| Energy bills 23:01 - Aug 24 with 49033 views | Hayesender |
Watching the news earlier, they were talking about the impact these energy bill rises will have on small businesses.
It got me thinking (dangerous I know) about the potential effect it could have on our club, and other clubs of similar and smaller size?
Not only the day to day running costs and matchday costs, but also the affect its gonna have on attendances.
Obviously when it comes down to heating, eating, mortgage, rent etc, days out with mates and family watching football, or any sporting event, are gonna have to take a back seat for many people.
Unless the government (lol) take action now, its gonna be a bleak winter for many people and businesses, and I fear for people's mental well being |  |
| |  |
| Energy bills on 14:27 - Sep 8 with 2520 views | dmm |
|  | | |
| Energy bills on 20:39 - Sep 8 with 2382 views | ManinBlack |
I feel I am being conned. We were getting £400 towards the £1,971 price cap but Lizard has now whacked the cap up to £2,500 yet we are still only getting £400. Surely the figure should have increased to £500 to reflect the increase. It feels like they are giving me £400 for the old cap rate in one hand but taking back £500 with the other with the increased cap. Am I being illogical? |  | | |
| Energy bills on 20:45 - Sep 8 with 2368 views | distortR |
| Energy bills on 20:39 - Sep 8 by ManinBlack |
I feel I am being conned. We were getting £400 towards the £1,971 price cap but Lizard has now whacked the cap up to £2,500 yet we are still only getting £400. Surely the figure should have increased to £500 to reflect the increase. It feels like they are giving me £400 for the old cap rate in one hand but taking back £500 with the other with the increased cap. Am I being illogical? |
With no incentive for the biggest users of electricity to cut back use now,can we expect power cuts in the winter?
Also,I used to work for a multi-millionaire whose energy bills were in 10's of thousands,with his swimming pools, spa, etc etc. So now his bill is subsidised. |  | | |
| Energy bills on 21:15 - Sep 8 with 2320 views | QPR_Hibs |
| Energy bills on 20:39 - Sep 8 by ManinBlack |
I feel I am being conned. We were getting £400 towards the £1,971 price cap but Lizard has now whacked the cap up to £2,500 yet we are still only getting £400. Surely the figure should have increased to £500 to reflect the increase. It feels like they are giving me £400 for the old cap rate in one hand but taking back £500 with the other with the increased cap. Am I being illogical? |
Yes, I think you are being illogical.
Truss has not increased the price cap - it was going to rise to £3549 on 1st October anyway, so she has effectively "reduced" this to £2500.
Martin Lewis claims the cap could have risen further in January to £5400 so a 2 year freeze in the cap surely helps. It is all a bit sh!t but I don't think the latest announcement is a con. |  |
| "Remember to listen to me but look at her. Don't get it the wrong way round. That would be hideous." |
| |
| Energy bills on 21:37 - Sep 8 with 2271 views | ManinBlack |
| Energy bills on 21:15 - Sep 8 by QPR_Hibs |
Yes, I think you are being illogical.
Truss has not increased the price cap - it was going to rise to £3549 on 1st October anyway, so she has effectively "reduced" this to £2500.
Martin Lewis claims the cap could have risen further in January to £5400 so a 2 year freeze in the cap surely helps. It is all a bit sh!t but I don't think the latest announcement is a con. |
Well I feel it is a bit of a con because the cap could have been frozen at £1,971. Truss wanted to round the figure up so why not £2,000? Why round it up to £2,500? The £400 help was for £1,971 so by increasing it over £500 then I feel the help should go up by at least £100.
This might be simplistic but by the old cap I could be paying £1,571 with the deduction. Now I am looking at £2,100 so on the surface that is an increase of over £500 which for me is unaffordable. It feels like Sunak gave me £400 and Lizard has come along and said you need to pay an extra £500.
The Tories have made it clear they are on the side of big companies and the people must pay just like we did for the banking collapse. Austerity followed by covid followed by cost of living crisis. | | | |
| Energy bills on 00:33 - Sep 9 with 2172 views | Boston |
| Energy bills on 13:03 - Sep 6 by HAYESBOY |
Thers an idea.......................Privatise the Sun. Simples. |
Good lord, I had no idea it had been nationalized. | |
| |
| Energy bills on 02:13 - Sep 9 with 2129 views | SydneyRs |
| Energy bills on 00:33 - Sep 9 by Boston |
Good lord, I had no idea it had been nationalized. |
Even at the capped level, that is a mental cost. | | | |
| Energy bills on 07:42 - Sep 9 with 2010 views | dmm |
I just came across this article and, though slightly off topic, had to post it here as it points to the solution to both the energy crisis and the climate emergency. Crucially, it shows the world can afford renewables for everyone.
Get oil and gas out of politics and this would be the way forward.
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/renewable-energy-costs-benefit | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Energy bills on 08:39 - Sep 9 with 1953 views | Sakura |
It's criminal what he's saying it really is. And why aren't the journalists interviewing him picking him up?!
Someone a sky news must have access to a Bloomberg terminal to check he's lying. Here is me with a quick Google providing facts which prove he is a liar
https://mobile.twitter.com/DoombergT/status/1551723272705871872
Gas is not as easy to transport as coal or oil. Much of our gas received here is must first be cooled down to its liquid state. Transported in that form and then special terminals turn it back into its gas state
So while market forces arbitrage out differences it's a pure lie what he is saying. Manufacturing Businesses are closing in this country and the damage will be done as they cannot compete with likes of US who have much cheaper energy then us because they have prior to Biden encouraged their own exploration and production of energy
Putting the intermittent nature of renewables to one side and the instability of a grid reliant on them. Miliband must also know that we in the West do not have access to sufficient amounts of lithium, cobalt. If we try and make that our entire focus what does he think will happen to their prices???
Environmentalists have restricted the supply of fossil fuels by stopping new projects. So the price goes up as demand not changed but supply is down. So that's why these energy companies are making these profits. If you take that money off them they will sell what they can somewhere else next time and they won't bother with new projects for new supply. Is that a scenario we really want?
Remember the consequence of Ed Miliband being even partially wrong is the destruction of our manufacturing sector who can't compete on global market where they pay less for energy and the starvation of global poor because lack of fertilisers mean lower harvests at next planting season
There are consequences to you being tricked by people like him.
To suggest taking it out of politics as well is offensive. It couldn’t be anymore political i am not ok supporting a policy that will starve hundreds of millions of the worlds poorest to death and wreck the British economy | | | |
| Energy bills on 08:41 - Sep 9 with 1949 views | Sakura |
| Energy bills on 14:53 - Sep 6 by connell10 |
The last massive price increase was April....most people probably had their central heating off....so even with a price cap freeze now , I think people are still gonna struggle!! Energy prices need to go down not be frozen at the present scandalous levels!! |
As there is a fixed and limited supply of energy, if we interfere with the prices do you see any negative consequences of demand not being brought down in the same way it would if we didn’t artificially reduce prices? | | | |
| Energy bills on 09:11 - Sep 9 with 1886 views | dmm |
Sakura, you miss the point. Milliband is correct in saying the way out of the energy crisis is to get out of fossil fuels. Simply put, if we had invested more in renewables 10 or 20 years ago we wouldn't be in the crisis we are in today. If we are to avoid further energy emergencies in the future, our dependency on fossil fuels must end as soon as possible.
Environmentalists have not just worked to restrict fossil fuels but also promoted renewables as clean and cheaper alternatives. As pointed out earlier, it is far quicker and less expensive to build new renewable resources than it is to drill for more fossil fuels or create new nuclear plants.
So why is this Government going for the more expensive and environmentally damaging fuels? Because energy companies have been involved in politics for many decades, lobbying for continued fossil fuel use and handing over large sums of money to those who will help ensure their businesses continue. A current example would be that our new PM, who once worked for Shell, received £100k for her leadership campaign from the wife of a former BP executive. | | | |
| Energy bills on 09:33 - Sep 9 with 1830 views | Sakura |
| Energy bills on 09:11 - Sep 9 by dmm |
Sakura, you miss the point. Milliband is correct in saying the way out of the energy crisis is to get out of fossil fuels. Simply put, if we had invested more in renewables 10 or 20 years ago we wouldn't be in the crisis we are in today. If we are to avoid further energy emergencies in the future, our dependency on fossil fuels must end as soon as possible.
Environmentalists have not just worked to restrict fossil fuels but also promoted renewables as clean and cheaper alternatives. As pointed out earlier, it is far quicker and less expensive to build new renewable resources than it is to drill for more fossil fuels or create new nuclear plants.
So why is this Government going for the more expensive and environmentally damaging fuels? Because energy companies have been involved in politics for many decades, lobbying for continued fossil fuel use and handing over large sums of money to those who will help ensure their businesses continue. A current example would be that our new PM, who once worked for Shell, received £100k for her leadership campaign from the wife of a former BP executive. |
My point was he was lying that there is no differential in pricing. I've proven that
So straight away I am not inclined to listen anymore to a proven liar
I am all for renewables being part of our energy mix. But this needs to be a gradual transition.
In the last few weeks in Europe price of natural gas has traded at $100 per million BTU
Natural gas in the US by contrast was as low as $2 per million BTU 18 months ago and now has been trading at $9 per million BTU
So if our energy inputs are 10 times more expensive than in America what chance has our manufacturing sector got. If we don't have an economy then we are being sent to the dark ages through our suicidal energy dreams
This causes inflation which robs everyone but especially the poorest in society
If we didn't neglect nuclear, encouraged fossil fuel exploration then we wouldn't be in this mess
Whether or not you think we should have done more on renewables before now the fact is we haven't. Nuclear and fossil fuels are proven to work we just need to access it in sufficient quantities. Which we can with the political will allowing that
Never before in human history have we switched to a less dense energy source as you are now asking. It's intermittent in nature and rely on rare earth minerals that particularly on the battery side are too limited in scope to be affordable or available on the scale required.
So you need to at least acknowledge that if you and in this case Miliband are as I see it wrong and we can't get the energy we need without interruption from focusing on renewables then that will mean destruction of our industry, a lack of food, inflation that harms the worlds poorest
When Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN), told Bloomberg TV yesterday that elevated fertilizer prices could decrease global grain production by upwards of 40% in the next planting season
You need to be aware that we are contributing to that. The recent closure of our only fertiliser plant due to the high energy costs is contributing to that
So your opinion on renewables needs to be balanced against it literally contributing to the starvation of the worlds poorest | | | |
| Energy bills on 09:54 - Sep 9 with 1783 views | dmm |
Sakura, we need to sit in a room together to properly discuss these issues - my apologies to those who find this discussion annoying.
"I am all for renewables being part of our energy mix. But this needs to be a gradual transition." Fossil fuel companies have said the same for years. They are the liars. It cannot be a gradual transition but asap to not only solve the energy issue but avoid catastrophic climate change. Investing in clean energy would create a huge number of jobs this positively affecting the ecomony.
Global poverty and starvation are the result of a number things, but renewables and lack of fertilisers are not the issues that should be focussed on. Fertilisers actually emit nitrous oxide which contributes to global warming and they are a major factor in soil degradation which leads to poor harvests and therefore hunger. Their use should be phased our quickly and more environmentally freindly methods of agriculture adopted. | | | |
| Energy bills on 11:00 - Sep 9 with 1702 views | Sakura |
| Energy bills on 09:54 - Sep 9 by dmm |
Sakura, we need to sit in a room together to properly discuss these issues - my apologies to those who find this discussion annoying.
"I am all for renewables being part of our energy mix. But this needs to be a gradual transition." Fossil fuel companies have said the same for years. They are the liars. It cannot be a gradual transition but asap to not only solve the energy issue but avoid catastrophic climate change. Investing in clean energy would create a huge number of jobs this positively affecting the ecomony.
Global poverty and starvation are the result of a number things, but renewables and lack of fertilisers are not the issues that should be focussed on. Fertilisers actually emit nitrous oxide which contributes to global warming and they are a major factor in soil degradation which leads to poor harvests and therefore hunger. Their use should be phased our quickly and more environmentally freindly methods of agriculture adopted. |
Just so I understand how many hundreds of millions of people are you prepared to allow to starve to death over the next few years? What's the number you are balancing against your climate change concerns?
Should we as expected produce 40% less grain next year around the world then that will lead to starvation. Do you feel comfortable you have the consent of Sub-Saharan Africans or do you think they have a less pressing concern around climate change then you do?
Are you totally comfortable supporting a policy that will lead to their deaths next year? What is that number you are prepared to allow to die before your concerns around climate changed are outweighed
The Haber Bosch process is natural gas producing fertiliser and then CO2 as a by product which is vital in frozen food storage.
The worlds poorest do not have the same luxury's as you.
I don't understand your jobs point here. The lithium, copper, cobalt are going to have to be extracted elsewhere. And would the factories like most modern ones be largely robots and low human inputs?
Can you explain what you mean when you say fertiliser isn't something that should be focused on when we are considering starvation. 40% grain next year because of less fertiliser
So are you saying that, you acknowledge hundreds of millions will die this decade and the political turmoil and likely wars will follow that. But you see that as a sacrifice you are willing to impose on say Sub-Saharan Africans as you see a worse problem down the line that our medical, engineering and software and scientific technological advancement won't be able to counter balance?
Seems a callous and nihilistic opinion to me.
Also I assume you aren't aware of how Sri Lanka's experience after their first harvest of no fertiliser went for them this year... | | | |
| Energy bills on 12:53 - Sep 9 with 1596 views | dmm |
You take a very aggressive stance on fossil fuels, Sakura, and I do wonder why? Are you involved with the industry in some way?
The starvation of the world's poorest has been going on for a very long time and historically fertiliser has not played a particular role. Rather the rapaciousness of the colonising West has been the major cause, and largely still is, with the West's overwhelming responsibility for causing the climate crisis rapidly becoming one of the main issues causing hunger in poor countries. They have already suffered increased severity in droughts, floods and storms that ruin livelihoods and harvests right across the world. Just look at what's currently happening in Pakistan and East Africa for example. Both emergencies have been made exponentially worse by the changes in climate. What we are witnessing now is only the start and will get worse.
Food shortages are increasing because our addiction to fossil fuels is driving the climate emergency. Soil degradation due to the use of fertilisers and unsustainable industrial farming practices contribute to that problem. And of course, we could mention the other associated existential issues associated with fossil fuel induced climate change like increased diseases, species loss including the vanishing insect population some of which we rely on for our food, rise in sea levels, depleted fresh water resources, and more.
You ask me how many hundreds of millions am I prepared to see die while ignoring the multiple millions who have and will die due to all the horrors, and not only food shortages, that climate change brings.
I have spoken to people in the towns and villages of a number of poor countries in Africa and Asia. They understand these issues better than most. Ask them what they need and they would not say fertiliser. They'd say for the climate to stop killing them.
We have the knowledge and technology to shift from the utterly unsustainable practices of the West, to stave off the worst of the coming crises but only if we take radical action right now. Your 'solutions' only make for a far worse future for everyone. | | | |
| Energy bills on 13:25 - Sep 9 with 1540 views | derbyhoop |
The only thing likely to be frozen this winter are the people who can't afford to heat their homes. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Energy bills on 13:35 - Sep 9 with 3158 views | Boston |
Renewable's are energy companies. | |
| |
| Energy bills on 14:17 - Sep 9 with 3070 views | R_from_afar |
| Energy bills on 13:03 - Sep 6 by HAYESBOY |
Thers an idea.......................Privatise the Sun. Simples. |
This is sort of relevant to what you posted. Back in 1960, Freeman Dyson wrote a paper on the subject of capturing *all* of a sun's solar energy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Energy bills on 15:16 - Sep 9 with 2980 views | Sonofpugwash |
Just be aware, the banknotes bearing the Queen's head are no longer valid. Please send them to me and I will ensure they are disposed of correctly. |  |
| |
| Energy bills on 15:20 - Sep 9 with 2972 views | Sonofpugwash |
You have to construct the Sphere utilising the material from the entire solar system.Problem is where do you park the population(s) while you're doing this? | |
| |
| Energy bills on 15:45 - Sep 9 with 2927 views | Sakura |
| Energy bills on 12:53 - Sep 9 by dmm |
You take a very aggressive stance on fossil fuels, Sakura, and I do wonder why? Are you involved with the industry in some way?
The starvation of the world's poorest has been going on for a very long time and historically fertiliser has not played a particular role. Rather the rapaciousness of the colonising West has been the major cause, and largely still is, with the West's overwhelming responsibility for causing the climate crisis rapidly becoming one of the main issues causing hunger in poor countries. They have already suffered increased severity in droughts, floods and storms that ruin livelihoods and harvests right across the world. Just look at what's currently happening in Pakistan and East Africa for example. Both emergencies have been made exponentially worse by the changes in climate. What we are witnessing now is only the start and will get worse.
Food shortages are increasing because our addiction to fossil fuels is driving the climate emergency. Soil degradation due to the use of fertilisers and unsustainable industrial farming practices contribute to that problem. And of course, we could mention the other associated existential issues associated with fossil fuel induced climate change like increased diseases, species loss including the vanishing insect population some of which we rely on for our food, rise in sea levels, depleted fresh water resources, and more.
You ask me how many hundreds of millions am I prepared to see die while ignoring the multiple millions who have and will die due to all the horrors, and not only food shortages, that climate change brings.
I have spoken to people in the towns and villages of a number of poor countries in Africa and Asia. They understand these issues better than most. Ask them what they need and they would not say fertiliser. They'd say for the climate to stop killing them.
We have the knowledge and technology to shift from the utterly unsustainable practices of the West, to stave off the worst of the coming crises but only if we take radical action right now. Your 'solutions' only make for a far worse future for everyone. |
Do you think they are expecting grain production to be 40% lower next harvest because of climate change or because of lack of energy producing a lack of fertiliser?
April 2021 Sri Lanka banner chemical fertiliser
July 2022 here is the people storming the presidential palace after crop yields were lowered so severely and prices rose
https://mobile.twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1545689501758111744
Wonder how these lads would have participated in your survey. The year before though the president was elected saying he would do this. The realities of physics caught up with that though
That is a political choice that has been imposed on those most likely to suffer from this. Their need not be a shortfall in energy but their is because of the actions of European politicians who don't fully understand the implications of their actions | | | |
| Energy bills on 17:24 - Sep 9 with 2797 views | Sakura |
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/20/sri-lanka-fertiliser-ban-president
The first line here from the Guardian article is pretty telling:
“For the farmers of Sri Lanka, their problems began in April last year when President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who now stands accused of pushing the country into financial ruin, implemented a sudden ban on chemical fertilisers.
The full implications of the ill-advised policy — which has now been reversed — are only just being realised. Farmers say their livelihoods are under threat and for the first time in its modern history, Sri Lanka, which usually grows rice and vegetables in abundance, could run out of food as harvests drop”
Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, 52, former governor of the southern province. “We have had past economic crises, security crises but never in Sri Lanka’s history have we had a food crisis.”
In Rajanganaya, where most farmers operate on a small scale with no more than a hectare apiece, the majority of those the Guardian spoke to reported between a 50% to 60% reduction in their crop harvest.
These are the people who suffer most from your views of trying to speed run switch to renewables [Post edited 9 Sep 2022 17:25]
| | | |
| Energy bills on 17:45 - Sep 9 with 2773 views | distortR |
| Energy bills on 15:20 - Sep 9 by Sonofpugwash |
You have to construct the Sphere utilising the material from the entire solar system.Problem is where do you park the population(s) while you're doing this? |
Rwanda. Probably. | | | |
| Energy bills on 18:18 - Sep 9 with 2719 views | R_from_afar |
Paul Johnson from the Institute for Fiscal Studies has just tweeted:
It's alright, 'cause the historical pattern has shown how the economical cycle tends to revolve in a round of decades, three stages stand out in a loop. A slump and war, then peel back to square one and back for more.
So things are looking up! 
Oh, hang on, it was actually Stereolab who came up with those pearls of wisdom. As you were.  | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
