Wind Power

[southernsoftie]

Yes, but Wheeze, you're a Labrador that can type. You can't tell me it's had no effect on you!

[Wheeze]

Hmm, I thought I was feeling a bit ruff!

[IainR]

Have a look at the "No to nuclear now" thread started by Readus - would you want to live near a nuclear reactor?

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..

[molehill]

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' .

[sore legs]

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.

[Wheeze]

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???

[Danbert Nocurry]

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.

[manothemoors]

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.

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.

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.

[Alf]

mmmmmm molten salt moderated Thorium

[Wheeze]

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??