To be fair I posted this from the BBC on the 26th:-)
The page has altered and now says
"A National Grid spokeswoman said the record level of solar power was achieved largely because of the clear and sunny weather on Friday."
She added that it would have been significantly harder to reach if it had been cloudy.
All we have to do is get Corbyn to moon in front of a solar array.
En el artículo , Dave Liquorice escribió:
Yes. (As the article I linked to says).
En el artículo , newshound escribió:
He could just bend over. He seems to think the sun shines out of his fundament.
En el artículo , ARW escribió:
I must have missed that, sorry.
Reporters these days, eh? Sharp as tacks, they are.
I don't know why whether it was cloudy or windy or not should be any or our concern. If wind(solar) can do x Gw at some given moment, then we've obviously installed (and paid for) x Gw of capacity.
It should therefore be the responsibility of wind(solar) to be able to supply x Gw on a 7 x 24 basis. How they do that is not our concern.
If they can't do that then they are in breach of contract.
They would be if normal contracts applied to them.
They don't. They get full exemption as 'renewable' sources.
The whole climate change scam is supported by governments and universities and all the power companies.
They aren't the losers. We are.
So is this the Govt unable to write contracts *again*? Just like with PFI? Did the renewable shills come round with a contract with the ink still wet, which said something like "we agree to supply some variable amount of energy of our choosing to you from time to time, and you agree to pay us lots of dosh and not enquire too deeply into how much volts we are supplying" ?? And you mean that the Govt *signed*
*it* without further ado? Well I'll be hornswoggled.So which Govt was this and who were the guilty men that pissed our money away in this fashion?
More like they refuse to be blackmailed by us.
Mostly the European Union with Browns Milliband licking their tailpipes.
"The Utilities Act 2000 gives the Secretary of State the power to require electricity suppliers to supply a certain proportion of their total sales in the United Kingdom from electricity generated from renewable sources. A Renewables Obligation Order is issued annually detailing the precise level of the obligation for the coming year-long period of obligation and the level of the buy-out price. The Renewables Obligation (England and Wales) was introduced by the Department of Trade and Industry, the Renewables Obligation (Scotland) was introduced by the Scottish Executives and the Northern Ireland Renewables Obligation was introduced by the Department of Enterprise Trade and Investment (DETINI). The Orders were subject to review in 2005/06 and new Orders came into effect on 1 April 2006. "
Blackmail? Oh, do we have something on them that would allow us to blackmail them? What would that be then?
We know where all the EU MEPS offshore accounts are hosted?
I think Dave imagines that for us to stand up for our own interests is somehow "blackmail" or is "racist" (to use childish socialist [1] jargon).
[1] Hmm, there's a redundancy right there.
If you don't behave, Corbyn will cut your benefits off.
I meant in that "childish socialist" is redundant. All socialists are childish - they believe in the magic money tree and unicorns.
+1
I think fining them for any deficiency in supply and giving that money back to all those energy consumers not receiving FIT payments could be one (real world) solution.
Cheers, T i m
Don't be silly, They get paid not to deliver!
renewable energy gets susbsidies to operate in terms of ROCS that must be bought by power companies or they get fined.
That means everyone want to buy renewables to not get fined.
If there is too much renewable energy, they get paid to switch it off.
If there is not enough, the power companies have to buy th shortfall at whatever price they can. Often over a £1 a unit if the wind lets em down.
Its a win win situation for renewable operators who only really lose if the wind is low and stays low. Or its cloudy all summer.
I know what you meant
I was just extending the concept.
You don't need 'something on them' to attempt blackmail. Merely the belief that they will give in to demands, no matter how ridiculous.
Well quite, but I was with Tim (hypothetically) questioning the morality / legality of that.
Yup ... and as discussed, who signed that one off ... ;-(
Cheers, T i m
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.