EV Public Charging Rip Off and Chaos

Hoenir

ThorOdinson said:

MattMattMattUK said:

ThorOdinson said:

MattMattMattUK said:

ThorOdinson said:

XRS200 said:

Is electricity cheaper in France? 

EDF is nationalised and the government makes sure they keep the price low. In fact they just had a price cut.

France built the nuclear power plants from taxpayer funds, they took the view that long term investment was worth it, our government did not.

ThorOdinson said:

We get absolutely fleeced in this country.

The reason that the French can afford state built, owned and operated nuclear power is because they pay far higher taxes than we do in the UK, it is also the reason for better healthcare, education, pensions, roads, policing etc. In the UK 55% of households receive more in cash benefits than they pay in taxes, more than 95% of people are a lifetime burden on the state. We have the largest tax free allowance in the EU, we have the lower starting rates of taxation. In the UK the bottom and middle third of earners have the lowest effective rate of income taxation in the EU, the top third have the fifth highest. The reality is that taxes are too low in the UK for everyone, but especially the bottom and middle third of earners, that is why we cannot have nice things, that is why we cannot afford to invest, that is why we have a huge debt and deficit. 

Funnily enough French nuclear plants are a much hated drain on the public purse. They turned out to be extremely expensive, and French customers are often in the position of subsidising them instead of being able to buy cheaper energy from other sources.

They might be hated by some, but they have supplied France with reliable energy security for decades and will continue to do so for decades more.

ThorOdinson said:

Now they are reaching end of life as well, so need expensive maintenance, monitoring, and eventual replacement.

Most are currently undergoing a life extension program which is adding an initial ten years with the option for a further three ten year blocks provided materials respond as expected. The French have also built a DGR which deals with high level waste and replacement is ongoing with the new reactor designs.

ThorOdinson said:

The only reason to keep building nuclear is to provide material for weapons, ensuring that France has an independent nuclear arsenal for the foreseeable future.

Total straw man argument. France (and the UK and USA) have more Plutonium than they could ever need and highly enriched Uranium does not require nuclear reactors and again, stockpiles in France and the UK are already high enough to provide for all strategic defence needs for at least a hundred years.

The reason is for a reliable, secure, domestic electricity supply. The French are also adjusting their generation plan, previously and currently they use plants in load following which makes nuclear plants inefficient but going forward they are going to use new plants at max capacity which increases efficiency and lowers cost per kWh. They are also only building the new plants in coastal locations to remove the issues causes by low river water levels and overheating of outflow into rivers which meant that they previously had to throttle plants. 

It's just such a colossal waste of time and money.

Hinckley Point C is taking 20 years to build and will provide 3GW. £30-40bn.

For comparison China installed 609GW of renewables and nearly 30GWh of battery storage last year.

You could argue that maybe back in 2010 when they started work on it they didn't know renewables would ramp up so quickly. A terrible lack of ambition and foresight, but common feelings... And Britain isn't good at infrastructure, we can't even build a high speed rail line. Oh yeah, China built more of those than the rest of the world combined has while we were deciding to cancel ours.

I'm actually okay with the idea of nuclear power... If you pay for it. I don't want to be covering those ridiculous costs, but it's hard to avoid.

China has over 1,000 coal fired power stations. Still building new ones. 

henry24

And we had 1 left and they've shut it

TooManyPoints

The only sensible course of action is to force the biggest carbon emitters to fund the transition.

So how much are China and the USA going to contribute towards our “transition”?

For comparison China installed 609GW of renewables and nearly 30GWh of battery storage last year.

Very possibly. But….

China has over 1,000 coal fired power stations. Still building new ones.

Indeed they are. China burns more coal than the rest of the world put together. It has, either ”permitted” or under construction, some 243GW of additional coal power. If you include projects that are in the pre-permit stages, there is a total of 392 GW of new coal-fired power capacity in the pipeline. This is over ten times the UK’s normal peak demand supplied by all sources (and since last week, none of this is sourced from coal):

China’s new coal power spree continues as more provinces jump on the bandwagon – Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air

The UK could cease all its emissions tomorrow (and I  mean all, not the ridiculous “net zero” deception) and it would make no significant difference whatsoever to the global total. 

Yes, the rollout and operation of the country’s EV charging network is somewhat shambolic (unless you live in London). There are many reasons for buying an EV; they suit some people and not others. But don’t think for one minute that by running one you are doing anything of any significance towards the reduction in global emissions.