Re: In before . . .
I'll just leave this here-
https://gridwatch.co.uk/Wind
Last Month-
minimum: 0.249 GW maximum: 16.742 GW average: 9.513 GW
Problem is still that it's not a like-for-like comparison. Coal generation can be turned up & down, wind does it's own thing. See also-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/12/07/labour-target-net-zero-electricity-by-2030/
Labour’s bold plan for net-zero carbon emissions from power by 2030 is unachievable. It will require adding around 90 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity, building transmission lines from Scotland and the East of England (where the wind is) to southern England (where most of the demand is), and adding about 32 terawatt-hours (equivalent to the supply of about eight million homes) worth of new base load to deal with what the Germans call dunkelflaute, when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining.
Wind and solar simply can't deliver 90GW consistently, reliably and especially cheaply. Also note how the units change from GW to TWh, and there's only enough base load for 8m homes. UK has around 25m, plus hospitals, schools, businesses etc. And domestic energy usage is going to increase as heating, cooking and transport is forced to electrify. The 32TWh translates to only 3GW of dependable power, and won't replace the generation we're losing as our nuclear and remaining coal power stations close down.
You see conspiracy theories. I see the engineering, economic and basic physics problems that Labour's 'bold plan' simply ignore. But then there has been a huge amount of lobbying done to convince politicians that this will work, and won't just generate even more collosal windfall profits for the lobbyists and their clients.
One simple way to demonstrate the fraud is to ask why customers on 'Renewable' tariffs have had the same massive price hikes as everyone else. If their energy is 'renewable' why has the price of gas inflated their bills so dramatically?