FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Onshore wind generation, the tories red line
Onshore wind generation, the tories red line
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"It seems that the tories are caught in a ideological trap again. Onshore wind will increase our ability to be energy independent, yet the tories cannot get this done because their party is so vehemently opposed to it. Why are the tories so stupid? Do they want us to be dependent on foreign energy forever?" The fossil fuel industry is a big donor to the Tories. So they are doing their best to serve their interests and keep us dependent on oil, gas and coal for as long as possible. No matter how damaging to the environment or to British people. | |||
| |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it." Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power" It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it." All such projects will face objections from wildlife campaigners because they alter the habitat. That doesn’t mean that it won’t happen. It’s been part funded by Centrica, the owners of British Gas. For all the conspiracy theorists who believe that the oil and gas companies are supported by the Tories. The net-Zero commitment was made by a Conservative government… | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. All such projects will face objections from wildlife campaigners because they alter the habitat. That doesn’t mean that it won’t happen. It’s been part funded by Centrica, the owners of British Gas. For all the conspiracy theorists who believe that the oil and gas companies are supported by the Tories. The net-Zero commitment was made by a Conservative government…" Why would any1 believe a word the Tories say? The Tories also went on & on about all the benefits Brexit would bring us... | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though." I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. | |||
| |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. " Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. All such projects will face objections from wildlife campaigners because they alter the habitat. That doesn’t mean that it won’t happen. It’s been part funded by Centrica, the owners of British Gas. For all the conspiracy theorists who believe that the oil and gas companies are supported by the Tories. The net-Zero commitment was made by a Conservative government…" What net zero commitment? This government is failing woefully on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. " Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. " I would not be against and as for change in environment there would probably be more positives then negative. There is a wind farm by me and its full of wild life as people can't get near it wild life adapts quicker then people think. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. I would not be against and as for change in environment there would probably be more positives then negative. There is a wind farm by me and its full of wild life as people can't get near it wild life adapts quicker then people think." Windfarms are far less impactful to the local environment than oil, coal or gas power stations. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. " So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts?" Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them." Diversity is the key: wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal, biogas etc combined with reduction in use through efficiency. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them." Understood but everything will be gone if we don’t do something! So I am arguing that long term benefits outweigh short term impacts. I do not know the exact figure but it is huge, maybe around 85% of all land in the UK is privately owned and the majority of that is part of large landed estates and farms. We have plenty of land (on this supposed crowded island) that could be used that will not be of scientific interest. Just takes a govt willing to take action. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them. Diversity is the key: wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal, biogas etc combined with reduction in use through efficiency. " You missed out nuclear… | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them. Diversity is the key: wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal, biogas etc combined with reduction in use through efficiency. You missed out nuclear…" That should be the 50% base load generation. | |||
| |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. " Just for more information, look up an article: how green is wind power in Forbes. It pretty much debunks the narrative evil wind power is secretly less green than coal. | |||
"For all the conspiracy theorists who believe that the oil and gas companies are supported by the Tories. The net-Zero commitment was made by a Conservative government…" Not voluntary though - only threats and avoidance of fines, made Boris make such announcements. What happened in the previous 8 years they were in power? Cameron, Clegg, Truss - is there any I've missed as lost track? Labour have no right to call either, Tony Blair spouted Nuclear needed investment in 2006 and only this week, government agreed not to further kick one of the fifteen planned stations, down the road again, although it was close. The only way we'll have affordable future energy is to build our way out, have they even started yet or are freezing Winters with no heating going be the norm? | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. " This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. | |||
"An eleven mile tidal power generator, with a zero carbon container port, is proposed for The Wash, between Skegness and Hunstanton. It would create 1700 jobs and provide enough power for the port and 600k houses and businesses. The Centre Port development was condemned within hours of its announcement, by a plethora of wildlife and nature groups, all vowing to put a stop to it. Therein lies the problem. People want an alternative power source but not on their doorstep. The Wash is perfect for tidal and wind power It wasn't a NIMBY objection, though. I know. This project isn’t just a power generator though, it is supposed to bring flood protection, which that area does need. Seems a fair enough point there's more to this story than the headline. Yet the poster above simply threw out the headline to try to get a reaction. Just shifting the focus and blame away from the failure of the government to take action on climate change to the real bad guys the Wildlife and nature groups and their evil agenda. So therein lies the rub with all of this. 1. Climate Change will have a devastating impact on the planet and all species on it. 2. We need to reduce use of and reliance on fossil fuels. 3. Projects that will provide long term green(er) energy are in the short term going to negatively impact on the environment. 4. Can’t have it both ways so surely long term requirements outweigh short term impacts? Possibly, however onshore wind is frequently located in areas of special scientific interest. Ancient peat bogs on top of hills are some I have looked at recently. Once these are destroyed, they are gone forever. Offshore wind, tidal and wave power also all have detrimental effects on the environment. All these have their place in the future energy generation mix but none are "no brainers". On dull, calm, cold days wind and solar don't generate much so we shouldn't be over reliant on them. Diversity is the key: wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal, biogas etc combined with reduction in use through efficiency. You missed out nuclear…" Nuclear is an important part of the puzzle. Especially in the medium term. | |||
| |||
"Does anyone know of a proposed renewable or green energy scheme, that isn't subject to local or environmental objections?" You'll want to read the "Renewable Energy Planning Database: quarterly extract" on the government website to trawl through the objections made and see. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. " Yesterday, due to lack of Wind, the UK was producing 57% of its electrical energy by burning coal and gas at 300 grammes per KWh. At 24GWh - if I'm not mistaken, that's 7,200 tonnes CO2 per hour. How the hell can a Wind Turbines even be a fraction of that once built, no further CO2 is produced, other than spare parts and the poor bastad panting out his CO2 after climbing up to grease them? 20 complete rotations will offset the CO2 used to manufacture it. 0.3Kg CO2 per kilowatt - a 1MWh turbine will save 300kg CO2 for every hour its producing. Divide the manufacturing CO2 by 300kg and work out how many hours to offset itself. One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!! | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked." Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Just for more information, look up an article: how green is wind power in Forbes. It pretty much debunks the narrative evil wind power is secretly less green than coal." Just for information I posted what it takes to have a wind turbine. I have posted nothing about how or how not green they are.! | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Just for more information, look up an article: how green is wind power in Forbes. It pretty much debunks the narrative evil wind power is secretly less green than coal. Just for information I posted what it takes to have a wind turbine. I have posted nothing about how or how not green they are.!" Your implication seemed pretty clear. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.!" I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. | |||
| |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Yesterday, due to lack of Wind, the UK was producing 57% of its electrical energy by burning coal and gas at 300 grammes per KWh. At 24GWh - if I'm not mistaken, that's 7,200 tonnes CO2 per hour. How the hell can a Wind Turbines even be a fraction of that once built, no further CO2 is produced, other than spare parts and the poor bastad panting out his CO2 after climbing up to grease them? 20 complete rotations will offset the CO2 used to manufacture it. 0.3Kg CO2 per kilowatt - a 1MWh turbine will save 300kg CO2 for every hour its producing. Divide the manufacturing CO2 by 300kg and work out how many hours to offset itself. One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!!" A year or a day?  | |||
| |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Just for more information, look up an article: how green is wind power in Forbes. It pretty much debunks the narrative evil wind power is secretly less green than coal. Just for information I posted what it takes to have a wind turbine. I have posted nothing about how or how not green they are.! Your implication seemed pretty clear." In your bias opinion you mean. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. " In real life you actually mean you don't like people knowing what materials it takes to produce a two-megawatt wind turbine. You just rather post it's all lies. It says a lot about some people in my opinion. | |||
"Trust me, there's worse shite been dumped into landfill than turbine blades over the years.." I don't doubt that, but moving forward. Is this the excuse green fanatics are going to use when faced with what to do with hundreds of used turbine blades in 20 years? | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. In real life you actually mean you don't like people knowing what materials it takes to produce a two-megawatt wind turbine. You just rather post it's all lies. It says a lot about some people in my opinion. " Why did you post this other than to further the anti-science fossil fuels narrative that green energy is bad for the environment? If you actually had even a vague interest in what is actually happening in real life you would have A. looked Beyonce a meme. And B. Posted comparison data for context. | |||
 | |||
| |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Yesterday, due to lack of Wind, the UK was producing 57% of its electrical energy by burning coal and gas at 300 grammes per KWh. At 24GWh - if I'm not mistaken, that's 7,200 tonnes CO2 per hour. How the hell can a Wind Turbines even be a fraction of that once built, no further CO2 is produced, other than spare parts and the poor bastad panting out his CO2 after climbing up to grease them? 20 complete rotations will offset the CO2 used to manufacture it. 0.3Kg CO2 per kilowatt - a 1MWh turbine will save 300kg CO2 for every hour its producing. Divide the manufacturing CO2 by 300kg and work out how many hours to offset itself. One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!! A year or a day? "It's just more sensationalism | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. Yesterday, due to lack of Wind, the UK was producing 57% of its electrical energy by burning coal and gas at 300 grammes per KWh. At 24GWh - if I'm not mistaken, that's 7,200 tonnes CO2 per hour. How the hell can a Wind Turbines even be a fraction of that once built, no further CO2 is produced, other than spare parts and the poor bastad panting out his CO2 after climbing up to grease them? 20 complete rotations will offset the CO2 used to manufacture it. 0.3Kg CO2 per kilowatt - a 1MWh turbine will save 300kg CO2 for every hour its producing. Divide the manufacturing CO2 by 300kg and work out how many hours to offset itself. One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!! A year or a day?
It's just more sensationalism "Well it’s possible to recycle these turbines or improve maintenance, that’s what normally happens. So you could reduce the cost of ongoing replacement after. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. In real life you actually mean you don't like people knowing what materials it takes to produce a two-megawatt wind turbine. You just rather post it's all lies. It says a lot about some people in my opinion. Why did you post this other than to further the anti-science fossil fuels narrative that green energy is bad for the environment? If you actually had even a vague interest in what is actually happening in real life you would have A. looked Beyonce a meme. And B. Posted comparison data for context. " Again that is your own biased opinion. The facts are that wind turbines do not just appear out of thin air. They have to be constructed first. My original post is about what it takes to make one. That's is all. However you don't like people to know that, so you try to dismiss my post. If you want people to get behind wind turbines you have to be honest and have an adult conversation in what it is going to take to set up a wind farm. That means the cost, the infrastructure build & maintenance. How many are needed to replace a gas fired generator. What happens when the is no wind etc. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. In real life you actually mean you don't like people knowing what materials it takes to produce a two-megawatt wind turbine. You just rather post it's all lies. It says a lot about some people in my opinion. Why did you post this other than to further the anti-science fossil fuels narrative that green energy is bad for the environment? If you actually had even a vague interest in what is actually happening in real life you would have A. looked Beyonce a meme. And B. Posted comparison data for context. Again that is your own biased opinion. The facts are that wind turbines do not just appear out of thin air. They have to be constructed first. My original post is about what it takes to make one. That's is all. However you don't like people to know that, so you try to dismiss my post. If you want people to get behind wind turbines you have to be honest and have an adult conversation in what it is going to take to set up a wind farm. That means the cost, the infrastructure build & maintenance. How many are needed to replace a gas fired generator. What happens when the is no wind etc." I don't have a bias opinion. I haven't expressed any opinions here. Aside from calling out the "information" which you got from a meme. Why would I want people to "get behind wind turbines"? You provided a tiny sliver of out of context "information" from a meme. And should expect to have it challenged. | |||
"Just for information. A two-megawatt wind turbine contains 260 tones of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. This "information" was from a meme and has been thoroughly debunked. Not it hasn't, the part which was debunked is the part I did not post.! I mean, in real life, it has. But sure, this tells us a lot about the state of the country when people put stock in memes over real information. In real life you actually mean you don't like people knowing what materials it takes to produce a two-megawatt wind turbine. You just rather post it's all lies. It says a lot about some people in my opinion. Why did you post this other than to further the anti-science fossil fuels narrative that green energy is bad for the environment? If you actually had even a vague interest in what is actually happening in real life you would have A. looked Beyonce a meme. And B. Posted comparison data for context. Again that is your own biased opinion. The facts are that wind turbines do not just appear out of thin air. They have to be constructed first. My original post is about what it takes to make one. That's is all. However you don't like people to know that, so you try to dismiss my post. If you want people to get behind wind turbines you have to be honest and have an adult conversation in what it is going to take to set up a wind farm. That means the cost, the infrastructure build & maintenance. How many are needed to replace a gas fired generator. What happens when the is no wind etc." They don’t work, but you have batteries, especially when you look at the new saline battery tech to replace the resource intensive batteries we use now. Which can store surplus energy and now most tech requires less power it’s inevitable. Of course people are going to say what about, but trust me, there is a reason why necessity is the mother of all invention, it will get figured, like it always has. | |||
| |||
"One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!!" I'm assuming that's another example of your "Northern humour". But just in case anyone thinks you're being serious ... One revolution of a 1MW turbine will produce 1MW of electricity for 3 seconds. That's 833Wh of power. Enough to boil a kettle for 30 minutes, or power all 8 low-power light bulbs in my house for 12 hours. It's about one tenth of the average household daily consumption. I've assumed in the above that the turbine is turning at a leisurely 20rpm, and that it's running at maximum efficiency (which is rare for wind turbines). In reality the figures would be much lower. Of course, if you went out to measure it today, you'd likely get no power at all, because the wind isn't blowing. | |||
"One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!! I'm assuming that's another example of your "Northern humour". But just in case anyone thinks you're being serious ... One revolution of a 1MW turbine will produce 1MW of electricity for 3 seconds. That's 833Wh of power. Enough to boil a kettle for 30 minutes, or power all 8 low-power light bulbs in my house for 12 hours. It's about one tenth of the average household daily consumption. I've assumed in the above that the turbine is turning at a leisurely 20rpm, and that it's running at maximum efficiency (which is rare for wind turbines). In reality the figures would be much lower. Of course, if you went out to measure it today, you'd likely get no power at all, because the wind isn't blowing." Sorry, but according to some posters on here your are not allowed to state those sort of truths about wind turbines. Best stick to their narrative of wind turbines can just pop up out of thin air where you need them and they will produce all your power needs forever.! | |||
"One revolution of a Wind Turbine is enough electricity to power a house for a year!! I'm assuming that's another example of your "Northern humour". But just in case anyone thinks you're being serious ... One revolution of a 1MW turbine will produce 1MW of electricity for 3 seconds. That's 833Wh of power. Enough to boil a kettle for 30 minutes, or power all 8 low-power light bulbs in my house for 12 hours. It's about one tenth of the average household daily consumption. I've assumed in the above that the turbine is turning at a leisurely 20rpm, and that it's running at maximum efficiency (which is rare for wind turbines). In reality the figures would be much lower. Of course, if you went out to measure it today, you'd likely get no power at all, because the wind isn't blowing. Sorry, but according to some posters on here your are not allowed to state those sort of truths about wind turbines. Best stick to their narrative of wind turbines can just pop up out of thin air where you need them and they will produce all your power needs forever.!" Quite right, we need to stick to information we see in memes. | |||
| |||
"So, I don’t like the look of wind turbines and I do worry about the effect they may have on migratory birds but for now they are part of a solution to the long term requirements of energy security we need and they have far less of an impact on the environment than a nuclear plant so where’s the problem?" The problem is that wind turbines are only a part of the solution, not all of it. The missing part is some way to store the energy for use when the wind isn't blowing. That technology just doesn't exist yet. So building more turbines will help us out on some days, but we'll still need to build nuclear power stations to cover the days when the wind isn't blowing hard enough. If we still need to build nuclear power stations, why disfigure the land with turbines that aren't doing anything useful? | |||
"So, I don’t like the look of wind turbines and I do worry about the effect they may have on migratory birds but for now they are part of a solution to the long term requirements of energy security we need and they have far less of an impact on the environment than a nuclear plant so where’s the problem? The problem is that wind turbines are only a part of the solution, not all of it. The missing part is some way to store the energy for use when the wind isn't blowing. That technology just doesn't exist yet. So building more turbines will help us out on some days, but we'll still need to build nuclear power stations to cover the days when the wind isn't blowing hard enough. If we still need to build nuclear power stations, why disfigure the land with turbines that aren't doing anything useful?" I guess the bigger question for me is how long does it take for each turbine to pay for itself (and it’s maintenance of course) and start providing free energy because I believe nuclear has a long term cost with storage of spent fuel and decommissioning which nobody wants to examine in detail | |||
"I believe nuclear has a long term cost with storage of spent fuel and decommissioning which nobody wants to examine in detail" You're right, it does. But the alternatives are: (1) Continue to burn fossil fuels (2) Wait for some technology to come along to make wind power reliable (3) Get used to having blackouts on calm days If we want to stop using fossil fuels at some point, then the only option guaranteed to provide reliable power is nuclear. We've waited decades for something else to turn up, and it hasn't arrived yet. It's time to stop hoping for a miracle, and start doing something. | |||
"So, I don’t like the look of wind turbines and I do worry about the effect they may have on migratory birds but for now they are part of a solution to the long term requirements of energy security we need and they have far less of an impact on the environment than a nuclear plant so where’s the problem? The problem is that wind turbines are only a part of the solution, not all of it. The missing part is some way to store the energy for use when the wind isn't blowing. That technology just doesn't exist yet. So building more turbines will help us out on some days, but we'll still need to build nuclear power stations to cover the days when the wind isn't blowing hard enough. If we still need to build nuclear power stations, why disfigure the land with turbines that aren't doing anything useful? I guess the bigger question for me is how long does it take for each turbine to pay for itself (and it’s maintenance of course) and start providing free energy because I believe nuclear has a long term cost with storage of spent fuel and decommissioning which nobody wants to examine in detail" I don't understand your wording of 'free energy'. There is always going to be some sort of cost at some point. Operator of the turbine, national grid, your own energy provider. By the time the electricity reaches your house you are going to have to pay for it as you do now. | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"So, I don’t like the look of wind turbines and I do worry about the effect they may have on migratory birds but for now they are part of a solution to the long term requirements of energy security we need and they have far less of an impact on the environment than a nuclear plant so where’s the problem? The problem is that wind turbines are only a part of the solution, not all of it. The missing part is some way to store the energy for use when the wind isn't blowing. That technology just doesn't exist yet. So building more turbines will help us out on some days, but we'll still need to build nuclear power stations to cover the days when the wind isn't blowing hard enough. If we still need to build nuclear power stations, why disfigure the land with turbines that aren't doing anything useful? I guess the bigger question for me is how long does it take for each turbine to pay for itself (and it’s maintenance of course) and start providing free energy because I believe nuclear has a long term cost with storage of spent fuel and decommissioning which nobody wants to examine in detail I don't understand your wording of 'free energy'. There is always going to be some sort of cost at some point. Operator of the turbine, national grid, your own energy provider. By the time the electricity reaches your house you are going to have to pay for it as you do now." By Free Energy .. think Tesla and not the car company .. the idea of harnessing the earth's energy and magnetic electro field .. yes I meant it that way .. toroidal vortex etc | |||
| |||
"Wind is a good source of energy, but like the last 48 hours, it's not exceeded any more than 7% UK demand. If anyone is watching UK consumption, we've not generated 100% of our needs for over 48 hours. 6pm last night whole UK generation was peak at 84% and tonight 88%. Demand has increased from 26GWh tea time to 42GWh peak and rising the colder the nights and which matches are playing in the World Cup. Wholesale electricity is high at between £300 and £950 per MWh, I'm paying 20p/kwh, my supplier is paying up to 5x times this to provide it. We need quadruple the Wind already installed, backed by Nuclear and if they do pull their fingers out of their backsides, tidal backed by a fleet of domestic batteries or Car chargers with DSR running to grab surplys when available. We're hammering EU supply each evening to keep our Grid afloat, especially reversing France from Export to Import between 5pm and 7pm - which is a little rich considering the sanctions they are under to reduce consumption, yet we just continue in blissful disregard of unrestricted supply - not very fair and doubt it will continue when they suffer cold weather. Currently our generation has just crawled back to 99.7% as wind has picked up and 4% higher than 6pm. 66.3% fossil fuels Coal 1.32 4.2% Gas 19.66 62.1% 12.0% renewables Solar 0.34 1.1% Wind 3.01 9.5% Hydroelectric 0.46 1.5% 21.4% other sources Nuclear 4.56 14.4% Biomass 2.05 6.5% Other 0.18 0.6% For how long are we or can we rely on the EU? Wind can supply up to 58% of a 41Gwh demand with Gas running alongside to top up while demand is higher, but reduced Wind, during a high demand tea-time we'll see in a few weeks - is simply not enough. France with its 30% Nuclear currently shut down and Norway who are running low on Hydro water will soon restrict supply to us. Light wind, little Imports, what then?" Running low on hydro water ????? I'm sure they use the same technology as most it's called pumped storage .. on off peak the cycle is reversed .. Also we are contracted so that price you are showing is when a country needs emergency electricity DRAX alone can make a fortune flogging Electricity to France when they have power shortages due to contracted work and emergency work How do I know ... I've worked on the turbines when this happens But hey let's fuck what the little man says who's worked in the industry.. | |||
"Wind is a good source of energy, but like the last 48 hours, it's not exceeded any more than 7% UK demand. If anyone is watching UK consumption, we've not generated 100% of our needs for over 48 hours. 6pm last night whole UK generation was peak at 84% and tonight 88%. Demand has increased from 26GWh tea time to 42GWh peak and rising the colder the nights and which matches are playing in the World Cup. Wholesale electricity is high at between £300 and £950 per MWh, I'm paying 20p/kwh, my supplier is paying up to 5x times this to provide it. We need quadruple the Wind already installed, backed by Nuclear and if they do pull their fingers out of their backsides, tidal backed by a fleet of domestic batteries or Car chargers with DSR running to grab surplys when available. We're hammering EU supply each evening to keep our Grid afloat, especially reversing France from Export to Import between 5pm and 7pm - which is a little rich considering the sanctions they are under to reduce consumption, yet we just continue in blissful disregard of unrestricted supply - not very fair and doubt it will continue when they suffer cold weather. Currently our generation has just crawled back to 99.7% as wind has picked up and 4% higher than 6pm. 66.3% fossil fuels Coal 1.32 4.2% Gas 19.66 62.1% 12.0% renewables Solar 0.34 1.1% Wind 3.01 9.5% Hydroelectric 0.46 1.5% 21.4% other sources Nuclear 4.56 14.4% Biomass 2.05 6.5% Other 0.18 0.6% For how long are we or can we rely on the EU? Wind can supply up to 58% of a 41Gwh demand with Gas running alongside to top up while demand is higher, but reduced Wind, during a high demand tea-time we'll see in a few weeks - is simply not enough. France with its 30% Nuclear currently shut down and Norway who are running low on Hydro water will soon restrict supply to us. Light wind, little Imports, what then?" We put on our big boy pants, line up and blow at the windmills like the tellytubbies would do, it has the added benefit of keeping us warm and this saving gas. Or we could accept that wind is just one very successful and easily implemented part of an alternative energy strategy. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Do we have big boy pants? Suppose the Wind is up to blow them off, at 18%. --- Demand 40.7GW Generation 38.6GW (94.9% of demand) Transfers 2.1GW . 55.8% fossil fuels Coal 1.22 3.0% Gas 21.48 52.8% . 22.3% renewables Solar 1.10 2.7% Wind 7.42 18.2% Hydroelectric 0.57 1.4% . 16.8% other sources Nuclear 4.61 11.3% Biomass 2.03 5.0% Other 0.20 0.5% . 5.1% transfers Imports and exports Belgium 0.56 1.4% France -0.70 -1.7% Ireland 0.22 0.5% Netherlands 0.45 1.1% Norway 1.40 3.4% . Storage Pumped storage 0.15 0.4%" We'll huff and we'll puff and we'll blow them blades round  | |||
"Wind is a good source of energy, but like the last 48 hours, it's not exceeded any more than 7% UK demand. If anyone is watching UK consumption, we've not generated 100% of our needs for over 48 hours. 6pm last night whole UK generation was peak at 84% and tonight 88%. Demand has increased from 26GWh tea time to 42GWh peak and rising the colder the nights and which matches are playing in the World Cup. Wholesale electricity is high at between £300 and £950 per MWh, I'm paying 20p/kwh, my supplier is paying up to 5x times this to provide it. We need quadruple the Wind already installed, backed by Nuclear and if they do pull their fingers out of their backsides, tidal backed by a fleet of domestic batteries or Car chargers with DSR running to grab surplys when available. We're hammering EU supply each evening to keep our Grid afloat, especially reversing France from Export to Import between 5pm and 7pm - which is a little rich considering the sanctions they are under to reduce consumption, yet we just continue in blissful disregard of unrestricted supply - not very fair and doubt it will continue when they suffer cold weather. Currently our generation has just crawled back to 99.7% as wind has picked up and 4% higher than 6pm. 66.3% fossil fuels Coal 1.32 4.2% Gas 19.66 62.1% 12.0% renewables Solar 0.34 1.1% Wind 3.01 9.5% Hydroelectric 0.46 1.5% 21.4% other sources Nuclear 4.56 14.4% Biomass 2.05 6.5% Other 0.18 0.6% For how long are we or can we rely on the EU? Wind can supply up to 58% of a 41Gwh demand with Gas running alongside to top up while demand is higher, but reduced Wind, during a high demand tea-time we'll see in a few weeks - is simply not enough. France with its 30% Nuclear currently shut down and Norway who are running low on Hydro water will soon restrict supply to us. Light wind, little Imports, what then?" I browsed the national grid site a few times recently and seen that at times the output is above 100%. If I am reading it correctly then the surplus is being exported. I assume to a nearby country so most likely EU. I am not sure exactly who it goes to though | |||
"... The life span of a wind turbine balde is roughly 20 years. Fibre glass is used to make the blades which is difficult to break down and recycle. " Chuck 'em in an estuary near warm water from a power station and farm mussels on them. Problem solved beneficially. | |||
" 6pm last night whole UK generation was peak at 84% and tonight 88%. Demand has increased from 26GWh tea time to 42GWh peak and rising the colder the nights and which matches are playing in the World Cup. " I will be bloody annoyed if my power gets cut because of the poxy World Cup! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"We'll scrape through comfortably tonight, I'll even take the car to a fast charger later as Wind is picking up nicely at 24%. Must be them big-boy pants I put on this morning. We can even still spare France a little - aren't we caring neighbours. Demand 42.2GW Generation 39.5GW (93.7% of demand) Transfers 2.7GW 50.9% fossil fuels Coal 1.31 3.1% Gas 20.12 47.8% . 25.6% renewables Solar 0.00 0.0% Wind 10.00 23.7% Hydroelectric 0.79 1.9% . 17.2% other sources Nuclear 4.61 10.9% Biomass 2.03 4.8% Other 0.62 1.5% . 6.3% transfers Imports and exports Belgium 0.75 1.8% France -0.78 -1.9% Ireland 0.04 0.1% Netherlands 0.87 2.1% Norway 1.26 3.0% . Storage Pumped storage 0.51 1.2% " Wow, you'd almost think the UK and several other countries have an agreement. Go figure lol | |||
| |||
"Very clever.!! Considering energy is two way street, its obvious there are agreements. But has it not dawned you cannot sell what you cannot spare! Go figure this: A Europe and UK wide high demand evening, such as cold weather, high pressure dominance leading lack of wind here or/and the EU. Zero Import from both France (30% Nuclear shut downs), Norway (Low water in Hydro catchments). Seems, I figured out months ago there will be shortages but as you like to slam my posts as conspiracy, sensationalism when reality - even if I said sky was blue, grass was green - you still claim I was wrong and scaremongering. Stick some facts to your comments and they just might be believable or you could show me what I've missed, but no. When you go figure, put them big boy pants on and get a generator, you might need it. You need a holiday..." Where are you getting your facts on Norway low in thier reservoirs ?? As I've been reading very recent articles they have filled up again and I think you haven't relayed properly what you read .. yes they have been low but not significantly compared to the Mean of 20 years The way you are going on I'd almost be convinced you run the selling floor for one of the big Six I could have told you 20 years ago we'd be pushed because Our demand is greater than our output since we've been decommissioning coal and Combined cycle stations (gas fired ..and secondary steam turbines .. two generations for the price of one ) Decommissioning Nukes doesn't happen that quickly .. Sellafield has lots of plants closed and rotting even leaching radioactive cooling water into the ground Waste to energy are being chucked up at a rate of knotts in this country too .. not that they put much to the grid .. they also stink to high heaven and we really haven't figured out burning anything carbon based is not the way forward Moreover seen as we have gone zero emissions mad in this country are we still Cremating Bodies I'll do my bit when I die Bob me in the ground and plant a tree over the top of me Ps .. I've ditched My Car .. no Blackpool illuminations outside my house I will never own an electric car I grow my own veg Don't buy shit I don't need Appliances are down to a minimum And I put more clothes on instead of the heating | |||
"Very clever.!! Considering energy is two way street, its obvious there are agreements. But has it not dawned you cannot sell what you cannot spare! Go figure this: A Europe and UK wide high demand evening, such as cold weather, high pressure dominance leading lack of wind here or/and the EU. Zero Import from both France (30% Nuclear shut downs), Norway (Low water in Hydro catchments). Seems, I figured out months ago there will be shortages but as you like to slam my posts as conspiracy, sensationalism when reality - even if I said sky was blue, grass was green - you still claim I was wrong and scaremongering. Stick some facts to your comments and they just might be believable or you could show me what I've missed, but no. When you go figure, put them big boy pants on and get a generator, you might need it. You need a holiday..." Resorting to compliments now ! Cut and paste figures combined with the words "maybe" and "such as" do not constitute a factual discussion, it's more of an opinion. Opinions are fine but don't get yourself wound up when others challenge your opinions with their own opinions lol Nobody is denying there may be power shortages, I've got a generator thanks very much. I'm just back from Gran Canaria and will be spending a fair part of the winter out there basking in the sunshine so I do believe the sky is blue, but there's not a lot of green grass out there and an awfuot of sand
Anyway, should we not stop hijacking the thread any further and get back to discussing the original point rather than speculation about nuclear power in some foreign land.
Interestingly and back to the point there's been a massive expansion of wind turbines between the airport and Playa del Ingles so someone thinks it's a good idea. | |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week."  thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation | |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week. thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation"Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has t been invented yet. Anything currently available isn't viable in a large scale, even domestically batteries are a luxury or a hobby. Tidal energy has to be a big part of the solution, an almost constant totally predictable source of renewable energy that's not had enough investment. Wind and solar was an easy cheap supplement but never was and never will be a replacement for traditional power. | |||
| |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week. thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation
Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has t been invented yet.
Anything currently available isn't viable in a large scale, even domestically batteries are a luxury or a hobby.
Tidal energy has to be a big part of the solution, an almost constant totally predictable source of renewable energy that's not had enough investment.
Wind and solar was an easy cheap supplement but never was and never will be a replacement for traditional power. "One of the Big six was funding heavily into the research for storage they had a huge battery facility down at little Barford CCGT it became a bit of a white elephant and I believe they sold what technology they had gleamed to a university in Canada Solar wind and waste to energy are just a quick shot in the electrical junky arm we all have In my own limited opinion while Fossil fuels are not the answer more should have been done to make them burn more greener .. Drax operate on 2 out of the 6 680mwh turbines on coal now and are heavily invested into carbon capture technologies When I got into the power generation game 25 year ago wind supplied 1% to the grid Drax the biggest power house in Western Europe Put 7% to the grid .. those turbines have been upgraded to eeek an extra 20mwh per unit .. Ferrybridge waste to energy just down the Rd puts 68mwh to the grid My point we closed our generation infrastructure without opening up new stations at the rate we were closing them Planned perhaps to hold us to ransom in the pincer grips of consumer greed What's happening in NI and Eire ? As you burn a hell of alot of peat and oil in your powerstations Totally agree with coming off topic probably my fault Can't just blame the tories as they are the same fat pigs eating from the greedy trough Can't see oil ever been weened from us .. by every refinery you'll find a chemical works and next to that Big Pharma as most medicines are derived from by products of the oil industry P66 a refinery makes more money making premium grade petrol .. a by product that is used extensively in the production of rechargeable batteries and thier biggest consumer is Apple Tories pocket the fat cats labour pocket the unions .. neither have our best intentions at heart In short hang the fucking lot monarchy too Parasites the lot of them | |||
| |||
| |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week. thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation
Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has t been invented yet.
Anything currently available isn't viable in a large scale, even domestically batteries are a luxury or a hobby.
Tidal energy has to be a big part of the solution, an almost constant totally predictable source of renewable energy that's not had enough investment.
Wind and solar was an easy cheap supplement but never was and never will be a replacement for traditional power.
One of the Big six was funding heavily into the research for storage they had a huge battery facility down at little Barford CCGT it became a bit of a white elephant and I believe they sold what technology they had gleamed to a university in Canada
Solar wind and waste to energy are just a quick shot in the electrical junky arm we all have
In my own limited opinion while Fossil fuels are not the answer more should have been done to make them burn more greener .. Drax operate on 2 out of the 6 680mwh turbines on coal now and are heavily invested into carbon capture technologies
When I got into the power generation game 25 year ago wind supplied 1% to the grid Drax the biggest power house in Western Europe Put 7% to the grid .. those turbines have been upgraded to eeek an extra 20mwh per unit ..
Ferrybridge waste to energy just down the Rd puts 68mwh to the grid
My point we closed our generation infrastructure without opening up new stations at the rate we were closing them
Planned perhaps to hold us to ransom in the pincer grips of consumer greed
What's happening in NI and Eire ? As you burn a hell of alot of peat and oil in your powerstations
Totally agree with coming off topic probably my fault
Can't just blame the tories as they are the same fat pigs eating from the greedy trough
Can't see oil ever been weened from us .. by every refinery you'll find a chemical works and next to that Big Pharma as most medicines are derived from by products of the oil industry
P66 a refinery makes more money making premium grade petrol .. a by product that is used extensively in the production of rechargeable batteries and thier biggest consumer is Apple
Tories pocket the fat cats labour pocket the unions .. neither have our best intentions at heart
In short hang the fucking lot monarchy too
Parasites the lot of them "sodding censorship petroleum c o k e | |||
| |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week. thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation
Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has t been invented yet.
Anything currently available isn't viable in a large scale, even domestically batteries are a luxury or a hobby.
Tidal energy has to be a big part of the solution, an almost constant totally predictable source of renewable energy that's not had enough investment.
Wind and solar was an easy cheap supplement but never was and never will be a replacement for traditional power.
One of the Big six was funding heavily into the research for storage they had a huge battery facility down at little Barford CCGT it became a bit of a white elephant and I believe they sold what technology they had gleamed to a university in Canada
Solar wind and waste to energy are just a quick shot in the electrical junky arm we all have
In my own limited opinion while Fossil fuels are not the answer more should have been done to make them burn more greener .. Drax operate on 2 out of the 6 680mwh turbines on coal now and are heavily invested into carbon capture technologies
When I got into the power generation game 25 year ago wind supplied 1% to the grid Drax the biggest power house in Western Europe Put 7% to the grid .. those turbines have been upgraded to eeek an extra 20mwh per unit ..
Ferrybridge waste to energy just down the Rd puts 68mwh to the grid
My point we closed our generation infrastructure without opening up new stations at the rate we were closing them
Planned perhaps to hold us to ransom in the pincer grips of consumer greed
What's happening in NI and Eire ? As you burn a hell of alot of peat and oil in your powerstations
Totally agree with coming off topic probably my fault
Can't just blame the tories as they are the same fat pigs eating from the greedy trough
Can't see oil ever been weened from us .. by every refinery you'll find a chemical works and next to that Big Pharma as most medicines are derived from by products of the oil industry
P66 a refinery makes more money making premium grade petrol .. a by product that is used extensively in the production of rechargeable batteries and thier biggest consumer is Apple
Tories pocket the fat cats labour pocket the unions .. neither have our best intentions at heart
In short hang the fucking lot monarchy too
Parasites the lot of them "I thought that Drax ceased coal use in March 2021, and now totally uses wood pellets for power generation? These wood pellets are shipped from Canada and North America into Liverpool docks, where a fleet of dedicated trains take them to Drax. | |||
"You're correct, mostly on Windy days when Wind supplies the bulk of UK demand and Gas generation is used to 'top up' and rest sold to the EU. These times you will see above 100% with the excess showing as Exports. We've been exporting a lot towards Norway the last few weeks to help conserve their Hydro Water for Norway's domestic need. There is good reason, by helping Norway conserve, they should in theory be able to send it our way when needed. Bit like letting Norway store eldctricity for us as water. France has taken Export from us nearly the whole of Autumn as they are struggling with reduced Nuclear output although they are letting us have some back during our peak - this might not continue as cold weather sets in. France, until this never buy in as with Nuclear and Gas, they are self sufficient with spare to sell - not this year though. The observation this week, is that we are struggling to even provide 100 of our own requirements during the day, which the slips to 84%-88% during the '6pm Happy Hour', and it's not minus two outside yet. Yes, we Export a fair bit normally, especially as we're unable to store much Gas, so logic is to burn and sell the electricity generated for profit when storage is full. Low Wind, Cold nights, it becomes a whole different story. While we suffer still, heavily moistured air, our Gas generated electricity is high and looks like denand outstripped supply this week. thank you. Looks like sorting out storage is key to the future along with more generation
Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has t been invented yet.
Anything currently available isn't viable in a large scale, even domestically batteries are a luxury or a hobby.
Tidal energy has to be a big part of the solution, an almost constant totally predictable source of renewable energy that's not had enough investment.
Wind and solar was an easy cheap supplement but never was and never will be a replacement for traditional power.
One of the Big six was funding heavily into the research for storage they had a huge battery facility down at little Barford CCGT it became a bit of a white elephant and I believe they sold what technology they had gleamed to a university in Canada
Solar wind and waste to energy are just a quick shot in the electrical junky arm we all have
In my own limited opinion while Fossil fuels are not the answer more should have been done to make them burn more greener .. Drax operate on 2 out of the 6 680mwh turbines on coal now and are heavily invested into carbon capture technologies
When I got into the power generation game 25 year ago wind supplied 1% to the grid Drax the biggest power house in Western Europe Put 7% to the grid .. those turbines have been upgraded to eeek an extra 20mwh per unit ..
Ferrybridge waste to energy just down the Rd puts 68mwh to the grid
My point we closed our generation infrastructure without opening up new stations at the rate we were closing them
Planned perhaps to hold us to ransom in the pincer grips of consumer greed
What's happening in NI and Eire ? As you burn a hell of alot of peat and oil in your powerstations
Totally agree with coming off topic probably my fault
Can't just blame the tories as they are the same fat pigs eating from the greedy trough
Can't see oil ever been weened from us .. by every refinery you'll find a chemical works and next to that Big Pharma as most medicines are derived from by products of the oil industry
P66 a refinery makes more money making premium grade petrol .. a by product that is used extensively in the production of rechargeable batteries and thier biggest consumer is Apple
Tories pocket the fat cats labour pocket the unions .. neither have our best intentions at heart
In short hang the fucking lot monarchy too
Parasites the lot of them
I thought that Drax ceased coal use in March 2021, and now totally uses wood pellets for power generation?
These wood pellets are shipped from Canada and North America into Liverpool docks, where a fleet of dedicated trains take them to Drax.
"Units 1 to 4 converted to Biomass not just shipped in to Merseyside it comes into Immingham docs too and railfrieghted .. they state the pellets are from the waste from the logging industry.. those pellets come in softwood and hardwood form when pulverised the hardwood dust becomes a carcogen if that's the correct spelling .. its not the best product it's highly flammable and a bitch to store hence the massive supply chain Units 5 and 6 still run on coal .. they use them as standby sets now and it's called double shifting .. those Behemoth Turbines were designed to run on full load continuously for years between scheduled maintenance outages Stopping and starting them frequently fucks them Moreover Each coal fired station was specifically designed to burn the local coal when we stopped using local coal it puts massive wear and tear on the boilers and ancillary equipment.. Biomass fucks the boilers is not green but they will blag your head by saying they are planting trees | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. " Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. " don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more " The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. | |||
| |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. " oxymoron goes to that sentence sorry buddy trees grow by themselves.. if you plant them good one sorry for being pedantic To be honest I was referring to palm oil not cattle ..also the everglades are disappearing at a rate of knotts for residential.. Sea grasses and everglades store more carbon than rainforest.. also how much carbon does a full grown tree convert and store compared to a sappling .. false economy you are buying into fed by those that generate so called green energy Plant more trees and stop cutting them down seems more logical to me | |||
"Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet." "Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation." Gravity batteries sound like a good idea, but they're just not practical. Take Dinorwig as an example. It's our biggest pumped hydro station. Running at full capacity it can generate just over 1.7GW, which is about 4% of the UK's requirements. To do this it drops water down a 100m shaft, using 390 tons every second. Let's imagine a gravity battery using 39ton concrete blocks. It would have to drop 10 of them, over a distance of 100m, every second to keep up with Dinorwig. To make that even slightly feasible we'd need 600 plants, each dropping one weight every minute. Even if it could be done, it would only generate 4% of what we need. We'd require another 12,600 plants to cover the rest of the demand. That's a hell of a lot of concrete blocks. | |||
"Storage would be more effective at point of use if cheaper domestic energy is the goal. DSR would signal domestic batteries and EVs to charge at times where surplus is high, especially with Wind and Tidal - if it ever appears. By having storage at the end point, integration with domestic Solar is simple and makes the most of availability of renewables both at home and via the Grid. The last few days has been stressful to supply which as wind has picked up is getting better, although I suspect it will tail off iff again. If millions of houses had decent size batteries (40-70kwh, not the poxy 5kwh's being sold by Solar companies) charged during the Windy weather 7 or so days ago - would the bulk of energy the last 4 days be required to come from Gas fired electricity while batteries had charge remaining? Battery farms will help but the supply is still from Grid where if the same capacity was stored on site, the price per kwh will be in favour of the customer, not the supplier who have investors to repay with profit. I run 45kwh Lithium Ion batteries and can last 6-10 days in Spring-Autumn-Summer from just 2 good days of Sunshine. Additional surplus is put into Hot Water and the rest goes into the Car. I don't fully see why Windmills need to be on land where offshore is working fine and without complaints from locals who object to them. Sources of Biomass fuel is questionable as we keep hearingn of illegal logging in Eastern Europe, Canada and the Amazon that appears as pellets at DRAX. It should be run down and finished as suppliers cannot be trusted. Yes - it does appear that Norway has had decent rainfall the last month or so that may have alleviated pressure on Hydro and Interconnector supply. I'd missed that as it hadn't been widely reported. However, even at full capacity Norway can send no more than 1.4GWh to us. Considering the UK is currently peaking at 45GWh during Happy Hour - it contributes but only a fraction of demand which will increase as weather's getting colder. New dishwasher arrived yesterday, rated at 300 runs for 255kwh, although days like today, it will be 50% cheaper to run as the sun is finally out - 80% of the rest of the next 12 months it won't cost a penny to run, same with the washer and tumble dryer. Load management, I try to save the washing for sunny days, dishwasher everyday while sunny, every two this time of year. Taking this UK wide, I've only seen one supplier, I think Scottish Power suggesting to be 'Greener' by washing only on days renewable % is high. This falls down to education and ease of information but that would infer government interference. If we all tried to run washers on Windy or Sunny days when CO2 per kwh is low, there would be a significant impact on emissions and burning of Gas." Put you into perspective Drax alone is almost capable on full load of 4 gig .. 680mwh x 6 = 4080 mwh 1000 mwh equals 1 gig To fully run this country by wind alone just about every square inch needs a wind turbine .. OK slight exaggeration Like I stated before the answer isn't generatio it's like you say education and cessation | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. oxymoron goes to that sentence sorry buddy trees grow by themselves.. if you plant them good one sorry for being pedantic To be honest I was referring to palm oil not cattle ..also the everglades are disappearing at a rate of knotts for residential.. Sea grasses and everglades store more carbon than rainforest.. also how much carbon does a full grown tree convert and store compared to a sappling .. false economy you are buying into fed by those that generate so called green energy Plant more trees and stop cutting them down seems more logical to me" Plant more trees absolutely - Plant more than is necessary than required to supply wood for wind turbines - Re-forestation only brings good things imo. But having more trees only goes part way to offsetting carbon in the atmosphere. We need to figure out ways of reducing our output of carbon. Eg. by not burning stuff. So consider this... How much energy could a wooden turbine produce over the course of its lifetime, and balance that against the amount of energy it could produce by burning the same volume of wood. One method releases carbon into the atmosphere - the other doesn't. I'll leave it to you to figure out which. Using mechanical energy to produce and store power is proven technology which humans have used for centuries. It can absolutely be clean, efficient and sustainable. | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. oxymoron goes to that sentence sorry buddy trees grow by themselves.. if you plant them good one sorry for being pedantic To be honest I was referring to palm oil not cattle ..also the everglades are disappearing at a rate of knotts for residential.. Sea grasses and everglades store more carbon than rainforest.. also how much carbon does a full grown tree convert and store compared to a sappling .. false economy you are buying into fed by those that generate so called green energy Plant more trees and stop cutting them down seems more logical to me Plant more trees absolutely - Plant more than is necessary than required to supply wood for wind turbines - Re-forestation only brings good things imo. But having more trees only goes part way to offsetting carbon in the atmosphere. We need to figure out ways of reducing our output of carbon. Eg. by not burning stuff. So consider this... How much energy could a wooden turbine produce over the course of its lifetime, and balance that against the amount of energy it could produce by burning the same volume of wood. One method releases carbon into the atmosphere - the other doesn't. I'll leave it to you to figure out which. Using mechanical energy to produce and store power is proven technology which humans have used for centuries. It can absolutely be clean, efficient and sustainable." If you had read up I'm not in favour of burning anything carbon based .. yes the industrial revolution converted thermal energy to kinetic to be more precise.. mechanical energy to store power ???? You lost me know moving parts are energy ... stored energy in mechanical parts .. springs .. tension in bolted flanges etc I suppose I inflicted some of your retort with my sarcasm before .. how much carbon is released in making everything else other than the blades.. Steel in the structure steel in the generator and ancillary equipment not to mention the Miles of re-bar and the oh so friendly to the environment concrete base .. | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. oxymoron goes to that sentence sorry buddy trees grow by themselves.. if you plant them good one sorry for being pedantic To be honest I was referring to palm oil not cattle ..also the everglades are disappearing at a rate of knotts for residential.. Sea grasses and everglades store more carbon than rainforest.. also how much carbon does a full grown tree convert and store compared to a sappling .. false economy you are buying into fed by those that generate so called green energy Plant more trees and stop cutting them down seems more logical to me Plant more trees absolutely - Plant more than is necessary than required to supply wood for wind turbines - Re-forestation only brings good things imo. But having more trees only goes part way to offsetting carbon in the atmosphere. We need to figure out ways of reducing our output of carbon. Eg. by not burning stuff. So consider this... How much energy could a wooden turbine produce over the course of its lifetime, and balance that against the amount of energy it could produce by burning the same volume of wood. One method releases carbon into the atmosphere - the other doesn't. I'll leave it to you to figure out which. Using mechanical energy to produce and store power is proven technology which humans have used for centuries. It can absolutely be clean, efficient and sustainable. If you had read up I'm not in favour of burning anything carbon based .. yes the industrial revolution converted thermal energy to kinetic to be more precise.. mechanical energy to store power ???? You lost me know moving parts are energy ... stored energy in mechanical parts .. springs .. tension in bolted flanges etc I suppose I inflicted some of your retort with my sarcasm before .. how much carbon is released in making everything else other than the blades.. Steel in the structure steel in the generator and ancillary equipment not to mention the Miles of re-bar and the oh so friendly to the environment concrete base .. " Mechanical energy - as in the physics definition of the term. The ability of an object to do work. Dams are an example of mechanical energy storage. Like I say - proven technology. Steel can likewise be produced with a minimal carbon footprint. In arc furnaces for instance, as opposed to more traditional blast furnaces. And there are sustainable concrete solutions out there also. Your objections to wind power are only valid as they relate to how we be build it *now*. As opposed to how we could build, and how we might build it in the future. That being the case - rather than advocating for the abandonment of wind power for electrical generation, would it not be more prudent to push for change in how wind power is built? | |||
" Yes storage is required but unfortunately it has not been invented yet. Not strictly true. It has been invented, its just not been developed yet. Gravity batteries could provide efficient clean storage for wind/solar power generation. Also just to call back to what someone said earlier in the the thread about fibreglass recycling. Fibreglass is not the only material. Finnish and German companies are developing wind turbines made of wood. Wind power is a perfectly viable and *sustainable* power generation technology. All it requires is some imagination. And obviously the removal of corrupt politicians who will quite happily watch the world burn as long as their own pockets are lined. don't you think we've torn down enough forests .. do you really think Wind is the Answer .. its a quick not so green hack nothing more The nice thing about forests is that they will grow again all by themselves if you plant them. We aren't talking slash and burn to make space for beef cattle here. oxymoron goes to that sentence sorry buddy trees grow by themselves.. if you plant them good one sorry for being pedantic To be honest I was referring to palm oil not cattle ..also the everglades are disappearing at a rate of knotts for residential.. Sea grasses and everglades store more carbon than rainforest.. also how much carbon does a full grown tree convert and store compared to a sappling .. false economy you are buying into fed by those that generate so called green energy Plant more trees and stop cutting them down seems more logical to me Plant more trees absolutely - Plant more than is necessary than required to supply wood for wind turbines - Re-forestation only brings good things imo. But having more trees only goes part way to offsetting carbon in the atmosphere. We need to figure out ways of reducing our output of carbon. Eg. by not burning stuff. So consider this... How much energy could a wooden turbine produce over the course of its lifetime, and balance that against the amount of energy it could produce by burning the same volume of wood. One method releases carbon into the atmosphere - the other doesn't. I'll leave it to you to figure out which. Using mechanical energy to produce and store power is proven technology which humans have used for centuries. It can absolutely be clean, efficient and sustainable. If you had read up I'm not in favour of burning anything carbon based .. yes the industrial revolution converted thermal energy to kinetic to be more precise.. mechanical energy to store power ???? You lost me know moving parts are energy ... stored energy in mechanical parts .. springs .. tension in bolted flanges etc I suppose I inflicted some of your retort with my sarcasm before .. how much carbon is released in making everything else other than the blades.. Steel in the structure steel in the generator and ancillary equipment not to mention the Miles of re-bar and the oh so friendly to the environment concrete base .. Mechanical energy - as in the physics definition of the term. The ability of an object to do work. Dams are an example of mechanical energy storage. Like I say - proven technology. Steel can likewise be produced with a minimal carbon footprint. In arc furnaces for instance, as opposed to more traditional blast furnaces. And there are sustainable concrete solutions out there also. Your objections to wind power are only valid as they relate to how we be build it *now*. As opposed to how we could build, and how we might build it in the future. That being the case - rather than advocating for the abandonment of wind power for electrical generation, would it not be more prudent to push for change in how wind power is built? " I don't actually think stored water is mechanical power .. or stored energy I've explained the two .. nevertheless it creates kinetic power Only a Dam with Hydro turbines would be an example of this I'm befuddled why you would keep wanting to try bemused me going round in circles .. potatoes potato .. Proven technology like what are you proving to me .. have I said any of our devices for generation non proven ??? Yes I'm talking in real-time not future I like how you flip it .. OK do we have any Arc furnaces in the UK .. no didn't think so OK electric arc furnaces yes the are cleaner but only if the electric used comes from a clean source Still you miss the point .. its not about making more it's about using less Thing is you are quite sanctimonious stating I'm closed off and only dismissed wind power now .. you bang on about proven technology then quibble with how and may it be done in the future Proven technology in your head I guess Not enough research has been done into the placements especially to our coastal environments You know about frequency and resonation I guess and that things on land have to be planned in wind tunnels .. stop vibration from resonance and things shaking themselves to bits Any wonder Whales are beaching up all over the nort East Coast.. no couldn't possibly be anything to do with the massive wind farms huh .. sure they may not resonate and shake themselves to oblivion.. but have they looked into what the shit its doing to whales Sonar and Birds magnetic navigation? Like I said they are a cheap nasty fix when the real fix is learning to USE less And like I stated we need just about every square inch of land to be covered with a wind turbine to be 100% They are no good without wind and no good with too much wind .. they blow up because in this country our optimal generation speed is 3000rpm .. that's the generator not the blade .. so a clutch and gearbox are used .. the clutches fail engaging the gearbox which can't handle the loads and explodes .. among one of the problems | |||
"Storage would be more effective at point of use if cheaper domestic energy is the goal. DSR would signal domestic batteries and EVs to charge at times where surplus is high, especially with Wind and Tidal - if it ever appears. By having storage at the end point, integration with domestic Solar is simple and makes the most of availability of renewables both at home and via the Grid. The last few days has been stressful to supply which as wind has picked up is getting better, although I suspect it will tail off iff again. If millions of houses had decent size batteries (40-70kwh, not the poxy 5kwh's being sold by Solar companies) charged during the Windy weather 7 or so days ago - would the bulk of energy the last 4 days be required to come from Gas fired electricity while batteries had charge remaining? Battery farms will help but the supply is still from Grid where if the same capacity was stored on site, the price per kwh will be in favour of the customer, not the supplier who have investors to repay with profit. I run 45kwh Lithium Ion batteries and can last 6-10 days in Spring-Autumn-Summer from just 2 good days of Sunshine. Additional surplus is put into Hot Water and the rest goes into the Car. I don't fully see why Windmills need to be on land where offshore is working fine and without complaints from locals who object to them. Sources of Biomass fuel is questionable as we keep hearingn of illegal logging in Eastern Europe, Canada and the Amazon that appears as pellets at DRAX. It should be run down and finished as suppliers cannot be trusted. Yes - it does appear that Norway has had decent rainfall the last month or so that may have alleviated pressure on Hydro and Interconnector supply. I'd missed that as it hadn't been widely reported. However, even at full capacity Norway can send no more than 1.4GWh to us. Considering the UK is currently peaking at 45GWh during Happy Hour - it contributes but only a fraction of demand which will increase as weather's getting colder. New dishwasher arrived yesterday, rated at 300 runs for 255kwh, although days like today, it will be 50% cheaper to run as the sun is finally out - 80% of the rest of the next 12 months it won't cost a penny to run, same with the washer and tumble dryer. Load management, I try to save the washing for sunny days, dishwasher everyday while sunny, every two this time of year. Taking this UK wide, I've only seen one supplier, I think Scottish Power suggesting to be 'Greener' by washing only on days renewable % is high. This falls down to education and ease of information but that would infer government interference. If we all tried to run washers on Windy or Sunny days when CO2 per kwh is low, there would be a significant impact on emissions and burning of Gas. Put you into perspective Drax alone is almost capable on full load of 4 gig .. 680mwh x 6 = 4080 mwh 1000 mwh equals 1 gig To fully run this country by wind alone just about every square inch needs a wind turbine .. OK slight exaggeration Like I stated before the answer isn't generatio it's like you say education and cessation " This was what I was trying to say about the size of Hornsea 2 wind farm. To power UK how many Hornsea 2 required and where to put them onshore ? | |||
| |||
| |||
"A Wind Turbine won't directly drive mains frequency so the gearbox doesn't run at 3000 RPM. I will generate AC which will then be converted to DC or direct DC then via an Inverter to Mains 50Hz Frequency. GE have created a spinning wheel that produces 50hz, but does not generate electricity in order to provide a constant local frequency on the Grid in light of more impedance from Coils being taken off the Grid. Inverters need this to keep their output in sync with mains so a 'fake' non generating sinewave needs to be available as more Inverters are swapped for 3000RPM Alternators." If you read my reply properly the every square inch was tongue in cheek .. My point we would need a hell of alot regardless of your regurgitated figures .. we do get windless days and areas that are blowing hence the bigger coverage to capture 3000rpm is the optimal speed for base load generation that gets excited in able to be more use able Wind turbines whatever thier optimal speed are ran through a gearbox to maximise one revolution of the blades . Too windy they disengage .. So you need allot of equipment from your home turbine to convert to 50hz what the grid provides already Wind turbines need base load from Main frequency power stations Have they made a nacelle with exciters in them .. don't think so Think most Big Companies GE ,Siemens, ABB , Mitsibushi are looking at perpetual motion ie flywheels for what you have just described The Pumped Storage in Snowdonia runs when we hit peak to supply emergency demand we have others in Scotland The Swiss are very proficient at pump storage if you ever visit the Swiss alps go visit one alot of the tunnels under the mountains were dug by hand My whole point besides Using less not making more Is We did have a very good Generating portfolio until we went carbon emissions mad started closing stations without replacing them .. Allowed foreign operators to do business here which meant we pay to subsidise other countries ie France and EDF .. RWE and Germany ..many many more operate in this country we used to have an international arm of National power now RWE and operate turbines around the world too .. not worked for international power for sometime so not up to speed on that anymore Alot of our behemoth power stations had Carbon reduction measures in place With FGD (flu gas desulperisation) plants fitted to the exhausted gasses coming from the boiler before being released via the chimney Didcot A was converted to run on natural gas .. Fawley ran on heavy fuel oil (made sense was right next to a refinery) Put it into perspective we had old stations that the sets were mothballed or cannibalised for parts Fawley Tilbury Littlebrook Each having 3 or 4 turbines down to one operational that could supply from that single Generator make 450mwh .. (roughly they have been demolished and my memory can't quite remember what sets were at each station) To then sometime in the future think oh we best replace them .. So a few quick start open cycle gas turbines were built only ran at peak times .. open cycle means no HRSG (Heat recovery Steam generator) a boiler .. instead they exhaust straight into the atmosphere.. combined cycle I've explained After that came the dirty stinking waste to energy power plants .. not seen or built one that can generate more than 89kwh Just Down the Rd from me a new installation CCGT has been built and at the same time DRAX shelved because of green opposition plans to Build a CCGT and Open Cycle .. they run black start Rolls Royce olympus Engines when the grid demand .. those old vulcan engines are gas guzzlers and only run for half hour max they were initially built to run the station during black outs hence the name black start .. The plan was then to run units 5 and 6 on the steam generated from the new CCGT and use the new open cycle instead of the costly Rolls Royce Vulcan Engines .. and also part of the plan was a big Battery facility All been kiboshed Use less .. grow more .. buy less . Exercise more .. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Cutting a very long story short, it is impossible to use less electricity. Goverment has embarked on a folly of Air Source to Water Heat Pumps, Electric Cars other Electrified heating such as the second push for some reason by plumbers to install Electric Boilers with COP value of 1 using fuel 3x the price of Gas. Chances of denand reducing in the next 10 to 20 years as more vehicles are swapped for EV. Those Diesel and Petrol Kwh's need to come from somewhere. One benefit of fossil fuels is that they generate the power on demand on not need to be put into a battery from a generation plant. The 'liquid and gas energy' becomes charging kwh demand on the Grid, bearing in mind 500,000 EVs were registered this year alone on top of the 500,000 already on the road. WARNING: Copy/ Paste Alert.. Well, we know a litre of petrol contains about 8.9 kWh of energy. If we convert this and compare it with the energy consumption of the MG5 Electric Long Range (15.3 kWh/100 km divided by 8.9 kWh/litre), you have an equivalent fuel consumption of just 1.7 l/100 km. In other words, the MG5 Electric is considerably more energy efficient than any car with an internal combustion engine (ICE). END So, as more cars are dumped from carrying liquid kwhs in favour of charged kwhs, therefore vast additional load on the Grid. I've done a lot of miles this week, meaning I've Rapid Charged this week 10 times at 38kwh per charge. This was 380kwh taken from the Grid at a time it was struggling sometimes - not squirted into the fuel tank to burn later and the oyster power used is the fuel pump. Then Heat Pumps, especially in Winter when COP tails off and they become 1 to 1 in very cold weather- more load on the Grid. I know many now pulling their hair out for accepting £5000 government BUS money, and having Gas Boiler ripped out in favour of an energy supply costing 34p/kwh over Gas at 10p/kwh. I told them to stay well away but the incentive was too good. To power our New Electric Future- we need more generation, lots more to cope with demand and bring back to affordable prices. It can be argued the switch to EVs, and electrifying heating was premature as the Grid wasn't up to the load. Used EV batteries will end up in home garages as load balancing buffers and home storage once they've done their 100,000 miles to 80% road capacity." I get what you are saying I really do .. but we have gone about this arse about face .. it is doable to use less .. but impossible because nobody will .. or are waiting on the next man .. unfortunately consumer greed and the need for things we don't need .. Simple green life we could all live .. but we don't well some do .. some try too and others think fuck it I'll leave for the next man/woman Either way I'll not be around but I'd like to leave this place in a better state than I came into it .. unfortunately I've been blinkered by the greenbacks.. I've serviced the oil industry,energy sector and big pharma .. heck I've built these waste to energy .. That's why I said you can stick me in the ground and plant a tree .. I'm older and wiser and not so blinded by the greenbacks .. All this climate and reset I'll be a target my house is 200 years old .. that won't be allowed for much longer as it can't be made energy efficient.. incidentally my boilers packed in and I've no intention of getting it fixed till gas prices come down .. I've no dependants or spouse .. so it's winter drawers on big pants and socks | |||
| |||
"If they'd actually done the things we were told needed doing such as immensely more Wind, the 15 Nuclear power stations Blair insisted we needed, tidal and full on drive into domestic Solar then we'd have the cheapest energy on Earth. Government are 100% to blame for the high prices and risk if supply loss we face today." Certainly agree with that, and annoyingly the French were smart enough to invest in nuclear so as to have a plentiful surplus. These problems have been in the making for a long time through total and utter negligence on the part of the government. | |||
| |||
"The Green lobby demonised nuclear power. They drove it out of Germany, and to a lesser extent, here as well. " Rightly so have you watched the documentary Whitscale nuclear Dumping Ground ? You know nuclear was 3.5 times more expensive than coal fired and we were all lied too .. nuclear became viable because of the arms Race .. no nuclear power no nuclear weapons | |||
| |||
"Especially if you compare annual deaths to Climate Change vs Nuclear accidents over the last 50 years, to include Three Mile Island, Windscale, Fukushima and Chernobyl. Scared of radiation sickness but oblivious to extreme weather events. Pakistan floods this year alone. Yet, with forecasts of up to the next 10 plus years of high energy pricing, increasing demand. Where's the urgency to invest and build more generation - I see little, if any. Especially at a time more electrification is the preferred route to tackle Climate. Rather than continously bailing people out of high energy prices use additional Windfall and Fossil Taxes to pay for. Does beg the question, the Green levies added to Fossil Fuels - where has it gone? I did a long reply on another post in the early hours but vastly increasing Domestic and Commercial Solar directly benefits the owner with cheaper energy, but also everyone else as reduced demand is ultimately reduced pricing for everyone. It really is a 30 year shit-show. Anyone noticed Tony Blair is quiet on energy matters? They all are guilty of gross negligence that's left us wide open to what we face today and years to come. Add to this, the Interest Rate Fiasco that will put many more on the streets or into rental. We could have and should have, been sheltered from high Gas prices and irregular supply." Was just about to reply to your late night addition but ironically my battery went flat .. I enjoy reading your content .. makes me think and go look things up I think I propose owe you an apology.. as I've been a uppity with you .. that's not good on my part I get carried away and I'm rather passionate about this subject My apologies | |||
"... Does beg the question, the Green levies added to Fossil Fuels - where has it gone? ..." Lining pockets. What else? I hope that only a few have ever believed that the levies help save the planet. | |||
| |||
"I agree on levies - so why have we allowed it to continue? Looking at the information below, around £40 per MWh (4p per kwh) produced from Wind. When you see current eye-watering costs per MWh based predominantly caused by Gas generation then Interconnector and Nuclear rates running the average around £400/MWh up to £975/MWh last week. I mentioned in previous posts, my current Tariff is 19.9p/kwh, my retailer is paying two to five times this to supply me yet people want to hurt them by refusing to pay - its not their fault. The next 10 days will be interesting as today, Wind speed is around 10mph on the coast thus generating around 11GWh, but cold weather is setting in with light 4mph to 6mph Winds so output will again fall pushing reliance back onto Gas, Interconnectors. The EU face cold weather also, will they have spare capacity and as it is cold, demand for electricity will increase here in the UK and across Europe. Since March I've been saying to people to expect shortages, even powercuts this Winter and at least the next three to their amusement and response "it is 2022, these things can never happen in the UK". Many of these being business clients who are eating humble pie and now asking me to source generators just in case. If they'd have listened they wouldn't be paying 30% extra and availability would have been easier than January deliveries. It's not hit the news yet, but talk that the EU face the real shortage issues next Winter as they managed to get the bulk of their Winter Gas stocks from NORDSTREAM while running. Although a new pipeline is commissioned from Norway to the EU to avoid the UK handling it, but? Will we see more evening Market Shortage alerts this week? ---- Copy Paste alert! The record-low prices will see projects due to start operating in 2023/24 coming in at £39.65/MWh (in 2012 prices, £44/MWh adjusted for inflation) and those for 2024/25 at £41.61/MWh. These are some £8-9/MWh below the government’s “reference price”, the level it expects to see for electricity on the open market in each year. Apologies weren't needed although appreciated, I post here to debate and discuss - not to start fights with people though some just can't help themselves. If nothing else, it's hopefully made yourself and others more aware of our Energy system and how it works. In respect to shortages referenced in posts, the detail is in the data. The bottom line being we have too many eggs in only two big baskets - Wind and Gas. To me, the Diverse and Robust Energy supply is government PR bollox, repeated to me by MPs and more worryingly by many Councillors responsible for the welfare of others." £975 for MWH equates to how much per whatt ? You pay for KWH they buy and Sell in MWH .. 1000 whatts to a kilowatt 1000 kilowatts to a megawatt so that would be 975 divided by 1000000 makes your electric supplier a lot of money .. | |||
| |||
| |||
"They should pay me as currently, the Solar is producing my consumption plus 100watts or 0.1KWh. I'm actually saving them from a 20p loss per kilowatt I use. Generous to a T me." Yes all the cheap traders whom don't have a generation portfolio have closed .. so whom may I ask supplies you .. if they have a portfolio they ARE making money | |||
"Don't you just love our price increases by foreign operators helps subsidise their energy prices .. EDF a prime example.. but what do the lovely tolerant people of no backbone Britain do .. lap it up moan a bit and continue to suck it " Precisely, while others focus on dreams the real issue is sliding under the table and the profits made by these windfarms is diabolical. Surely they don't run on gas ? Is it time to rattle the cage and have electricity prices disconnected from oil and gas prices ? Will that really stimulate proper innovation and investment in proper planning? | |||
"Don't you just love our price increases by foreign operators helps subsidise their energy prices .. EDF a prime example.. but what do the lovely tolerant people of no backbone Britain do .. lap it up moan a bit and continue to suck it Precisely, while others focus on dreams the real issue is sliding under the table and the profits made by these windfarms is diabolical. Surely they don't run on gas ? Is it time to rattle the cage and have electricity prices disconnected from oil and gas prices ? Will that really stimulate proper innovation and investment in proper planning?" Will be something to do with Gas fired power and oil derived power making base load that wind power needs to be viable .. all befuddled so the layman has no clue what is going on .. | |||
| |||
| |||
"For those interested.. Screenshot this now, and again at 6:30pm, Wind is due to drop later for a few days, its already tailed off from 12GWh. If like last Tuesday, you may see UK go above supply to see where it's coming from. Worse when Wind drops to 4Gwh. https://grid.iamkate.com/" So what happened at 18:30? Did the grid fall over due to lack of supply? | |||
| |||
