Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Baron Von Spongebob]

 If Windows are killing thousand of birds, I'm going to use Linux from now on 

[TheBoy]

If Windows are killing thousand of birds, I'm going to use Linux from now on 

You forgot your coat

[Baron Von Spongebob]

I don't need my coat, with this Global warming .

[dbdb]

The past winter was 2012 and aboot the only detail not highlighted

While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument

I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though

I meant false comparison (not like-for-like). My bad. 

How about "Collisions with wind turbines account for about 0.1% of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year" then (from my link)?

[Rods2]

The problem with wind turbines is that they are not a reliable constant source of power so you have to have constant backup as Germany have found to their cost with grid instability. They are building 6 new coal fired power stations after an ultimatum from industry, keep the power on and the machines turning or we will relocate to where they will, with Poland already the destination of choice to lower costs. In the UK grid local stability has got so bad that they are implementing as fast as possible backup diesel generators as vast expense to us the customer. The last and current governments high price energy is doing immense damage to this country with fuel poverty and industry relocating to cheaper cost bases.

Australia have just voted with their feet with their Conservative party winning the election on the pledge of scrapping their carbon tax and tightening immigration policy. There is increasing debate and pressure in this country for the amending or scrapping the climate change law.

There is going to be an increasing energy gap as oil and gas production falls. The only credible available technology to fill the energy gap is nuclear and preferably Thorium nuclear as it is much safer and produces far safer nuclear waste, with Cesium 137 the biggest byproduct which has a half life of 30 years.

[dbdb]

The problem with wind turbines is that they are not a reliable source of power

Hoiw reliable is this?

[dbdb]

The only credible available technology to fill the energy gap is nuclear and preferably Thorium nuclear as it is much safer and produces far safer nuclear waste, with Cesium 137 the biggest byproduct which has a half life of 30 years.

Just looked this up.

1) Caesium 137 "is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts."

2) "Thorium cannot in itself power a reactor; unlike natural uranium, it does not contain enough fissile material to initiate a nuclear chain reaction. As a result it must first be bombarded with neutrons to produce the highly radioactive isotope uranium-233 – 'so these are really U-233 reactors,' says Karamoskos.This isotope is more hazardous than the U-235 used in conventional reactors, he adds, because it produces U-232 as a side effect (half life: 160,000 years), on top of familiar fission by-products such as technetium-99 (half life: up to 300,000 years) and iodine-129 (half life: 15.7 million years).Add in actinides such as protactinium-231 (half life: 33,000 years) and it soon becomes apparent that thorium's superficial cleanliness will still depend on digging some pretty deep holes to bury the highly radioactive waste.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/23/thorium-nuclear-uranium 

15.7 million years!  That's just for half of it to disappear.  What do you reckon the total salary bill for 3 night watchmen working in shifts for 30 million years is? Plus 3 dogs,  some guns and barbed wire. My guess is £40 trillion at todays prices. Which is about 30 times the entire national debt. 

[TheBoy]

Hoiw reliable is this?

Far more reliable than anything based on wind. As with wind, you need a backup capable of delivering 100% capacity. Same with non-storage based Hydro, although you'd have more warning to be able to fire up alternatives. Storage based hydro is on viable for short term peaks (few hours).


Nuclear, if looked after correctly, is pretty safe now. Take the disaster you mentioned - the station was hit by an earthquake double the intensity it was designed to withstand, and it shut down properly.  It was then hit with a wave 3 times the size it's defences where designed to withstand, knocking out its generators, but still the plant remained safe running on its batteries, as designed. It was the poor response afterwards - getting an emergency system brought in to recharge the flattening batteries - where the problem lay. The first set they brought in were incompatible. All the technical safety systems worked exactly as they should have done, despite never being designed for this level of natural disaster.

As per the usual hyped up media 'dangle berries', the quoted picture is of a (expected) hydrogen explosion, rather than the nuclear meltdown armageddon that was portrayed.

As to the aftermath, far more were killed in the natural disaster than the resultant leak. Thats a perspective that keeps getting lost.

Yes, the human element did cock it up in this instance, but nuclear remains safe, reasonably efficient, and ultimately reliable.  We just need our politicians to grow some, as the current idea of renewables available to the UK are impractical and wasteful.

[dbdb]

1. it's always windy somewhere.

2. if an act of nature can cause that damage what would an act of terrorism do?

[MaxV6]

compared to nature,  terrorists are puny.



seriously......      "act of nature"


that covers everything from a leaf falling off a tree, to our sun going  supernova.

the energy release in even a relatively minor earthquake is orders of magnitude larger than anything man made....   

 

[dbdb]

twin towers were earthquake resistant

[MaxV6]

but not earthquake proof.   

you show me any man made device capable of moving several hundred square miles of the earths crust in a few seconds,   not to mention  a few billion litres of seawater....   


nothing mankind has ever made is anything like the same scale.....        if you want proof,   look up seismological comparisons of H bomb tests vs real earthquakes....       the US Geo seismograph network was put in place to listen for underground nuke testing in the USSR.   

[dbdb]

I think you miss my point - twin towers are not there anymore and there was no earthquake.

[TheBoy]

Windmills are going to be less earthquake and terrorist resistant than a nuclear power plant

[tunnie]

Wind power has no future, they just don't generate the constant power we need. Driven through France/Belgium ect, massive Turbines along the A16/E40, driven past plenty of times with them not moving 

Nuke power is the most cost effective power and reliable, it's well proven constant power.