is called in the insurance business “nuclear peril”; uncontrolled release of radiation. The one developed country in the world in which energy supply is well commercialised is the US, and there have been no new nuclear power plants built there for fifty years. The main reason is that they haven't been cost effective, not only because of the very high cost of building them (even though they had to be and were generally better built than other industrial plant because of the risks, the list of build failures is still large and worrying) but also because of insurance - and of course the larger nuclear peril is not insured  because it is presumed the state will step in. 

mapj1: 
 

Well, when it becomes clear that the political types are indeed talking through their hats,  if not through something less appealing, then perhaps dispassionate  engineering judgement will be respected. 

The current energy situation in the UK is not an engineering problem. It is a political and policy problem. Here is proof. Spot prices for fossil-fuel energy are what they are. But other countries in Europe are not suffering in the same way the UK is at the moment, which they would be if the spot price of gas were the decisive factor.

Let me give an example. I live in Germany. I pay a monthly charge for gas and electricity which is fixed in July of each year and reconciled the next July. The supplier sets the price once per year, in advance (not necessarily in July).  That is the contract, and the way it is done, by law, all over the country. So no suddenly finding out you can't afford to heat your house over the winter.

If you rent, the charge for heating (and other costs) is fixed by your rental contract as a monthly charge to be paid with the rent, and it is reconciled once a year. The landlord has the same contract with the energy supplier as I do above. 

Obviously all the costs eventually get passed on, but the cycle is very long. And booting someone out of accommodation, or turning their energy supply off, is not something a supplier or landlord can just do. There are legal processes involved with a long resolution time, more than a year, regarded as long enough for a renter to find alternative, cheaper accommodation, and the courts generally allow arrears to be paid off relatively slowly, adjusted to the income situation.

I am not saying the situation is perfect, or even good. I am just using this example to show that engineering/lack of engineering is not the decisive issue. It is not as if electrons or gas molecules behave differently this side of the English Channel/North Sea.

"We should of course be building nuclear plant, 

You can only make that case if you ignore the externals, I think. 

One of the externals with nuclear power is what is called in the insurance business “nuclear peril”; uncontrolled release of radiation. The one developed country in the world in which energy supply is well commercialised is the US, and there have been no new nuclear power plants built there for fifty years. The main reason is that they haven't been cost effective, not only because of the very high cost of building them (even though they had to be and were generally better built than other industrial plant because of the risks, the list of build failures is still large and worrying) but also because of insurance - and of course the larger nuclear peril is not insured  because it is presumed the state will step in.