| Ed Miliband - Energy companies 13:09 - Sep 26 with 14290 views | Charlie1 |
I admired the speach and stir he's actually created. Energy companies have been ripping us all off for far to long. He's right to raise and challenge although I'm not sure in such a draconian style. He's made a statement - fine just think it's too far. He could have made the same splash but just differently. I'm not sure his proposals work although it is right to challenge the energy firms.
But, this current labour regime:
1) I can't take Ed Miliband seriously. His voice is just a joke!
2) Ed Balls is one of the most dangerous men on the planet. A loon. That guy in charge of the exchequeor is frightening.
|  |
| |  |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:13 - Sep 27 with 1807 views | NW5Hoop |
Bascially, the law assumes you are an adult at 16. So why the hell doesn't the voting system? |  | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:21 - Sep 27 with 1803 views | MrSheen |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:13 - Sep 27 by NW5Hoop |
Bascially, the law assumes you are an adult at 16. So why the hell doesn't the voting system? |
Not quite that simple. The law says you can only drink at 18 and drive at 17, but can be put on trial at (I think) 11. 16 is only significant milestone for leaving school and having sex, and both used to be different. |  | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:25 - Sep 27 with 1801 views | R_from_afar |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 07:06 - Sep 27 by jonno |
I work for British Gas - and I worked for them before they were privatised. While they were nationalised they lost money every year without fail - and that loss was subsidised by the tax payer. Hugely inefficient and massively overstaffed. If you want to go back to that then fine - your energy costs, whether through extra taxation or your bills (probably both) will rocket alarmingly. As I've already stated - the UK has the cheapest energy in Europe. If and when shale gas fracking finally gets under way those costs will come down massively as well. There's a lot I don't personally like about the company since it's been privatised but I have to admit it's certainly far more efficient - it makes profits (of which most are re-invested into the energy infrastructure - something which never happened under the nationalised company as they never really made a profit) and thus it keeps costs down to it's customers as much as possible. It has no control over the cost of the energy which it has to buy on the free market but it does a lot to mitigate those costs by buying in energy using the futures market etc. It keeps it's other costs down aggressively as well (unfortunately this has meant below inflation pay rises - or even none at all - for a number of years now!). I'm no Tory but I can assure you that re-nationalising the energy sector would be a very bad idea. [Post edited 27 Sep 2013 7:08]
|
I have to take issue with what you say about fracking and costs coming down massively because that is far from certain. Why?
- It has taken the US 10 years to get it right
- Their geology is different
- The higher population density of the UK makes widescale fracking more difficult
- In the UK, mineral rights belong to the Crown, not the landowner, as is the case in the US
- Planning rules are stricter in the UK
- We do not currently have the infrastructure in place for onshore oil/gas exlporation, unlike the US.
A lot of politicians and observers are making the cheaper fuel claim about fracking but it really is unclear what would happen to prices.
There are other issues too, quite apart from the ones relating to earth tremors and pollution of groundwater supplies:
- It locks us into another fossil fuel
- The huge amount of water the process uses: To replace 10% of UK gas we need 2,500-3,000 wells spread over 140-400 sq km using 27-113m tonnes of water (acc to the Tyndall Centre). The water required per well is over 4m litres per well (500 tanker loads per well). So what you say? Well, the National Farmers Union says water shortfall in the UK in dry years in the2020s could approach total current agricultural water abstraction. So, widespread adoption of fracking could mean a choice between food and energy. There are already cases in the US where farmers have sold their water sources to fracking companies and those companies' water abstraction has then left communities bereft of drinking water.
RFA |  |
| "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." |
| |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:42 - Sep 27 with 1788 views | R_from_afar |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:09 - Sep 26 by ak68 |
This policy is a blunt response to the rises in fuel costs partly forced up by the push for expensive renewables. If we encouraged fracking the price of gas would collapse in the UK or we could build more storage facilities that could hold cheap summer fuel. These are long term solutions and not an election gimmick.
The saving to consumers is based on a presumption that prices will rise by a certain amount during the short period from the election to the start of 2017. It ignores any extra costs that may be front-loaded before then and any catch-up costs after 2017 probably negating any benefit. This price freeze could end up holding prices up when they naturally should be falling. That would be ironic. |
I've dealt with the "fracking will slash the cost of gas" argument but the cost of renewables will only come down. There is no variable cost, the "fuel" is infinite, secure, local, and free and is already providing a huge chunk of our energy. I was stunned but on some days, wind energy is providing 17% of all our electricity! Nuclear only provides 19%. On an annual basis, renewables are already providing 11.3% of our electricity. In Spain and Denmark, wind energy is providing 20-30% of electricity a lot of the time and the Danes plan to turn the current energy paradigm on its head and make renewables the base load source and fossil fuels the back-up.
There is a myth being peddled by parts of the media and some politicians when it comes to "what is putting your energy bill up". According to Ofgem, between March 2011 and March 2012 bills rose by around £150. Ofgem say that £100 of that was due to the higher wholesale cost of gas and £25 was down to support for renewables.
Oil and gas can only get more expensive. They are both in huge demand, supplies are finite, and all the easy stuff has already been used up. In traditional oil fields, one barrel of oil is used to extract 20 barrels. When it comes to tar sands, its one barrel in, just five out.
This is just where we are but some politicians and observers (I am not talking about posters here) stick grimly to their dogma...
RFA | |
| "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." |
| |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 13:39 - Sep 27 with 1750 views | derbyhoop |
Labour have been criticised, and rightly so, for not coming up with any policies. I think they have been one of the most feeble opposition parties in my adult life. And, after 2 recessions since 2010, they've had plenty to oppose.
Finally, the leader does announce some policies and still cannot win. The fact is that energy prices have been going up faster than inflation and a good deal faster than the majority's pay packet. There's various reasons for this and the regulator has been weak in dealing with it. After a mortgage (or rent), energy prices are the second most expensive item and this announcement was Milliband's way of appealing to "hard working families".
Whether it's a practical measure or not, we won't find out until after the next election. And, then, only if Labour get into government. |  |
| "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 |
| |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 13:59 - Sep 27 with 1735 views | WestminsteRs |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 13:39 - Sep 27 by derbyhoop |
Labour have been criticised, and rightly so, for not coming up with any policies. I think they have been one of the most feeble opposition parties in my adult life. And, after 2 recessions since 2010, they've had plenty to oppose.
Finally, the leader does announce some policies and still cannot win. The fact is that energy prices have been going up faster than inflation and a good deal faster than the majority's pay packet. There's various reasons for this and the regulator has been weak in dealing with it. After a mortgage (or rent), energy prices are the second most expensive item and this announcement was Milliband's way of appealing to "hard working families".
Whether it's a practical measure or not, we won't find out until after the next election. And, then, only if Labour get into government. |
To be fair to Miliband, I worked for an opposition party a while back and we didn't have any policies at this point in the Parliament. Rather than hard policy though I think Labour post-2010 have really struggled to even define what they are and what they stand for. Understandable perhaps after 13 years in government. Similar to the Tories after 1997.
Now he has at least defined his brand of Labour. Red Ed and all that. |  | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:03 - Sep 27 with 1731 views | jonno |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 07:51 - Sep 27 by beeeater |
Not really fair to compare. State owned industries were never meant to make a profit. Only serve the state. |
That is totally not true. The idea is that they make a profit - and those profits are re-invested to improve the industry etc. Not subsidised by the taxpayer. |  | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:20 - Sep 27 with 1711 views | jonno |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 10:29 - Sep 27 by doogi55 |
also dont forget these companies get goverment susbsides. |
Complete rubbish. What "subsidies" do British Gas get from the UK Government? In actual fact Centrica (owners of British Gas) pay the largest amount of corporation tax to the government of any FTSE company (many of the others operate various tax avoidance schemes - Centrica does not). And in total taxes to the UK government, last year they contributed £4.2 billion - the equivalent of £158 for every household in the country. Considering they actually only make £4 profit from each domestic customer annually for energy supply that's pretty good I reckon. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:33 - Sep 27 with 1704 views | THEBUSH |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 13:38 - Sep 26 by TheBlob |
Please God no more Climate Change/renewable energy bollocks. |
It's not bollocks, Climate Change, Global warming is here to stay, were leaving an enormous pile of sh it for our kids to clean up !! |  | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:35 - Sep 27 with 1698 views | TheBlob |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:33 - Sep 27 by THEBUSH |
It's not bollocks, Climate Change, Global warming is here to stay, were leaving an enormous pile of sh it for our kids to clean up !! |
Well therein you have the answer.Kids are not the solution - they are the problem. |  |
| |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 15:00 - Sep 27 with 1665 views | TacticalR |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 14:35 - Sep 27 by TheBlob |
Well therein you have the answer.Kids are not the solution - they are the problem. |
Couldn't they be recycled and used to fuel the furnaces? |  |
| |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 15:14 - Sep 27 with 1656 views | jonno |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 12:25 - Sep 27 by R_from_afar |
I have to take issue with what you say about fracking and costs coming down massively because that is far from certain. Why?
- It has taken the US 10 years to get it right
- Their geology is different
- The higher population density of the UK makes widescale fracking more difficult
- In the UK, mineral rights belong to the Crown, not the landowner, as is the case in the US
- Planning rules are stricter in the UK
- We do not currently have the infrastructure in place for onshore oil/gas exlporation, unlike the US.
A lot of politicians and observers are making the cheaper fuel claim about fracking but it really is unclear what would happen to prices.
There are other issues too, quite apart from the ones relating to earth tremors and pollution of groundwater supplies:
- It locks us into another fossil fuel
- The huge amount of water the process uses: To replace 10% of UK gas we need 2,500-3,000 wells spread over 140-400 sq km using 27-113m tonnes of water (acc to the Tyndall Centre). The water required per well is over 4m litres per well (500 tanker loads per well). So what you say? Well, the National Farmers Union says water shortfall in the UK in dry years in the2020s could approach total current agricultural water abstraction. So, widespread adoption of fracking could mean a choice between food and energy. There are already cases in the US where farmers have sold their water sources to fracking companies and those companies' water abstraction has then left communities bereft of drinking water.
RFA |
Which is why I said "if and when" - and not "when". Obviously there are numerous issues to be resolved with fracking for shale gas but it's a potential source of cheap energy and that's why Centrica have taken a stake in the major fracking firm which is currently testing for feasibility. | | | |
| Ed Miliband - Energy companies on 00:17 - Sep 28 with 1611 views | Brightonhoop |
Bit suprised at you Charles, thought you were proper Labour not City Labour. Oh well.
Credit where it's due, Milliband has stirred the pot. If he had said he would renationalise Royal Mail with no compensation to investors he would have brought this coalition of tossers down this week and Elections would have taken place next week. He's obviously concerned where his next expenses checque comes from, hence he real silence.
Balls should have been axed three years ago and until they do, show some, Labour will remain unelectable, and England will shrink some more. Hostage to a sub-standard Eaton and no backbone future. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
