Re: For many of us, hybrids make more sense than BEVs
Again, this is backwards. We are far too slow, to build out the grid which is needed. This has been crystal clear since at least 2005, when it the trends showed that solar & wind would become cheaper marginal grid power sources within 5 years an some places, and 20 years in most places. Therefore they would begin to drive into the grid because of economics. It was clear by 2011 that EV's actually use about 1/3 the energy of fossil fuelled vehicles, and so in the long term would displace them (even if you had to burn coal to make the electricity)
Actually.. that's backwards, or just marketing BS from the 'renewables' lobby. The reality looks somewhat different-
minimum: 0.099 GW maximum: 0.954 GW average: 0.368 GW
Which are yesterday's 10-min averages. Then-
No new offshore wind project contracts have been bought by developers at a key government auction, dealing a blow to the UK's renewable power strategy.
...It was hoped offshore wind in the latest round could have helped generate five gigawatts of power, enough to run five million homes, but wind farm builders had warned for months that the government was not taking into account how much the costs of developing them had soared.
The UK currently has around 11GW of installed capacity, and yesterday (and much of the week) have been generating 2/10ths of f'all. Simple reason. The weather. A nice, high pressure 'heat dome' meaning virtually no wind across the UK, and much of Europe. The rest highlights the bs from the 'renewables' scumbags and their PR operations, which of course includes the dear'ol Bbc. If "the trends showed that solar & wind would become cheaper marginal grid power sources within 5 years an some places" were true, then there would have been no problem bidding in this round of CfDs.
Instead there's been something of a self-inflicted reality check. Last auctions there were some large wind projects that were awarded on low-ball bids. This allowed the 'renewables' scumbags to claim that wind was cheap. Since then of course the bidders on those projects have announced they may have to pull out because they can't actually afford to run at the prices they bid for. Same has been happening in the US, but the US regulators are being stricter on holding bidders to contracts, and penalties for breaking them.
The inflation claim is also bs. CfDs are indexed, which is one of the problems, ie the price of their electricty increases by the rate of food inflation. Or gas prices. Neither of which are an input cost for the subsdiy farmers. However, high energy costs are a major contributor to inflation, along with other 'Green' policies. So steel making uses a lot of energy, as does baking massive carbon fibre blades. Wage inflation is also energy driven, ie people need more money to pay for their over-inflated 'renewable' energy.
Then there's the impact on 'modernising' the grid to support these follies. Sure, let's waste billions on batteries, but batteries still need charging, and if there's no wind, that's not going to happen. They also can't perform grid stabilisation if they're flat, and grid stability has got a whole lot worse thanks to intermittent 'renewables'. And then to add insult to injury, Net Zero will roughly triple UK energy demand to support electrification of transport, heating, cooking etc. And fossil fuels are just far more efficient at that due to the fuels energy density.
So hopefully this is a wake-up call to restore sanity, ditch 'renewables' and get building nuclear... Although that may be optimistic given the intense lobbying from the 'renewables' scumbags, Greens and anti-nuclear and fossil fuel neo-luddites.