Polanski And Farage Don’t Agree. But They Have More In Common Than You Might Think
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC, by Laura Kuenssberg.
It is very much a must read article comparing two of the most controversial party leaders in the UK.
This is the sub-heading.
One is a former stockbroker from the south who, by his own proud admission, loves smoking, drinking and women. The other’s a proud vegan, gay, northern former actor, who told me he’d never drunk a drop.
These first three paragraphs add detail to the story.
But the jubilant Zack Polanski and Nigel Farage have rather a lot in common.
Before you scream, burst out laughing, or think I have lost my marbles, of course, there are very big differences between them.
The Greens talk about a climate emergency. Reform UK calls the government green plans, “net stupid zero”.
This is Laura’s summing up of the Terrible Twins.
Their views on the cause of Britain’s pain vary wildly.
The Greens might point the finger at the super-rich, the “donor billionaires” they often cite. Reform often blames immigration, which they controversially characterise as an “invasion” of people arriving in the UK without permission.
But both parties feed off and stir up sentiment that’s felt by lots of the public: that Britain doesn’t work any more.
Whether it’s the new Green MP saying “working hard used to get you something” in her victory speech, or Nigel Farage repeatedly telling us “Britain is broken”, the same argument flows from both: that the country is in such a dreadful state that only new political saviours can fix it.
And both Reform and the Greens are willing to push the conventions of what traditional UK politicians would find acceptable – or what they believe would make them electable.
That’s not just about their image or the unstuffy ways they court publicity – Nigel Farage willingly going into the I’m A Celebrity jungle, or Zack Polanski being seen on a dance floor in campaign videos – but how they choose to focus on sensitive issues, where others might not choose to tread.
I would disagree that Britain is broken, but that it needs someone with sensible policies that everybody can get behind.
The Greens policies on the super-rich would drive anybody with ambition and money from this country and already countries like Canada are advertising for migrants.
With two immigrant lines, Farage is everything my father thought was bad about Oswald Mosley and his fascists in the 1930s. If a Reform UK Government started rounding up illegal immigrants on the streets, the violence would probable be enormous.
How Much Renewable Energy Will The UK Be Generating By 2030?
I have to admit, that whether you like the Tories or not, they have developed an energy generation policy and an energy relationship with Germany, that appears to be working and is allowing the current Government to do a bit of spending on defence and other needs.
I asked Google AI, the question in the title of this section and received this reply.
The UK government has set an ambitious target to reach 95% low-carbon electricity generation by 2030, aiming for a system driven by 43-50 GW of offshore wind, 27-29 GW of onshore wind, and 45-47 GW of solar power. This plan aims to dramatically reduce fossil fuel reliance, supported by 23-27 GW of battery capacity.
Key 2030 Renewable Energy Projections & Targets:
Total Clean Power Goal: The goal is 95% of electricity from low-carbon sources (renewables and nuclear) by 2030, up from roughly 74% in 2024.
Offshore Wind: Target of 43-50 GW, deemed crucial to powering the grid.
Onshore Wind: Target of 27-29 GW, with recent policy changes lifting bans to accelerate development.
Solar Power: Target of 45-47 GW, aiming to triple current capacity.
Flexibility: 23-27 GW of battery capacity and 4-6 GW of long-duration storage are needed to manage intermittency.
Challenges and Forecasts:
Shortfall Risks: While the government target is high, some projections suggest wind and solar may only account for 44% of generation by 2030, requiring significant acceleration to reach the 95% clean goal.
Investment Needs: Achieving these goals requires an estimated £48 billion in additional investment, on top of planned projects.
Progress: In 2024, renewable sources already hit a record of over 50% in certain quarters, with low-carbon sources overall (including nuclear) providing nearly 70% of generation.
My Thoughts
I will add some of my thoughts.
Electricity Demand: As I write, according to National Grid: Live it is 33.3 GW, which is met by with Production of 27.1 GW and Transfers of 6.2 GW.
Electricity Production: In 2030, I believe that if the UK has long-term battery capacity of something like 4 GW/40 GWh, that total UK electricity production could be upwards of 125 GW.
Hinckley Point C Power Station: This should add 1.6 GW in 2030 and 2031 to further boost UK electricity production.
Pumped Storage Hydro: In How Much Pumped Storage Hydro Will Be Operational In The UK By 2030?, I estimate that the Bank of England standard of energy storage, will add 5 GW of electricity production.
Highview Power: Highview Power are developing long duration liquid-air energy storage and have identified locations for sixteen 300 MW/3.2 GWh monsters.
Excess Electricity Production: This will be exported, either as electricity or after conversion to hydrogen. It will be a Magic Money Forest for the victor of the General Election in 2029.
If Hinckley Point C, the pumped storage hydro and Highview Power’s batteries work as their engineers hope, then the result of the next General Election will be predictable.
It is certainly, Kier Starmer’s to win, by getting the energy right!
Highview Power And The 2029 General Election
Every extra GWh added to energy storage has the following affect.
It will mean that more wind farms will not have to be switched in times of high wind and over production, as the electricity can be stored.
At the present time, there are four ways of storing energy.
- Turn it into hydrogen. But the Hindenberg did a good PR job for not using hydrogen.
- Store it in a pumped storage hydro system, but these have problems with their large land use.
- Store it in a large lithium battery, but these have problems with fire risks and need a large amount of expensive lithium.
- Store it in one of Highview Power’s liquid air batteries.
I believe that Highview Power’s liquid-air long duration batteries, have several advantages.
- They are built from readily available components.
- They can be scaled to the need at the location, where they are installed.
- A small one is 50 MW/300 MWh and a large one is 300 MW/3.2 GWh.
- The batteries come with grid stabilisation and other features.
- The batteries have a lifespan of greater than 50 years
- The energy storage fluid, is captured from the air.
- They are a product, that would be easy to finance in quantity.
- Goldman Sachs is an investor.
- A village with a power problem could fund a Highview Power battery and have a nice little earner, with perhaps a wind turbine on a nearby hill.
- Centrica is an investor.
If a politician were to understand it, it could wind them the next General Election.
The Anonymous Widower 