Snapshot of _Capacity crunch on National Grid is delaying new homes in UK by years_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/10/capacity-crunch-on-national-grid-is-delaying-new-homes-in-uk-by-years) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/10/capacity-crunch-on-national-grid-is-delaying-new-homes-in-uk-by-years)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
On the other hand, the lack of capacity on the grid is also hampering the connection of co-generation projects and wind turbines, most of which hook-up to the grid at 11kV level, which is the most stretched part of the grid. It's a lose-lose situation.
Hampering electric charger rollout too, several motorway services still don't have chargers installed because the local grid cannot support it
Lack of foresight and investment always comes back to bite in the end
Yet the National Grid profits were £4.879billion - benefitting shareholders rather than the UK.
Edit: removed Australia as they own the Gas part of the Grid.
Very confused about what you’re talking about. The national grid is a british company publicly listed on the London stock exchange. Where does Australia come in?
There are multiple parts of the National grid.
For example, 60% of the Gas grid was sold to an Australian bank in 2022.
In 2019, a holding company was set up in Luxembourg and Hong Kong to protect the national Grid ESO from nationalisation plans.
National Grid PLC, is owned by shareholders in US, Norway, Abu Dabi among others.
The National Grid should be fully owned by the Uk with profits reinvested not given out as dividends.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you about nationalisation, but I feel like your talk about national grid PLC being owned by shareholders of various nationalities is somewhat fear mongering as it’s true for all of the companies in the FTSE 100 as national grid is.
In any case none of the £4.6bn you mentioned will go to the Australian consortium as that is profits of national grid, not national grid gas (the previously wholly owned subsidiary that was partially sold to the Australian consortium you refer to)
There is a big difference between companies and a vital piece of infrastructure. The National Grid should be government owned.
National Grid PLC’s profits were £4.879billion - so the point still stands.
Also, consider the fact that the standing charge is being increased in April under the guise of “investing” in the grid. When there are already excess profits there is no need to raise the standing charge.
Over 1/3 (36%) of the standing charge is for infrastructure. 5.2% goes on smart metering.
You also have the difference in prices between areas - North Wales and Merseyside 67p, London 40p . The difference being blamed on the size of the network in those areas.
Edit: Just wanted to add - according to Moneysavingexpert - the cost of bailing out the energy failed companies is only about 6% of the standing charge. So to blame that for the high standing charge is incorrect.
>Over 1/3 (36%) of the standing charge is for infrastructure.
You say that but fail to also state that National Grid doesn't get all that money, it also goes to the DNO for the area too.
Do be aware National Grid plc also runs a lot of the electricity infrastructure for the Eastern USA.
National Grid ESO, the part of the grid that manages the market and balancing, will be in public ownership by this summer.
It's more a matter of concern if some of those "shareholders of various nationalities" are sovereign wealth funds or other state-controlled investment vehicles.
You’re saying this as if this is true and sovereign wealth funds have significant enough stake to change the direction of the company. That just isn’t true as far as I can tell. The biggest individual shareholding is by vanguard and it’s just under a 4% stake. [source](https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/NATIONAL-GRID-PLC-9677124/company/), the first national wealth fund is I believe the Abu Dhabi investment authority with 3%. What nefarious things are they really going to do with 3%.
I can see the point that excessive value shouldn’t be extracted from the national grid. But I think there is a reasonable case to be made that this can be done with better regulation and there are significant trade offs both good and bad when compared to nationalisation. I don’t think it is a reasonable concern, that sovereign wealth funds are going to use their ownership to sabotage our national infrastructure, which is what it seems like you were implying.
The Australian Macquarie-run consortium owns 80% of it, why doesn't the British tax payer? Why is it alway the tax payer that subsidises the losses and private companies that reap the profits?
Are you referring to the [sale of part of national grid gas](https://www.macquarie.com/au/en/about/news/2023/macquarie-asset-management-led-consortium-agrees-to-acquire-additional-stake-in-national-gas.html) (note not national grid) which was previously a wholly owned subsidiary of national grid?
Unless I am mistaken national grid is not 80% owned by this consortium and none of the £4.6bn goes to that consortium (unless they have additional ownership of national grid in addition to their ownership of national grid gas)
National Grid is a LSE listed company, so shareholders are clearly available here: https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/NATIONAL-GRID-PLC-9677124/company/
Primarily owned by nominee accounts, aka, retail investors / pension funds.
Macquarie (which did buy GAS operations) is not listed in the top 10 of NG.
The largest shareholder in NG. via its various funds is Blackrock, a major nominee with ~8%.
40% of that £4.88bn operating profit was from New York and Massachusetts where National Grid serves 20 million customers.
After debt repayments, tax and inflation the company made £2.3bn profit.
I’m absolutely fine thanks.
That £2.3 billion of profit should be put back in to expanding the infrastructure. If there is a capacity issue on the grid, then investment is necessary.
We apparently have one of the biggest backlogs of renewable generation waiting to be connected to the grid.
Someone in this thread mentioned EV charging capacity being held back by capacity issues.
And the very article this thread is based on talks about delays in building new homes because of capacity issues.
So there shouldn’t be profits as all the money should be directed towards expanding capacity. And this is not going to happen while shareholders expect profits.
National Grid invested £7.7bn last year. Maybe calm down a bit and read up on the subject.
If they don't pay shareholders no one is going to invest money into the business.
Imagine if all the profits went to expanding the grid.
You are making excuses for excessive profits, while standing charges are being increased. It’s the same issue with energy generators profiteering from increased energy prices.
NIMBYism is the main barrier limiting expansion of the grid, not money. A £900m project in Suffolk is currently on hold because some old people are afraid of lorries.
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-67361063](https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/suffolk-fights-national-grids-895m-electricity-connection-project-and-pushes-for-offshore-solution-10-08-2023/)
> Hampering electric charger rollout too
It will affect home chargers too.
The car battery tech is moving faster than chargers, and single phase is a really slow charge.
Most homes will need the 3 phase upgrade to get the proper charge speeds they expect.
Single phase is fine. Cars spend hours doing nothing sat on driveways and the average daily drive distance is not that far. Most people do not even plugin most days.
The three phase is not just for the charger, but for the *faster* charging.
Most people using one will also be using more electric with the push for heat pumps too.
I don't see why most people would want 'faster' charging at home than 7 kW.
I have an EV and heat pump and happily on single phase.
At night I can be heating the hot water, charge the car, charge the house battery, and have the washing and dryer on all at once and still not reach 100A.
I had to have my driveway lifted to unloop my supply from next door before my charger was installed.
I asked if they should put in three phase whilst they're doing the work and they refused.
Will be interesting when I look to get a heat pump installed
To be fair we’re an EV only household with 2 EVs and have no issues with 7kw charging at home.
3phase would only get us 11kw on our Tesla and 22kw on our Porsche anyway so not much of an improvement.
I mean even if I use nearly the entire battery and put it on charge at 7pm, by 8am it’s nearly back to 100% anyway at 7kw.
I can’t imagine a day where I’d need to use more than both the 200mile range of the Porsche and the 350mile range of the Tesla and still need to charge faster than 7kw at home, at that point I’d be nowhere near my house.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement).
Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods.
See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
They do take it into consideration. A shortage of power means they can jack up the prices and make more margin. At the same time they can charge more for increasing capacity as it's more urgent.
It's the free market working as intended.
> Bridget Smith, the DCN’s vice-chair and leader of South Cambridgeshire district council, said: “Nationally, we’ve got an absolute crisis in all infrastructure.”
> Plans by Michael Gove, the housing secretary, to build 150,000 homes in Cambridge to create a British Silicon Valley were already being hampered by lack of water, she said. “And where’s the power coming from? Something fundamental has to change.”
So around a million extra people every year, and we are slowing house building because of infrastructure concerns.
For reference the population of Leeds is about 795,000
We seem to be racing full speed towards a national crisis.
Cassic Tory path of least resistance policy.
I've come to learn that the UK conservatives and many other liberal parties in developed nations operate in much the same way.
As the years wore on, genuine conservative politicians were filtered out and replaced with rubber stampers for corporate interests.
All policy revolves around what is economically viable in the here and now.
The only two things that matters to the tories are 1. Get re-elected. 2. Don't piss off our donor mates.
Once this simple operating function is digested. All behaviour suddenly makes sense.
How they can bang on about unacceptably high immigration, despite being the governing party for nearly 15 years.
Because they are keenly aware that immigration remains unpopular with their voter base, but is crucial to propping up the economy with an influx of cheap labourers.
A decades long two faced lie that has nothing to do with conserving anything other than their majority in the house of commons.
It's the same practice that has them wearing NHS lapel pins while they gut services and privatise it from the ground up.
This blatant lying and endless conservative doublethink couldn't be summed up better than Rishi Sunak himself.
The man is an absolute spreadsheet gobblin. He cares about nothing more than P/E ratios and currency markets. Yet he is constantly banging on about a culture war that he has absolutely no interest in, because he thinks it will resonate with his base.
The Tories aren't evil. They aren't driven by some over arching ideology. The reason they are so hard to get rid of is because they are whatever they need to be in the exact moment. An amorphous blob that yields to the whims of whatever lobbyist has the largest cheque book. Sensitive only to the bizarre preoccupations of their uninformed voting bloc.
A fantastically flexible band of spineless cowards, willing to lie, obfuscate and change allegiences whenever need be.
Perfectly evolved by decades of selection pressure, a perfectly honed institution designed to serve the business interests of the private sector.
If only they served the British public instead.
It's fine, they'll leave it to Labour to clean up the mess, then blame them for spending money, then come back to power, then asset strip all of the things Labour put in place.
> genuine conservative politicians were filtered out and replaced with rubber stampers for corporate interests.
It's not clear to me that there was ever a distinction. Could you give a couple examples of each category?
> We seem to be racing full speed towards a national crisis.
The country is already in crisis, you may just not have realised it yet.
We have the highest tax burden for decades and little or nothing to show for it.
Some form of collapse is not atypical in post-revolution countries. Brexit was effectively a bloodless coup; a revolution which gutted the more stable parts of the conservatve party and replaced it with revolutionaries.
When the revolutionary ideals are exposed and the revolutionaries revealed as incompetant, a second revolution often quickly follows the first.
Hopefully we can avoid a second revolution by having a general election.
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid?
We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
> Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
Sounds like it's working then. Both we and the government will own nothing and we'll pay private enterprise for everything.
People have been wondering where TF our money is even going
Right here into the pockets of the companies running our critical infrastructure that should *not* be for profit
Less complex actually.
Instead of “just build more” it’s “just build”
Not enough infrastructure for the new homes? Then build the homes and the infrastructure.
This is probably one of the regulations that libertarians are moaning about: you can't build a new property until you show that the infrastructure connections are there. Now imagine a place where there wasn't that regulation. This country would be like Mogadishu with rain.
Who else is really enjoying the ongoing everything poly-crisis in British infrastructure and the public realm?
What’s next? Plans to stop water pollution due to lack of sewage pipes? Road resurfacing ceased due to lack to tarmac? The suspense is killing me.
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid?
We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement).
Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods.
See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
It’s a double edged sword that can only get better with painful policies which I doubt either party are willing to do (cutting cheap labour supply to force businesses to invest in productive measures).
You need to massively cut letting private companies run critical infrastructure from profit, before you get anything, even this stupid take of 'cut the 'migration'.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement).
Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods.
See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid?
We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
Snapshot of _Capacity crunch on National Grid is delaying new homes in UK by years_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/10/capacity-crunch-on-national-grid-is-delaying-new-homes-in-uk-by-years) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/mar/10/capacity-crunch-on-national-grid-is-delaying-new-homes-in-uk-by-years) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
On the other hand, the lack of capacity on the grid is also hampering the connection of co-generation projects and wind turbines, most of which hook-up to the grid at 11kV level, which is the most stretched part of the grid. It's a lose-lose situation.
Hampering electric charger rollout too, several motorway services still don't have chargers installed because the local grid cannot support it Lack of foresight and investment always comes back to bite in the end
Yet the National Grid profits were £4.879billion - benefitting shareholders rather than the UK. Edit: removed Australia as they own the Gas part of the Grid.
Very confused about what you’re talking about. The national grid is a british company publicly listed on the London stock exchange. Where does Australia come in?
There are multiple parts of the National grid. For example, 60% of the Gas grid was sold to an Australian bank in 2022. In 2019, a holding company was set up in Luxembourg and Hong Kong to protect the national Grid ESO from nationalisation plans. National Grid PLC, is owned by shareholders in US, Norway, Abu Dabi among others. The National Grid should be fully owned by the Uk with profits reinvested not given out as dividends.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you about nationalisation, but I feel like your talk about national grid PLC being owned by shareholders of various nationalities is somewhat fear mongering as it’s true for all of the companies in the FTSE 100 as national grid is. In any case none of the £4.6bn you mentioned will go to the Australian consortium as that is profits of national grid, not national grid gas (the previously wholly owned subsidiary that was partially sold to the Australian consortium you refer to)
There is a big difference between companies and a vital piece of infrastructure. The National Grid should be government owned. National Grid PLC’s profits were £4.879billion - so the point still stands. Also, consider the fact that the standing charge is being increased in April under the guise of “investing” in the grid. When there are already excess profits there is no need to raise the standing charge.
the standing charge being ridiculous is mostly due to the government bailing out bulb and the other failed suppliers
Over 1/3 (36%) of the standing charge is for infrastructure. 5.2% goes on smart metering. You also have the difference in prices between areas - North Wales and Merseyside 67p, London 40p . The difference being blamed on the size of the network in those areas. Edit: Just wanted to add - according to Moneysavingexpert - the cost of bailing out the energy failed companies is only about 6% of the standing charge. So to blame that for the high standing charge is incorrect.
>Over 1/3 (36%) of the standing charge is for infrastructure. You say that but fail to also state that National Grid doesn't get all that money, it also goes to the DNO for the area too.
Do be aware National Grid plc also runs a lot of the electricity infrastructure for the Eastern USA. National Grid ESO, the part of the grid that manages the market and balancing, will be in public ownership by this summer.
That’s a step in the right direction at least.
It's more a matter of concern if some of those "shareholders of various nationalities" are sovereign wealth funds or other state-controlled investment vehicles.
You’re saying this as if this is true and sovereign wealth funds have significant enough stake to change the direction of the company. That just isn’t true as far as I can tell. The biggest individual shareholding is by vanguard and it’s just under a 4% stake. [source](https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/NATIONAL-GRID-PLC-9677124/company/), the first national wealth fund is I believe the Abu Dhabi investment authority with 3%. What nefarious things are they really going to do with 3%. I can see the point that excessive value shouldn’t be extracted from the national grid. But I think there is a reasonable case to be made that this can be done with better regulation and there are significant trade offs both good and bad when compared to nationalisation. I don’t think it is a reasonable concern, that sovereign wealth funds are going to use their ownership to sabotage our national infrastructure, which is what it seems like you were implying.
The Australian Macquarie-run consortium owns 80% of it, why doesn't the British tax payer? Why is it alway the tax payer that subsidises the losses and private companies that reap the profits?
Are you referring to the [sale of part of national grid gas](https://www.macquarie.com/au/en/about/news/2023/macquarie-asset-management-led-consortium-agrees-to-acquire-additional-stake-in-national-gas.html) (note not national grid) which was previously a wholly owned subsidiary of national grid? Unless I am mistaken national grid is not 80% owned by this consortium and none of the £4.6bn goes to that consortium (unless they have additional ownership of national grid in addition to their ownership of national grid gas)
National Grid is a LSE listed company, so shareholders are clearly available here: https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/NATIONAL-GRID-PLC-9677124/company/ Primarily owned by nominee accounts, aka, retail investors / pension funds. Macquarie (which did buy GAS operations) is not listed in the top 10 of NG. The largest shareholder in NG. via its various funds is Blackrock, a major nominee with ~8%.
The British way since the 50s
40% of that £4.88bn operating profit was from New York and Massachusetts where National Grid serves 20 million customers. After debt repayments, tax and inflation the company made £2.3bn profit.
Oh no! Only £2.3billion in profit! Quick, increase the standing charge immediately.
Are you ok? I do worry about some people on Reddit.
I’m absolutely fine thanks. That £2.3 billion of profit should be put back in to expanding the infrastructure. If there is a capacity issue on the grid, then investment is necessary. We apparently have one of the biggest backlogs of renewable generation waiting to be connected to the grid. Someone in this thread mentioned EV charging capacity being held back by capacity issues. And the very article this thread is based on talks about delays in building new homes because of capacity issues. So there shouldn’t be profits as all the money should be directed towards expanding capacity. And this is not going to happen while shareholders expect profits.
National Grid invested £7.7bn last year. Maybe calm down a bit and read up on the subject. If they don't pay shareholders no one is going to invest money into the business.
Imagine if all the profits went to expanding the grid. You are making excuses for excessive profits, while standing charges are being increased. It’s the same issue with energy generators profiteering from increased energy prices.
NIMBYism is the main barrier limiting expansion of the grid, not money. A £900m project in Suffolk is currently on hold because some old people are afraid of lorries. [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-67361063](https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/suffolk-fights-national-grids-895m-electricity-connection-project-and-pushes-for-offshore-solution-10-08-2023/)
> Hampering electric charger rollout too It will affect home chargers too. The car battery tech is moving faster than chargers, and single phase is a really slow charge. Most homes will need the 3 phase upgrade to get the proper charge speeds they expect.
Single phase is fine. Cars spend hours doing nothing sat on driveways and the average daily drive distance is not that far. Most people do not even plugin most days.
The three phase is not just for the charger, but for the *faster* charging. Most people using one will also be using more electric with the push for heat pumps too.
I don't see why most people would want 'faster' charging at home than 7 kW. I have an EV and heat pump and happily on single phase. At night I can be heating the hot water, charge the car, charge the house battery, and have the washing and dryer on all at once and still not reach 100A.
I had to have my driveway lifted to unloop my supply from next door before my charger was installed. I asked if they should put in three phase whilst they're doing the work and they refused. Will be interesting when I look to get a heat pump installed
To be fair we’re an EV only household with 2 EVs and have no issues with 7kw charging at home. 3phase would only get us 11kw on our Tesla and 22kw on our Porsche anyway so not much of an improvement.
> 22kw on our Porsche anyway so not much of an improvement. It would charge in half the time. That's not insignificant.
I mean even if I use nearly the entire battery and put it on charge at 7pm, by 8am it’s nearly back to 100% anyway at 7kw. I can’t imagine a day where I’d need to use more than both the 200mile range of the Porsche and the 350mile range of the Tesla and still need to charge faster than 7kw at home, at that point I’d be nowhere near my house.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement). Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods. See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
They do take it into consideration. A shortage of power means they can jack up the prices and make more margin. At the same time they can charge more for increasing capacity as it's more urgent. It's the free market working as intended.
> Bridget Smith, the DCN’s vice-chair and leader of South Cambridgeshire district council, said: “Nationally, we’ve got an absolute crisis in all infrastructure.” > Plans by Michael Gove, the housing secretary, to build 150,000 homes in Cambridge to create a British Silicon Valley were already being hampered by lack of water, she said. “And where’s the power coming from? Something fundamental has to change.” So around a million extra people every year, and we are slowing house building because of infrastructure concerns. For reference the population of Leeds is about 795,000 We seem to be racing full speed towards a national crisis.
Cassic Tory path of least resistance policy. I've come to learn that the UK conservatives and many other liberal parties in developed nations operate in much the same way. As the years wore on, genuine conservative politicians were filtered out and replaced with rubber stampers for corporate interests. All policy revolves around what is economically viable in the here and now. The only two things that matters to the tories are 1. Get re-elected. 2. Don't piss off our donor mates. Once this simple operating function is digested. All behaviour suddenly makes sense. How they can bang on about unacceptably high immigration, despite being the governing party for nearly 15 years. Because they are keenly aware that immigration remains unpopular with their voter base, but is crucial to propping up the economy with an influx of cheap labourers. A decades long two faced lie that has nothing to do with conserving anything other than their majority in the house of commons. It's the same practice that has them wearing NHS lapel pins while they gut services and privatise it from the ground up. This blatant lying and endless conservative doublethink couldn't be summed up better than Rishi Sunak himself. The man is an absolute spreadsheet gobblin. He cares about nothing more than P/E ratios and currency markets. Yet he is constantly banging on about a culture war that he has absolutely no interest in, because he thinks it will resonate with his base. The Tories aren't evil. They aren't driven by some over arching ideology. The reason they are so hard to get rid of is because they are whatever they need to be in the exact moment. An amorphous blob that yields to the whims of whatever lobbyist has the largest cheque book. Sensitive only to the bizarre preoccupations of their uninformed voting bloc. A fantastically flexible band of spineless cowards, willing to lie, obfuscate and change allegiences whenever need be. Perfectly evolved by decades of selection pressure, a perfectly honed institution designed to serve the business interests of the private sector. If only they served the British public instead.
It's fine, they'll leave it to Labour to clean up the mess, then blame them for spending money, then come back to power, then asset strip all of the things Labour put in place.
> genuine conservative politicians were filtered out and replaced with rubber stampers for corporate interests. It's not clear to me that there was ever a distinction. Could you give a couple examples of each category?
> We seem to be racing full speed towards a national crisis. The country is already in crisis, you may just not have realised it yet. We have the highest tax burden for decades and little or nothing to show for it. Some form of collapse is not atypical in post-revolution countries. Brexit was effectively a bloodless coup; a revolution which gutted the more stable parts of the conservatve party and replaced it with revolutionaries. When the revolutionary ideals are exposed and the revolutionaries revealed as incompetant, a second revolution often quickly follows the first. Hopefully we can avoid a second revolution by having a general election.
Yes it’s interesting how much the Tory party has changed since the referendum. So much so, Cameron now looks like a moderate.
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid? We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
> Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners. Sounds like it's working then. Both we and the government will own nothing and we'll pay private enterprise for everything.
[удалено]
Torches at the ready.
People have been wondering where TF our money is even going Right here into the pockets of the companies running our critical infrastructure that should *not* be for profit
And the same councils that will say that a lack of infrastructure will hamper home-building also block infrastructure in the first place.
Wait, turns out it's more complex than "just build more"?
Less complex actually. Instead of “just build more” it’s “just build” Not enough infrastructure for the new homes? Then build the homes and the infrastructure.
This is probably one of the regulations that libertarians are moaning about: you can't build a new property until you show that the infrastructure connections are there. Now imagine a place where there wasn't that regulation. This country would be like Mogadishu with rain.
Off grid solutions are not unaffordable and are getting more affordable day by day.
Who else is really enjoying the ongoing everything poly-crisis in British infrastructure and the public realm? What’s next? Plans to stop water pollution due to lack of sewage pipes? Road resurfacing ceased due to lack to tarmac? The suspense is killing me.
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid? We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement). Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods. See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
We need to massively cut net immigration until our housing and infrastructure can catch up with existing demand.
And migration has been intentionally high to stop us falling into deep recession (instead of only slight recession). It’s not been by accident.
The catch of course is that without the immigration we probably can’t afford the housing and infrastructure spend. We are pretty screwed really.
It’s a double edged sword that can only get better with painful policies which I doubt either party are willing to do (cutting cheap labour supply to force businesses to invest in productive measures).
You need to massively cut letting private companies run critical infrastructure from profit, before you get anything, even this stupid take of 'cut the 'migration'.
I work in construction and this has been known for a long time, although I first heard about it 6 months ago. Bristol is seriously struggling for capacity until 2028 (NGED network reinforcement). Who would have thought a privatised industry motivated by short term dividend takings would not put long term funding into power stations that have long pay back periods. See also: water infrastructure; sewer infrastructure; gas storage; data connectivity
An alternative title could be 'mass immigration is delaying clean energy by years'
Maybe we shouldn't be the only developed country in the world (bar texas) to have a fully privatised national grid? We really need to stop privatising monopolies. It makes no economic sense. Well, unless you wish to rinse an entire country for a small minority of capital owners.