Author Topic: "Gas Armageddon": Energy/electricity prices in EU/UK (and how to deal with them)  (Read 79102 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
I would not call it extra EUR 100.

Yet, it might end up being not much more than that. We are getting scaremongered and seeing scaring signs, yet:

* If food price increase is really just about inflation, as it is called by media, and not stagflation, wages will follow. Even though it is more expensive in EUR, it's not more expensive in real price. Of course, there is a delay, which is also why hyperinflation is an actual problem, but no one knows if we are gonna see that.

* Huge energy price peak will likely remain a short peak, a panic reaction of the market, plus then the "new normal" where the era of ridiculously under priced fossil energy is over, good riddance. For example, electric energy price to the consumers went here from 0.05EUR/kWh to 0.40EUR/kWh or so, but the companies secured futures for ~0.30EUR/kWh for the winter, and get this: back to ~0.15EUR/kWh for the spring. So consumer prices will more or less follow.

And now that we have more motivation than ever to solve the energy problem, solutions will be seen. There are so many obvious low-hanging fruits to pick, just limited by the fact no one wanted to invest even 1000EUR to any energy upgrade because of ridiculously cheap gas.

I kinda like role playing this survivalist game, but to be frank: I believe tszaboo will be much closer to what will actually happen, than the... collapsists. Boring, I know.

In international relations, friends come and friends go (remember, "we don't have permanent friends, only permanent interests").

So, if you think really far down the road (10 years?  20 years?)  who's to say there isn't a new, very modernising leader in Russia and that the whole problem has disappeared?
 

Offline Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9336
  • Country: fi
is the current situation really much worse than the oil crisis and recession of the early 70's and 80's ?

Likely not at all. We have just forgotten it, so we feel like the current crisis is something much more serious. The oil crisis kinda resolved almost too quickly, so while good progress was made (for example: thermal energy storage implemented, my house has this too, from 1982), all that went out of fad for cheap energy again.
 

Offline Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9336
  • Country: fi
So, if you think really far down the road (10 years?  20 years?)  who's to say there isn't a new, very modernising leader in Russia and that the whole problem has disappeared?

I truly think that in 10-20 years we need significantly less fossil fuels. If you look at Germany's progress for example, it has been exceptionally good - just not good enough, not in time for this particular crisis. But they are clearly halfway there, you can easily confirm that, and in just 10 years they have easily doubled the wind, quadrupled PV, implemented heatpumps in trivial estates, and have some actually viable/scalable pilot projects in energy storage.

It's worth noting you don't need to completely stop fossil fuel use, even just halving it will basically solve the political volatility problem and significantly ease the climate thing. Having the asset of burning some fossils significantly helps with the most difficult part, longer term (weeks, months) energy storage. What about calm, cold winter weeks with little wind and solar? Just burn fossils, you can well afford that if it's just a few weeks a year.

Using Germany as an example, they decided to replace both fossil and nuclear by renewables, which is a good target, but did that in the wrong order (in a hindsight).
 

Offline Marco

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7044
  • Country: nl
Appeasement is wrong, and resorting to violence as the first response is also wrong.  Life (and relations) isn't black and white...  which is what cool heads know, and the extremes never get, being so excitable.

The difference between being noncommittal and taking a position is black and white.

Don't give weapons and support to Ukraine? It would have almost certainly caused their quick demise after which NATO and Russia would have moved on to the Baltics. NATO would probably have been forced to station nuclear weapons in the Baltics to show their absolute commitment to its defense and that would have truly brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.

That's why it's appeasement and dangerous.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2022, 03:22:40 pm by Marco »
 
The following users thanked this post: tom66, KE5FX, Siwastaja

Offline JohanH

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 669
  • Country: fi
It's worth noting you don't need to completely stop fossil fuel use, even just halving it will basically solve the political volatility problem and significantly ease the climate thing. Having the asset of burning some fossils significantly helps with the most difficult part, longer term (weeks, months) energy storage. What about calm, cold winter weeks with little wind and solar? Just burn fossils, you can well afford that if it's just a few weeks a year.

Exactly. And rather than each car and each house having their own inefficient oil and gas burner, it makes sense to do this in big industrial stoves and turbines with high efficiency and exhaust cleaning, both creating electricity and distributing the heat.
 

Offline tom66Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7335
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Yet, it might end up being not much more than that. We are getting scaremongered and seeing scaring signs, yet: [..]

Yep, this is what the media does not report.

Real wages (for the UK) have fallen this quarter, but are still above the pre-Covid slump.  Inflation bites into wages, but there is an unemployment problem, partially caused by Covid.  This means workers will continue to be able to demand high wages, and competition in the employment market is high.  This is not a bad situation, even for employers oddly, as it keeps things circulating.

Consumer confidence is wavering, but it's still reasonable.  There's not a shortage of activity on the high streets around here, people are still spending money.

While I'm not a fan of the overall implementation, the energy bills cap introduced by UK gov't will probably stave off any serious recession. There may be a small one, but c'est la vie.  I expect most major EU economies will act similarly.  Supporting industry is more difficult.

I am happy to bear some pain if it allows Ukraine to be victorious, and looking at recent results, it may be less time than I expect!
 

Online themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3266
  • Country: gb
Quote
I'm not a fan of the overall implementation
whats wrong with the  average tax payer  paying to line the pockets of the energy companys shareholders?its what the majority voted for after all.
 

Offline JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3573
  • Country: it
is the current situation really much worse than the oil crisis and recession of the early 70's and 80's ?

according to my parents, it is not. Back then they couldn't use private cars during sundays (or weekends?) as there wasn't oil, period.
Currently it just costs "A lot more" (since last november, when it really started, i've spent about 300 euros more on diesel alone, just for going to work. This summer i almost never went far away on weekends because it cost too much)
 
The following users thanked this post: Someone

Online iMo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5570
  • Country: va
It is sometimes pretty funny to see the approach to this crisis and the war from the side of people coming from the pre-year-1989 "western" countries - something like - "let us negotiate somehow the peace in Ukraine and all will return back to the former life". A rather mechanistic approach, or even quite naive, even childish.

You should perhaps listen more to the new EU countries who spent decades under soviet siege - it could easily be they have a much better understanding what is going on today, as they understand the soviet and russian mentality much much better than the former "westeners"..

This all is not about Ukraine only - 90% of today's RU population considers 70% of current EU (and the future EU, incl. Ukraine in EU), and all the former soviet republics their ultimate "sphere of influence" based on the WWII result (that is for them carved in stone for ever), and they also want to see compensation for all the sanctions they received since ever.. And mind the current leaders there consider ".. the collapse of the Soviet Union the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20tieth century.." [Putin April 29th, 2005], moreover, they still consider the West guilty for the economic turmoil there in 90ties..

All these events what you may see today are simply because the "imperium wants back their sphere of influence". It has less to do with the final outcome of the war in Ukraine or the actual thinking of the current leaders in Kremlin. It will stay the same paradigm even with any other new leaders there. The imperial soviet mentality is simply embedded deep in the souls of the vast majority of their population, effectively amplified by a decades of massive propaganda.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2022, 04:30:58 pm by imo »
Readers discretion is advised..
 
The following users thanked this post: daqq, Vovk_Z

Offline tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8218
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
So power to gas will be more profitable, and companies will do that. Germany is investing a load of money into that, excess solar power can be used to make your own CNG/LNG.
It's actually a transport problem, because prices in the USA and Canada is 1/10th of the prices here. So we build ships to transport it. Also, probably most of these prices are just going to brokers, who make extra profit. Govmt will step in and limit it when necessary.
The strategic storage tanks are almost full, everyone chillax. Except UK, because they don't want to do the right thing.
That big antagonist red country in the east might be a lot of smaller much friendlier countries in the near future. In 1989 it fell apart so quickly nobody expected.



 

Online themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3266
  • Country: gb
Quote
The strategic storage tanks are almost full, everyone chillax. Except UK, because they don't want to do the right thing
we've done the right think,we've taken delivery of lpg and pipeline gas and sold it to europe to help fill there reserves,we'll then buy it back at an inflated price come winter
 

Offline tom66Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7335
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Russia may want and demand a greater sphere of influence, but the only thing it has to offer the West that it really desperately needs is oil and gas.  This is going to wane as the EU reverses two decades of disastrous energy policy.  And then Russia will be left knocking on the door to China to sell its energy, good luck with that.
 

Online langwadt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4857
  • Country: dk
".. the collapse of the Soviet Union the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20tieth century.." [Putin April 29th, 2005], moreover, they still consider the West guilty for the economic turmoil there in 90ties..

well in way he was right it was a catastrophe, the result was several wars, mass poverty and oligarcs stealing everything of value

afaiu in the same speech he talked about building "an effective state system within the current national borders" with democracy and fighting corruption

I wonder what changed?
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 17952
  • Country: lv
It is a good move, imho, the EU decided to eliminate the dependency on Russian energy (gas, oil, nuclear), which dependency, btw. has been criticized for at least 2 decades by many politicians, but EU was lazy and childish naive in that regard. Also it is clear that the free market with energies in EU must be regulated during this transition period, so hopefully EU does the necessary steps now. Also Germany and other big players should resume all their nuclear power-plants during that transition period (let say for next 10y), also the coal should come again into the game during that period. The naive green EU should wait for a while.. That transition costs us and it will cost us even more in EU, but at least the next generation will be happy that we finally undertook this painful step..
The problem is you are not supposed to eliminate dependency by destroying your country in the process. The only way EU can live without of Russian gas in short term is shutting down a huge number of factories.
 
The following users thanked this post: SiliconWizard

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Quote
I'm not a fan of the overall implementation
whats wrong with the  average tax payer  paying to line the pockets of the energy companys shareholders?its what the majority voted for after all.

The problem with the "this is what you voted for" argument is that typically when voting there are two, maybe a few more buckets to choose from and every bucket will contain some number of desirable items and some quantity of shit. The only way to avoid voting for a bucket of shit is by not voting at all. The best you can do is aim for the best apparent ratio of good stuff to shit and hope for the best.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline daqq

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
  • Country: sk
    • My site
The only way to avoid voting for a bucket of shit is by not voting at all. The best you can do is aim for the best apparent ratio of good stuff to shit and hope for the best.
Funnily enough no. There are voting systems where the little guy with an appealing message can get the chance without actually throwing your vote into the trashcan, see: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/improving-democracy-through-math/
Believe it or not, pointy haired people do exist!
+++Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
The only way to avoid voting for a bucket of shit is by not voting at all. The best you can do is aim for the best apparent ratio of good stuff to shit and hope for the best.
Funnily enough no. There are voting systems where the little guy with an appealing message can get the chance without actually throwing your vote into the trashcan, see: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/improving-democracy-through-math/

Well there are certainly advantages to that. You have to be careful though, sometimes the "little guy with an appealing message" turns out to be not very good in practice, we've seen a few of those get elected. It also doesn't change the fact that even those little guys often have some stance on something I don't like. There is no perfect candidate.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2022, 07:43:32 pm by james_s »
 

Offline IconicPCB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1564
  • Country: au
Zelenski?
 

Offline daqq

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
  • Country: sk
    • My site
The only way to avoid voting for a bucket of shit is by not voting at all. The best you can do is aim for the best apparent ratio of good stuff to shit and hope for the best.
Funnily enough no. There are voting systems where the little guy with an appealing message can get the chance without actually throwing your vote into the trashcan, see: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/improving-democracy-through-math/

Well there are certainly advantages to that. You have to be careful though, sometimes the "little guy with an appealing message" turns out to be not very good in practice, we've seen a few of those get elected. It also doesn't change the fact that even those little guys often have some stance on something I don't like. There is no perfect candidate.
The alternative to 'giving the little guy with an appealing message a chance' and 'one of two parties or chuck your vote into the trashcan' is to do away with democracy altogether - that's just math.

And yeah, there is no perfect candidate, but with a plurality (say, six) of political parties where none have the majority you can create a situation where they need to work together to get anything done, either forming coalitions of parties or negotiating between themselves. That allows a finer grained choice and the parties are forced to represent a wider range of interests.

I'll be the first one to say that Slovakian politics are a mess, but at least there's a choice - there's some 50 active political parties, 25 of which tried their hand in the last election, 6* of which managed to get into the parliament.
The parties available  represented most everything, from communists, through pirates, Christian conservatives, libertarians, various flavors of socialists to nazis**.


* - a tad more complicated.
** - like, actual nazis, whos party members had a history of stuff like marching in uniforms very reminiscent of a very awkward period of Slovakian history...


edit: Formating
« Last Edit: September 13, 2022, 08:08:46 pm by daqq »
Believe it or not, pointy haired people do exist!
+++Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
 

Offline tom66Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7335
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
The problem is you are not supposed to eliminate dependency by destroying your country in the process. The only way EU can live without of Russian gas in short term is shutting down a huge number of factories.

Not sure that is true.

Shortfall of gas is about 25%, given increases in Norway/UK production, additional LNG deliveries, etc.  This will probably fall to around 15% within a year but assume 25% for now.

EU has proposed measures to reduce gas usage by 10% in the public sector, currently optional, which may become mandatory. Hungary continues to receive Russian gas without restriction because, well, Orban.  Electricity usage will be supplemented by Germany delaying nuclear shut downs.

So realistically if those are implemented you are looking at a 10-15% reduction in gas usage in industry.  I think that's manageable, obviously the heaviest industries (glass making is a good example) will struggle more.  But a great deal of industrial gas is just spent on heating factories, offices and so on, so that will just mean they are a bit colder.
 
The following users thanked this post: nctnico, Siwastaja, tooki

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
The only way to avoid voting for a bucket of shit is by not voting at all. The best you can do is aim for the best apparent ratio of good stuff to shit and hope for the best.
Funnily enough no. There are voting systems where the little guy with an appealing message can get the chance without actually throwing your vote into the trashcan, see: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/improving-democracy-through-math/

Well there are certainly advantages to that. You have to be careful though, sometimes the "little guy with an appealing message" turns out to be not very good in practice, we've seen a few of those get elected. It also doesn't change the fact that even those little guys often have some stance on something I don't like. There is no perfect candidate.
The solution for that is having a system with multiple parties and no absolute power in a single person. Many countries in Europe have such a system and generally this works well because extreme ideas get dampened. Not saying nothing goes wrong ever, but there is a quick counter response not hindered by the short sightedness / tunnel vision of a very small group of people.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7549
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
The problem is you are not supposed to eliminate dependency by destroying your country in the process. The only way EU can live without of Russian gas in short term is shutting down a huge number of factories.

Its well planned and intentionally pursued.

A severely weakened EU is going to be an excellent state to make a "more" obedience EU, good for Washington, think about it for a minute from the white house POV. Also a poor, pissed and frustrated population can be easily to be converted into extremists as the blame/escape goat already set, you can not easily do that on a relatively wealthy/relatively content population.

Another fact is that we are watching Euro and Pound-sterling keep weakening week by week, as UK and EU are keep printing money like crazy, just few days ago UK's PM Least Trust just signed a humongous financial bail out package that is even bigger than the one used in the 2008 global financial crisis in UK. EU central bank is also about to print a lot more, as its not realistic to expect the pain thresholds of each EU countries are identical on the current crisis.

If you have an idle saving in these currencies, convert it to what ever other currency you trust, the sooner the better.

Offline dietert1

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2473
  • Country: br
    • CADT Homepage
The whole western is printing money like mad, with the US no exception. This seems to be a problem of western style democracy: Economical failure of the state, as people vote for an easy life with luxury cars, large housing, health insurance, multiple vacations every year including flights for everybody etc. etc.
And the business sector that works better is an exception to democracy anyway: No free speech in large corporations. Maybe we should respect autocratic governments who try to run and develop their countries like a business and suppress any disturbance from outside.

Regards, Dieter
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7549
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
The whole western is printing money like mad, with the US no exception. This seems to be a problem of western style democracy: Economical failure of the state, as people vote for an easy life with luxury cars, large housing, health insurance, multiple vacations every year including flights for everybody etc. etc.
And the business sector that works better is an exception to democracy anyway: No free speech in large corporations. Maybe we should respect autocratic governments who try to run and develop their countries like a business and suppress any disturbance from outside.

Regards, Dieter

When giant businesses and industries in EU are collapsing, wonder how it will hit & drag the financial/banking sector, and once the main EU industrial work horse like Germany is hit hard, as Euro is centrally managed, a domino effect is a sure thing, its just the matter on how fast & how contagiously it spreads throughout EU countries.

Just fyi, one of my friend working at German's chemical giant BASF said workers are worry that mass lay off is coming at their big factory as its totally stopped running for few months now.  :scared:

Online iMo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5570
  • Country: va
There is no need to print new money in EU. EU should start to reflect new geopolitical and economic situation and to focus itself on the most important things - like energy in this very moments. EU should stop throwing big money into various "nice to have" projects and start to manage the today's real issues. That needs quite committed political staff in Brussels and in within the EU countries, what is not the case I think, as building the "nice to have green gardens" is a much more sexier offer for its voters than doing corrective measures in energy sector. I have not heard that any EU program stopped or was put on hold because of the redirection of funding into more important issues.

Kremlin is laughing when they observe what is going on in our Brussels and in our media, where to decide on something takes many years of public discussions and political disputes - while you have to mess with thousands of childishly unimportant EU agendas especially in these days. They call it a "decadent western democracy" and they do not understand how we in EU can live with it and therefore the vast majority of population there does not understand the real need for such a democracy there. They have the Tzar and he will decide on what is important for them within a day.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2022, 06:15:32 am by imo »
Readers discretion is advised..
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf