Greenpeace: Arctic 30
- Thread starter securespark
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Why?
It's not an answer on its own, in just the same way that renewables are not an answer on their own. We have both now when we didn't fifty years ago but we have a looming energy crisis . The real cause is increasing consumption which is the issue to be addressed , hence the mention of TEQ's or tradable energy quotas , ok so it's a form of rationing but eventually it will be necessary .
You mention that green peace would cover the country with wind turbines as well they might, but fail to control consumption and we'll end up covering the country with nuclear power stations.
One other problem in some respects is the obsession with generating electricity, wind turbines could be used directly power things. Remember the Dutch largely drained their country with windmills. Likewise solar is better used to produce heat. Something like 60-70% of our energy goes into some sort of heating and it makes sense to use the sun for direct heating rather than generation only to convert it back into heat. We have solar collectors on the roof and our summer quarter gas bill was less than a tenner.
Nuclear has a part to play as has other sources but a mix is required and no one form of generation is an answer on its own.
You mention that green peace would cover the country with wind turbines as well they might, but fail to control consumption and we'll end up covering the country with nuclear power stations.
One other problem in some respects is the obsession with generating electricity, wind turbines could be used directly power things. Remember the Dutch largely drained their country with windmills. Likewise solar is better used to produce heat. Something like 60-70% of our energy goes into some sort of heating and it makes sense to use the sun for direct heating rather than generation only to convert it back into heat. We have solar collectors on the roof and our summer quarter gas bill was less than a tenner.
Nuclear has a part to play as has other sources but a mix is required and no one form of generation is an answer on its own.
Funny, it seems to provide all they need in France. But then, they have invested properly in nuclear power and have enough surplus to sell to us poor Brits who are desperately hoping for our windmills to come up with the goods.
I don't think energy consumption is increasing that rapidly. The problem is that we are shutting down fossil fuel power stations or trying to convert them to burn wood (to appease the greenies), which doesn't have anything like the energy content of coal.
Compare the energy output of, say, a hundred windmills to that of a single nuclear power station and you'll see the futility of that argument.
Bearing in mind that we don't really need to drain our country, tell me what windmills could do other than generate (a piddling amount of) electricity.
Solar energy might have some practical application in tropical and sub-tropical areas, but I haven't even seen the sun for days and it's in these 'sunless' times that we need heat.
On the contrary, nuclear power is the only practical solution to our energy needs now and for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, the government are afraid of the green lobby (I can't think why) and are procrastinating about building more nuclear power stations. I think they will eventually do this, but not until we are in a situation where regular power cuts are commonplace.
Too little and too late, as usual.
Sponsored Links
Never mind eh.
Stock up on candles and firewood.
OOh I nearly forgot, all the trees have already been chopped down.
Buy a woolly jumper instead and huddle by the pc at night to keep warm.
I know its a compromise on the open fire and listening to the banter from the friends who stopped by on their caly to share a wee dram but its all you got mate.
Stock up on candles and firewood.
OOh I nearly forgot, all the trees have already been chopped down.
Buy a woolly jumper instead and huddle by the pc at night to keep warm.
I know its a compromise on the open fire and listening to the banter from the friends who stopped by on their caly to share a wee dram but its all you got mate.
I think the truth is, that campaigners like Greenpeace, won't be happy until we're living back in mediaeval times. They'd rather the industrial revolution had never happened.
Good point. If Greenpeace have their way we won't be able to use our computers, then this forum, e-mails, internet, online purchasing, and everything else will disappear.
.
I don't think energy consumption is increasing that rapidly. The problem is that we are shutting down fossil fuel power stations or trying to convert them to burn wood (to appease the greenies), which doesn't have anything like the energy content of coal.
Bearing in mind that we don't really need to drain our country, tell me what windmills could do other than generate (a piddling amount of) electricity.
On the contrary, nuclear power is the only practical solution to our energy needs now and for the foreseeable future
Too little and too late, as usual.
If energy consumption isn't increasing that much closing a few power stations isn't a problem then?
Wind may produce a "piddling" amount but is presently producing more in this country than nuclear.
True we don't need to drain the country , the Dutch example was given to show that huge amounts of work can be achieved with zero input of electricity.
You're right that it's too late. Even if we put all the unemployed onto building nuclear power stations it'd be 2020 before any were coming on line.
.
I don't think energy consumption is increasing that rapidly. The problem is that we are shutting down fossil fuel power stations or trying to convert them to burn wood (to appease the greenies), which doesn't have anything like the energy content of coal.
Bearing in mind that we don't really need to drain our country, tell me what windmills could do other than generate (a piddling amount of) electricity.
On the contrary, nuclear power is the only practical solution to our energy needs now and for the foreseeable future
Too little and too late, as usual.
If energy consumption isn't increasing that much closing a few power stations isn't a problem then?
Of course it is. Closing them down would be OK if energy demand were decreasing. Actually, we need more.
I'm not sure that's correct (see http://www.computescotland.com/images/ECZszquj5Go0EAtFW5P70ff0bq.jpg ) but, if it is, it is because they have decommissioned nuclear power stations and not replaced them. Actually, we need more.
So can you tell me what we could use our nice new windmills for, other than generating a piddling amount of electricity?
You're right! We should have been building them much earlier, but for our short-sighted government. If they got their fingers out now, we might be able to overcome the problem belatedly but, as I said, they won't until blackouts are commonplace.
You'll have the greenies to thank for that. Just remember.
Irrespective of how electricity is generated it's undeniable that the amount we have generated has risen since it was first discovered, and equally the amount consumed has similiarly risen so simplely building more power stations will serve to increase consumption which will lead to another crisis which will result in the call for more generation , and so the cycle continues.At the moment the only thing keeping consumption down is the current economic situation, but IF the situation changes then it will have a knock on effect .
Wind , tidal , or nuclear are all expensive options and FF are running out, but the implications of instigating TEQ's is a very cost effective way of helping the problem and giving us the fuel security that is spoken of.
I'm not completely anti nuclear nor do I think renewables are a waste, as I said the situation calls for a mix of generation options.
Wind , tidal , or nuclear are all expensive options and FF are running out, but the implications of instigating TEQ's is a very cost effective way of helping the problem and giving us the fuel security that is spoken of.
I'm not completely anti nuclear nor do I think renewables are a waste, as I said the situation calls for a mix of generation options.
Interesting piece from Dale Vince
http://zerocarbonista.com/2013/09/26/how-many-more-winters-of-energy-discontent/
http://zerocarbonista.com/2013/09/26/how-many-more-winters-of-energy-discontent/
Yes, of course electricity generation and consumption has increased over the last century and a half, and continues to increase. The only way to stop that increase would be to limit our population, so I think you're addressing the wrong problem.
Until that can be achieved, if it ever can, we need to invest in more nuclear power stations or suffer the consequences.
Sponsored Links
