I remember when north sea oil and gas was supposed to bring us energy independence. With wind and solar we could get a lot closer than we are currently. Wouldn't it be lovely not to have to care about Russia or the middle east...
2689
GoblinGreen_1 day ago
+973
The last month we've had days of 90% renewables. There's some huge new off shore wind farms given the green light too as well as some great new energy storage solutions. Not just batteries either, but inertia storage which is more efficient.
Check out the goodnewsuk sub.
973
Sunshinetrooper871 day ago
+232
that's usually for electricity, which is great but our other energy, including transportation and heating, is largely fossil fuels.
232
NewCrashingRobot1 day ago
+211
70% of passenger trains are electric, with the entire UK rail network being 38% electrified.
22.6% market share of all new car registrations in the UK are battery electric vehicles.
All this to say, a push towards renewables makes them cheaper, which pushes other modes of transport towards electricity.
211
Pheeshfud1 day ago
+32
If we kick gas off the grid electricity prices will drop and that switch will accelerate.
32
zosolm1 day ago
+1
Gas prices will drop too
1
Reostat1 day ago
+49
Trains in the UK are insanely expensive.
Every day it's "renewables, cheaper than ever!' and some report about how much x country produced. The reality as a CONSUMER though, is continuing to pay out the ass.
It sucks.
(This is in no way a knock against renewables, build them out).
49
tomjone51 day ago
+20
I wish we invested properly in rail infrastructure in the UK. It costs me over twice as much to get the train to work than it would to drive, and it takes about 45 minutes longer including the walk to/from the station.
Labour talked about renationalisation but not in a meaningful way that would actually address the insane prices and shoddy infrastructure.
20
parsuval1 day ago
+6
With any luck, HS2 will spark a renewed focus on rail travel after its completion.
We really do need to shake things up when it comes to rail.
6
barnfodder1 day ago
+73
Almost as if privatisation is worse for the consumer every time it happens.
73
Outrageous_Donut76811 day ago
+32
Nothing wrong with it in certain markets, but whoever decided to privatise foundational essential infrastructure should be flogged
32
famousbrouse1 day ago
+33
So Thatcher should be flogged then. She privatised Gas, Telecoms, Water, Oil, Electricity, Aerospace, Ports, Freight, Steel and of course Council Homes
Rail came later under John Major.
Common theme here... Conservatives
33
Eastern_Hornet_64321 day ago
+6
Here in Ireland I'm still waiting on Fine Gael to deliver on their promise of a referendum to enshrine public ownership of our water supply into our constitution. I.E. prevent our water infrastructure from ever being privatized and sold to, for example, Nestlé.
6
Bruvvimir1 day ago
+8
Completely unrelated statements, but yeah, trains in the UK are stupid expensive.
8
Reostat1 day ago
+4
I meant it in the broader picture of the idea of rising energy costs. But yeah. It's just annoying and I'm ranting.
I installed a heat pump at my place which has a massive upfront cost, electricity prices are high despite renewable rollouts and lowering energy costs to producers. Everything is just expensive.
4
Alpacapalooza1 day ago
+75
It's a long-term project, but are there any pushes for modernisation of heating systems with heat pumps in the UK?
75
NewCrashingRobot1 day ago
+84
Yes. In the UK is the Boiler Upgrade Scheme (BUS) provides a £7,500 upfront grant for homeowners in England and Wales to replace fossil fuel heating systems with electric ones i.e. heat pumps.
There is also currently 0% VAT on the installation of heat pumps until March 31, 2027.
While some energy suppliers like Octopus Energy, British Gas, and EDF offer specialized "Heat Pump Tariffs" with cheaper off-peak electricity rates to lower running costs, and even some mortgage lenders offer cashback for installing energy-efficient tech through approved schemes.
84
djpeesh1 day ago
+63
You do that and then Hounslow council tells you to remove it as it needs planning permission and they aren’t going to give planning permission and to use a gas boiler instead. So that’s 25k down the tube. Ask me how I know
63
JivanP1 day ago
+33
Sincerely, why on earth would a heat pump need planning permission?
33
Ch1pp1 day ago
+15
Listed building perhaps?
15
JivanP1 day ago
+12
That's pretty much the only thing I could think of, but what residence is a listed building? Hounslow Council lays out their criteria here:
https://www.hounslow.gov.uk/environment/improving-sustainability-home/9
12
IvivAitylin1 day ago
+8
> but what residence is a listed building?
While it's not super common there's plenty out there. You can browse them on a map here: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/map-search/
Just pulling up Hounslow centre there's a couple of residential properties right in the middle, though the commenter is probably talking about one more on the outskirts if they're doing serious renovations. They're a pain to deal with though, since as OP noted it seriously restricts what work you can do with the building, especially if it ever needs maintenance or repairs. (Want to replace the single glazed windows with double glazing? Good luck with that).
8
Stubot011 day ago
+14
Oof, I was just thinking I’d spring for this. You just saved me 25k 😂
14
adomo1 day ago
+13
Biggest issue we run into in Ireland with similar stock of houses is that the insulation and associated improvements to make a great pump effective are too costly, especially now
13
Letstalkreaper1 day ago
+11
So I love me some heat pumps. I'm not sure how old your house is but mine was built in 1972. I put a heat pump in 4 years ago in a climate that gets down to -35C ambient (-40+ with windchill). I haven't done any insulation upgrades except for windows on the top floor. The first year before we put in solar we came in less expensive than the furnace we replaced.
Now that we have solar we save 4k per year. There's a good chance you don't need as many improvements as you think (obviously they would make things more efficient, but they're not necessary)
11
No-Spoilers1 day ago
+7
The real future of heating is geothermal, even on a small scale. Every town could have their own well. There are a couple companies with very promising work towards making it happen in the coming years.
7
TheSylvaniamToyShop1 day ago
+24
Electrification of transport and heating is underway. It is more efficient and economical than using fossil fuels. Structural inertia and FUD are now the greatest barriers to deployment.
Norway is now at ~98% BEV for cars, Denmark at ~80%. DK, NL, Sweden are around BEV 20% for nee trucks. Battery electric buses were over 90% of new city buses in a dozen European countries last year. Heat pumps made up 50% of 2025 new domestic heating installations in Germany, and have been the dominant system in Nordics for some time.
While some work has been done by the government, more work needs to be done to accelerate the deployment rates here. Structural issues like the cost and availability of public chargers for cars, and reducing the spark gap for heat pumps, spring to mind.
24
Ok_Math45761 day ago
+8
Electric heat pumps for heating and hot water. Electric trucks and vans for transport. It’s happening elsewhere, wake up
8
Significant_Ad12561 day ago
+6
Fortunately many of those things are moving to electricity too. I got paid for charging my car the other day.
6
Nebresto1 day ago
+3
How does that work?
3
graffight1 day ago
+6
Tariffs like Agile Octopus from Octopus Energy sometimes dip into the negative, resulting in you being paid to use electricity (as an incentive to take up excess grid resource).
6
wintersdark1 day ago
+5
One way is you use your cars battery as part of the grid - it charges at low demand times and supplies power back at high demand times. It basically becomes an additional battery on the grid. You basically but electricity when it's c**** and sell it back when it's expensive.
Edit: obviously, with limits for how far it'll discharge, time constraints, etc etc.
5
DiabolicallyRandom1 day ago
+5
Gotta get on those EV's ASAP. Probably the best place to get them from right now is Korea... or China if you must!
5
pawala71 day ago
+48
Inertial storage is actually a pretty bad energy storage method, it self-discharges too fast and has limited capacity and scalability. Giant flywheels that need to be perfectly balanced, lubricated and kept in a vacuum to stay close to efficient are really tough to scale. It's useful for stabilizing supply short-term like a capacitor, but isn't viable for storing more than a few minutes worth of energy due to basic thermodynamics.
Pumped storage (liquid or gas) is actually the most efficient method we have so far, but is limited by available geography. But for most cases, batteries are still the most practical tech we have.
48
Xalara1 day ago
+19
At this point, it’s gonna be large scale batteries. Modern lithium ion are great except for the fire issues when built at an industrial level. There’s some new chemistries that look to be mass produced soon that, while less energy dense, solve the fire issues and use cheaper materials that are perfect for industrial scale grid storage.
19
pawala71 day ago
+10
Agreed. Though for now, it's mostly going to be LFP just because mass production is already underway, then maybe Sodium Ion to scale up and cut costs. Then, hopefully at some point we get more breakthroughs in redox flow battery tech.
10
CuriousitySparksJoy1 day ago
+8
I help build redox flow batteries in Scotland! They're a promising technology, there's some massive vanadium flow battery projects in China. Our company is currently building what will be the largest flow battery in Europe once it's complete :)
8
BTCbob1 day ago
+15
sorry but inertia storage does not hold significant amounts of energy. It has some niche cases like frequency stabilization but in terms of Joules/$, hydro is king, followed by batteries.
15
Naomi_Tokyo1 day ago
+10
I'd describe it more as "inertia storage serves an important role in grid resilience but isn't a meaningful form of grid-scale energy storage"
10
Hat_Maverick1 day ago
+5
Uranium fever has done and got me down
5
CV90_1201 day ago
+3
> inertia storage which is more efficient.
It's not more efficient than lithium batteries which beat it by 5-10% depending, but it is more efficient than many other storage battery chemistries.
3
robplays1 day ago
+236
Unfortunately, the '80s and '90s decided that tax cuts for the rich were more important.
236
ElbowDroppedLasagne1 day ago
+110
Don't worry, it will trickle down any moment now....
110
hackingdreams1 day ago
+29
Weird that the trickle is yellow, though, huh?
29
skibbin1 day ago
+19
Those shoulder padded suits, Filofaxes and giant mobile phones weren't c****.
19
SomethingNotOriginal1 day ago
+9
I think there was also a decision based on 'i need money now' which the Norwegian Sovereign Fund didn't have to compete with at the same level.
Do you think that the gas fields being opened up in the 80's would have been welcomed if everything was going into the state and being sat on rather than spent?
This isn't coming from protory (as a swimmer, my favourite stroke forever will be thatchers), but hindsight is always is 20/20.
Same reason people rag on Brown for selling off gold when it was at a historic low that a lot of the rest of the world fell , and there was a new literal gold mine expected to open in NI that still isn't to this day, going through nimbyhell.
9
JyveAFK1 day ago
+6
Aye. There's no way at least ONE successive government would have been able to resist raiding the Sovereign funds if needed to top up a budget. Elections would be won by whoever said "Why are we all paying so much and getting so little, RELEASE OUR MONEY!"
6
Historical_Owl_16351 day ago
+92
Problem is we only ever seem to care about becoming energy independent during a crisis.
Hopefully this kicks us up the ass but at the same time if the Strait reopens tomorrow I wouldn’t be surprised if we put it back on the low priority list.
92
davepage_mcr1 day ago
+35
Nah. Ed Miliband has been doing a good job of getting UK renewables back on track after the Tories fucked it up, before this Iran stuff happened. There's just a lead time on getting things done.
35
shoobs51 day ago
+12
Im usually first in line to critisise the Tories. But during their time they removed coal from the Grid and brought us from ~7% renewables to about 45% renewables.
12
Enough_Efficiency1781 day ago
+11
It started out with a lot of support but they U-turned on that policy and then started hacking it to pieces
11
F_A_F1 day ago
+55
Every time I hear this, I get frustrated because it's not the UK who drills the oil, it's BP/Shell etc. Yes we get to tax their profits but it's not "our oil" it's theirs and they get to sell on global markets.
55
LastTrainLongGone1 day ago
+26
It is taxed at 78% so not a terrible deal for society.
Selling on global markets gives those supers more profit which means more tax for UK gov.
26
Alto_DeRaqwar1 day ago
+16
Yeah but the fact they let that tax be used for general funding was a wasted opportunity. Look at Norway and their sovereign wealth fund; that will provide long term benefit to the country. Compared to the one off benefit the UK took which is currently expiring as the North Sea runs dry.
16
augur421 day ago
+7
If the entire UK housing stock was properly insulated to modern standards it would reduce the UKs consumption of natural gas by about 50%. The UK also happens to import 50% of it's natural gas needs.
If only i) better insulation had been written into new build regulations three decades ago and ii) the post build government run external wall insulation scheme hadn't had a 98% issue rate that is going to cost the government a *lot* more than the grants to get fixed because the cowboy builders didn't know how to install it properly.
Not that I'm bitter or anything.
Same goes for upgrading the national grid, they don't have the trained staff to perform the necessary work to achieve any of the deadlines. The rate needed to triple six years ago to hit the carbon zero 2050 target, and every year it fails to achieve that rate means future years will have to be even faster *or* the target date will move decades further away. Guess which one I'm expecting it to be.
The single best option any household can do is get solar+battery if they have the right roof and work away from home during the day. The second best cheaper option is balcony solar, when it gets legislated later this year. C**** panels with self-installation an idiot could manage that provide free electricity during the peak usage demands daytime hours.
Oh and decouple the electricity price from the most expensive generation option (almost always gas), otherwise heat pumps are *never* going to be a fiscally better option than gas combi boilers.
7
Sweet-Competition-151 day ago
+7
It would be lovely not to worry about donnie.
7
SlakingSWAG1 day ago
+7
Energy independance is extra fucked considering Reform is all but guaranteed to be the next government, and they've gone so far as to say they'll literally destroy already existing wind and solar farms for some reason. Absolute dead-end country
7
wdomeika1 day ago
+1092
Trump is already gunning for Starmer. I heard Vance throw shade all over him in a news interview in Poland …
1092
lollysticky1 day ago
+551
Shade from a couch-lover with the charisma of a damp rag
551
ChinaCatProphet1 day ago
+148
And the eye makeup of an 80s New Wave singer.
148
VRNord1 day ago
+27
Maybe she’s born with it
27
BarrelMaker691 day ago
+35
Maybe it’s Valvoline
35
SkaveRat1 day ago
+6
I constantly expect him to start some card magic trick
6
Trisa1331 day ago
+8
I've never seen any man wear so much makeup or except for clowns and KISS.
8
WesternTelevision5791 day ago
+3
The only man who wears more is Trump himself with his signature orange aesthetic. Can file that one under clowns though.
3
RGJ5871 day ago
+42
Don't ask how the rag got damp....
42
SauronOfDucks1 day ago
+13
He used it to wipe down the couch?
13
Chardan00011 day ago
+132
Trump is always gunning for Starmer. Loves to compare him to Churchill. Even the f****** Irish PM defended Starmer to Trump.
132
zuzg1 day ago
+79
"He may be a Eejit but he's our Eejit and he's certainly better than that shitehawk"
79
TtotheC811 day ago
+81
That's the funniest thing about this whole shitshow. Trump is making everyone realise that our inter-European feuds are family arguments compared to the existential threat that America has become.
81
ASVP-Pa9e1 day ago
+23
Ultimately, we're all European and share far more values and culture than we don't.
A united Europe is the only way to guarantee safety & prosperity going forward.
23
Acrobatic-Ad5841 day ago
+11
He doesn't seem to get ruffled by it
11
SauronOfDucks1 day ago
+72
I'm hoping JD Vance will come over and give some of our far-right parties the ol' Kiss-Of-Death endorsements he's so good at.
72
OkFix40741 day ago
+153
this if anything will only make Starmer look more stronger in UK - not weaker !
153
Redpin1 day ago
+88
God knows it helped the governing party in Canada.
88
kaisadilla_0x11 day ago
+22
Yup. Since 2025, almost every time a European leader has clashed with the US, that leader has gone up in the polls. Trump and the GOP are radioactive in Europe right now, even the parties they support here have to mark distance with them.
22
RexLatro1 day ago
+52
Worked for us in Canada, apparently most people threatened by the US tend to vote strongly against parties that want to imitate him
52
cardew-vascular1 day ago
+31
I did enjoy the last few months of no fucks to give Trudeau. He went from measured statements to I'm done I can do and say what I want. I wonder if Starmer feels the writing on the wall here.
31
OkCaterpillar89411 day ago
+4
We have local elections in May so it will be interesting to see what happens.
4
BasicFishOutOfWater1 day ago
+4
Go figure!
4
waltz_with_potatoes1 day ago
+35
Because Vance is in thiels pocket and Thiel wants reform in power.
35
ITAdministratorHB1 day ago
+7
Trump has had a hate-boner for Starmer ever since it came out that Labour was trying to help Kamala and the democrats in the previous election.
7
Acrobatic-Ad5841 day ago
+9
Yes, some members of labour party went handing out leaflets for Kamala. Just like Vance interfering in Hungary!
9
monkeybawz1 day ago
+11
Trump is the best thing to happen to starmer. Before this, starmer was a useless bag of shit in a grey suit. Trump has made him look like a statesman for the ages.
11
clipse2701 day ago
+851
MI6 could probably find the Epstein files
851
Kukukichu1 day ago
+375
Probably already has them
375
Broken_Reality1 day ago
+97
Yeah we sent James Bond to the island to infiltrate the paedophile ring and he had P**** Galore.
Oh the old Bond movie female names were so bad lol.
97
AdCreepy51651 day ago
+16
You think the names where bad, then maybe you haven't seen how they were portrayed in the movies. They were sex symbols, and everyone knew it. The teen snow bunny who kept trying to get in bonds pants was the height of it.
16
Furthur_slimeking1 day ago
+13
What? That's a perfectly normal name, and my friend Fanny Cummings agrees.
13
downtofinance1 day ago
+8
Probably why Andrew got tossed out on his ass.
8
ebles1 day ago
+100
Epstein was friends with the late Queen's favourite son. They probably have their own files.
100
Scioptic-1 day ago
+35
I imagine they've already got them. Plus ol' Charlie's going to be pissed at members of his own family being dragged through the mud (as they should be) - so why no retaliation by leaking the full thing to piss off the yanks? My own conspiracy theory is that I bet someone in the security service has probably briefed him along the lines of "if we do that, it'll be worse in the long run, because there's even more terrible things about royals in there that hasn't yet been revealed."
35
ShortStoryIntros1 day ago
+7
ahh the old adage of trading dirt, as long as you don't get any mud on you
7
jert31 day ago
+12
Most of the world's intelligence services service the billionaire/vampire class at this point. Protecting a nation from a leadership compromised by a child sex abuse operation isn't exactly a priority. If anything, releasing the files would be bad for stability, and their owners.
12
helpnxt1 day ago
+7
Be really fun if Mandelson or Andrew just happened to name a name
7
Pillowsmeller181 day ago
+7
MI6 had evidence of Trump running for president in 2016 with the help of Russians. CIA just dropped the ball call bullshit.
7
tristan16161 day ago
+8
Next James Bond movie plot
8
Super-Nuntendo1 day ago
+1
Won't do anything, as there are British politicians and royal family links in there too
1
konq1 day ago
+5
if they had them, we'd have seen them. No way they'd just take trump shitting all over the UK the past month if they had leverage like that.
My money is on no one has them. Some people have said Israel has them, but if that was the case, there would be no attempts from Trump to have any kind of Iran ceasefire.
The most incriminating files were shredded years ago.
5
Heisenbergg551 day ago
+736
K. Starmer saying he's "fed up" is the most honest thing a Western leader has said in months
The UK has ZERO leverage over any of the three variables wrecking its energy market right now: Trump's foreign policy, Putin's gas taps and whether a ceasefire in the Gulf holds for another week That's a brutal position for any PM to be in
The Lebanon criticism is notable though Starmer publicly calling Israeli strikes "wrong" during an active ceasefire is a harder line than most NATO leaders will touch
736
LDNVoice1 day ago
+78
Holds? Didn't it already get broken lmao
78
Woffingshire1 day ago
+50
Well *technically* Israel wasn't named in the ceasefire so weren't part of it so the US - Iran ceasefire is still unbroken... *Technically*... According to Israel...
50
major_hyman1 day ago
+33
Except That’s not what the Pakistanis said who brokered the deal. They were included and so was Lebanon a part of it the deal.
33
SnooPuppers86981 day ago
+21
you cant just include a country in a ceasefire without them agreeing lmao wtf
21
Woffingshire1 day ago
+8
I know, which is why *technically* the ceasefire hasn't been broken even though the war has carried on as normal.
The whole ceasefire is completely moot at this point but *technically* hasn't been broken
8
SnooPuppers86981 day ago
+6
if iran has stopped lobbing missiles at american bases, it hasnt carried on as normal imo.
6
punninglinguist1 day ago
+7
I'm not an international diplomacy buff. Is it normal to go through all that effort and not get anything in writing?
7
KrisKat931 day ago
+17
Well no but I guess that's what happens when diplomacy only happens in frantic phone calls during the last two hours of an arbitrary deadline because one side went psycho threatening to genocide the other.
17
rabidstoat1 day ago
+4
We apparently document things in tweets and "truths" these days, from what I can tell.
4
MiniGiantSpaceHams1 day ago
+5
Ceasefires are often chaotic to start. There's usually some violations for a few hours or days until things settle. Doesn't necessarily mean it won't end up holding up, but doesn't mean it will either. We shall see.
5
rabidstoat1 day ago
+9
Though that's true, we're past the first 24 hours.
And usually, the rockiness of the first 4 to 24 hours is a result of orders trickling through to the lowest level of control, especially if there's a 'mosaic' structure like with Iran. But Israel wasn't accidentally firing missiles because they were still trying to get everything in order after the cease fire. They were firing missiles because they rejected the cease fire as it applied to Lebanon.
9
Darkone5391 day ago
+56
>The UK has ZERO leverage over any of the three variables wrecking its energy market right now:
Oddly enough they kind of do. There's a reason trump is so focused on the uk. Without uk bases they found their bombing runs doubled in flight time. The only ones big enough to hold their biggest bombers are in either American or British soil. Which gives them some say with Trump.
>Putin's gas taps and whether a ceasefire in the Gulf holds for another week That's a brutal position for any PM to be in
The uk has long made its choice in Russia. They are perfectly content backing Ukraine.
>The Lebanon criticism is notable though Starmer publicly calling Israeli strikes "wrong" during an active ceasefire is a harder line than most NATO leaders will touch
Seems like the uk, france and Germany all agreed a position on this one.
56
LeNordique1 day ago
+11
What's keeping the UK from investing heavily in nuclear power?
11
winmace1 day ago
+23
Nothing, we already do, and SMRs are a big area of investment at the moment as an alternative to the big nuclear plants of the past. Faster to build, modular so can be expanded as needed and utilises expertise we already have in building the same reactors for nuclear subs.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies
23
RedofPaw1 day ago
+6
Hinkley point is over budget and over schedule.
Meanwhile wind turbine are going up in the north sea and even with limited sun compared to other places solar is also growing.
6
gmc987651 day ago
+11
Nuclear costs twice as much as any other form of power.
It would be cheaper to install enough renewable capacity to meet 5× the average demand plus enough gas generation to cover the remaining few percent when that isn't enough.
Also, it suffers from the same issue as renewables: you can't control the output to match demand. Well, you can but it doesn't actually save you any money; the cost of nuclear power is dominated by the capital cost, so you pay (heavily) for capacity whether you use it or not.
11
OllyDee1 day ago
+207
Yeah well, aren’t we all mate.
207
soapinthepeehole1 day ago
+8
A majority of Americans are also fed up with Trump and Putin on this and so many other things. So tired of the world being run by sociopaths and outright psychopaths.
8
YesterdayIcy19631 day ago
+32
There was that guy from Canada who made that speech at Davos about middle powers banding together. Canada has one of the largest oil reserves on the planet. Why not talk to that guy.
32
Everestkid1 day ago
+12
We have oil reserves but no way to get them to the European market.
If you wanna fund an oil pipeline across Canada to supply Europe, be my guest. It's not like it's been tried for almost 50 years with nonstop controversy or anything.
12
YesterdayIcy19631 day ago
+6
Newfoundland a rather large oil reserve. Why does everyone only think that Alberta has oil?
6
Everestkid1 day ago
+7
Because Newfoundland's oil production is a fraction of that of Alberta's.
7
wellyboi1 day ago
+118
Western leaders finally saying something remotely negative about Trump now that enough public sentiment has turned against him and other leaders are taking a stand.
118
littlebossman1 day ago
+90
Every time Starmer speaks out about Donald, his poll ratings climb. Mark Carney won the Canadian election on largely the same platform.
Donald Trump is the most-hated man on the planet. Tying yourself to him is a mistake politically - because Donald goes back on any deal he ever makes - and personally, because voters hate Donald and anyone associated with him.
It's about time politicians started doing what their citizens overwhelmingly want... which is putting Donald C*** in his place. At this point in time there is *zero* benefit to treating the US as anything other than a rogue state.
90
washag1 day ago
+25
Previously they maintained a diplomatic silence because the US economy is large and deeply intertwined enough with most global economies (with the exception of the individual nations in the EU) that it can be weaponised against Trump's critics. The best thing the leaders could do for their country was avoid making themselves targets. No matter what anyone says, the power to stop Trump's idiocy is not something other countries have. The US could stop him, but outsiders can't compel them to.
That all changed with Iran. The threat of the US damaging their economy on purpose is diminished when the US has already severely damaged the global economy through sheer idiocy, without meaning to. Higher oil prices function the same as the tariffs Trump was threatening them with - they make international trade more expensive.
The moron has been figuratively pointing a gun at world leaders to muzzle them, then set off a bomb that pelted them all with shrapnel anyway. That loosened the muzzles.
25
Gentle_Snail1 day ago
+6
If you point out how Starmer has acted in response to Trump his pole numbers instantly surge 26%.
6
metallicadefender1 day ago
+86
All the more reason to go green or nuclear.
86
Jay-Seekay1 day ago
+33
I hope you mean for energy…
33
metallicadefender1 day ago
+16
Yes. No pun intended.
16
TemujinRi1 day ago
+101
Publicly state that if he is going to keep threatening allies the UK is going to have to consider his families businesses as enemy property and bar them from doing business in the UK.
101
Hirork1 day ago
+120
Seize his golf course and turn it into a public green space. Invite Rosie O'Donnel over from Ireland for the opening ceremony. Name it the Obama Public Park.
120
DarkStanley1 day ago
+62
Fill it full of wind turbines
62
Hirork1 day ago
+12
That was my second option but only if it doesn't impede on the people who live nearby. They suffered enough when he was constructing the thing.
12
saidtheWhale20001 day ago
+8
ngl just turn it into a wind and solar panel farm would be so funny, just to f*** with him
8
TemujinRi1 day ago
+12
I genuinely think the rage of this would cause a stroke.
12
hackingdreams1 day ago
+7
You couldn't tell the difference from how he is now.
7
Agile_Resolution_8221 day ago
+125
WOW that might be the first time he used a bad word
125
KingBlackToof1 day ago
+58
The f\* word!!!!
"fed"
58
-kahmi-1 day ago
+9
or maybe the u word
9
Scioptic-1 day ago
+45
Aren't we all, Starmer; aren't we all.
45
Fenris_uy1 day ago
+48
Deploy more renewables, deploy more batteries, electrify freight trains.
48
Informal_Drawing1 day ago
+25
Electrify *all the things*.
25
ReeceAUS1 day ago
+17
Sounds like he’s saying “we shouldn’t be dependent on energy from the rest of the world”.
I think most people/countries are saying that now… but what are you going todo about it?
17
RollingSparks1 day ago
+46
Should've went balls deep on nuclear in 1991.
46
winmace1 day ago
+3
The second best time to do it is now, which we are doing; https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies
3
AndromedaFire1 day ago
+4
I think there’s still space for new nuclear but I think they need to freeze non critical regulations for a project at inception. It takes say 5 years to build the plant. So year -3 they design it, year -1 they fund it, year 0 they break ground and then bring in or change the rules and they do that every year making constant design changes and set backs until year 10 when people complain why it’s not built yet and is double the funded budget.
4
ottermanuk1 day ago
+8
To be fair that's literally any infrastructure project in the UK, and ESPECIALLY and infrastructure project longer than one election cycle.
We've been coasting on shit infrastructure since 08
8
jourdan4421 day ago
+6
The window of nuclear being the best and most economical option would’ve eventually closed in favour of renewables either way. It would’ve been a lot of investment (and long term waste management) for what would’ve amounted to a blip in the greater timeline of energy production. I’m as anti-anti-nuclear as they come but it’s getting harder and harder to believe it would’ve had a better outcome than going balls deep on renewables.
6
SuperTropicalDesert1 day ago
+3
I still hope we get some progress on SMRs thoigh
3
coomzee1 day ago
+15
Just strike a deal with Norway. No one says you have to buy oil and gas using the world's index prices.
15
DexJedi1 day ago
+15
That sounds great. But is that not something everyone will try then? Which... drives up the price?
These kind of tricks only work if nobody knows about Norway.
And why would Norway sell it at a lower rate then the world prices to the UK?
15
whatsgoingon3501 day ago
+3
If that was possible why would America give a shit about world prices they produce more than enough.
3
kmdsid1 day ago
+11
We f****** hate Trump.
11
Cabbages24ADollar1 day ago
+16
When Joe Biden is a MUCH better president you’re cooked.
Remove the cranky old demented narcissist pedo. He’s done. MAGA failed.
16
zissouo1 day ago
+9
Anyone thinking Biden was a bad president has been wading too deep in MAGA propaganda.
9
takeda641 day ago
+12
> When Joe Biden is a MUCH better president you’re cooked.
Sorry, but you're falling for the misinformation from the conservatives.
In what way was he actually bad? Yes, he is old, and has speech impediment from childhood (and because of the age it was harder for him to control it), but he got a really good team in his cabinet, and he actually was much more progressive than his predecessors (IMO the media jumped on him not because of the debate but because he promised to heavily tax income above $1M, you can see that Harris used his platform, but that specific thing was removed)
He also passed quite groundbreaking bills. Unfortunately trump illegally killed them. Illegally, because Republicans knew it would be unpopular to do it through legislation, so trump blocked money through the DOGE c*** effectively killing them.
I think Biden was actually much better than Obama in terms of effectiveness, of course Obama is much better speaker and of course younger.
Edit: https://www.npr.org/2024/02/19/1232447088/historians-presidents-survey-trump-last-biden-14th
12
Informal_Drawing1 day ago
+12
It's almost as if going out of our way to appease these world-class fuckwits isn't in our best interests.
Nice that he finally got the god damned memo.
12
Sweet-Competition-151 day ago
+3
Well, guess what...I'm not exactly tickled pink about it either!
3
TheOpeningAct21 day ago
+3
We all are fed up
3
wjames03941 day ago
+3
Buy CDN.
3
Intelligent_Kick_4361 day ago
+3
As the saying goes, never let a good crisis go to waste!
Now is the time for sane and reasonable nations to lock in strong win-win cooperative pacts regarding resources, energy, land, and human capital. Along with that, have strong terms that punt defective countries, like Hungary/Orban. And arm yourselves to the teeth and starve out the US and Russia: if they've gone rogue let them flounder in insanity.
3
xCueMe1 day ago
+3
Oh NOWWWW you’re fed up!
3
Quoramilu1 day ago
+3
Join the club mate everyones bills are through the roof
3
NeoIsJohnWick1 day ago
+3
Everyone is tbh.
3
Old_Badger3111 day ago
+3
Tell you king not to come here. Trump doesn’t deserve the honor of a royal visit
3
m__s1 day ago
+1
You are not the only one. We are all tired with Trump.
1
Worth_Cobbler_41401 day ago
+49
Maybe he should ya know do something about it?
49
LDNVoice1 day ago
+37
Not saying they are doing a perfect job but they are doing a fair bit about it. The reality is things don't just happen with a click of the fingers and people don't care because it doesn't make headlines.
37
Hirork1 day ago
+19
Exactly, they are doing things in the background right now. Our energy bills literally dropped this month. We have until July before the next price change and realistically until October before energy use becomes a concern for winter.
They are planning a package of measures to see people through the next winter if energy prices remain stubborn. But we won't know what they will be until closer to the time. Because they'll be planning for the worst and hoping for the best.
They've lifted a ban on plug-in solar so that people can get c**** solar panels that can go on balconies, etc.
It's like people are looking for excuses to hate on this government sometimes. It's like guys, compared to the last 3 prime ministers which would you rather? Yes everything is still broken, because those lot broke it. Rebuilding takes time.
19
LDNVoice1 day ago
+9
It's actually sad. The government has also done things that are genuinely bad (Mostly regarding internet, monitoring and safety online) but compared to what this it was 100x worse. I find it quite sad how much criticism these guys are getting compared to previous administrations.
They aren't perfect but they are putting us on the right track. Finally getting some improvements in the UK than the constant degradation of our country
9
CautiousBiscuit1 day ago
+24
What would you suggest?
24
Cube001 day ago
+40
Woah slow down there Nigel Mansell.
40
Jabjab3451 day ago
+11
What powers does he possess that can actually do anything?
11
RealAmbassador40811 day ago
+7
We are all fed up with this Bullshit. Americans need to take back their country from these maniacs.
7
YourOverlords1 day ago
+5
buy canadian mr.starmer
5
munchinerara1 day ago
+11
Do something about it then.
11
HumanBeing73961 day ago
+19
Stirring stuff - reminds me of Churchill’s famous “I’m slightly annoyed” speech.
19
[deleted]1 day ago
+8
[deleted]
8
Jbroy1 day ago
+7
He should add Netenyahu as well to the mix!
7
OttoKrieg1 day ago
+4
join the club dude
4
Redmistburns1 day ago
+2
World leaders hate it when you do this one trick
2
timesuck471 day ago
+2
So are they converting to 100% renewable energy?
2
so_dope241 day ago
+2
Same
2
Odd_Photograph_75911 day ago
+2
Then he may want to accelerate/increase the UK's renewable energy goals
2
kurashima1 day ago
+2
Should have done something about it instead of Pandering to Mango Mussolini whilst he was manoeuvring around you
2
Baskreiger1 day ago
+2
Make lobbyism illegal and real project will be allowed to be on the table.
2
irishsausage1 day ago
+2
Decouple the energy prices from oil and gas then you cowards
2
LogAware1 day ago
+2
Cool. Do something about it
2
Treehousefairyqueen1 day ago
+2
Particularly when they profit from it!
2
CriticalJump1 day ago
+2
If only Giorgia Meloni had even an inch of the spine that Starmer and other Western European leaders had...
2
Dont_Kick_Stuff1 day ago
+2
Please Keir Starmer do something... anything at all because it just might end this madness. I say this as an American who is oh so tired of this shit because I voted against the Cuntmander in Chief here.
2
Waste_Jello99471 day ago
+2
Me too Starmer... me too
2
duxwontobey1 day ago
+2
100% energy independence would mean we can sell excess to other countries too. It's literally a win win with an upfront cost.
2
SAAPenguin1 day ago
+2
[ Removed by Listnook ]
2
kcbluedog1 day ago
+2
Sounds like jam on a biscuit, Keir.
2
Few_Scientist53811 day ago
+2
Best he puts energy prices up now then, save him doing a uturn in two weeks.
2
cantbelieveshesaid11 day ago
+2
Renationalise it all then. Right now. Emergency time.
2
OpinionDude50001 day ago
+2
As an American, Im fed up with Trump affecting energy costs too.
2
drive2rigel1 day ago
+1
The first honest comment from British PM.
1
n8udd1 day ago
+1
And yet they still don't offer decent schemes for installing solar panels!!
200 Comments