The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain
Discussion
Gary C said:
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
China has beaten its targets set fore renewable energies and overtaking all others to the biggest growth in Offshore Wind 
Whereas in the money no limits uae they are building four PWR's all at the same time !Wish we could do that.
Meanwhile back to ORE/Tus and the China offshore 'miracle'. Out of interest where was the starting line for this major growth target? A low point, from which significant improvement would be difficult to avoid?
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
No doubt that sort of spending power could do, and probably is doing, some good somewhere, but conspiring with China under the banner of climate fairytales is little more than green blobbery soaking up more subsidies from hard-pressed taxpayers with ever increasing commercial and domestic energy bills to pay.
That's assuming the power stays on, no thanks to our own unreliables.
.
Here is a weird situation in the Australian market: the operator of the Tesla battery system being paid by producers to take power to charge the battery
https://twitter.com/simonahac/status/9521486205260...
https://twitter.com/simonahac/status/9521486205260...
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
turbobloke said:
If only.
Meanwhile back to ORE/Tus and the China offshore 'miracle'. Out of interest where was the starting line for this major growth target? A low point, from which significant improvement would be difficult to avoid?
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
No doubt that sort of spending power could do, and probably is doing, some good somewhere, but conspiring with China under the banner of climate fairytales is little more than green blobbery soaking up more subsidies from hard-pressed taxpayers with ever increasing commercial and domestic energy bills to pay.
That's assuming the power stays on, no thanks to our own unreliables.
.
Every paragraph of propaganda in your post is either misleading or wrong.Meanwhile back to ORE/Tus and the China offshore 'miracle'. Out of interest where was the starting line for this major growth target? A low point, from which significant improvement would be difficult to avoid?
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
No doubt that sort of spending power could do, and probably is doing, some good somewhere, but conspiring with China under the banner of climate fairytales is little more than green blobbery soaking up more subsidies from hard-pressed taxpayers with ever increasing commercial and domestic energy bills to pay.
That's assuming the power stays on, no thanks to our own unreliables.
.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Nope.
Partly because his post contains the normal splurge of rhetoric that makes it both incomprehensible and enough wriggle room to abandon when proved wrong.
The other reason is because of the likes of yourself are unable to debate with reason or understanding.
The Post by TB is Bulls
t. That is all
Good to see you're on top of your subject as usual Partly because his post contains the normal splurge of rhetoric that makes it both incomprehensible and enough wriggle room to abandon when proved wrong.
The other reason is because of the likes of yourself are unable to debate with reason or understanding.
The Post by TB is Bulls
t. That is all
Thanks for the informative and wholly on-topic response
with none of your usual personal angle defeat signals.Everything posted apart from the initial question (which was a question (!) and you ducked it, also as usual) was factual, comprehensible and checkable.
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news-analysis/302...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/innovat...
The above links cover what I posted. You really are clueless, with bluster to go, just enough bluster to turn a windymill - perfect for an unreliables activist.
The final checkable element was this "In the 2006 Budget Gordon Brown announced the intention to set up the Technology Strategy Board as a 'non-departmental public body' ".
"Technology Strategy Board (TSB) is now called Innovate UK."
Info on IUK / TSB here.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/techno...
"Technology Strategy Board (TSB) is now called Innovate UK."
Info on IUK / TSB here.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/techno...
I couldn't see it in any of the links posted - how much subsidy are we giving the Chinese toward their wind energy systems?
It says there's opportunities worth around £220M to British companies under the deal, but no hint as to what the government (via Innovate UK) are actually spending and where.
It says there's opportunities worth around £220M to British companies under the deal, but no hint as to what the government (via Innovate UK) are actually spending and where.
rscott said:
I couldn't see it in any of the links posted - how much subsidy are we giving the Chinese toward their wind energy systems?
In your haste to fall over yourself propping up Paddy your comprehension skills have let you down, not for the first or last time.Your question is at least on topic and a reasonable one but you need to ask IUK (formerly TSB) for each element of its spending history or spending plans.
My post gave details of the IUK budget 2016/17 and acknowledged that some of it may be doing some good somewhere, read it again as you clearly need to.
turbobloke said:
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
"Delivery Plan for the year 2016 to 2017 shows how Innovate UK will invest £561 million"https://www.gov.uk/government/news/innovate-uk-inv...
As posted already. Invest, waste it's a mix and a matter of phraseology.
Your question echoes my post, and its first question asking about the level of funding through which we're subsidising China's offshore windymills. PnM ducked it, maybe somebody else in the unreliables industry can help.
UK gov't IUK (etc) webpages give a claimed 'benefit' to UK universities and institutions but it's not crystal clear how much of this is China currency flowing to the UK and how much is no more than UK taxpayer money adding to the subsidy bill.
turbobloke said:
rscott said:
I couldn't see it in any of the links posted - how much subsidy are we giving the Chinese toward their wind energy systems?
In your haste to fall over yourself propping up Paddy your comprehension skills have let you down, not for the first or last time.Your question is at least on topic and a reasonable one but you need to ask IUK (formerly TSB) for each element of its spending history or spending plans.
My post gave details of the IUK budget 2016/17 and acknowledged that some of it may be doing some good somewhere, read it again as you clearly need to.
turbobloke said:
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
"Delivery Plan for the year 2016 to 2017 shows how Innovate UK will invest £561 million"https://www.gov.uk/government/news/innovate-uk-inv...
As posted already. Invest, waste it's a mix and a matter of phraseology.
Your question echoes my post, and its first question asking about the level of funding through which we're subsidising China's offshore windymills. PnM ducked it, maybe somebody else in the unreliables industry can help.
UK gov't IUK (etc) webpages give a claimed 'benefit' to UK universities and institutions but it's not crystal clear how much of this is China currency flowing to the UK and how much is no more than UK taxpayer money adding to the subsidy bill.
Still not able to provide specifics of the investments then?
rolando said:
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
turbobloke said:
If only.
Meanwhile back to ORE/Tus and the China offshore 'miracle'. Out of interest where was the starting line for this major growth target? A low point, from which significant improvement would be difficult to avoid?
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
No doubt that sort of spending power could do, and probably is doing, some good somewhere, but conspiring with China under the banner of climate fairytales is little more than green blobbery soaking up more subsidies from hard-pressed taxpayers with ever increasing commercial and domestic energy bills to pay.
That's assuming the power stays on, no thanks to our own unreliables.
.
Every paragraph of propaganda in your post is either misleading or wrong.Meanwhile back to ORE/Tus and the China offshore 'miracle'. Out of interest where was the starting line for this major growth target? A low point, from which significant improvement would be difficult to avoid?
Is funding coming from Innovate UK (TSB) i.e. a quango, with DoBEIS spending our taxes by subsidising the development of China's windymills? IIRC this ndgb arose from Gordon Brown's spunkfest and as of the tax year to April 2017 had around £0.6 billion to carry on spunking.
No doubt that sort of spending power could do, and probably is doing, some good somewhere, but conspiring with China under the banner of climate fairytales is little more than green blobbery soaking up more subsidies from hard-pressed taxpayers with ever increasing commercial and domestic energy bills to pay.
That's assuming the power stays on, no thanks to our own unreliables.
.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Nope.
Well done, top marks, 0/10, and as expected from someone who has fallen for the scam hook, line and sinker. They're all the same when asked to justify their position — something they, including you, can't do because the scam is founded on bullst.rolando said:
Well done, top marks, 0/10, and as expected from someone who has fallen for the scam hook, line and sinker. They're all the same when asked to justify their position — something they, including you, can't do because the scam is founded on bullst.
Seems to be the position your mate turbobloke has taken. t.Won't give specific evidence only vague links and insults.
rscott said:
rolando said:
Well done, top marks, 0/10, and as expected from someone who has fallen for the scam hook, line and sinker. They're all the same when asked to justify their position — something they, including you, can't do because the scam is founded on bullst.
Seems to be the position your mate turbobloke has taken. t.Won't give specific evidence only vague links and insults.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Innovate UK does invest - but in typical fashion you omitted the important following words.
"Innovate UK is to invest £561 million in innovation over the next 12 months and take a more focused and efficient approach to supporting innovative UK companies."
Wrong again, I didn't 'omit' the possibility of potential benefit from use of the approx £0.6bn IUK funding, I referred to it in my own words."Innovate UK is to invest £561 million in innovation over the next 12 months and take a more focused and efficient approach to supporting innovative UK companies."
It's good to see China putting money in, as well as the UK, but has the key question been answered - exactly how much money is the UK shipping out to China along with our landfill used as ships' ballast and optimistic guestimates of future (unrealised) benefit? Somebody must know but quangos don't like being fully transparent when spending other people's money.
It's a recognised risk of doing business in China.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-test-c...
https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-test-c...
Article said:
The U.S. green energy company AMSC is suing its former customer Sinovel Wind Group Co., China’s biggest wind turbine manufacturer, for breach of contract, copyright infringement, and theft of trade secrets. In total, AMSC, based in Devens, Mass., is asking for about US $1.2 billion in damages, making this the largest intellectual property case to date in China.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
A less rascist way of explaining world markets - and perhaps grown up way to get your bigoted view across.
Note another example from the archives..... not current.
Goldwind is more current and relevant.
Grow up and try to understand that an expression of cultural differences between Western democracies and totalitarian communist regimes is not a demonstration of racism, nor is identification of corrupt practices!Note another example from the archives..... not current.
Goldwind is more current and relevant.
Ali G said:
It's a recognised risk of doing business in China.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-test-c...
What was the final verdict - I assume the case was settled by now as that report is nearly 6 years old. https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-test-c...
Article said:
The U.S. green energy company AMSC is suing its former customer Sinovel Wind Group Co., China’s biggest wind turbine manufacturer, for breach of contract, copyright infringement, and theft of trade secrets. In total, AMSC, based in Devens, Mass., is asking for about US $1.2 billion in damages, making this the largest intellectual property case to date in China.?
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
A bit Rascist
Manufacturist I would say.As someone in a white goods sales role said to be a couple of years ago "The products from [unnamed German manufacturer] are generally very good but if you buy at the lower priced end of the range that is less true and that basically means the ones made in [a country in what we call "Asia"].
With consumer electronics it may be difficult to tell since there seem to be few other parts of the world where mass market products can be made at a price the consumer is typically willing to pay. It seems to be a matter of South Korea vs the rest. Thus only special products seems to come from any other part of the globe and so quality comparisons are difficult to establish.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
A less rascist way of explaining world markets - and perhaps grown up way to get your bigoted view across.
Note another example from the archives..... not current.
Goldwind is more current and relevant.
My dad has done a lot of business in China and with Chinese in Malaysia and it's in many areas very dodgy. Even to the extent of being driven into the jungle at gunpoint and told exactly how many Chinese employees are going to be given contracts on the project.Note another example from the archives..... not current.
Goldwind is more current and relevant.
Using the racist card is a bit much
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Take a wild guess ?
Inferring again, swinging away with wild unfounded generalisations lacking any basis in logic.Thing is, if wind-turbines actually functioned as advertised by renewables inc. then we'd all be much happier and not have to pinch our noses to avoid the all pervading stench of bull.
If there is a solution out there - go fetch for us to see.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff