Krill

u/Krill@feddit.uk
0 posts · 99 comments

Recent posts

No posts.

Recent comments

Actually this gives more rights to people. Instead of saying "you lack capacity so you can't make this decision" social workers will be able to work more closely with people to make sure care packages are designed how they want, and will help stop care providers from being overly restrictive, trying to protect themselves from safeguarding and the CQC.

It will help reduce the burden of wasteful court applications, legal fees and judges time for the cases where everyone is in agreement. It will help get people discharged from hospital faster into their own homes.

It doesn't change the situation where a person doesn't want to go into the care environment (supported accommodation or even there own home with care), that still follows the old process.

This is actually a good thing.

From the article: "The BMA’s findings provoked a furious response from the Royal College of Nursing. A RCN spokesperson said: “Advanced nursing practice is highly skilled, delivered by expert registered nurses and is underpinned by a masters level education and a comprehensive range of knowledge, skills and capabilities.

“These nurses are central to the delivery of safe and effective care across many services. They are not substitutes for other professions. They are autonomous professionals, delivering complex care as part of multi-disciplinary teams.”

Obnoxious is an interesting description of the BMA.

The original post is in relation to commercial solar PV, not residential, which is a power generator rather than power consumer.

Except via planning law, which is not in the direct control of grid operators (lobbying...), it is not within the gift of the grid operators to stop or agree to the co-location of batteries.

Given that both solar panels, and wind turbines, arr DC generators, the direct connection to batteries via DC-DC charge controllers (which is the most efficient way to charge batteries) does not have anything to do with grid operators, so their commercial interests are irrelevant to the implementation, if that is necessary to create a financially sustainable asset for the power plant owner.

For reference: https://modoenergy.com/research/co-location-battery-energy-storage-solar-ac-dc-coupling

In relation to residential solar PV...which I think you were commenting on, inverters can be set to zero export. If laws are created to specifically fuck over residential solar, the worst case will always be to decommission existing solar PV (say, it was taxed annually on a per panel basis, make it unlawful to self consume etc, but it is possible to set inverters to zero export so one should never have to pay a charge for exporting).

But so long as one can self consume and batteries are available (note even house batteries could be made unlawful, ie due to bullshit argument based on safety), there will always be a system that can reduce costs unless power costs 0 short of a truly broken system. ie grid operators charge power producers for both over production and at the same time charge users for using), but even then solar production cost is essentially 0: fill your own batteries and zero export once full, then discharge a portion at night if profitable.

Pumped hydro is without a doubt the most effective energy storage method but requires the right geology and geography, and is only part of a solution. Check the key statistics on this link to see just how nuts it can be when paired with reliable solar over production. https://british-hydro.org/pumped-storage-hydropower/