Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Nickbat on 02 October 2008, 14:32:14
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
-
If a few shops turned their lights off overnight that would help
-
mmm, too busy giving out free theatre tickets to people likely to never go again.
The job is done now. The nuclear sites have been flogged off cheap to the Frogs who strangely aren't limited by the government to their % rises to the Uk consumer like they are in France or Spain. Our electric co only managed a staggering (to everyone here) rise of 11%.
No government likes to make long term decisions that are going to cost money today for something you will see the benefit of in 10 years time. Those sort of decisions should have been made by a seperate body.
In the meantime a good start would be to ask people to use less!! Switch off lights(not just in homes but in offices at night) when not in use, unplug transformers for charging mobiles, switch off TV's instead of leaving them on standby etc. It would be consumately easy to save 10% of daily use within a week. But wait, that wouldn't sit well with a society used to conspicious consumption. ;D
varche
-
If a few shops turned their lights off overnight that would help
Some times not, often in the larger stores the capacitive effective of the flourescent lights are used to counter the inductive effective of the freezer/chiller motors for power factor correction.
Reality is that there are a number of private prime movers around the country that get called upon (e.g. in Stafford we had two large gas turbines for backup that coud feed the grid) and some major industrial sites go onto power saving for an hour or so (often happened at Alsthom Stafford to)
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Hi Nickbat. Now I know from your previous threads that you think that global warming is a myth.
But did you see the recent documentary that stated that in the past temperatures had risen by 5 degrees in one year (according to the ice cores ) and they think that this could happen again at any time with monumental consequencies.
I would be interested to hear your views on this..fact or fiction ? :y :y
-
In the meantime a good start would be to ask people to use less!! Switch off lights(not just in homes but in offices at night) when not in use, unplug transformers for charging mobiles, switch off TV's instead of leaving them on standby etc. It would be consumately easy to save 10% of daily use within a week. But wait, that wouldn't sit well with a society used to conspicious consumption. ;D
Problem is, although the nut munchers like to bang on about mobile phone chargers and TVs on standby these actually take bu66er all power. Less than a watt in most cases (unless it happens to be Murdoch's Gay set top boxes that stay on all night using 20+watts so they can "phone home" >:().
It's what we've come to expect as the basic things in life that take the majority of the power. Heating, hot water, water supply, street lighting, sanitation, fresh and frozen food, having any sort of industrial / commercial activity.
It's a little less easy to do without these. Granted savings could be made in some areas. Many offices are lit and air conditioned throughout the night, PCs left on, etc. Data centres take a lot of power and are, in some cases, half full of idle machines.
A marginal saving won't get away from the fact that our electricity supply network is decaying and needs investment.
We will, literally, have to wait until the lights go out, I suspect. >:(
Kevin
-
In the meantime a good start would be to ask people to use less!! Switch off lights(not just in homes but in offices at night) when not in use, unplug transformers for charging mobiles, switch off TV's instead of leaving them on standby etc. It would be consumately easy to save 10% of daily use within a week. But wait, that wouldn't sit well with a society used to conspicious consumption. ;D
Problem is, although the nut munchers like to bang on about mobile phone chargers and TVs on standby these actually take bu66er all power. Less than a watt in most cases (unless it happens to be Murdoch's Gay set top boxes that stay on all night using 20+watts so they can "phone home" >:().
It's what we've come to expect as the basic things in life that take the majority of the power. Heating, hot water, water supply, street lighting, sanitation, fresh and frozen food, having any sort of industrial / commercial activity.
It's a little less easy to do without these. Granted savings could be made in some areas. Many offices are lit and air conditioned throughout the night, PCs left on, etc. Data centres take a lot of power and are, in some cases, half full of idle machines.
A marginal saving won't get away from the fact that our electricity supply network is decaying and needs investment.
We will, literally, have to wait until the lights go out, I suspect. >:(
Kevin
Quite right Kevin! us fly boys know what we are talking about!! ::)
We need nuclear power stations now!! I have worked on nuclear, coal, power stations and fairy windmills and I know which one is the solution to this problem!! We need them built now!!!! >:(
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Hi Nickbat. Now I know from your previous threads that you think that global warming is a myth.
But did you see the recent documentary that stated that in the past temperatures had risen by 5 degrees in one year (according to the ice cores ) and they think that this could happen again at any time with monumental consequencies.
I would be interested to hear your views on this..fact or fiction ? :y :y
Hi Optimist<
I don't know which programme you watched, but rapid temperature changes are entirely feasible - and natural. Indeed Greenland warmed at a high rate between 1920-1930, about 50% higher than between 1995-2005.
http://meteo.lcd.lu/globalwarming/Chylek/greenland_warming.html
Actually, there's an historical article here, which claims that Greenland warmed 10 degrees between 1913 and 1948.
http://theweatheroutlook.com/twocommunity/forums/t/19575.aspx
Of course, neither of these were caused by man-made emissions.
Changes can be rapid, either up or down (and I know which I would prefer!). Can we stop such changes? No. Absolutely not. But we can adapt.
For a full guide to global warming claims, I recommend this site: :y
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html
Must fly..off on the school run now! ;)
-
Went into our local brand new B & Q store recently and it is a massive place. Couldn't help noticing all the lighting that they had on, even though the roof was letting in suffience light it was almost negative to have the lights on. Also they had an electrical dept with all lights blazing, why can't they just switch them all off until needed.
It's the same with places like Currys isle after isle of TVs blazing out, and hardly anyone in the shop.
Then the government energy dept take out full page ads in the newspapers this week, costing god knows how much of tax payers money. There telling us to switch off that TV on standby or phone charger that's been left on, to save energy.
Mick
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Hi Nickbat. Now I know from your previous threads that you think that global warming is a myth.
But did you see the recent documentary that stated that in the past temperatures had risen by 5 degrees in one year (according to the ice cores ) and they think that this could happen again at any time with monumental consequencies.
I would be interested to hear your views on this..fact or fiction ? :y :y
I watched this programme as well Optimist and noted what the scientists had concluded which was very interesting to say the least. I also understand that the scientists involved in this research have established, using the evidence obtained from the ice core, that the 5 degree climate change happened within days and quote "within no more than a week" :o :o :o rather than the year you mentioned.
It highlighted what other scientists have predicted could happen very quickly if sea currents, for us in the UK the Gulf Stream, were affected by rising temperatures and diverted further South. The onslaught of fresh water in large volumes from the melting Artic with rapidly reducing salinity of the Atlantic could produce an ice age for the Northern hemisphere, and not for the first time by far. :(
It strikes me that whatever man does for the good or worse will be greatly overwhelmed by nature herself as has happened countless times over the history of this planet. ::) ::) Blackouts could be the least of our problems, and I lived through the blackouts of the early 1970s. :(
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Hi Nickbat. Now I know from your previous threads that you think that global warming is a myth.
But did you see the recent documentary that stated that in the past temperatures had risen by 5 degrees in one year (according to the ice cores ) and they think that this could happen again at any time with monumental consequencies.
I would be interested to hear your views on this..fact or fiction ? :y :y
I watched this programme as well Optimist and noted what the scientists had concluded which was very interesting to say the least. I also understand that the scientists involved in this research have established, using the evidence obtained from the ice core, that the 5 degree climate change happened within days and quote "within no more than a week" :o :o :o rather than the year you mentioned.
It highlighted what other scientists have predicted could happen very quickly if sea currents, for us in the UK the Gulf Stream, were affected by rising temperatures and diverted further South. The onslaught of fresh water in large volumes from the melting Artic with rapidly reducing salinity of the Atlantic could produce an ice age for the Northern hemisphere, and not for the first time by far. :(
It strikes me that whatever man does for the good or worse will be greatly overwhelmed by nature herself as has happened countless times over the history of this planet. ::) ::) Blackouts could be the least of our problems, and I lived through the blackouts of the early 1970s. :(
Oh Lizzie, Lizzie. It's impossible to determine a week within an ice core. Secondly, we are talking about global average temperatures. On a local level, temperatures regularly change by more than 5 degrees in a week. As I noted before, the Arctic melted more in the 1920-1930 period than in the 1995-2005 period...and no one really noticed. Of course, the other thing that the alarmists go on about is rising sea levels due to melting ice caps. Remember that (aside from the fact that Antarctica is growing in size) the melting of sea ice cannot have an effect on sea levels (due to the relative displacement of the ice). It could only have an effect if ice on land melted and thus added to the total ocean volume.
The other thing to remember is that global temperatures are roughly back to where they were a hundred years ago (I say roughly because we are talking about fractions of a degree here - something which they couldn't measure years ago anyway).
The whole idea is to scare people and, in that way they are doing a pretty good job. In contrast, the upcoming energy shortage is entirely man-made (and avoidable, which climate change isn't) and is very scary. :o
-
Sorry, Lizzie, I forgot to mention the Gulf Stream:
For convenience, I have cut-and-pasted this (with the link shown at the end).
Myth #1: The Gulf Stream will fail if a massive outpour of freshwater will come out of Greenland glaciers due to increasing temperatures.
Answer: No, it most definitely will not. As explained by Carl Wunsch, Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physical Oceanography at the MIT in Cambridge, Mass. (USA), in a letter published on The Economist:
The Gulf Stream is a wind-driven phenomenon (as explained in a famous 1948 paper by Henry Stommel). [...] Shut-off would imply repeal of the law of conservation of angular momentum [...] focusing on near-impossible Gulf Stream failure is an unproductive distraction
Myth #2: The Gulf Stream is responsible for the milder weather in the United Kingdom and part of Northern Europe than North American regions at similar latitudes.
Answer: No, it most definitely does not. As explained by Richard Seager, Senior Research Scientist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, in an article published on American Scientist:
That the Gulf Stream is responsible for Europe’s mild winters is [...] nothing more than the earth-science equivalent of an urban legend.
See http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/gulf-stream-myths/ and links therein.
:y :y
Cheers, Lizzie.
Nick
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Hi Nickbat. Now I know from your previous threads that you think that global warming is a myth.
But did you see the recent documentary that stated that in the past temperatures had risen by 5 degrees in one year (according to the ice cores ) and they think that this could happen again at any time with monumental consequencies.
I would be interested to hear your views on this..fact or fiction ? :y :y
I watched this programme as well Optimist and noted what the scientists had concluded which was very interesting to say the least. I also understand that the scientists involved in this research have established, using the evidence obtained from the ice core, that the 5 degree climate change happened within days and quote "within no more than a week" :o :o :o rather than the year you mentioned.
It highlighted what other scientists have predicted could happen very quickly if sea currents, for us in the UK the Gulf Stream, were affected by rising temperatures and diverted further South. The onslaught of fresh water in large volumes from the melting Artic with rapidly reducing salinity of the Atlantic could produce an ice age for the Northern hemisphere, and not for the first time by far. :(
It strikes me that whatever man does for the good or worse will be greatly overwhelmed by nature herself as has happened countless times over the history of this planet. ::) ::) Blackouts could be the least of our problems, and I lived through the blackouts of the early 1970s. :(
Oh Lizzie, Lizzie. It's impossible to determine a week within an ice core. Secondly, we are talking about global average temperatures. On a local level, temperatures regularly change by more than 5 degrees in a week. As I noted before, the Arctic melted more in the 1920-1930 period than in the 1995-2005 period...and no one really noticed. Of course, the other thing that the alarmists go on about is rising sea levels due to melting ice caps. Remember that (aside from the fact that Antarctica is growing in size) the melting of sea ice cannot have an effect on sea levels (due to the relative displacement of the ice). It could only have an effect if ice on land melted and thus added to the total ocean volume.
The other thing to remember is that global temperatures are roughly back to where they were a hundred years ago (I say roughly because we are talking about fractions of a degree here - something which they couldn't measure years ago anyway).
The whole idea is to scare people and, in that way they are doing a pretty good job. In contrast, the upcoming energy shortage is entirely man-made (and avoidable, which climate change isn't) and is very scary. :o
I take your overall point, and those in the post of yours following this Nick :y :y :y.
Of course it is all opinions of individual scientist and their interuptation of the evidence in front of them, as in the field I study, History, where 12 historians can come up with 13 conclusions!! ;D ;D ;D
However the ice core in question went from opaque to clear, interupted by regular bands of snow. I am NO scientist that's for sure ::) ::), but the scientist who was being interviewed explained that there had been a sudden rise of 5 degrees "within days" that was dramatic and "permanent", completely out of line with any 'normal' regular changes in the climate. This was in the Iceland area where such temperature fluctations would not have been expected, as confirmed by the ice core's "record" of weather over thousands of years. :o :o
Like everyone else I suppose all we can do is be spectators to the 'experts' conclusions of the evidence, and of course always question when we can, but the evidence in this case was compelling. ;)
So who really knows Nick? I don't think anyone really does yet as nature, history, time and space seem to hold their secrets extremely well! :) :) ;)
-
In addition to my previous post Nick I would reiterate that it is the opinion of weather experts in general that many factors affect sea currents. You are right of course that the wind drives them, but as I stated so does the salinity of the water itself, the rotation of the earth, and land mass directing them.
You may find this link very interesting as it is published by the BBC / Weather Centre specialists:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/impact/gulf_stream.shtml
which provides the following explanation of the Gulf Stream and the affects of climate change:
"The Gulf Stream
The world's oceans move constantly. Ocean currents flow in complex patterns and are affected by the wind, the water's salinity and temperature, the shape of the ocean floor, and the earth's rotation.
How does it work?
The gulf stream is one of the strongest ocean currents in the world. It is driven by surface wind patterns and differences in water density. Surface water in the north Atlantic is cooled by winds from the Arctic. It becomes more salty and more dense and sinks to the ocean floor. The cold water then moves towards the equator where it will warm slowly. To replace the cold equator-bound water, the gulf stream moves warm water from the Gulf of Mexico north into the Atlantic.
The gulf stream brings warmth to the UK and north-west Europe and is the reason we have mild winters. The average annual temperature of north-west Europe is about 9C above the average for our latitude."
This gives a different opinion by implication of the affects that certain natural or man-made changes can have on the sea currents. :y
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
I was a 'difficult' mature student, bet you are a right bu**er Lizzie ;D ;D ;D
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
I was a 'difficult' mature student, bet you are a right bu**er Lizzie ;D ;D ;D
Oh yes Mike I certainly am; but the lecturers have told me that is exactly what they want from students, and it is usually only the mature ones who are bold enough to do it. This year so far a few younger students are asking very pointed questions, which is great! :y :y
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
I was a 'difficult' mature student, bet you are a right bu**er Lizzie ;D ;D ;D
Oh yes Mike I certainly am; but the lecturers have told me that is exactly what they want from students, and it is usually only the mature ones who are bold enough to do it. This year so far a few younger students are asking very pointed questions, which is great! :y :y
I agree, I found the younger ones had limited 'life' experience and therefore too theoretical in their arguments, having no idea of the 'real world' and objectivity. ::)
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
I was a 'difficult' mature student, bet you are a right bu**er Lizzie ;D ;D ;D
Oh yes Mike I certainly am; but the lecturers have told me that is exactly what they want from students, and it is usually only the mature ones who are bold enough to do it. This year so far a few younger students are asking very pointed questions, which is great! :y :y
I agree, I found the younger ones had limited 'life' experience and therefore too theoretical in their arguments, having no idea of the 'real world' and objectivity. ::)
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Sorry, Lizzie, but it is impossible to identify a few days in an ice-core sample. I think the programme was referring to the Greenland High Res Ice Core Project:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/321/5889/680
"The last two abrupt warmings at the onset of our present warm interglacial period, interrupted by the Younger Dryas cooling event, were investigated at high temporal resolution from the North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core. The deuterium excess, a proxy of Greenland precipitation moisture source, switched mode within 1 to 3 years over these transitions and initiated a more gradual change (over 50 years) of the Greenland air temperature, as recorded by stable water isotopes. The onsets of both abrupt Greenland warmings were slightly preceded by decreasing Greenland dust deposition, reflecting the wetting of Asian deserts. A northern shift of the Intertropical Convergence Zone could be the trigger of these abrupt shifts of Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes of 2 to 4 kelvin in Greenland moisture source temperature from one year to the next."
They talk of 1-3 years. I know of no higher resolution than that. Also, remember that these are "proxies" - in other words using the deuterium to measure precipitation, to measure temperature.
As for being a spectator to the 'experts'. No way, at least not within the mainstream media, at any rate. There are many 'experts' out there that think we are being fed falsehoods by the other 'experts'. I regard as a duty to myself to seek out the truth as best I can. :y
Cannot argue that Nick :y :y :y Actually so do I in reality, usually everyday with my lecturers ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
I was a 'difficult' mature student, bet you are a right bu**er Lizzie ;D ;D ;D
Oh yes Mike I certainly am; but the lecturers have told me that is exactly what they want from students, and it is usually only the mature ones who are bold enough to do it. This year so far a few younger students are asking very pointed questions, which is great! :y :y
I agree, I found the younger ones had limited 'life' experience and therefore too theoretical in their arguments, having no idea of the 'real world' and objectivity. ::)
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
There are many in my profession, and I am not going to say what, feel there should be a minimum age of around 25, however it seems to have gone down from 21, no good in real life. :-X
-
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
When I was an (immature) student I was too preoccupied with planning my next pint, er, amongst other things. :-X
I've often wondered what it'd be like to return as a mature student.
Kevin
-
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
When I was an (immature) student I was too preoccupied with planning my next pint, er, amongst other things. :-X
I've often wondered what it'd be like to return as a mature student.
Kevin
Believe me Kevin it is great fun :y :y as I do not suffer from the pressures of youth that I would have done at 19, and those I see being encountered by my fellow, younger, students. :( :(
I would highly recommend any 'mature' person going to Uni if it is going to assist your career! :y :y :y
-
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
When I was an (immature) student I was too preoccupied with planning my next pint, er, amongst other things. :-X
I've often wondered what it'd be like to return as a mature student.
Kevin
Believe me Kevin it is great fun :y :y as I do not suffer from the pressures of youth that I would have done at 19, and those I see being encountered by my fellow, younger, students. :( :(
I would highly recommend any 'mature' person going to Uni if it is going to assist your career! :y :y :y
I would agree, and me, well I was 39 and single, as I always intended to be, in those days and moved back in with my Mum and Dad ::) Sad yes but had lost my Job and house with it :( No financial worries and had a great time at Uni, a few of us were mature students and had a great relationship with the lecturers. You are never too old to learn. :y
-
.........or usually common sense and recognition of "grey" areas; just like I didn't before 25!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
When I was an (immature) student I was too preoccupied with planning my next pint, er, amongst other things. :-X
I've often wondered what it'd be like to return as a mature student.
Kevin
Believe me Kevin it is great fun :y :y as I do not suffer from the pressures of youth that I would have done at 19, and those I see being encountered by my fellow, younger, students. :( :(
I would highly recommend any 'mature' person going to Uni if it is going to assist your career! :y :y :y
I would agree, and me, well I was 39 and single, as I always intended to be, in those days and moved back in with my Mum and Dad ::) Sad yes but had lost my Job and house with it :( No financial worries and had a great time at Uni, a few of us were mature students and had a great relationship with the lecturers. You are never too old to learn. :y
Indeed Mike I am learning all the time and I hope to be at 90, if I live that long!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
There are many small business units in and around the country which have a pair of 16 cylinder (Ship engines) inside them, they are all heavily soundproofed and run on natural gas, these things are dotted around at intermediate points between main subs on the grid, they have one running at all times as a trickle into the grid, when the demand increases they can kick in the second generator to give some capacity. They don't tell you about these computer controlled, extremely efficient things which have the "Perfect Burn" 17.5:1 air/gas... They only seem to paint the grim picture, it's as though they're trying to send us back to the 70's.
Remind me,
Why did they close the pits? :-?
I'm off to buy some candles, queue for petrol and fight with my neighbour over a loaf of bread :D
DC
-
I think all this noise coming out of governments about carbon footprint, etc is complete tripe.
I would be intregued to find out how much of these 'Green taxes' have gone directly to Green issues or projects. The eternal synic in me says not all of it if even a significant part.....
Why dont we do things that could actually make a difference, the glass recycling system here in Germany works fantastically. You buy a plastic crate of beer full of glass bottle, you pay a deposit on it all (couple of euros) and then when done you bring it back and a machine reads it you get a coupon towards you next crate or even the money back. We also have the Yellow bag system, standardised all over the country, where all the recyclables go. It is unlimited so it normal rubbish with communial large bins in the road. They never get full. Also the packaging here is much less than in the UK. Most of it is just about necessary.
If we want to be serious about the environment lets do things that actually work, not just pay extra taxes to fund MP pay rises
-
I think all this noise coming out of governments about carbon footprint, etc is complete tripe.
I would be intregued to find out how much of these 'Green taxes' have gone directly to Green issues or projects. The eternal synic in me says not all of it if even a significant part.....
Indeed. they pay lip service to it when they want to raise taxes and use it as an excuse not to invest in the national infrastructure. Other than that, they couldnt care less.
Why dont we do things that could actually make a difference, the glass recycling system here in Germany works fantastically. You buy a plastic crate of beer full of glass bottle, you pay a deposit on it all (couple of euros) and then when done you bring it back and a machine reads it you get a coupon towards you next crate or even the money back. We also have the Yellow bag system, standardised all over the country, where all the recyclables go. It is unlimited so it normal rubbish with communial large bins in the road. They never get full. Also the packaging here is much less than in the UK. Most of it is just about necessary.
Just like the Corona bottles we used to collect as kids for the 5p deposit...
The problem is, people in the UK, government included, moan about the environment from one side of the fence or the other, but never actually DO anything. If people dumped unnecessary packaging at Sainsbury's before walking out of the door, or stopped buying drinks in plastic bottles, it'd stop pretty soon. Maybe that'll start happening if councils start chipping bins but unless there's a big stick hovering over them, most people un the UK are oblivious to the environment in their day to day lives, IMHO.
Kevin
-
There are many small business units in and around the country which have a pair of 16 cylinder (Ship engines) inside them, they are all heavily soundproofed and run on natural gas, these things are dotted around at intermediate points between main subs on the grid, they have one running at all times as a trickle into the grid, when the demand increases they can kick in the second generator to give some capacity. They don't tell you about these computer controlled, extremely efficient things which have the "Perfect Burn" 17.5:1 air/gas... They only seem to paint the grim picture, it's as though they're trying to send us back to the 70's.
Remind me,
Why did they close the pits? :-?
I'm off to buy some candles, queue for petrol and fight with my neighbour over a loaf of bread :D
DC
What are the engines?
I know a few Valentas are used for this, and also I think a few of the EE/Ruston series engines of the type started as the 6T in the 1930s and last known as the RK280 before sell off from MAN.
-
There are many small business units in and around the country which have a pair of 16 cylinder (Ship engines) inside them, they are all heavily soundproofed and run on natural gas, these things are dotted around at intermediate points between main subs on the grid, they have one running at all times as a trickle into the grid, when the demand increases they can kick in the second generator to give some capacity. They don't tell you about these computer controlled, extremely efficient things which have the "Perfect Burn" 17.5:1 air/gas... They only seem to paint the grim picture, it's as though they're trying to send us back to the 70's.
Remind me,
Why did they close the pits? :-?
I'm off to buy some candles, queue for petrol and fight with my neighbour over a loaf of bread :D
DC
At the time Dave it was because the railways had stopped using coal, the majority of houses has ceased to be heated by coal, and industry had greatly reduced its need for coal, especially in areas like steel production, with even power stations tending to opt for oil burning or, at that time the great "vision" of nuclear power.
In short the NCB (National Coal Board) was producing vast amounts of coal that nobody needed at vast expense to the taxpayer. Many unprofitable pits were being run purely because of the subsidies from government.
It had to come to an end, like the taxpayers huge subsidy of the railways, the steel and ship building, along with the car industry. 8-) 8-)
That is of course the political and cold commercial view! ::) ::) ::)
Opposite to that is the massive social worth in terms of local communities and employment that not only the coal mines but the railways represented. The latter in particular is a public service and should not be run purely on the basis of profit, although I believe that could be possible with better management as it once was. The coal mines should have not been so drastically slaughtered as they were! The closure of small unprofitable pits was necessary, but some larger ones should have beenkept open, as there was, and still is, a demand for good quality coal in industry (and the steam railway preservation movement who require good quality Yorkshire steam coal!! :D :D ;))
However Great Britain now imports far too much to meet our needs. >:( >:( >:( Now they are even going to build a new coal powered power station at Northfleet! ::) ::) ::)
Oh well we cannot quickly reverse time, but this is what makes History and Politics so interesting! :y :y
-
There are many small business units in and around the country which have a pair of 16 cylinder (Ship engines) inside them, they are all heavily soundproofed and run on natural gas, these things are dotted around at intermediate points between main subs on the grid, they have one running at all times as a trickle into the grid, when the demand increases they can kick in the second generator to give some capacity. They don't tell you about these computer controlled, extremely efficient things which have the "Perfect Burn" 17.5:1 air/gas... They only seem to paint the grim picture, it's as though they're trying to send us back to the 70's.
I don't doubt that they're efficient compared to car engines but a piston engine will never get close to a fossil fuel fired steam turbine or gas turbine power station due to the amount of waste heat that is a necessary by-product of the process. Unless you use the heat in a CHP type project you have something that's useful as a standby due to the quick startup times, but not something that can compete on cost or "green-ness" with the larger scale generating stations.
Even domestic and commercial CHP systems installed in buildings where the waste heat is used are of only marginally greater efficiency compared to large scale electricity generation, which means that a small increment in the efficiency of the latter, or the addition of some renewable generation to the grid, and such systems become environmentally unfriendly.
When I was at school I did a week's work experience at a film studios. I couldn't help but notice that every evening the engineers would remove everything from the shelves above their benches and place them in the floor.
I came in one morning to find my cup had dropped off the shelf and smashed. One of the guys took be down into the basement where there were 2 rather great ship engines thrumming away. Apparently they were installed to provide a suitable power supply for the lighting in the early days and never got replaced by grid power. The vibrations they sent through the building were to blame for the demise of my cup. :'(
Kevin
-
There are many small business units in and around the country which have a pair of 16 cylinder (Ship engines) inside them, they are all heavily soundproofed and run on natural gas, these things are dotted around at intermediate points between main subs on the grid, they have one running at all times as a trickle into the grid, when the demand increases they can kick in the second generator to give some capacity. They don't tell you about these computer controlled, extremely efficient things which have the "Perfect Burn" 17.5:1 air/gas... They only seem to paint the grim picture, it's as though they're trying to send us back to the 70's.
I don't doubt that they're efficient compared to car engines but a piston engine will never get close to a fossil fuel fired steam turbine or gas turbine power station due to the amount of waste heat that is a necessary by-product of the process. Unless you use the heat in a CHP type project you have something that's useful as a standby due to the quick startup times, but not something that can compete on cost or "green-ness" with the larger scale generating stations.
Even domestic and commercial CHP systems installed in buildings where the waste heat is used are of only marginally greater efficiency compared to large scale electricity generation, which means that a small increment in the efficiency of the latter, or the addition of some renewable generation to the grid, and such systems become environmentally unfriendly.
When I was at school I did a week's work experience at a film studios. I couldn't help but notice that every evening the engineers would remove everything from the shelves above their benches and place them in the floor.
I came in one morning to find my cup had dropped off the shelf and smashed. One of the guys took be down into the basement where there were 2 rather great ship engines thrumming away. Apparently they were installed to provide a suitable power supply for the lighting in the early days and never got replaced by grid power. The vibrations they sent through the building were to blame for the demise of my cup. :'(
Kevin
The key thing is that these are available to supliment the base load under peek conditions.....
Here is the turbines where I used to work:
http://www.multimap.com/s/FSnMjJYD
Bloody great big things, think they were spey engines are something huge!
-
The key thing is that these are available to supliment the base load under peek conditions.....
Here is the turbines where I used to work:
http://www.multimap.com/s/FSnMjJYD
Bloody great big things, think they were spey engines are something huge!
Agreed. And such things will become more important as unpredictable renewables start to form a greater proportion of generating capacity, as will dynamic demand control and pumped storage.
I have also heard that standby power generation infrastructure from organisations such as water boards, etc. is attached to the grid so that it can help out during times of peak demand. Makes sense that it does, rather than sit idle most of the time, I guess.
The difficult question is that the political push to build more wind farms and other renewables, will prompt greater use of short term capacity to cover the periods when the wind isn't blowing. Short term capacity is much less efficient than the large fossil fuelled power stations that cover the base load. Now, is that better or worse for the environment than just binning the renewables and letting the base load increase very slightly?
Kevin
-
The key thing is that these are available to supliment the base load under peek conditions.....
Here is the turbines where I used to work:
http://www.multimap.com/s/FSnMjJYD
Bloody great big things, think they were spey engines are something huge!
Agreed. And such things will become more important as unpredictable renewables start to form a greater proportion of generating capacity, as will dynamic demand control and pumped storage.
I have also heard that standby power generation infrastructure from organisations such as water boards, etc. is attached to the grid so that it can help out during times of peak demand. Makes sense that it does, rather than sit idle most of the time, I guess.
The difficult question is that the political push to build more wind farms and other renewables, will prompt greater use of short term capacity to cover the periods when the wind isn't blowing. Short term capacity is much less efficient than the large fossil fuelled power stations that cover the base load. Now, is that better or worse for the environment than just binning the renewables and letting the base load increase very slightly?
Kevin
As per above link, that standby station was connected to the grid (by suitable isolation etc) and it to was a private holding.....
Cant recall the generator capability but it was many many megawatts!
-
Just found it in this doc.........5.5MW oil powered!
http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/BCD86AB9-0DDD-4C5D-8179-F3EC9750699B/17473/Sys2007_embedded_and_renewable_generation.pdf
Its surprising how many small power units there are about!
-
(and the steam railway preservation movement who require good quality Yorkshire steam coal!! :D :D ;))
What about Welsh steam coal?
-
I think all this noise coming out of governments about carbon footprint, etc is complete tripe.
I would be intregued to find out how much of these 'Green taxes' have gone directly to Green issues or projects. The eternal synic in me says not all of it if even a significant part.....
Indeed. they pay lip service to it when they want to raise taxes and use it as an excuse not to invest in the national infrastructure. Other than that, they couldnt care less.
Why dont we do things that could actually make a difference, the glass recycling system here in Germany works fantastically. You buy a plastic crate of beer full of glass bottle, you pay a deposit on it all (couple of euros) and then when done you bring it back and a machine reads it you get a coupon towards you next crate or even the money back. We also have the Yellow bag system, standardised all over the country, where all the recyclables go. It is unlimited so it normal rubbish with communial large bins in the road. They never get full. Also the packaging here is much less than in the UK. Most of it is just about necessary.
Just like the Corona bottles we used to collect as kids for the 5p deposit...
The problem is, people in the UK, government included, moan about the environment from one side of the fence or the other, but never actually DO anything. If people dumped unnecessary packaging at Sainsbury's before walking out of the door, or stopped buying drinks in plastic bottles, it'd stop pretty soon. Maybe that'll start happening if councils start chipping bins but unless there's a big stick hovering over them, most people un the UK are oblivious to the environment in their day to day lives, IMHO.
Kevin
If you ever served here you'll know that it is law here. End of.... :y
And as the biggest sceptic of global warming I dont mind doing this recycling palarva as long as it is clear what I can and cannot recycle. I dont want rubbish strewn all over the place. Lets reuse what we can :y
-
Germany do have it sorted on the bottle front, most are deposit bottles with big areas in the car parks of the large supermarkets where they are returned and the deposit refunded.
Much more efficient than smashing them up and re-processing them.
-
Much more efficient than smashing them up and re-processing them.
Agreed. Making bottles from sand doesn't seem any worse than making them from fragments of broken glass of mixed colour, with the odd bit of stale beer and sticky label thrown in. Yet in NE Hants we have an entire door to dorr waste collection round in a rather great diesel truck dedicated to collecting fragments of broken glass for delivery to a depot in Southampton (35 miles away).
And as the biggest sceptic of global warming I dont mind doing this recycling palarva as long as it is clear what I can and cannot recycle. I dont want rubbish strewn all over the place. Lets reuse what we can
Me too. They're different issues entirely in my view. Not re-using glass bottles in favour of strewing plastic everywhere where it will stay for decades to come just doesn't make sense when we used to have a system of recycling that worked.
Unless, of course we incinerate the plastic to use the energy locked into it, but then the nimbys won't let anyone build the incinerator. ::)
Kevin
-
(and the steam railway preservation movement who require good quality Yorkshire steam coal!! :D :D ;))
What about Welsh steam coal?
When I was on the Mid-Hants Railway Martin they always spoke of good quality Yorkshire steam coal, so I always quote that one!! ;D ;D ;D :y :y
Nothing against the Welsh, who I worked amoungst for many years, I hasten to add! :D :D ;)
-
(and the steam railway preservation movement who require good quality Yorkshire steam coal!! :D :D ;))
What about Welsh steam coal?
When I was on the Mid-Hants Railway Martin they always spoke of good quality Yorkshire steam coal, so I always quote that one!! ;D ;D ;D :y :y
Nothing against the Welsh, who I worked amoungst for many years, I hasten to add! :D :D ;)
Someone told me they're on Russian coal now. :'(
Kevin
-
(and the steam railway preservation movement who require good quality Yorkshire steam coal!! :D :D ;))
What about Welsh steam coal?
When I was on the Mid-Hants Railway Martin they always spoke of good quality Yorkshire steam coal, so I always quote that one!! ;D ;D ;D :y :y
Nothing against the Welsh, who I worked amoungst for many years, I hasten to add! :D :D ;)
Someone told me they're on Russian coal now. :'(
Kevin
Oh my goodness Kevin now that is bad! :o :o :o
It means along with gas and oil supplies we even have my lovely Watercress Line using imported coal! I bet a lot of it is no more than dust, which is what I experienced when the quality Yorkshire steam coal was in short supply! Very bad for firing and producing the required steam!! :'( :'(
-
Railways designed their locos for certain coals hence the different designs of fireboxes
-
Once again, more dire warnings about our upcoming energy shortage. Indeed, from this site:
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/10/2_The_Energy_Crunch_Cometh.html
"The blackouts could begin as early as the week commencing November 10, for which the National Grid has warned “that the margin of spare capacity could be as slim as 0.8 gigawatts - the equivalent of one mid-sized coal-fired power station or the electricity consumed by a city the size of Nottingham.”
Will our government, or the"government in waiting" please make this issue a top priority?
FFS, why the dithering? >:( >:( >:(
Thats what they do best
-
In the meantime a good start would be to ask people to use less!! Switch off lights(not just in homes but in offices at night) when not in use, unplug transformers for charging mobiles, switch off TV's instead of leaving them on standby etc. It would be consumately easy to save 10% of daily use within a week. But wait, that wouldn't sit well with a society used to conspicious consumption. ;D
Problem is, although the nut munchers like to bang on about mobile phone chargers and TVs on standby these actually take bu66er all power. Less than a watt in most cases (unless it happens to be Murdoch's Gay set top boxes that stay on all night using 20+watts so they can "phone home" >:().
It's what we've come to expect as the basic things in life that take the majority of the power. Heating, hot water, water supply, street lighting, sanitation, fresh and frozen food, having any sort of industrial / commercial activity.
It's a little less easy to do without these. Granted savings could be made in some areas. Many offices are lit and air conditioned throughout the night, PCs left on, etc. Data centres take a lot of power and are, in some cases, half full of idle machines.
A marginal saving won't get away from the fact that our electricity supply network is decaying and needs investment.
We will, literally, have to wait until the lights go out, I suspect. >:(
Kevin
Heating?? You still using yours? I sleep with clothes on now - can't afford Eon's £350 per quarter anymore!
-
In the meantime a good start would be to ask people to use less!! Switch off lights(not just in homes but in offices at night) when not in use, unplug transformers for charging mobiles, switch off TV's instead of leaving them on standby etc. It would be consumately easy to save 10% of daily use within a week. But wait, that wouldn't sit well with a society used to conspicious consumption. ;D
Problem is, although the nut munchers like to bang on about mobile phone chargers and TVs on standby these actually take bu66er all power. Less than a watt in most cases (unless it happens to be Murdoch's Gay set top boxes that stay on all night using 20+watts so they can "phone home" >:().
It's what we've come to expect as the basic things in life that take the majority of the power. Heating, hot water, water supply, street lighting, sanitation, fresh and frozen food, having any sort of industrial / commercial activity.
It's a little less easy to do without these. Granted savings could be made in some areas. Many offices are lit and air conditioned throughout the night, PCs left on, etc. Data centres take a lot of power and are, in some cases, half full of idle machines.
A marginal saving won't get away from the fact that our electricity supply network is decaying and needs investment.
We will, literally, have to wait until the lights go out, I suspect. >:(
Kevin
Heating?? You still using yours? I sleep with clothes on now - can't afford Eon's £350 per quarter anymore!
WOW, did not realise there was electric up north. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
No, that's gas ;D