Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
France has capped prices by renationalising the part of EDF it did not own. We've also nationalised Bulb and subsidised prices. Investment requires money to pay for it but you get some kind of return. We're not getting that currently through our interventions.
As I've previously argued, we should have replaced coal fired capacity with alternatives when they were decommissioned but failing that we need more power generation now.
Fracked gas is sold at global prices so that doesn't reduce prices and it still contributes to the climate change crisis.
All sources have their disadvantages. Nuclear power is struggling at the moment, (just look at France both in inability to deliver new projects and issues in operating during hot summers), better storage is needed for renewables and we know the story on gas. But doing nothing and waiting for the markets to solve it is not an option.
In terms of electricity generation, I think you need to look at sources on a quarterly basis not a daily one to get a more representative figure
Ofgen states for Q1 2022:
Gas 27.45%
Wind and solar 26.49%
Nuclear 11.34%
Bio 8.46%
Net imports 4.94%
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-data...created&page=4 |
Doesn't matter what any longer period figures say, it still represents the generating capacity you need at this point in time. At this point in time, you need 49% gas generated. In winter you are going to have less solar. The claim was that we should've invested in other than gas. Today's figures show it couldn't be done, as Germany itself found out.
Where would today's missing 22%(compared to Q1 figures) have come from instead?
Fracking gas in the UK, would increased supply, thereby reducing market prices.