Windfarm could cost up to £40 million

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

but stick them in the sea

Maybe that will happen sometime but its more expensive.

 

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

Maybe tidal will become a major source of power.

Sadly I don't think so here on the isle of man. We have no way of harnessing it. 

[Cambon]

14 hours ago, NoTail said:

I thought the UK tax payers paid for UK power, motorways, reservoirs and whatever else you care to think of which is a UK public utility. 

Unfortunately, the uk tax payers pay for very little. Major infrastructure is paid for by government borrowing against the national debt. The hope is that over time the national debt is inflated away. Not been happening for the last 15 years. Current high (overdue) inflation is helping but it has also pushed up the cost of government borrowing. 

[Happier diner]

44 minutes ago, Cambon said:

Unfortunately, the uk tax payers pay for very little. Major infrastructure is paid for by government borrowing against the national debt. The hope is that over time the national debt is inflated away. Not been happening for the last 15 years. Current high (overdue) inflation is helping but it has also pushed up the cost of government borrowing. 

The UK tax payer has to pay the cost of borrowing

[Cambon]

13 hours ago, Happier diner said:

I'm afraid your post sounds sensible. It's not. 

Interconnectors do not buy time. They are incredibly expensive as is the electricity that we would have to purchase on top of the massive capital outlay required. It would be financial suicide. 

There is no potential in geothermal in the isle of man. You and your fellow believers are absolute crack pots pedalling misinformation.

Of course wind energy is not free. No one is saying it is. It is though proven to be the cheapest and most environmentally friendly form of electricity generation. We are an island blessed with a potential rich source of power and nut cases are going to ruin that opportunity.

We already have one interconnetor. A second is to be laid as the lifespan of the first is in sight. The cost to purchase is not incredibly expensive, but varies. Today, right now, only 1.7% of the uks electricity is being produced by wind power. Meanwhile, 23.5% is being produced by solar. 47.1% is being produced by gas. Total cost of production is £61.10 per MWh, or just over 6P per unit. What do we pay? 

[Cambon]

9 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

The UK tax payer has to pay the cost of borrowing

Read my comment again and think very carefully what it says. 

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, Cambon said:

Unfortunately, the uk tax payers pay for very little. Major infrastructure is paid for by government borrowing against the national debt. The hope is that over time the national debt is inflated away. Not been happening for the last 15 years. Current high (overdue) inflation is helping but it has also pushed up the cost of government borrowing. 

 

50 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

The UK tax payer has to pay the cost of borrowing

 

39 minutes ago, Cambon said:

Read my comment again and think very carefully what it says. 

You’re both wrong. Electric generation and distribution is mainly privately funded in the UK. So no government capital borrowing, interest, or capital repayment ( even at deprececiated figures - and really that only worked in the 60’s-90’s within high inflation and depreciating Sterling ).

Water is the same. 
 

and you don’t borrow against national debt, what you borrow is national debt. You borrow against future tax income ( if you’re a government ).

Any future motorways are likely to be privately funded tolls.

The only place this has been displaced recently is railways, where, due to covid, government pays for the operators ( those they’ve not taken the franchises off ) to run the trains and takes the ticket money in full.

[Happier diner]

50 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

 

You’re both wrong. Electric generation and distribution is mainly privately funded in the UK. So no government capital borrowing, interest, or capital repayment ( even at deprececiated figures - and really that only worked in the 60’s-90’s within high inflation and depreciating Sterling ).

Water is the same. 
 

and you don’t borrow against national debt, what you borrow is national debt. You borrow against future tax income ( if you’re a government ).

Any future motorways are likely to be privately funded tolls.

The only place this has been displaced recently is railways, where, due to covid, government pays for the operators ( those they’ve not taken the franchises off ) to run the trains and takes the ticket money in full.

Good points. I didn't think about it like that. But I am afraid you are a little bit wrong as well.

"When the Conservative prime minister Margaret Thatcher sold off the water industry in 1989, the government wrote off all debts amounting to £5bn and granted the water companies a further £1.5bn of public money, known as a “green dowry”. As of this year net debt of the main water and sewerage companies was £53.9bn"

Its true to say though that the former state owned utilities have borrowed vast amounts of money from the Government at good rates (and continue to do so to a small extent now) and the Government will have borrowed to give them that money and write of debt. That money is the UK tax payers money at source (In Cambons world anyway)

Your point is valid though and all I will say is its got nothing to do with my point and @Cambon is merely conflating the argument to try and make a point, a point that I cannot get my head around

My point is that any electricity we buy from the UK is sold to us at cost +. That cost includes all the costs of generating  that electricity including capital expenditure and running costs (CAPEX and OPEX)

[John Wright]

12 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

But I am afraid you are a little bit wrong as well.

That’s 35 years ago. And was less than the shares sold for. It was an incentive to maximise the price.

The lumbering of water infrastructure with debt is typical of how investors in infrastructure extract money and put excessive cost on the consumer. It’s little different to McQuarrie and the Steam Packet. Pure corporate greed. Ineffective regulation and watchdogs.

[Happier diner]

5 minutes ago, John Wright said:

That’s 35 years ago

Yes. But that's when all the major investment was happening. So all the investment was funded with public money. Like I said I understood you point. We are letting @Cambon get us off track. Well I am 😁

[John Wright]

31 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Yes. But that's when all the major investment was happening. So all the investment was funded with public money. Like I said I understood you point. We are letting @Cambon get us off track. Well I am 😁

Don’t be sure. Many of the smaller water bodies were public corporations, but with perpetual or preferential debenture stock issued to the public for fundraising, or local authority water works, again with debenture loan finance.

[Happier diner]

49 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Don’t be sure. Many of the smaller water bodies were public corporations, but with perpetual or preferential debenture stock issued to the public for fundraising, or local authority water works, again with debenture loan finance.

Fair point. They initially went crazy with Thatchers money though and its only in the last 20 years that OFWAT have got a grip on them. Now they use private borrowing to pay their shareholders instead of public money. People in the UK through enjoy many of the fruits of public money spent by 'privatised entities' many years ago.

Anyway, back to the debate.

[Moghrey Mie]

I wonder who paid for the two-page anti-windfarm 'advert' in the Courier.

[asitis]

9 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

I wonder who paid for the two-page anti-windfarm 'advert' in the Courier.

I didn't read it as anti wind farm, I read it as a series of observations with questions, which Government in their haste to virtue signal had chosen to overlook. It's a real pity we didn't see an article like that before the Liverpool debacle !

I am not anti renewables, I just have no confidence that our Government can get anything related to major public expenditure and civil engineering right, particularly when an emotive issue like climate change is driving zealots in the background.

To give you a poor but possible simile , Government in 2006 were absolutely desperate to get easyJet to come here, they wouldn't listen to anyone, merely asking them to consider any possible negative consequences, in their eyes there were none. So many millions spent later, we are where we are !

Edited September 2, 2023 by asitis

[Non-Believer]

5 minutes ago, asitis said:

I didn't read it as anti wind farm, I read it as a series of observations with questions, which Government in their haste to virtue signal had chosen to overlook. It's a real pity we didn't see an article like that before the Liverpool debacle !

I am not anti renewables, I just have no confidence that our Government can get anything related to major public expenditure and civil engineering right, particularly when an emotive issue like climate change is driving zealots in the background.

 

I saw this the other day too....

 

[WTF]

10 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

I wonder who paid for the two-page anti-windfarm 'advert' in the Courier.

manx gas.