zlacker

>>RobinL+(OP)
Curtailment, like negative prices, seems like something that it is hard for people to have constructive conversations about.

Probably the cheapest and best option is to build more wind and not care too much if it increases curtailment.

Yes, all the things mentioned should be looked into and done when it makes financial sense but "wasting wind" is much less a thing to worry about than "burning gas", and I'd rather waste wind than waste money.

>>ZeroGr+k8
I understand that curtailment is needed to incentivise private businesses to invest in wind when the output and demand can’t be correlated, but if the government owned the wind farms then it wouldn’t matter if we wasted right? We could just always be overproducing and wouldn’t have to pay for it.

>>mattco+fa
The UK government? Owning things? Surely you can't be serious...

>>jthirk+Xa
They seem to be re-nationalising the railways: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways

Maybe not: "The Transport Secretary announced on 19 October 2022 that the Transport Bill which would have set up GBR would not go ahead in the current parliamentary session."

>>alkjsd+kj
since covid it has been essentially nationalised: the government took on the risk and any pnl

the franchising sysem won't be coming back

>>blibbl+Rl
I'm sure TransPennine Express and Avanti West Coast passengers would love that but it's not quite true (yet?)

>>smcl+Ey
Despite what corbynites tell you the problem has never been privatisation or the franchise system - certainly not the TOCs. Indeed the system has managed to take Marylebone and the Chiltern main line from near closure under government control to providing massive investment and high quality thanks to long term franchises. The competition has lowered prices dramatically for those that care (in 1990 a 3 hour return Manchester to london cost about 3 times the £45 price it does today, but today you also have the option of a 2 hour return on a faster service, the revenue of which subsidies the rest of the network), and has driven usage to record levels arresting massive declines under BR

>>midasu+VH
I don't have a strong opinion personally about the franchise system as I don't use any UK rail. My gut tells me they're not adding any value and they might as well be nationalised but someone whose opinion I trust (rail engineer and YouTuber Gareth Dennis[0]) has said that ditching them and nationalising it entirely wouldn't really fix what people think it would. However it has to be said that TPE and AWC have stood out as particularly dismal services - AWC were found to be fucking around with their already disappointing stats around cancelled services, for example. Hence my comment about users of those services - I would completely understand if they would want an overhaul if not outright nationalisation.

[0] - interestingly his "RailNatter" this Wednesday was titled "How to fix Britain's broken railways". I haven't watched it yet, but it will certainly feature some good insight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmKhVjw1xDA

>>smcl+PC1
Yes both of those franchises are failing, and if they aren't meeting their KPIs then they should have the franchise stripped.

Some of that is infrastructure (the cancellation of platform 15/16 at Piccadilly means the new Ordsall chord is basically useless, but they tried to use it anyway), I don't know enough about TPE to fairly attribute it, but with AWC it's franchise operation -- especially staff availability. Some of that is also government interference.

Why the left think a tory government would be any better running services than the train operators is anyones guess. When you dig down to it they seem to want more tax subsidies to big businesses (the ones who pay the £400 first class peak time returns on Manchester-London) and high income commuters (the ones with 50% discounts via season tickets who cause peak problems in the same way peak is a problem on the electric grid, and who typically earn far more than the average UK person who commutes via bus or van/car)

Fortunately the franchise system means many lines have significant competition, and you can choose based on journey time, price, and reliability.

Where privitisation does have its weakness is the financing of rolling stock.

>>iso163+OT1
I’ve no idea where you get the idea that “the left” (an enormous and diverse block of people) primarily want subsidies for the rich. It seems similar to the same (IMO bad faith) argument American conservatives made about student debt forgiveness - that because a small amount of wealthy people would benefit from a universal thing, it is therefore wrong.

The popular opinions I have seen are:

- “nationalise the railways”

- more frequent, reliable and cheaper services overall

As discussed, nationalising the railways isn’t necessarily the silver bullet many people think, but if you engage with those people and don’t insult/berate them they’ll come round easily. They're not hardline communists, hellbent on the destruction of private companies - they just want better train service somehow and may not fully understand how to get there. That's not to deny the existence of "tankies" and other weirdos, they're just a very very tiny minority.

HS2 should enable the “more frequent” part over the regions it covers. I don’t know how to make services cheaper or more reliable, I imagine subsidies come into it somewhere though, and this inevitably means that yes someone wealthy at some point will benefit from a cheaper rail ticket.