Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Nickbat on 16 December 2010, 10:34:40
-
"£500 on electricity bills to pay for green energy"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/8205123/500-on-electricity-bills-to-pay-for-green-energy.html
More idiocy from Huhne = more pensioners freezing to death, higher inflation and stifled economic activity.
The man's a menace. >:(
PS. Who can spot the Photoshopping in the picture that accompanies the article? ::)
-
I see no photo shopping just some pollution causing steam clouds ;D ::)
-
I see no photo shopping just some pollution causing steam clouds ;D ::)
;D ;D ;D ;D
Yeah, that steam's a real bu**er isn't it? ;)
-
I see no photo shopping just some pollution causing steam clouds ;D ::)
;D ;D ;D ;D
Yeah, that steam's a real bu**er isn't it? ;)
Just a shame it isn't a greenhouse gas.
..and from steam, to kettles.. Chocolate kettles, perhaps? Oh, we're back to Mr. Huhne, who is about as much use as one. ;)
Kevin
-
I certainly do not want to see higher energy bills.
However, what are the alternatives to what is proposed? We need to produce more electricity to meet growing demands, and it has to be paid for. Who else can pay for it other than the consumer who uses the energy.
As for the 'green' tag, well should we go back to coal power stations beltching out toxic fumes as we had as children in the 1940s/50s, and even town gas works gushing out sulphuric gases?
Building nuclear power stations, that I personally favour, is very expensive and we the consumer have to pay for it like we pay for everything else we gobble up.
Free energy is a thing of fantasy, with someone having to pay for the development and production costs. The alternative is we stop using energy like there is no tomorrow, and cut out non-essential appliances that I have seen multiply tremendously since my childhood. I suspect though that would not be very popular and practical!! ::) ::) ::)
So, what is the alternative apart from leaving the planet?
-
I don't think its photoshopped, the sun behind the thick cloud of steam is dark as its so dense as to be opaque :y :y
and I agree with Liz - we're going to have to get used to paying more for everything that uses up fossil fuels, or use less - sad, unwelcome but nonetheless a fact :o
-
I don't think its photoshopped, the sun behind the thick cloud of steam is dark as its so dense as to be opaque :y :y
Hmm. Looks pretty false to me. ;)
and I agree with Liz - we're going to have to get used to paying more for everything that uses up fossil fuels, or use less - sad, unwelcome but nonetheless a fact :o
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
As to the mythical renewables, and paying operators to NOT generate anything... Photovoltaics were even mentioned on the radio this morning.. Has he looked at the sky recently? :D
I can see a lot of this extra cost being wasted on schemes that don't fly unless he finds some advisers who actually know how the electricity supply infrastructure works. :(
Kevin
-
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
Kevin
I think a start would be to wean us off foriegn owned energy providers. :y
-
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
Kevin
I think a start would be to wean us off foriegn owned energy providers. :y
Another challenge altogether. :(
Kevin
-
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
Kevin
I think a start would be to wean us off foriegn owned energy providers. :y
Why Zulu?
I do not care who develops the power stations and produces the energy, as long as it is all done efficiently and as economically as possible.
The contracts to build new power stations are put out for tender after all, and we as consumers can shop around for our gas and electricity as much as we like. 8-) 8-)
-
I would suggest running an energy policy that suits the needs of this nation and to relegate the desire to appear to be one of the 'good' guys’ further down the list.
What else do we expect when we allow strategic infrastructure to be controlled by foreign owned providers and permit our national policy to be dictated by outside interests who operate to their own agenda?
All this breast-beating currently being displayed will simply will lead this country into an economic wasteland with all of us paying more than we need to for energy and having it rationed as and when needed by the providers after the installation of these 'smart' meters.
Anyone welcoming these possible increases should also be aware that a lot more than domestic bills will rise as increases experienced by any concern providing goods or services will most certainly be passed along to the consumer market.
An old adage suggests that if one bends over and assumes the position for a long enough someone will come along and shaft us for the privilege.
We are already paying through the nose for energy – why would we want to pay more?
-
Why Zulu?
Look at the case of Nuclear power. In a generation we have gone from being the pioneers to relying on buying-in any future nuclear infrastructure from the French!
Kevin
-
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
Kevin
I think a start would be to wean us off foriegn owned energy providers. :y
Why Zulu?
I do not care who develops the power stations and produces the energy, as long as it is all done efficiently and as economically as possible.
The contracts to build new power stations are put out for tender after all, and we as consumers can shop around for our gas and electricity as much as we like. 8-) 8-)
Does shopping around really work to the consumers advantage in the long run Lizzie?
Why allow foreign enterprises to profit by providing basic-need services? -
We can see the undesirable result as prices go up very quickly when there is an upward fluctuation in their acquisition costs but never seems to fall at a similar rate when those costs decrease.
-
Why Zulu?
Look at the case of Nuclear power. In a generation we have gone from being the pioneers to relying on buying-in any future nuclear infrastructure from the French!
Kevin
But we live in a globalised world, with materials and finance coming from multiple international sources, including the City of London. Companies may appear to be "French", "German" or "American", but in fact their finance and ownership can be lodged around the world. It is a competitive situation, not one of a monoply that the UK used to see with its utilities.
So why not have a French company building the nuclear power stations, using British labour and finance? I don't see many on this forum objecting to buying French, German, Japanesse, Chinese, and American cars, computers, tv's and general goods, etc, etc. The money goes out and it comes back in. Wecome to the capitalist international world! ::) ::) ::)
-
We need to do something. He's right about weaning us off imported gas and coal. That with bite us eventually. We desperately need more nuclear capacity, and should have embarked on that decades ago.
Kevin
I think a start would be to wean us off foriegn owned energy providers. :y
Why Zulu?
I do not care who develops the power stations and produces the energy, as long as it is all done efficiently and as economically as possible.
The contracts to build new power stations are put out for tender after all, and we as consumers can shop around for our gas and electricity as much as we like. 8-) 8-)
totally agree lizzie and at the moment all we can do is shop around :(
-
Some interesting observations.
The people of Britain are NOW having to pay for not having invested in new power stations (nuclear of course) through years of ducking the issue.
Worse unlike the sensible European brethren countries we sold our family silver off (and everyone was a Sid etc and loved it) with nary a thought for the long term or who owns it. I believe we even recently courted the Saudis (of all people) to fund building new power stations.
When energy prices were being put in Spain it had to be approved by government. Not so in the UK. In any case it would be hard to tell a French or German company not to charge you more. Economically I belive that in these hard times and they are hard times that the government should cap energy prices. So the Foreign owned companies can Milk the UK to make up the capped shortfall in their home country. put simply you are subsidising Johnny Foreigner.
As far as green power is concerned, that has to be a good thing if sensibly implemented. As Lizzie says, living in the era of coke and coal wasn't nice. You would have thought that an island nation that endures many grey days would have turned to wave power by now. Just where are our modern day Brunels? We could have been a world leader ;D
-
I can't agree with you on this one Liz, it's not like buying cars and dishwashers...........energy is too closely tied to defence and national security for it ever to be wise to be too reliant on anyone.
Look what happens when Russia gets annoyed with any of its former republics - off goes the oil until they beg for it to be turned on - like the school bully holding a kids head in the toilet :o its a damocles sword dangling over our heads, i dont care if its not the cheapest option - subsidise it, nationalise it but nuclear power is necessary and no one can tell me we don't have the wherewithal to design and build our own :y
-
I can't agree with you on this one Liz, it's not like buying cars and dishwashers...........energy is too closely tied to defence and national security for it ever to be wise to be too reliant on anyone.
Look what happens when Russia gets annoyed with any of its former republics - off goes the oil until they beg for it to be turned on - like the school bully holding a kids head in the toilet :o its a damocles sword dangling over our heads, i dont care if its not the cheapest option - subsidise it, nationalise it but nuclear power is necessary and no one can tell me we don't have the wherewithal to design and build our own :y
Agreed. I suppose the only consolation is that it's difficult to take away a nuclear power station. Then again. I wonder where we'll get the fuel for those? ::)
Kevin
-
I can't agree with you on this one Liz, it's not like buying cars and dishwashers...........energy is too closely tied to defence and national security for it ever to be wise to be too reliant on anyone.
Look what happens when Russia gets annoyed with any of its former republics - off goes the oil until they beg for it to be turned on - like the school bully holding a kids head in the toilet :o its a damocles sword dangling over our heads, i dont care if its not the cheapest option - subsidise it, nationalise it but nuclear power is necessary and no one can tell me we don't have the wherewithal to design and build our own :y
Agreed. I suppose the only consolation is that it's difficult to take away a nuclear power station. Then again. I wonder where we'll get the fuel for those? ::)
Kevin
Exactly, so does it matter who builds them. We can always nationalise them later.
As for the Russian gas, we are now relying less on the pan-European pipe line, with more coming in by huge gas tanker ships. The Russians want the cash from the gas they do sell to us, and if things get nasty we have still many billions of tons of coal that in an emergency we could utilise again.
Fuel supplies will of course be ever more at risk in a world desperate for them. But water is actually going to be the first reason for an internation crisis, not coal, oil or gas. There is still so much of all that all around the world to be bought and sold to keep countries solvant. ;) National security has always been a factor in our supplies, so nothing has changed there, and it just gives us another good reason for keeping close up and personal with the USA - along with keeping a modern Royal Navy with a strong nuclear, as well as conventional, punch.
-
I think it'll be a race between water, oil and food - Mad Max vs Waterworld ;D ;D :y
-
Its the tree huggers lunacy of trying to build millions of windmills to avoid the reality that we need lots of nuclear power stations. Its rather madness, but what else can we expect from a country which allowed an unelected mentally unhinged cretin to become PM and then not utter a murmur when he sells our nuclear industry to a french company which just happens to employ his brother.
-
From Matt Ridley (Times) via Delingpole:
For a glimpse of a truly scary future dependent on volatile suppliers look no farther than Mr Huhne’s favoured approach, the dash for wind. Every wind turbine has a magnet made of a metal called neodymium. There are 2.5 tonnes of it in each of the behemoths that have just gone up to spoil my view in Northumberland. The mining and refining of neodymium is so dirty (involving repeated boiling in acid, with radioactive thorium as a waste product), that only one country does it: China. This year it flexed its trade muscles and briefly stopped exporting neodymium from its inner Mongolian mines. How’s that for dangerous reliance on a volatile foreign supply?
::) ::)
-
Surely we simply aren't a big enough land-mass (unlike the Americas, Europe, Russia and Asia) to be self reliant? Whether it's gas, coal, nuclear, solar, wind or sea power we don't have the gas rigs, coal, uranium, silicon or neodymium mines to produce the necessary materials..
(I'm just guessing that the wave based sea power generators probably also use neodymium magnets, since they're some of the most powerful available it stands to reason when you want to extract the most power out of something)
-
Exactly, so does it matter who builds them. We can always nationalise them later.
As for the Russian gas, we are now relying less on the pan-European pipe line, with more coming in by huge gas tanker ships. The Russians want the cash from the gas they do sell to us, and if things get nasty we have still many billions of tons of coal that in an emergency we could utilise again.
Fuel supplies will of course be ever more at risk in a world desperate for them. But water is actually going to be the first reason for an internation crisis, not coal, oil or gas. There is still so much of all that all around the world to be bought and sold to keep countries solvant. ;) National security has always been a factor in our supplies, so nothing has changed there, and it just gives us another good reason for keeping close up and personal with the USA - along with keeping a modern Royal Navy with a strong nuclear, as well as conventional, punch.
Insofar as the nationalisation (after the fact) of this critical infrastructure is concerned Lizzie we should have no need to do this - we should have it under our control already and also have a policy of development that suits this nation well underway.
The problem with gas supply to here is the lack of storage. I believe this to be a critical oversight that makes us vulnerable to fluctuating prices through having to buy at disadvantageous times.
I also believe that some energy providers are using this very thing as the reason for the recent hikes on energy cost to the consumer.
We should also be re-commissioning these mines now it's madness to allow then to fall into disrepair; coal is a precious national resource that we shouldn't ignore because others wish us to.
If we can't keep our people warm and the wheels of commerce turning without crippling energy costs the possible lack of water will be of little consequence in my view.
In terms of international energy security and the possible benefit of maintaining close links with the United States, I don't believe this will be worth depending on to the exclusion of a strong national energy policy.
The world demographic in terms of financial and strategic power is changing and I think the United States will have severe problems to work through, so much so that it will ultimately diminish their influence on the world stage. Not that there way a two way relationship with them in the first place.
Weapons of war will be useless in trying to maintain the continued availability of energy from international sources as such energy would have to be transported over distance to this country and no amount of military power will ever be able to guarantee this.
Our government should be developing an energy policy for the good of our people not others scattered around the world.
-
I'm glad I've got my PV panels. At least it will offset the cost of my bills. ;D ;D ;D
-
Surely we simply aren't a big enough land-mass (unlike the Americas, Europe, Russia and Asia) to be self reliant? Whether it's gas, coal, nuclear, solar, wind or sea power we don't have the gas rigs, coal, uranium, silicon or neodymium mines to produce the necessary materials..
(I'm just guessing that the wave based sea power generators probably also use neodymium magnets, since they're some of the most powerful available it stands to reason when you want to extract the most power out of something)
My point was that we have a huge coastline. If in every harbour we had a device that harnessed the EVERY day without fail rise and fall in tides we would be laughing. We couldn't sell the technology to the Swiss or the Austrians but plenty of other folk would buy it. Powers that be Too narrow minded I am afraid. I would have had the Severn Estuary utilised by now. plenty of other habitats and so on for wild life. they have wings and fins..................
-
Surely we simply aren't a big enough land-mass (unlike the Americas, Europe, Russia and Asia) to be self reliant? Whether it's gas, coal, nuclear, solar, wind or sea power we don't have the gas rigs, coal, uranium, silicon or neodymium mines to produce the necessary materials..
(I'm just guessing that the wave based sea power generators probably also use neodymium magnets, since they're some of the most powerful available it stands to reason when you want to extract the most power out of something)
My point was that we have a huge coastline. If in every harbour we had a device that harnessed the EVERY day without fail rise and fall in tides we would be laughing. We couldn't sell the technology to the Swiss or the Austrians but plenty of other folk would buy it. Powers that be Too narrow minded I am afraid. I would have had the Severn Estuary utilised by now. plenty of other habitats and so on for wild life. they have wings and fins..................
True enough - but as someone mentioned above, we'd almost certainly still be at the mercy of X foreign power for the raw materials to build the generators.. granted their influence ends (or at least vastly diminishes) once they're installed and just being maintained.
-
My point was that we have a huge coastline. If in every harbour we had a device that harnessed the EVERY day without fail rise and fall in tides we would be laughing. We couldn't sell the technology to the Swiss or the Austrians but plenty of other folk would buy it. Powers that be Too narrow minded I am afraid. I would have had the Severn Estuary utilised by now. plenty of other habitats and so on for wild life. they have wings and fins..................
Wave technology is proving very difficult to develop V although it would be incredebily useful around our coastline without doubt.
One system tested in the narrows of a loch outlet near here was found to be very difficult to place in the fast flowing current. It used the bladed propeller system of energy transfer which was also found to be prone to damage from debris inducing imbalance leading to bearing failure. (Much the same as used in the Hudson River installation at New York)
The develpoment of this realistic alternative system has been allowed to limp along in favour of wind power as that method has grabbed the headlines as being the fashionable standard bearer for alternative energy generation.
Not that the relative lack of expense where wind was concerned (when compred to that of wave power) had anything to do with it.
-
We could have had an alternative energy generation system for the last 20years. Profeesor Salter invented a system for extracting energy from wave motion way back in 1974. It looked good, extracting some 80% of the energy, plus the water behind it was flat, with no energy save the tidal rise and fall. Anyone want to stop coastal erosion ?.
However, somehow the Atomic energy boys got control of the patents, and figures presented to the House of Commons showing the costs of implementation got "massaged" to show that it was very expensive, when in reality.........
Ken
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
I don't think making your cats run round a treadmill counts as alternative energy Zu. ;D
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
I don't think making your cats run round a treadmill counts as alternative energy Zu. ;D
;D ;D ;D I would be flayed within seconds Z ;D ;D
-
Tried it with the ferrets, they decided the wheel was a cozy place to curl up for a snooze.
Back to the drawing board. ;D
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
They can generate 240MW which is quite a few kettles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
Google is your friend :y
Ken
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
They can generate 240MW which is quite a few kettles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
Google is your friend :y
Ken
In the 1960s, it cost €94.5 million to build (how much at today's prices, I wonder?) and it supplies just 0.012% of the country's needs.
Clever? Maybe.
Economically viable? Nope. ;)
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
They can generate 240MW which is quite a few kettles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
Google is your friend :y
Ken
In the 1960s, it cost €94.5 million to build (how much at today's prices, I wonder?) and it supplies just 0.012% of the country's needs.
Clever? Maybe.
Economically viable? Nope. ;)
Yes I see that - there also appears to be a need to site these installations carefully which obviously will restrict their widespread use.
Development costs today would be substantial I would imagine.
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
They can generate 240MW which is quite a few kettles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
Google is your friend :y
Ken
In the 1960s, it cost €94.5 million to build (how much at today's prices, I wonder?) and it supplies just 0.012% of the country's needs.
Clever? Maybe.
Economically viable? Nope. ;)
Waste to be disposed of and cost.......None.
Life time........UNtil the Ocean's stop flowing.
Ken
-
Oh and France has had a tidal power system operational since 1966. What, the french better engineers than us ? :-[
Ken
I do have an interest in alternate sources.
What system are they using Ken - does it provide any reckonable capacity?
They can generate 240MW which is quite a few kettles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station
Google is your friend :y
Ken
In the 1960s, it cost €94.5 million to build (how much at today's prices, I wonder?) and it supplies just 0.012% of the country's needs.
Clever? Maybe.
Economically viable? Nope. ;)
Waste to be disposed of and cost.......None.
Life time........UNtil the Ocean's stop flowing.
Ken
Ken, it would cost billions at today's prices.
-
A lot, yes that just shows how forward thinking the French were back then. PLUS they now have a team of engineers who have designed and installed a successful tidal power system. Other countries may think they can do it, the French actually have, so are streets ahead in the technology stakes.
Oh, what's happened to the UK nuclear power industry, bought out by someone, I wonder who ?.
That's forward thinking, something britain will never be accused of.
Ken
-
A lot, yes that just shows how forward thinking the French were back then. PLUS they now have a team of engineers who have designed and installed a successful tidal power system. Other countries may think they can do it, the French actually have, so are streets ahead in the technology stakes.
Oh, what's happened to the UK nuclear power industry, bought out by someone, I wonder who ?.
That's forward thinking, something britain will never be accused of.
Ken
Did they follow that up with another one Ken?
While the technology seems appealing the technical difficulties remain - along with capital costs and siting, I don't think the technology lends itself to widespread installation.
-
What all the proponents of wind and tidal power are
missing brushing under the carpet is that energy supply that varies with the wind and tides isn't actually much use to our national grid as it stands today. It just promotes less efficient use of the fossil fuels that have to be on standby for when the wind stops blowing.
Until we can dump non-critical loads from the grid during peak periods and/or store more energy between peaks unpredictable renewable energy is a chocolate fireguard.
A workable "smart grid" is a precursor to any of these schemes, hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.
Kevin
-
I certainly do not want to see higher energy bills.
However, what are the alternatives to what is proposed? We need to produce more electricity to meet growing demands, and it has to be paid for. Who else can pay for it other than the consumer who uses the energy.
As for the 'green' tag, well should we go back to coal power stations beltching out toxic fumes as we had as children in the 1940s/50s, and even town gas works gushing out sulphuric gases?
Building nuclear power stations, that I personally favour, is very expensive and we the consumer have to pay for it like we pay for everything else we gobble up.
Free energy is a thing of fantasy, with someone having to pay for the development and production costs. The alternative is we stop using energy like there is no tomorrow, and cut out non-essential appliances that I have seen multiply tremendously since my childhood. I suspect though that would not be very popular and practical!! ::) ::) ::)
So, what is the alternative apart from leaving the planet?
Yes, we should go back to coal, no doubt about it.
MMGW is, as of yet, a theory based upon some very dubious science IMHO.
However, if that sort of thing does bother you, then you will be happy to know that there are ways of trapping plant food discharge from the large scale burning of coal, Just a pity that this, just like nuclear power, (which again, through the production of foam glass (IIRC) the waste can be 'trapped' indefinatley). Just a pity that this sensible idea would never get past the church of crusty's, who are seemingly oblivious to our ever impending energy crisis, and I for one a fed-up with paying spiraling costs whilst being held ransom by the French and Russians. >:(
And as for the modern day Conservative Party, well, as true blue as I am, I hold them in almost as much contempt as I do 'New Labour'. DC just doesn't have the balls needed to sort this country out.
-
hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.
Kevin
I concur
-
A workable "smart grid" is a precursor to any of these schemes, hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.
Kevin
I quite agree. All the proposed tinkering will do is to allow the present government to take the easy way out.
The attempt to alter the energy use of millions of people in this country by using the blunt tool of taxation and ration is an indictment on the ability of our legislators to think strategically.
It also frustrates me that the very people who propose these ridiculous ideas are often those who will not feel the financial pinch if and when these proposals are eventually adopted.
To be lectured by politicians who are either millionaires or are, or will be, in receipt of a very generous lifetime pension simply twists the knife.
If many people are struggling with excessive energy costs at the moment how in the name of opps will they manage if the proposals, currently being made by our millionaire Energy Secretary, are adopted in the terms he's talking about?
-
What all the proponents of wind and tidal power are missing brushing under the carpet is that energy supply that varies with the wind and tides isn't actually much use to our national grid as it stands today. It just promotes less efficient use of the fossil fuels that have to be on standby for when the wind stops blowing.
Until we can dump non-critical loads from the grid during peak periods and/or store more energy between peaks unpredictable renewable energy is a chocolate fireguard.
A workable "smart grid" is a precursor to any of these schemes, hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.
Kevin
We can. A recent program on Scotland's use of water power showed several pumped storage systems in current use. I believe the french system can hold back the water until needed. And regards cost it has paid back its constructional costs and is cheaper than nuclear (1.8c per kWh, versus 2.5c per kWh for nuclear).
I'm not saying we chould immediately put a windmill in everybody's back garden, I think we should have a mix of different technologies, so we are not reliant on any one, and can choose which to develop. That way we can take advantage of any new technologies as they come along. I know windmills are fairly ugly things, but Salter's duck has the advantage of cutting down the waves to size which I am sure could be put to good use in various places around our coastline.
The more development we have in this country the less dependent we are on foreign suppliers who often have alterior motives for the things they do. A strong electrical generation research program would help to halt the decline in UK engineering.
Ken
-
A couple of other ways of generating power/heat.
I wonder how much heat you would get from a heat pump installed in the back garden ?. This might be a better way of heating your home.
How about microturbines' combined heat and power (CHP) technology for providing energy to far off places ?. To give Deb's power must involve a lot of infrastructure. If she had a microturbine, she could generate power as and when she needed it.
We don't always need a new way of generating terawatts, a few thousand local plants generating megawatts or even kilowatts would do just as well ( local generation = low transmision losses).
Ken
-
The more development we have in this country the less dependent we are on foreign suppliers who often have alterior motives for the things they do. A strong electrical generation research program would help to halt the decline in UK engineering.
Ken
You'll certainly get no argument from me on that one Ken.
We would need however a government with the balls and determination to put this country first and foremost.
-
The more development we have in this country the less dependent we are on foreign suppliers who often have alterior motives for the things they do. A strong electrical generation research program would help to halt the decline in UK engineering.
Ken
You'll certainly get no argument from me on that one Ken.
We would need however a government with the balls and determination to put this country first and foremost.
In which case Zulu, we are, and are highly likely to continue to be, frankly, screwed :(
-
What all the proponents of wind and tidal power are missing brushing under the carpet is that energy supply that varies with the wind and tides isn't actually much use to our national grid as it stands today. It just promotes less efficient use of the fossil fuels that have to be on standby for when the wind stops blowing.
Until we can dump non-critical loads from the grid during peak periods and/or store more energy between peaks unpredictable renewable energy is a chocolate fireguard.
A workable "smart grid" is a precursor to any of these schemes, hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.
Kevin
We can. A recent program on Scotland's use of water power showed several pumped storage systems in current use. I believe the french system can hold back the water until needed. And regards cost it has paid back its constructional costs and is cheaper than nuclear (1.8c per kWh, versus 2.5c per kWh for nuclear).
I'm not saying we chould immediately put a windmill in everybody's back garden, I think we should have a mix of different technologies, so we are not reliant on any one, and can choose which to develop. That way we can take advantage of any new technologies as they come along. I know windmills are fairly ugly things, but Salter's duck has the advantage of cutting down the waves to size which I am sure could be put to good use in various places around our coastline.
The more development we have in this country the less dependent we are on foreign suppliers who often have alterior motives for the things they do. A strong electrical generation research program would help to halt the decline in UK engineering.
Ken
Agreed, but we would need storage on a much greater scale than the current projects, which really just provide some load for the less than agile plant during the off-peak times in the daily cycle. They wouldn't cope with a few days or even weeks without any wind, for example, nor with potentially much larger daily variations in surplus / surfeit that would be inevitable with a significant contribution from wind power.
I was speaking to a friend who works at NG's control centre and he said wind power is the bain of their life and taking the energy (which the nut munchers are trying to compel them to do whenever it's available) simply results in fossil fuel plant idling waiting to cover for a lull in the wind.
Kevin
-
Bring back the Victorian engineers.
Power from the sea doesn't have to be just from turbines. With the so called decline in fishing we have plenty of spare harbour space. Generators using the rise and fall could be fixed to the piers of every coastal town. Heat pumps from land/sea would deliver tons of energy. I think we are just lacking a bit in imagination.
There is a pumped storage scheme in Wales. Why not have dozens more? Make them into tourist attractions.
Something I have been meaning to comment on as well. People who say Windmill generators are ugly.... what about all the wretched NG pylons. They would never have been allowed if being contemplated today!
-
Bring back the Victorian engineers.
Power from the sea doesn't have to be just from turbines. With the so called decline in fishing we have plenty of spare harbour space. Generators using the rise and fall could be fixed to the piers of every coastal town. Heat pumps from land/sea would deliver tons of energy. I think we are just lacking a bit in imagination.
There is a pumped storage scheme in Wales. Why not have dozens more? Make them into tourist attractions.
Something I have been meaning to comment on as well. People who say Windmill generators are ugly.... what about all the wretched NG pylons. They would never have been allowed if being contemplated today!
Now you are talking Varche!! :y :y :y :y
Brunel and Stephenson & Son, to name just two of the great mechanical engineers, would soon solve our power issues!
In later years Gresley, Bullied, Churchward / Collet and Stanier would also have advanced electrical generation 8-) 8-) 8-)
-
Now you are talking Varche!! :y :y :y :y
Brunel and Stephenson & Son, to name just two of the great mechanical engineers, would soon solve our power issues!
In later years Gresley, Bullied, Churchward / Collet and Stanier would also have advanced electrical generation 8-) 8-) 8-)
Agreed. I would love to see what some of these engineers would be able to achieve with the tools at our disposal today.
Kevin
-
Now you are talking Varche!! :y :y :y :y
Brunel and Stephenson & Son, to name just two of the great mechanical engineers, would soon solve our power issues!
In later years Gresley, Bullied, Churchward / Collet and Stanier would also have advanced electrical generation 8-) 8-) 8-)
Agreed. I would love to see what some of these engineers would be able to achieve with the tools at our disposal today.
Kevin
Not much sadly, the elf & safetee brigade would hamstring them in a heartbeat. ;D
-
Not much sadly, the elf & safetee brigade would hamstring them in a heartbeat. ;D
Agreed. Not to mention the environment stasi. You want to do what? burn coal! :o
Kevin
-
Not much sadly, the elf & safetee brigade would hamstring them in a heartbeat. ;D
Agreed. Not to mention the environment stasi. You want to do what? burn coal! :o
Kevin
Indeed Kev, from here I can just about hear Mr Dibnah rotating in Tonge Cemetery.
Probably the best place for him too, if he were still with us he'd be on remand for breaching numerous elf & safetee and envirobollix regulations with his antics.
-
No other country in the world has an energy policy so utterly mad and unworkable. Yet all our major political parties are equally locked into the same self-deceiving bubble of unreality. Any final hope that we might be saved from this absurdly unnecessary disaster seemed last week to vanish, even as the ice and the snow closed in.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8211944/Chris-Huhne-has-a-blueprint-for-a-green-cold-dark-Britain.html
Sadly, Mr Booker, you have summed up the situation precisely. >:(