Until the planning system allows basic homes to be factory build, we will not get the cost down.

This also can not happen until the UK housing sector stops being so "up and down", as no one will invest the capital in a mass production home factory, not know if there will be any demand for new built homes in 3 years time.

I think so, though really the other way round. As you say, with limited building land available house prices are set by what the market can bear which is, in turn, set by what the lenders will lend. Building is relatively competitive (nobody makes money building in more expensive ways than others around them do) so the land prices expand to fill the difference.

Yes, it is indeed the land price that takes up most of the 'value', but it does derive from the ultimate value of the houses that can be built on it.

It's interesting to note the massive jump in value once planning permission is achieved (hence the incentive to tax that, as it's essentially a capital gain to the owner).

And yes, the supply of mortgage finance is a key determinant, although, unlike incomes, it can't grow at a compound rate forever (there's a discussion). House prices fell and rose in direct relation to mortgage finance drying up, then becoming available again.

Not sure if public authorities have the land or not, but they certainly shouldn't lack the finance. Banks love lending to public authorities as it's one of the safest counterparties you can have. Perhaps it's the inclination and/or other wherewithal. It's not technically in their remit to a great degree these days.

The quarry could give you a bit of meaningful employment ST! - and it could go on for decades, as the promoting co plans lots more lagoons around the UK coast.

Are they going to put rows of wind turbines on it? If not why not, while they're at it?

Suppose this the end for the Severn Barrage? I was looking forward to a short drive to visit Mike in Swansea, or to collect ebay stuff that says '40 miles away' (as the crow flies).

That does seem barmy, though there is no harm in having both.

I can understand that with some existing units there may not be a robust enough local electrical infrastructure, but not on a new build that size.

Why don't you get in touch with the developers of the solar farm and ask why they are not putting it on the new warehouse?

Posted By: CWattersI guess I'm mostly annoyed at government policy that doesn't encourage the efficient use of land. It's hard enough finding places where renewable energy won't upset local residents and the roof of this development seems ideal - very hard to see it from the ground.

Posted By: SteamyTeaWhy don't you get in touch with the developers of the solar farm and ask why they are not putting it on the new warehouse?

That seems a good start to beginning to understand whether it is indeed government policy that is at fault and if so in what way and why?

... was it her I heard this morning on R4 claiming that nuclear is a 'different type of electricity'?

Posted By: DarylP'different type of electricity'?

Yes, that made me smile too.

Posted By: owlmanI hope she does for Anaerobic Digesters too

I have mixed feelings about AD.
It does solve a waste stream problem and generate power, but it also adds to atmospheric CO2.
Used on site it can be a good power supply and benefits from stored energy, if the waste is transported I am not so sure ust how good it is. There is also the land use issues, though if farmers grows energy crops on Grade A or B land, they are probably not making best use of their assets.

I can see the argument that, once though planning, there should not be a fixed price for the energy produced, but this does not take into account the price of not having that energy.
It is a bit like buying a new car when petrol is £1.20/lt, then only having to pay £1.20/lt for the next 20 years, regardless of your mileage, and get others at the gas station to pay your bill. When you get punched on the nose and taken to hospital by someone that feels you don't deserve this special treatment, you then send the full NHS bill, and another for loss of earnings to everyone.

I think the real problem was that the last Labour government created such a muddle of schemes dismantling then is never going to be easy.

Posted By: SteamyTeaIt ..................but it also adds to atmospheric CO2.

Dunno about that ST, but it does add atmospheric ammonia.

Posted By: djhWhat do you suppose happens to the methane?

I thought the other point of 'anaerobic' is that the methane is captured as fuel - so it eventually ends up as CO2 anyway. But no more and no less that wd happen anyway to the original organic matter left to itself.

So whether 'anaerobic' produces CO2, CH4 etc shd surely be completely immaterial to

Posted By: SteamyTeafeelings about AD

AD doesn't

Posted By: SteamyTeaadds to atmospheric CO2

Posted By: SteamyTeaMuch of it goes into the ground and gets converted to carbon

Emitting hydrogen as water? What's the mechanism?

Posted By: SteamyTeaintensively farmed areas have low carbon content soil

because ploughing exposes the carbon to oxidation?

I'm sceptical about hydrocarbon cellulose decomposing to pure carbon - surely endothermic, so where does the input of energy come from? Why doesn't it prefer the more 'downhill' (exothermic) oxidation route (or in absence of oxygen, decomposition to methane)?

Data from OBR

Posted By: ringiUntil the planning system allows basic homes to be factory build, we will not get the cost down.

They're called park homes, usually delivered in two halves.