Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–259 of 259 posts

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#251

Post by trashtester »

missedthecue wrote: post #249
trashtester wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, Germany could cut at least 75% of their NG consumption, which is pretty significant. This link describes how even the ammonia can be produced from hydrogen, which in turn can be produced from electricity (solar, nuclear, wind, take your pick): https://www.freethink.com/environment/sustainable-fertilizer

Germany can do that maybe by 2040. Retrofitting every home in Germany to do away with gas heating and implement efficient electrical heating is easier said than done, to put it lightly. We're talking trillions in euros worth of investment and spending.

If electricity doesn't come down enough in price, I fear it will take a lot longer than 2040. IF the price of electricity can be brought down below the price of natural gas per unit of energy, many use cases (the low hanging fruits) can be replaced relatively quickly.

Over the last couple of decades, though, the electricity price in Germany seems to have risen sharply, even when not including the last year.

It seems to me that many of the energy related policies in many countries have been focusing way to much on symbolism, instead of minimizing the price while also limiting actual harm to the population and the environment as much as possible. And when the price of electricity doesn't come down, consumers want to use it for as few things as possible.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#252

Post by _kbh_ »

pydry wrote: post #248
sofixa wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Alas, the world doesn't operate based on the moral principles you imply, but cold hard realpolitik. Actions have consequences in the great power game between nation states. If there's anything the Russian invasion of Ukraine isn't, it's realpolitik. Invading a country because "they aren't a real country and they should be ours" is as far as the cold practicality of realpolitik as possible. (Unless you choose to bel…

>Unless you choose to believe Russia's propaganda that it was all due to NATO's expansion, which even if true is even stupider - check Finland and Sweden which joined A) Finland and Sweden havent yet joined and may not. B) There are no ethnic Russians in Finland or Sweden in need of protection from paramilitaries sporting swastika tattoos. C) No border disputes either. D) No Russian military bases. E) It's highly def…

> A) Finland and Sweden havent yet joined and may not

After Russias constant rhetoric that Ukraine is only the first country on their “let’s genocide post soviet states” list their is 0 doubt that Finland and Sweden will finish the application.

> B) There are no ethnic Russians in Finland or Sweden in need of protection from paramilitaries sporting swastika tattoos.

The largest group of paramilitaries sporting swastikas and killing Russians in Ukraine is Russians from the neo nazi Wagner group so ironically if Russia left Ukraine there’d be less Russian deaths by (Russian) Nazis.

> C) No border disputes either.

Wasn’t any border disputes with Ukraine until they discovered vast natural resources in the Donbas region that would threaten Russia as a gas and oil provider to Europe. Then suddenly there were all kinds of problems then appeared over night and people who suspiciously looked like FSB and GRU officers started a civil war in Ukraine.

> E) It's highly defensible terrain (see the winter war) unlike Ukraine.

Either Ukraine is very defensible or Russia is terrible at war the losses so far have been staggering.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#253

Post by Schroedingersat »

danhor wrote: post #244
Schroedingersat wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn't. "400%" gives you no indication that the upper bound is 800%. And failing to communicate that the heat comes from elsewhere is condescending and leads to misunderstandings. It also fails to communicate that it's harder to move the heat when it is colder. We have a perfectly valid term that does what yoh want without lying and without anti-education in the name of making it 'easier' which is coefficient…

> gives you no indication that the upper bound is 800%. But it isn't? For e.g. outside sheds (heated to 7°C) the COP can theoretically go up to 27. For solar panels, the highest theoretical efficiency is well below 100% and the bound isn't communicated. > It also fails to communicate that it's harder to move the heat when it is colder. For heating that's less the case, but the efficiency of e.g. solar panels also var…

> But it isn't? For e.g. outside sheds (heated to 7°C) the COP can theoretically go up to 27. For solar panels, the highest theoretical efficiency is well below 100% and the bound isn't communicated.

That's just another way of saying that framing it as efficiency and disregarding that you're moving heat from a colder reservoir is incredibly misleading. Now the marketing department can put a giant "1300% efficient*" sticker on the dual use heat pump even though it's worse for heating to 24C. A heat pump is fundamentally moving heat. It's in the name. (Heat created + heat moved) / work in does not map to an intuitive or technical notion of efficiency, and framing it that way is encouraging a mental model which is not just quantitatively off, but fundamentally wrong. It's also a distinction that is subtle enough that it is very hard to see while you are confused. This is the almost worst kind communication failure (maybe just after using a dimensionless number for insulation, or using kilo for kibi) because it's so hard to correct. It leaks into other domains and destroys communication, allowing marketers to lie, and requiring a constant treadmill of new terms to fix.

> For solar panels, the highest theoretical efficiency is well below 100% and the bound isn't communicated.

The absolute bound is carnot efficiency, which is about 80% for coupling to the sun. This is close enough that out/in is fine. Additionally out/in is the correct model because you are converting energy not movng it. 'Simple silicon cells can't exceed about 35% efficiency because they need to pick whether to waste energy in blue light or ignore energy in infrared' is the only other piece of information needed to convert that to a quantitatively and physically complete model. You can even communicate it succinctly by drawing a rectangle on a black body diagram.

> saying in school maths that you can't take the square root of -1.

This is also anti-education and a far worse sin because it is crushing one of the few moments where mathematics might actually be learned in a maths class instead of rote algorithm memorization. A teacher should never ever say this. Far better to say something along the lines of "that's a question that doesn't have an answer when we're talking about numbers on the number line, come talk to me about it later". Or "it's really cool that you're thinking about that, here's the khan academy and wiki pages, write a letter telling me all about it instead of your normal homework". Or even "think about it and tell me what you think the answer should be".

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#254

Post by jjav »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #99
phantomathkg wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain why you think people is slacking, please?

I can’t say why. But work seems to have no “gravity”. Like in my brother’s government job, coming into office was a given. You could have serious career repercussions if you were slacking off. Then the lockdown happened and work moved online. Everyone was slacking off, including the managers. Now they’ve got in-office mandates again but some of the workers just don’t come in when they don’t fee like it and just log i…

> Everyone was slacking off, including the managers.

That sounds mostly like a good thing. Turns out that killing oneself for maximizing productivity wasn't a smart move, or even necessary for things to work ok.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#255

Post by ck425 »

LatteLazy wrote: post #189
ck425 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, do we actually have higher taxes than most other countries and if so in which specific areas? Personally a well paid individual no dependants I find the Tory focus on cutting taxes ridiculous but I'm aware I'm ignorant of how we compare to other countries.

Comparing tax rates is notoriously detail driven but... I earn a (healthy) 95k. I pay 35% in NI and Income tax. I'd pay another 9% in student loans if I wasn't lucky. So 44% total deductions https://listentotaxman.com/?year=2022&taxregion=uk&age=0&tim... In France I'd pay the exact same rate overall (95kGBP->112kEUR) https://salaryaftertax.com/fr/salary-calculator I think this sums up the UK: European style taxes, US…

Hmm I'm not sure it's fair to consider student loan repayment a tax. It's limited and many people will pay it off fast. I presume you're based in London if you're on £95k and still have outstanding student loads?

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#256

Post by dogma1138 »

trashtester wrote: post #247
dogma1138 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest you look at how much natural gas is used by the chemical industry, in Germany ~25% of the natural gas consumed is consumed by non-energy related uses as in not heating, electricity production, smelting cooking etc, with ammonia and fertilizer production accounting for about 15% of total consumption alone. That isn’t a small percentage and those industries have an enormous knock on effect globally there is a…

In other words, Germany could cut at least 75% of their NG consumption, which is pretty significant. This link describes how even the ammonia can be produced from hydrogen, which in turn can be produced from electricity (solar, nuclear, wind, take your pick): https://www.freethink.com/environment/sustainable-fertilizer

You should look at how much electricity it would take to replace LNG in the chemical industry.

Whilst all of these are possible it’s possible with a multi decade mega project style of planning.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#257

Post by armitron »

_kbh_ wrote: post #236
armitron wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody forced Russia to invade a sovereign country (or to consider itself the rightful owner of those lands for that matter), that's entirely their fault. Alas, the world doesn't operate based on the moral principles you imply, but cold hard realpolitik. Actions have consequences in the great power game between nation states. > And it was mind bogglingly stupid, as we can see a few months in, with the massive losse…

> The Russian economy is doing fine, business with India and China is thriving. "Massive losses to their army" I believe is far from accurate. I'll be greatly surprised if at the end of this, Ukraine isn't economically destroyed, geographically devastated. Territories lost will remain lost, and the deaths of so many people will have been for nothing more than furthering the geopolitical and industrial interests of th…

These are western propaganda estimates from biased sources. Russian sources claim 7-10000 casualties (deaths and wounded). The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Taking into account that Russia has neither mobilized nor deployed its actual army yet, and that most of the fighting is being done by locals and volunteers from the disputed regions, I fail to see the significance of "massive casualties" much less people state that "Ukraine is winning".

Anyone that looks at the events with a modicum of objectivity should admit that it looks super-dire for Ukraine and the only thing Ukrainians can hope for given current trajectories is further devastation.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#258

Post by _kbh_ »

armitron wrote: post #257
_kbh_ wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Russian economy is doing fine, business with India and China is thriving. "Massive losses to their army" I believe is far from accurate. I'll be greatly surprised if at the end of this, Ukraine isn't economically destroyed, geographically devastated. Territories lost will remain lost, and the deaths of so many people will have been for nothing more than furthering the geopolitical and industrial interests of th…

These are western propaganda estimates from biased sources. Russian sources claim 7-10000 casualties (deaths and wounded). The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Taking into account that Russia has neither mobilized nor deployed its actual army yet, and that most of the fighting is being done by locals and volunteers from the disputed regions, I fail to see the significance of "massive casualties" much less p…

> These are western propaganda estimates from biased sources.

These are visually verified numbers, not even the numbers being claimed by Ukraine, if you want to improve them you can always point out duplicates and they will removed if they are actually duplicates. The real number is likely higher because not all losses will be photographed.

> Russian sources claim 7-10000 casualties (deaths and wounded)

Russian sources also claimed they weren't even going to invade the day before the invasion happened. Russian casualties are nearly guaranteed to be fake.

> Taking into account that Russia has neither mobilized nor deployed its actual army yet, and that most of the fighting is being done by locals and volunteers from the disputed regions, I fail to see the significance of "massive casualties" much less people state that "Ukraine is winning".

The VDV and Spetsnaz are both in Ukraine, are they not part of the 'actual army'?. In the least we know that the VDV has suffered massive losses, even just the videos of the gravestones in Russia should show you that Russias casualties are numbers are likely very fake.

If Ukraine isn't winning, why is Russias progress so slow?, Kyiv is less than 300km from the Russian and they still haven't made it there yet. Id consider being in month 6 of a '3 day special military operation' to be winning.

> Anyone that looks at the events with a modicum of objectivity should admit that it looks super-dire for Ukraine and the only thing Ukrainians can hope for given current trajectories is further devastation.

Yeah Ukraine has been devastated and lots of Ukrainians (both soldiers and civilian) are dying in the war, but Russia is suffering huge losses too, how else do you explain Russias fielding of old equipment (such as the T62)?. If Ukraine didn't put any resistance it would be even worse, Russia has been committing genocide with impunity in Ukraine and the only thing really standing in there way is the Ukrainian armed forces.

Re: UK inflation forecast to hit 18.6% next year, energy bills may rise to £6000

#259

Post by trashtester »

dogma1138 wrote: post #256
trashtester wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, Germany could cut at least 75% of their NG consumption, which is pretty significant. This link describes how even the ammonia can be produced from hydrogen, which in turn can be produced from electricity (solar, nuclear, wind, take your pick): https://www.freethink.com/environment/sustainable-fertilizer

You should look at how much electricity it would take to replace LNG in the chemical industry. Whilst all of these are possible it’s possible with a multi decade mega project style of planning.

So we should start increasing capacity now :)

And the first step is to have a realistic plan to make electricity as cheap and abundant as possible, as soon as possible, while still minimizing pollution.

Also, every step helps. If we cut consumption in half, we halve the rate of global warming (at least). It's not like its all-or-nothing.

Post reply on HN