Print

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

[Dishevelled Den]

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?

[CaptainZok]

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.

[Dishevelled Den]

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.

  I would be flayed within seconds Z 

[CaptainZok]

Tried it with the ferrets, they decided the wheel was a cozy place to curl up for a snooze.
Back to the drawing board.

[Ken T]

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 

Ken

[Nickbat]

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 

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.  

[Dishevelled Den]

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 

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.

[Ken T]

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 

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

[Nickbat]

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 

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.

[Ken T]

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 

[Dishevelled Den]

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.

[Kevin Wood]

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

[V6 CDX-er]

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.

[V6 CDX-er]

 hence the need for more nuclear ASAP.

Kevin

I concur

[Dishevelled Den]

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?