Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
National Grid Plc LSE:NG. London Ordinary Share GB00BDR05C01 ORD 12 204/473P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  4.20 0.47% 902.30 899.10 899.30 903.00 894.40 899.90 7,051,145 16:35:04
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Gas Water & Utilities 14,540.0 1,754.0 36.5 24.7 32,024

National Grid Share Discussion Threads

Showing 7926 to 7947 of 8075 messages
Chat Pages: 323  322  321  320  319  318  317  316  315  314  313  312  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
26/1/2021
22:56
did any one see that experiment making hydrogen for the air which did work,it was quite a large amount installation of equipment as i remember it was in the cambridge area..
lippy4
26/1/2021
22:43
Hydrogen is produced by electricity. I see a problem
ccraig69
26/1/2021
21:31
Pierre, Yes nukes can provide response but their main purpose was to supply the base load. I appreciate all steam operated turbines can provide primary response as they all work on basis that the Gen is synchronised to the system and the governor system of the turbine allows more or less steam into the turbine, similar philosophy to cruise control on your car ( car goes uphill more fuel is injected into the engine to maintain the speed). With the turbine, elect demand goes up, freq starts to fall (insufficient Gen vs Demand) and turbine responds. The Governors work off a 4% droop and can provide a certain amount of Primary. I am ex NG System Ops and ex CEGB fossil fuel as well as nukes (Heys, Hatl) 👍 IMV we need a good mix of suitable generation which includes wind. Wind and solar IMO is not the panacea to all future generation. We also need nuclear, pumped storage, hydro, converted fossil fuel PStns like Drax ( bio fuel), and CCGTs ( which is still fossil), carbon capture, future Hydrogen fuel cells and massive industrial batteries all to provide the right mix. All this requires massive investment and NG should not be out of out of pocket in doing what is required. As I keep saying NG is not a charity.
utyinv
26/1/2021
18:47
people using less electricity now thats what i call progess,its going backwards as they want us to heat our homes,electric cars,electric trucks,buses,trains, of every description and use less,you are mad....
lippy4
26/1/2021
18:15
Bike, How much energy storage do you envisage to smooth out the peaks and troughs? How many TWh of storage is necessary? Always good putting numbers to these things. Quantitative analysis (i.e. numbers) show problems which easily remain hidden in a qualitative (i.e. words) analysis.
pierre oreilly
26/1/2021
18:02
Green supporters did not kill off nuclear and some of use are not dreamers. A short sighted government damaged nuclear in the UK by not investing when we had developed the capability and knowledge to build the first generation of nuclear power stations so the capability was lost forcing the UK to put UK funds into foreign pockets instead of back into our economy. Anyhow Hinkley point is going ahead so nuclear is not dead. Bills are going up... yes I see how much we are paying a Chinese company for Hinkley point, I see how much oil companies have to pay to remediate the damage they cause through oil spills, I see that oil and gas are not infinite resources and as they become more scarce a commodity becomes more expensive and that as it becomes harder and riskier to extract the cost goes up. You can see a wind turbine blade production facility moth balled on the Isle of Wight while the wind turbines we are paying to install have blades and turbines made in Scandinavia. There is a theme here of being short sighted. If the government stimulate innovative storage of energy from wind, solar and tidal sources that can smooth out peaks in demand. You probably know better than I that there are ways to store energy through chemical conversion, stored mechanical energy etc but the investment must be made to allow this to happen. Yes a coal or gas power station can spin up its turbines in time to supply the surge when all the kettles go on during Coronation street adverts, but if each home generated its own electricity (with storage) and people were educated to use less electricity in their homes, there would not be a surge on the grid requiring that power station. Industry can also find ways to reduce their energy demand if they are incentivised. How much of the real estate of factories and warehouses has solar arrays on for a start? Very little because accountants want short term payback for capital investments and the government could encourage a change of attitude such as they achieved through increasing landfill taxes.
bicycleguy
26/1/2021
16:10
Uty, Nukes, being steam plant, can supply primary reserve in the same way as coal. When frequency sensitive, they just hold an excess of pressure over that necessary for the generation - it doesn't imply any ramping of their generation. The main difference is the ramp rates for an instructred change in generation - coal can change generation in the minutes scale, nukes take several hours or days for a big generation change. So my view is until the base load is fully satisfied by nukes and the slow ramp rates are irrelevant, they are preferable to coal. Above that of course, the quicker ramp rates of coal give them an advantage. But of course, the greens (generally) don't like nukes or coal! You are more positive than me that the green dream can become a reality. We struggle atm with a 55GW peak and yet more nukes are scheduled for decommissioning. Add in probably a further 100GW to meet likely peak ev demand at the green dream of fully electric transport and zero co2 emissions, and i'd say it's impossible in the forseeable future. Three times the current peak -how are they going to do that? The scale really is way off the chart. Not only is 100% e transport a dream, I'd say only selling electric cars in 2030 doesn't stand a chance of being feasible (and that for more than a single insurmountable reason imv).
pierre oreilly
26/1/2021
15:34
Pierre, Fossil fuel power stations provide better Primary and Secondary response matching dynamic demand with the correct generation. This is also done extremely well with pumped storage as we have at Dino, where a generator spinning in air can produce 0-300 mw in a few seconds. Wind is not as dynamic and has to be supplemented by new innovative storage capacity. Nuclear provides the base load to meet demand and a source of off-peak power to pump the water back up the mountain at Dino, when we all sleep. Nuclear can’t two shift like fossil fuel Gensets ( off at night and re-synch in the morning), due to restrictions, ie reactor poisoning. Governments don’t always think of the implications and seldom accept the consequences of the need for vast investment when they promote the ‘Green Philosophy’. It can be done but Companies like Grid have to be allowed to recoup capital. The Gov can’t have it both ways, Green and Cheap. In time it might be cheap but the transition is costly and NG is not a charity.
utyinv
26/1/2021
15:20
"Nuclear is far superior imv, but the greens have almost killed that off in the uk over the last 50 years. " Don't wave all 'the greens' with a wide brush Pierre. Some of us are pro nuclear.
minerve 2
26/1/2021
13:59
Bike, agree - it is possible to make a lot of money being 'green'. Big landowners with windfarms on their land, big business supplying an ev charging infrastructure and selling electricity at 30x cost price, solar installers and many others are really showered in green cash. Ultimately paid for by consumers of course, wh are seeing rapidly rising bills, haven't you noticed? agree - there are better alternatives to fossil fueled electricity. Nuclear is far superior imv, but the greens have almost killed that off in the uk over the last 50 years. Pumped storage, which has elements of generation, is also a major saver of fossil fuels by basically allowing other stations to operate at their maximum efficiency. It's been around since before the word 'green' took on its current meaning. I'm not sure whether you think windmills are a better technology for the grid than coal, but they aren't fom a power matching pov. Coal provides dispatchable generation, windmills are intermittent, which results in all sorts of issues - the most ironic of which is that at current levels of intermittent penetration, the capacity market is now encouraging old coal stations to fire up again on winter afternoons. Did you know that?
pierre oreilly
26/1/2021
13:17
bicycleguy there are????????? green energy is not as green as you think.. the cost of changing our power structure is so huge that the government think they can change it all in 5 minutes some hope,it needs years and years of change.. as pierre says the government just want a yes man in position to okay their will and we will suffer..
lippy4
26/1/2021
12:56
It is possible to be green and save or make money. Why wreck the planet when there are viable and better alternatives to fossil fuel and carbon emissions?
bicycleguy
26/1/2021
09:49
Luder, do you have any mates with the ability to post the intelligent boy viewpoint? tia
pierre oreilly
25/1/2021
16:36
Pierre Oreilly = Stupid boy.
luderitz
25/1/2021
09:17
Surprised we're still being bamboozled into a green energy transition after Germany's experience of doing just that. I expect the gov are a bit fed up with the advice they get from Ng for their green proposals, so they want someone who tells them that a green energy transition will result in far cheaper bills, a more reliable supply and world peace. I think the driving force for the new green company should be a fresh face, not fuddy duddy engineers who understand the system and implications. Greta is now 18 and can therefore be a company director - what a great CEO she would make, she could ensure mass power rationing and cuts in just a few short years. Perhaps she'd also have every employee striking for the climate every Friday, a sort of 'electricity and gas free Fridays' initiative.
pierre oreilly
25/1/2021
08:44
If that separate entity to run green power goes through, they will still need the NG infrastructure to supply it.
wilc42
25/1/2021
08:23
No market reaction to ofgem announce today of ISO. https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/ofgem-recommends-independent-body-help-lead-britain-s-green-transformation This reads as a power grab by ofgem to me. NG. are capable of doing what ofgem propose going forward.
trader2
24/1/2021
22:30
Motley Fool: "National Grid is another FTSE 100 stock with a high yield. Its yield of 5.7% is relatively high compared to its historic average. It suggests that investor sentiment towards the utility company is relatively weak. Yes, it faces the prospect of regulatory change it has a business model that is relatively uncorrelated to the performance of the economy. Its defensive characteristics and stable dividend could become more attractive should the economic outlook deteriorate." Https://www.fool.co.uk/investing/2021/01/23/3-of-the-best-shares-id-buy-now-in-an-isa-to-make-a-passive-income/
bountyhunter
13/1/2021
21:11
Bond yields dropped back today.. Https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/01/13/us-bonds-treasury-yields-move-following-strong-10-year-auction-.html
bountyhunter
13/1/2021
20:55
Dividend paid today and reinvested back for more NG. shares
gateside
13/1/2021
20:55
Bond market yields going up. Good for banks bad for utilities.
action
13/1/2021
18:00
Added a few today. Hopefully a calm port for the storms ahead in 2021. IMO of course.
lovewinshatelosses
Chat Pages: 323  322  321  320  319  318  317  316  315  314  313  312  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
NG.
National G..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210417 10:28:56