Why you should never listen to vocal community groups.

[beeb375]

I agree with Ploes, there's nothing wrong with wind farms, and I grew up in the Lake district. Most of the new proposals aren't to put turbines 'in the middle of the Lake District', they're to put them in farmer's fields and other places of no particular interest, but people still insist on protesting, which pisses me right off. I think engineers need to change the design of turbines so that they need 10 people to work each one, THEN people would be glad of the jobs in these remote countryside spots

I mean, look at Sellafield (first UK nuclear power station), thousands of people worked there for 50 years, and now the decommisioning work is going to take even longer than that, and of course, hardly any locals complain (only Greenpeace do that) because of the vital jobs it's providing.

[Ploes]

I mean, look at Sellafield (first UK nuclear power station), thousands of people worked there for 50 years, and now the decommisioning work is going to take even longer than that, and of course, hardly any locals complain (only Greenpeace do that) because of the vital jobs it's providing.

I'm not sure it was put there for the provision of jobs.

It was put there so if it all went tits up and into meltdown there wasn't anything to close!

[beeb375]

Admittedly yes, but that ain't gonna happen now for two reasons

1) It doesn't produce power anymore
2) My friend's dad runs it, and he's a good bloke

[ostlandr]

That's the arguement overhere. Can't have nuclear power, or coal, or oil, or natural gas, or wind, or geothermal, or hydroelectric, or fusion, or whatever. But that 2.75 kw hair dryer better work when I plug it in, or I'll sue!

We need to do it all. Diversify and decentralize our energy sources, put them close to the demand areas. Get enough supply into the energy markets to stabilize prices.

And BTW, over here in the US we do have a few energy storage systems. Some of our hydroelectric dams have "pumped storage" so that when demand is low water is pumped into a separate resirvoir where it can be tapped at need. Hydrogen production would make an excellent peak-leveling tool also, as lots of kw are needed to produce it from water.

I'm not fond of looking at wind turbines or cell phone towers myself. But wind energy is one important piece of the puzzle, and building those suckers requires machinists, sheet metal workers, concrete workers, steel workers, etc. One of our presidential candidates says that we have to "slow the economy in order to help save the world from global warming." A former president stated that we must "cut our carbon emissions to 1919 levels by 2020 to save the planet." If they actually go through with this nonsense, wind power is about all we're gonna have- just not where anybody has to look at the towers, and if any birds are killed the tower has to come down. . .

[athanasios]

No. The only solution is energy from the Sun.

[Raichase]

No. The only solution is energy from the Sun.

The English are going to be spending a fair few days in the dark then...

[John]

No. The only solution is energy from the Sun.

The English are going to be spending a fair few days in the dark then...

technically speaking energy from the sun also includes wind, hyrdo, coal, gas and oil...

just not nuclear....

[Ploes]

Hang on, I made a post but its gone!

[Ameecher]

No. The only solution is energy from the Sun.

The English are going to be spending a fair few days in the dark then...

Well the scots are even more stuffed then.
As for Solar power being the only effective option... HA!
The irony is, solar panels (the photovoltaic ones - ie the ones that produce electricity) use A LOT of polluting chemicals in their production so all that is happening is that the pollution is coming from the factory instead of the power station...

[EXTspotter]

Its the same story with Energy-Saving lightbulbs, which have mercury in them.

[Ploes]

...or the Toyota Prius, with all the wonderful environmental cost of producing and safely disposing of large Nickel-metal hydride batteries!

[athanasios]

Its the same story with Energy-Saving lightbulbs, which have mercury in them.

If you properly recycle them instead of breaking them, as I did for fun when I was a kid, there is no problem...
Or do you believe the nice story that they passed to us to ban mercury thermometers and replace them by electronic ones? It never happened to me to see a patient break accidentally a mercury thermometer and drink the contents... OK I broke one when I was 3 years old, but my mom immediately collected the mercury.

The English are going to be spending a fair few days in the dark

As for Solar power being the only effective option... HA!
The irony is, solar panels (the photovoltaic ones - ie the ones that produce electricity) use A LOT of polluting chemicals in their production

Solar Panels is not the only method to get electricity from the Sun. And also they need to develop more to be efficient.
There exist various other methods to capture this "free" energy. The following is of interest:

Solar chemical processes use light (photonic) and heat from the sun to drive chemical reactions. These processes offset energy that would otherwise be required from an alternate source, produce no pollution, and can serve as reversible method of storing solar energy.

That is the future. Plants use photosynthesis and do not pollute. We have to imitate them.

regards
athanasios

[spaceman-spiff]

One impressive solution I've seen on National Geographic, extreme machines
It's in Island, they have build a huge dam to block a river with the melting water from their biggest glaciers
That water is then tunneled and transported 30-ish miles away
Then it drops hundreds of feet and drives turbines of some sort
What happens with that water next, I'm unaware of

Off-course it has a very high impact on the surrounding landscape and nature
But there is a price to pay for "clean" electricity, or not ...

[athanasios]

Sometimes things can get wild. Yesterday Electric Company was going to sign a contract with a German company to build a new stone coal Power Station.

Workers in the company and concerned citizens broke police lines (in the tension an unlucky policeman had a heart attack) invaded the building and stopped the procedure.

Not so legal way of action, but effective.

And all this while politicians are fooling us that the company had to increase the price of electric to get the necessary funds to build new "clean" power stations. B...s!

-

Also yesterday finished the campaign of ΣΚΑΙ (SKY) TV channel and Philips for energy saving bulbs. They gave for free 50.000 energy saving light bulbs. A distribution took place in Agia Paraskevi central square (Neighbour suburb.) but I was lazy to go.

[ostlandr]

Interesting how strong the opposition to nuclear power is. We've seen the worst-case scenario at Chernobyl. Even if you believe Greenpeace that the total death toll from all causes will be 93,000, we lose 40,000 dead to auto accidents in the US every year.
And about 70,000 in the US die from air pollution each year, if the figures are correct:
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htm

And even putting aside funds for eventual decommissioning of the plant, nuc power is currently cheaper per kwh than coal power. Much as I love the railroads, Powder River coal isn't the best solution to our energy needs.

Long Island Lighting Co. (a private for-profit electric utility) built a nuc plant at Shoreham at a cost of $5.6 billion (in 1985 dollars.) It was fueled and ready to go in 1985. Governor Cuomo of NY bowed to his constituents (the NIMBYS, the Greens, etc.) and prevented it from ever generating a kw of commercial electricity. The losses were by regulatory fiat passed on to LILCO ratepayers. and stockholders. Eventually LILCO was taken over by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA), a public authority. End result? Some of the highest electric rates in the nation.

http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/Shoreham_N ... ower_Plant

Discouraging new energy development keeps supplies artifically short, which drives up prices, which puts MORE money in the pockets of the energy industry.
Encouraging new energy development increases supplies, drives down rates, and causes competition, which means the energy industry folks really have to work for their bread and butter.
Which is better for the common folks?

[JamieLei]

When I went to Edinburgh, there were Solar Panels Everywhere. Not that many down in Cornwall where it's considerably more sunny.

Waste of money? Not particularly, but it could be better spent by moving the panels southwards, or even better, into the Sahara Desert where sunlight is at a maximum.

[athanasios]

And depend from African Countries?
Don't tell this to Mr Bush. You will be considered a terrorist...

I didn't dare say a word about Sahara but now you opened the box of Pandora!

[JamieLei]

Italy are planning it.
They'd own the power plants and cabling, and I guess pay a premium back to the government of Libya

[Expresso]

Well, you could have them painted with some colours which would make them less noticeable.

[61653]

They (the Government) ought to hurry up and get the Severn Barrage built, and lay HS2 (or more likely HS3) across it linking Cardiff to Bristol & London.