Slashdot Mirror


China To UK: 'Golden' Ties At Crucial Juncture Over Nuclear Delay (reuters.com)

mdsolar quotes a report from Reuters: China has cautioned Britain against closing the door to Chinese money and said relations were at a crucial juncture after Prime Minister Theresa May delayed signing off on a $24 billion nuclear power project. In China's sternest warning to date over May's surprise decision to review the building of Britain's first nuclear plant in decades, Beijing's ambassador to London said that Britain could face power shortages unless May approved the Franco-Chinese deal. "The China-UK relationship is at a crucial historical juncture. Mutual trust should be treasured even more," Liu Xiaoming wrote in the Financial Times. "I hope the UK will keep its door open to China and that the British government will continue to support Hinkley Point -- and come to a decision as soon as possible so that the project can proceed smoothly." The comments signal deep frustration in Beijing at May's move to delay, her most striking corporate intervention since winning power in the political turmoil which followed Britain's June 23 referendum to leave the European Union.

18 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Given that the wholesale price being guaranteed by the government for each kWh was massively higher than even the price consumers are expected to be paying when it was due to open I see no reason to go ahead with it. Energy prices should be dropping not climbing as we have better renewables being developed.

    1. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that the wholesale price being guaranteed by the government for each kWh was massively higher than even the price consumers are expected to be paying when it was due to open I see no reason to go ahead with it. Energy prices should be dropping not climbing as we have better renewables being developed.

      Yes but quite a few politicians would have got backhanders, erm I mean consultation fees

    2. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Pax681 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The UK is mostly in a poor region for solar so that is not really an option, and wind performance isn't exactly spectacular. They would have to install massive amounts of offshore wind overcapacity to significantly reduce carbon production, which would be even more expensive. Their options are limited.

      oh.. so please.. tell my why it is that 57.7 per cent of Scotland's electricity came from renewables in 2015? Do you think it' because Scotland does rather well with shitloads of offshore and wind generation? .. I know it is .. try researching before opening your mouth and letting your belly rumble. we currently use the following...
      Hydro-electric power
      Wind power
      Wave power
      Tidal power
      Biofuels
      Biodiesel
      Biogas, anaerobic digestion and landfill gas
      Solid biomass
      Micro systems
      Solar energy
      Geothermal energy
      And are world leaders on research too! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and behold the plethora of renewable stuff that gives us more than half our energy needs in Scotland... so tell me... how does it feel to be someone who could not be more wrong if your name was W . Wrongy Wrongenstien???

    3. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 4, Informative

      > you forget all the problems with wind

      No, I don't. Because most of them are made up by people who don't work in the energy industry, work for other sources (the nuclear and coal industries publish a constant stream of anti-renewables materials) or just don't want turbines in their backyard and will pick up any any old crap they find on the 'net as "proof", like YouTube videos.

      Let me make this very simple: the people who actually buy, sell and finance these things *don't care about these made up problems* that anti-wind people dream up. They are as cogent as complaining about the color of the blades. Want proof?

      https://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/WEO2015SUM.pdf

    4. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Pax681 · · Score: 4, Informative

      power outages? only in storms or some such.. sorry bud but apart from the 1970's when strikes hit and there was a 3 day week... no power outages here apart from after storms etc. to say it's a shortage of generating power is is just plain bullshit and you made it up. .. Fairlytale? 57.7% of power generated for Scotland was renewable and we even exported some 24%..
      As for paying several times the price? you are a fucking idiot pal, i pay quite cheap rates with my electricity supplier and it's mostly renewable ( www.ovoenergy.com ) not because i am all green and that but because IT'S FUCKING CHEAPER AND I WANT TO SAVE MONEY!
      same reason i used energy saving light bulbs.. it's cheaper on my pocket You sir are full of shit!

    5. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 3, Informative

      cost is:

      wind: $1.50 / .32 = $4.70 / Wc nuclear: $8.25 / .80 = $10.30 / Wc

      An installed watt of nuclear generates 3 to 5 times the amount of electricity in a year as an installed watt of wind. And you get the added value of reliability and dependability.

    6. Re: It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Except the UK has almost completely stopped burning coal for electricity...

      Converting British coal plants to burning wood chips from shredded American trees does not count as going carbon free.

    7. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      same reason i used energy saving light bulbs.. it's cheaper on my pocket You sir are full of shit!

      Scots are the only reason I might use a site like slashdot which used video instead of text. I'm imagining your comment spoken emphatically and with the appropriate accent... and want to subscribe to your youtube channel

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:It was a terrible deal for Britain anyway by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      "All the problems with wind" is a bit of an overexaggeration. In fact, the video nicely shows how resilient it is. For instance, the first clip is of a wind turbine on fire. Notice how the rest of the wind farm is not on fire. The wind farm would have perhaps lost 2% of its capacity, but it has resilience in numbers.

      To start with, yes, I think the UK needs new nuclear capacity - we need *something* that's not coal that is good at doing baseload.

      But on the other hand: from the point of view of the National Grid, wind does have certain advantages:

      * Each generator is small and there are an awful lot of them. A generator or two going offline doesn't cause sudden capacity problems. However, a large nuclear generating plant going offline suddenly can cause a huge power shortage that can be solved only by shedding load (in other words, blackouts).

      * The wind, over a period of the next few hours, is pretty easy to predict. The wind doesn't just suddenly and unexpectedly stop blowing. You can pretty much say the wind will be doing in 10 minutes time what it's doing now, and if it's not going to do that (e.g. due to the passage of a frontal system) you can at least know what it's going to do. Not so with a large powerplant which may suddenly go offline with no warning.

  2. Chinese island by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're unaware, China has made an artificial island in the South China sea, near the Philippines. It's claiming a lot of sea off Vietnam, Malasia and Phillipines waters as its own territory. It's even build an airbase on the new island and placed ground-to-air missiles on it.

    It's military has targetted US spy planes flying over the islands, despite those planes having permission from the Philippines to fly over its sea.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/30/world/asia/what-china-has-been-building-in-the-south-china-sea.html?_r=0

    UN has already adjudicated on this, and ruled the island as fake and the Chinese claim as false.

    Do you really want their nuclear power plant in a western country? They seem to want to stir up a war.

    1. Re:Chinese island by pereric · · Score: 4, Insightful

      so far they've pursued their irresponsible dreams responsibly, that could change at any time

      Mostly, from our point, yes. But probably many in in occupied Tibet or of the Uyghurs (and many other ethnical minorities) beg to differ.

    2. Re:Chinese island by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      BS: China was hegemony in S. E. Asia to tell others what to do. It wants Taiwan. It wants all of the S. China Sea. It wants the U.S. far, far away and unable to protect S. Korea and Japan from Chinese military adventures. If it needs to go to war to get that and its Communist oiks still running the show, then it will do that. There will be no public opinion to oppose it since public opinion is not allowed in their kingdom.

      Want to see what their view of S. E. Asia is? Look at Tibet and what they did to its people.

  3. Chinese imports will ruin Britain by ickleberry · · Score: 3

    Given that the British economy is mostly based on people sitting in office chairs surrounded by imported Chinese goods and that the British are already completely dependent on China for the most basic of everyday products it is in the interest of the Chinese to further nurture this culture of dependency on China. The British are deluded to think that the Chinese will continue to shower them in iPhones and PC's while they pump out nothing but intangible financial services. The Chinese are already realising they don't need the Western business suit middleman, having already made their way into the smartphone industry with completely domestic models and taken over the drone industry almost completely. Soon the Brits will have to start selling out to the Chinese bigtime if they want to continue their office chair based lifestyle for longer. I'd be very worried about the Chinese attempts to strong arm their way in and would be trying to keep them at bay and reduce dependency on imports from that country

  4. Re:Not just the Chinese by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...Yep, the same French government that is going to be taking a lead role in the Article 50 negotiations governing Brexit, already seems to be taking a hardline stance on the potential terms and, like all other members of the EU, has the ability to veto any deal that might be negotiated over Brexit. That all bodes well for a better Brexit deal with lower trade tariffs than the WTO default, doesn't it?

    Anybody who thinks the UK will get some sort of sweetheart deal on access to the common market is delusional ...the same goes for anybody who thinks that only getting access to the common market on WTO defaults won't have an impact on the UK economy because UK trade in goods and services with the EU is so minimal as to be unimportant. I'm pretty sure the negotiations about a post Brexit relationship with the EU nations will not be hallmarked by the EU doing Britain any favours. These negotiations will be long be hard and quite mercilessly focused on what's in the best interest of the EU and as the negotiations drag on the uncertainty over what future they will face will either deter companies from making investments in the UK or if they have UK based operations they will simply move those operations elsewhere in Europe where the political classes are less likely to shoot themselves in both feet.

    Meanwhile, having annoyed the Chinese, Theresa May is now apparently trying to improve relations with Russia which, while it definitely needs to happen in its own right, doesn't exactly scan well in connection with alienating the Chinese the week prior.

    Not to mention that fact that normalising relations with Russia as long as the Ukrainian wound continues to fester will piss off a whole string off their allies, most of whom the UK will be conducting sensitive trade and economic negotiations that will severely affect the economic future of the UK for the foreseeable future.

  5. A lice little country you have there by grungeman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Liu: Well suppose some of your power plants was to get broken and power lines start getting cut, er, power outages could occur during general inspection, like.
    Xi: It wouldn't be good for business would it, Ma'am?
    May: Are you threatening me?
    Xi: Oh, no, no, no.
    Liu: Whatever made you think that, Ma'am?
    Xi: The Prime Minister doesn't think we're nice people, Liu.
    Liu: We're your buddies, Ma'am.
    Xi: We want to look after you.
    May: Look after me?
    https://youtu.be/pm5mtpPtW1Q?t...

    --

    Signature deleted by lameness filter.
  6. Re:Not just the Chinese by Zocalo · · Score: 3, Informative

    I totally agree; there's never going to be a sweetheart deal, nor was there ever any chance of one. The EU has to look out for the EU at this point. Basically, I think it's going to come down a choice between an EEA access agreement similar to Norway's with all the strings that entails, or a full exit and having to pay trade tariffs to the EU with all the strings that entails. There will be a little give and take on the details, but pretty much everything else comes down to window dressing on the EEA terms & conditions. Obviously any EEA access agreement that includes the almost inevitable free travel precondition is going to be considered completely unacceptable to most of those who voted Brexit, so I'm really looking forwards to see how Theresa May tries to salvage this and get another term - and who she's going to throw under the bus to try and pull it off (other than David Davis and Boris Johnson, obviously).

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  7. Re:Not just the Chinese by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Scotland will leave. Gibraltar will join them, either as part of Scotland or as an independent micronation. Otherwise they will have to accept joint Spanish sovereignty because once outside the EU, Spain will no longer be obliged to make passing through the border they depend on easy.

    If Scotland leaves Sterling, it will only have to retain its own debts. It's bizarre to think it could be any other way. You are correct that the UK national debt is not tied to the currency, it's tied to the UK government. If Soctland retains Sterling it will be obliged to contribute to reducing that debt, because the value of Sterling is partially dependent on the ability for it to be serviced and because any agreement would likely mandate that they do. If they adopt the Euro, only debts belonging to the Scottish government and secured on Scottish assets will be carried with them, and the rest will be left to the rUK.

    That's why the rUK will likely agree to let them keep Sterling, assuming they still want it. Post Brexit, they may feel that the Euro is a better bet, especially if Gibraltar joins them.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  8. security experts were worried by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "But Nick Timothy, May's influential joint chief of staff, also said last year that security experts were worried the state-owned Chinese group would have access to computer systems that could allow it to shut down Britain's energy production.

    "Rational concerns about national security are being swept to one side because of the desperate desire for Chinese trade and investment," Timothy wrote in October 2015 in a column for a conservative news and comment website. " http://www.reuters.com/article...

    Sorry China not everyone's your bitch....