Yes, but Wheeze, you're a Labrador that can type. You can't tell me it's had no effect on you! :eek:
Printable View
Yes, but Wheeze, you're a Labrador that can type. You can't tell me it's had no effect on you! :eek:
Hmm, I thought I was feeling a bit ruff!
Didn't Lovelock once famously offer to store waste nuclear fuel in his garden, as he was so convinced it was a necessary evil to save the planet? Think it was Gaia, the revenge..Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike T
Poking about at the Royal Welsh Show today and put my head inside the "Green Energy" tent, seemed dominated by companies selling wind turbines. Not, top of the roof, up the garden home turbines, but big eff u ones for mountains.
In other words there's big £££££s to be made out of these from subsidies - and where better to find "poor farmers" all too willing to sell up their mountain tops than the RWS?
It all rather stank of profit to me, and beggar all to do with 'saving the planet' :rolleyes:.
We had a guy recently who had to deliver a project as part of a promotion course and he had to investigate renewable energy for HM Forces in Cyprus and the best way to achieve this. Naturally part of his investigation involved wind turbines.
I seem to remember that he stated that many of the reasons for wind turbines is that it is a) Renewable Energy and b) Green Energy. When he did more digging into the Green side he found out the following (it was a while ago so figures may be slightly off):
a. A wind turbine has a life span of 20 - 25 years (new) / 15 years (refurbished).
b. The pollutants produced in the process of making a wind turbine and energy used in the production would take over 30 years to be off set by the energy produced by the wind turbine.
So in short - a wind turbine may well be renewable energy but it is far from being 'Green Energy'. These simple facts are not widely advertised though when discussing the advantages of wind farms and how good they are for the environment - Simple they are not as they cause more damage in their production than they can ever repay.
Just took a trip on the eurostar. The flat northern plains of France are dotted with loads of windfarms so why do continue to despoil or precious heritage of upland areas? And then have to turn the effin things off when its too windy PLUS paying the owners compensation????!!!!!
Anyway, it seems to me that we need to strip the scales from our eyes when it comes to nuclear:
"The Japanese plant failures underscored the need for new, safer types of nuclear power that have been quietly in gestation for years. For instance, plants that don't rely on uranium, and/or that are much smaller in scale, or that don't produce weaponizable byproducts. Or that are capable of consuming today's vast stores of plutonium waste. Or that are based on reactions that can't possibly melt down or explode in the face of natural disasters or terrorist attack," wrote Kachan. (The full text of the Kachan letter is available here.)
Systems with those benefits are actively being developed, according to the consortium.
"Thorium-based systems, originally developed in the U.S., offer the promise of operational safety, proliferation security and near zero nuclear waste," said John Kutsch, Director of the Thorium Energy Alliance, a longtime advocate of thorium.
"The Kachan report rings the alarm bell for the Western world," said James Kennedy of ThREEConsulting. "China is quickly establishing global primacy in nuclear energy, including a much safer, U.S.-developed system: The thorium molten salt reactor. China already controls rare earth resources on a global basis and is about to do the same with energy."
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1lhkW6ZRH
Anyone on here an expert on molten salt moderated Thorium???
I'm 100% with you Wheeze. I suggest we form a revolutionary vanguard and seize control of the State.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
There are obviously costs involved with making turbine but the same goes for other power stations. I suspect that an audit of the real environmental cost involved with the building of a nuclear plant or gas fired power station would throw up an even worse picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by sore legs
I like the windfarm up on Ovenden Moor. I'm less keen on the enormous windfarm which is being planned for Swedish Lapland.....to supply power to a city 500 miles further south.
mmmmmm molten salt moderated Thorium :D
http://i592.photobucket.com/albums/t...ing_homerj.jpg
Brilliant Alf!! Great start to the day.
On a serious note, reading about MSMT, it seems too good to be true. Ubiquitous fuel, no chance of melt-down, it can consume nasty plutonium waste from previous dirty generation, it won't make weapons grade products. There must be a downside??
Westinghouse have developed the AP1000 PWR, which is capable of passively cooling itself in the event of something like a primary cooling loop failure like what happened at Three Mile Island. TMI apparently boiled its reactor dry and reached criticality in 2.5mins, it can be that fast. The AP1000 is a significant leap forward compared to the units that were in operation in Japan.
http://www.power-technology.com/proj...s/5-ap1000.jpg
I don't think molten salt is used as a moderator. If they are working on some type of Breeder Reactor, which Thorium powered units often are, then the fast neutrons from fuel decay are used to break down other materials in the core, which is probably why they are claiming it produces no radioactive waste. If a moderator was present it would hoover up all the fast neutrons and drastically reduce the energy output.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
I know absolutely nothing in this are Mr B, but is this something that Governments etc should be considering? Technology moves on extremely quickly - do we need to account for this in the engineering of the power stations? What I mean is, are there industry standards that can help you to 'future-proof' the power stations themselves - upgrades could be done easily?Quote:
Originally Posted by mr brightside
Very good question Heathens. Future-proofing at a component/device level is pretty much impossible due to the fact that newer things are always smaller, and advances in device communication and process control philosophy will render older equipment incompatible to a certain extent. It's also not ideal to make small scale local upgrades and leave the rest as it is, in processes where failure can lead to catastrophe. Most manufacturers will only certify and guarantee the operation of their equipment under specific circumstances, and small scale user installed upgrades can invalidate such certifications and guarantees. Full de-caps and commissioning of complete new plants is the safest way, industry standards and best practices would likely lead to this.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHeathens
The vendor of a nuclear power generation unit, such as Westinghouse, will have performed what is called a 'String Test' on the plant at some point to verify that all the components and machinery meet the correct operational criteria when run as a unit, and any upgrades will invalidate the original test. This will probably take place as part of the commissioning procedure on something as vast as a reactor. Where i work we carry out the string tests on site before shipping, pumping sets are far less vast than nuclear reactors, customers often come on site to witness the tests and we can test anything up to 30MW power wise; even if it's driven by a gas turbine.
I heard a while ago that the UK was planning to install gas cooled reactor plants provided by EDF Energy, but that these wouldn't arrive in time because the coal fired power stations are due to hit their decommissioning stages long before. So what do we do? Start rolling blackouts to reduce output and prolong operational life or run them past their decommissioning dates? Obviously they'll be kept limping along. The problems are often more political than anything else, the Jap govt. should have decommissioned Fukushima yonks before the tsunami hit but they probably couldn't be arsed. Hopefully the IAEA will take note of how old arse plants can be really dangerous.
Currently in a grid locked London as a result of the climate change protesters. I'm with them. We need to drastically change our energy strategy. And for all the push to renewables, the total energy equation is never going to be solved quickly enough and with the required cut in CO2 without a move to nuclear.
Read about MSR. It is so far removed from our conventional ideas of nuclear power generation that it makes our fears of Cold War, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima irrelevant.
So, yes, lets get behind the push away from fossil fuels but at least have the common sense to replace it with a realistic alternative.
I thought this discussion might make a refreshing change from pounding the B word to death!
So many of us just don't care, with our big cars, and outside flood lights left on overnight because it looks pretty. Wastage everwhere.
Good on them.
Hope there not about tomorrow otherwise I will be like a wind turbine.
They have a valid point but don't spoil my golf.
Waste, excess yes. The awful by products of a population addicted to the latest and greatest gadget/food/fad and a econoindustrial machine designed to feed and expand their addiction. The new Primark in Birmingham. AAAGGHHHH!
160,000 square feet of shite! And its been rammed out since it opened. No care for the water consumption/human oppression/transport pollution to feed their insatiable desire for a bit of coloured rag to wear today and toss tomorrow. I despair!
I agree. The problem is people like me, who care and want to make a difference but it’s not as high a priority as making a living and trying to better ourselves and our families in the current system. I drive a car and fly on planes (mainly for work).
Sure I do what I can, but all those little things like recycling and eating less red meat are probably playing at the margins.
No more wind turbines thank you. There is not a mountainous walk/run in Mid-Wales to be had without the view being blighted by the damn things.
They are not very green either when the manufacture, transportation, building of new access roads and erection are taken into consideration.
And when the wind doesn't blow.........
I actually think solar panels are worse than wind turbines. At least between turbines you have natual landscape, While with panels you just have hectares of land completly covered.
On an island one may assume that waves would play a part.🙄
Another thing that pisses me off, I think the Goverement is only half-hearted in funding research into these other renewable options.
Pulled the pug on the tidal project then ploughing money into nuclear.
Both wind and solar have their immediate environmental issues. I'm with llani on the dreadful rape of Welsh wilderness by wind farms.
Oh, and covering deserts with solar panels has unintended consequences too. A large desert farm in California was overrun by vermin....because the panels scorched the Raptors trying to get to them. Yet another food chain ruined.
Good point Wheeze. I wouldn’t have thought of that. I guess it’s a case of minimising our impact. Is the impact on desert ecosystems more or less bad than building an oil-powered power station, or a nuclear plant, or 10,000 turbines? And this also needs to address diversity of supply and the relative outputs - nuclear power stations make lots and lots of energy so would be equivalent to hundreds of wind turbines.
There’s no easy answer, but it’s a debate we need to have.
Heysham 1 output is the equivalent of around 100 modern wind turbines, give it 5 years and it’ll be 50 turbines, as the technology moves on, the footprint will be much smallerQuote:
Originally Posted by noel
The Agricultural Revolution allowed us to Survive on the land. Took thousands of years.
The Industrial Revolution allowed us to Shape the land. Took hundreds of years.
The Technological Revolution allows us to Save the land. Arrived in tens of years...
... and now gives us important choices to make. We need to take care that organisations like Extinction Rebellion do not become a vehicle for anarchistic agendas. We need this energy to redesign, rethink and progress.
Are you comparing when they both run at capacity? The problem with wind is they often don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daletownrunner
Are you sure it's 100 as well? It would seem you should have added a 0 for most of the installed turbines.
Heysham 1150 MW and a turbine up to 1.5MW.
Yes I know they have some recently installed turbines at a declared 8MW but when they only run at 30% capacity (typical) you're still looking at close to 500 of these to match Heysham 1.
Wind turbines like most so called green alternatives are a waste of space and always have been, because all of the revolutions that Wheeze spells out have been detrimental to nature and the planet.
In fact from the minute Homo sapiens walked the earth changing and making things they have been screwing nature up, but they have a misguided sense that humans are smart enough to correct the damage they have done to the planet over millions of years but it seems that we like to ignore the fact that we are just a tiny part of nature and the planets Eco system and as such we are probably the weakest and maybe the most disruptive, which in turn makes us the most vulnerable to nature whhen it comes to the long term survival of the planet i.e. Nature will wipe out mankind in favour of protecting the planet and all we are doing is adding to our own destruction.
Take wind turbines as an example do they ever re-pay there carbon footprint for manufacture and placement,has any body ever taken the trouble to investigate the collective effects of every Wind Turbine in the world of the deflected wind flows that is created by each Turbine and what effect that has on the Jet Stream and hence climate change.
In short Nature will look after itself and humans as we know them now are unlikely to be a part of Natures long term format.
At what cost? To drive us humans back to some sort of sustainable level (hunter/gather or whatever) would take what percentage of the animinal kingdom with us? What gives us the right to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnK
8MW run at 8MW at wind speeds as low as 10m/s, not hard offshore, next generation will be 15MW and beyond 1.5MW is old news, 3.6MW is industry standardQuote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
The first 8MW were installed in the last 2 years and there aren't that many of them out there yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daletownrunner
Burbo Bank 2 has them and has installed capacity of 254MW or less then 1/4 of Heysham.
It is currently operating at 37%, one of the best rates in the sector, so that's an actual capacity of 94MW.
And Heysham is old technology you are comparing the capacity of wind turbines that might be running in the UK in 5-10 years at 30-40% with a 40+ year old technology that's due to close in 5 years.
There are wider issues with wind as well, as have been touched on by others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
87 8MW off Walney, so there are a few, plus a bunch more off the East coast, I agree Heysham is old tech, I only picked it as it was local :D I am a nuclear fan, modern process control will prevent any major disasters barring operator error but this not withstanding, nuclear has and does leave a terrible legacy for future generations
Not MSR Daletown. MSR will help remove the legacy from old nuclear tech. We really should be pushing for it.
I think the animal kingdom will do a whole lot better when we humans are not around.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...ed-extinction/
We must not forget that Humans are just a part of the planets Eco System and as such no more important than any other particular part of our planets elements, however because we think we are intelligent we are potentially the most harmful and destructive element on the planet, that smart that we are hell bent on destroying ourselves
How can you write such rubbish. Which other species on the planet has the ability to do so much damage to the world? We are hugly important, and our decisions about how WE decide to treat the planet is critical as it will determine the outcome for the entire ecosystem.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnK
I rest my case and am out of here:)Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
There's no doubt we are just a mere hiccup in a long and turbulent history. There was a time when land masses were covered with dense forestation and the atmosphere would have a been a toxic brew of way too much oxygen. There were other times of severe vulcanism that would have spewed out volumes of CO2 and other gasses that make our current pre-occupations look pathetic! The difference is that the organisms who were affected by the mass extinction events that took place in these times were mere passengers whereas we can think about trying to survive the change. But it must be about trying to survive not influence. All this bleating about trying to reverse climatic trends ignores the massive latency in the system. We wont reverse what is already happening for considerable time....measured in generations. But I guess we try to make the swing less severe so that whoever survives after the next, say 10 generations, can return to something like a more equitable environment.....maybe!
hence we should be focussing on being environmentally responsible rather than saviours of the planet. The scaremongering does nothing to further the cause - just ask George Osborne ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
It depends whether you are considering centralised or local distributed generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
I have 5kw cells on a roof in north west that are invisible in the sense that they cannot be seen from the road, and a big 14 kWh tesla battery in the garage. So I generate 85 percent of what I use, only dipping below in Dec and Jan. I also Generate enough to heat water by electric for six months of the summer during which my energy bills are near zero. The battery is what turns useless to useful. In those numbers we cook electric, and have a heat pump tumble drier. I will have some left over to power an electric runabout for local journeys in summer, although I am waiting for the specs to improve to buy one.
I cannot do that with wind and certainly not invisibly.