By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I acknowledged they were more efficient by being bigger, but that is diminishing returns. I gave you the figures for offshore plus onshire wind earlier this week 1Gw, so the wind doesn't blow all the time, in fact quite often when it stalls it stalls right across europe.
I know what the rest of the world wants, because they are all building Coal and Gas powered stations with a few nuclear thrown in. In fact the Chinese are building most of them for them. That is not guessing that is the reality which you refuse to face.
I'm not sure that is what the rest of the world "wants". They need something and maybe it is the short term easy solution for many.
Lord_Jack increasingly detached from the riches of kicking a ball
Sorry, but Wind Generators are not that much more effecient, just bigger, unless they go to vertical design there is also not much chance of more improvement. Regardless of how efficient they make them if the wind is not blowing they are parasitic on the Grid. Have ever bothered to see after all this time and all the money invested how much Wind & Solar contribute to World Electricity generation? As of 2019, the last year they have data for. Fossil Fuels - 63.3% Nuclear - 10.4% Hydro - 15.8% Wind - 5.3% Solar - 2.7% But of total power generation Fossil Fuels - 84.3% Nuclear - 4.3% Hydro - 6.4% Wind - 2.2% Solar - 1.1% The increase in world generation from 2018 to 2019 was 2100TWh, the increase in Wind and Solar combined was 728TWh. So despite all the hype about increases in wind and solar it did not even increase enough to cover the annual increase in demand. In fact 2018 investment in renewables was less than 2016 & 2017.
You guys need to face reality, the rest of the world do not want Renewables, they want good stable baseload power that can run modern societies. UK virtue signalling is not going to change that.
Unless the rest of the world gets it's collective ass into gear on this the day will come when the "modern" world is not worth living in.
Your negativity towards renewables is ill founded. Look back in time, they said man would never fly, that we would never get into space, actually lots of apparently very clver people made some very bad predictions...
I acknowledged they were more efficient by being bigger, but that is diminishing returns. I gave you the figures for offshore plus onshire wind earlier this week 1Gw, so the wind doesn't blow all the time, in fact quite often when it stalls it stalls right across europe.
I know what the rest of the world wants, because they are all building Coal and Gas powered stations with a few nuclear thrown in. In fact the Chinese are building most of them for them. That is not guessing that is the reality which you refuse to face.
But how many days does the wind not blow, the sun not shine, water not flow and the tide not ebb and flood, all at the same time?
We aren't there yet, we aren't even close, one day we will be. We absolutely have to be.
That isn't what the rest of the world wants, it's what they need at the moment, driven by an expanding population and the need for power. Developed countries are shunning fossil fuels.
Let's not forget that Biden had the largest popular vote in US election history. Was that on the promise of more coal power stations?
But how many days does the wind not blow, the sun not shine, water not flow and the tide not ebb and flood, all at the same time?
We aren't there yet, we aren't even close, one day we will be. We absolutely have to be.
That isn't what the rest of the world wants, it's what they need at the moment, driven by an expanding population and the need for power. Developed countries are shunning fossil fuels.
Let's not forget that Biden had the largest popular vote in US election history. Was that on the promise of more coal power stations?
We are not there yet last night wind provided 57% of the UK power needs. Gas was down 17%.
But how many days does the wind not blow, the sun not shine, water not flow and the tide not ebb and flood, all at the same time?
We aren't there yet, we aren't even close, one day we will be. We absolutely have to be.
That isn't what the rest of the world wants, it's what they need at the moment, driven by an expanding population and the need for power. Developed countries are shunning fossil fuels.
Let's not forget that Biden had the largest popular vote in US election history. Was that on the promise of more coal power stations?
No it was on the back of the worst case of Voter/Election fraud ever seen.
But how many days does the wind not blow, the sun not shine, water not flow and the tide not ebb and flood, all at the same time?
We aren't there yet, we aren't even close, one day we will be. We absolutely have to be.
That isn't what the rest of the world wants, it's what they need at the moment, driven by an expanding population and the need for power. Developed countries are shunning fossil fuels.
Let's not forget that Biden had the largest popular vote in US election history. Was that on the promise of more coal power stations?
What developed countries are shunning fossil fuels? Some countries may be shunnung coal, but only because Gas is easier, cheaper and more efficient. The USA and the UK had already swapped most coal plants for gas before the Climate Change Act was enacted, because it made economic sense when you have plenty of it Ever heard of the UK "dash for gas"? Germany were still building new Lignite coal (dirtiest there is) power stations up until last year when the latest one came on line.
The sun doesn't shine enough between 6pm & 6am every day, it doesn't shine enough when there are clouds as in today, it peaked at 2Gw. It doesn't shine enough between November and March at this latitude either. Wind can stall for a week or more at a time and Tidal peaks 4 times a day, at different times every day, so that the peaks do not necessarily align with Peak Demand or when it is cloudy or at night to compensate for Solar. I thought I made that pretty clear when we discussed the Swansea Lagoon. Bio is dirtier than Coal in both pollution and CO2.
I didn't realise that you did not have an engineering background, but now it is clear why you don't understand the requirements of Base Loads and Spinning Reserves and Grid stability, or that batteries will never ever be able to hold sufficient charge to back up intermittent production even if you spend Billions of pounds on it.
The answer is Nuclear.
Did you see the latest puff piece by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard who also does not have an engineering background, in the Telegraph yesterday about the IEA report? One of his comments was this "Net zero does not cost jobs: it replaces five million lost in oil, gas, and coal with eight times as many jobs for engineers, electrical experts, offshore operators, solar technicians, or lithium and rare earth miners, whether directly or indirectly. " So to produce the same amount of energy they are going to need 40 million people employed instead of 5 million. So are they going to all be working on 1/8 of the wages that the 5 million are earning now? This comes from a "business editor", how doesn't he know anything about economics that he thinks replacing 5 workers with 40 workers is a good idea?
What developed countries are shunning fossil fuels? Some countries may be shunnung coal, but only because Gas is easier, cheaper and more efficient. The USA and the UK had already swapped most coal plants for gas before the Climate Change Act was enacted, because it made economic sense when you have plenty of it Ever heard of the UK "dash for gas"? Germany were still building new Lignite coal (dirtiest there is) power stations up until last year when the latest one came on line.
The sun doesn't shine enough between 6pm & 6am every day, it doesn't shine enough when there are clouds as in today, it peaked at 2Gw. It doesn't shine enough between November and March at this latitude either. Wind can stall for a week or more at a time and Tidal peaks 4 times a day, at different times every day, so that the peaks do not necessarily align with Peak Demand or when it is cloudy or at night to compensate for Solar. I thought I made that pretty clear when we discussed the Swansea Lagoon. Bio is dirtier than Coal in both pollution and CO2.
I didn't realise that you did not have an engineering background, but now it is clear why you don't understand the requirements of Base Loads and Spinning Reserves and Grid stability, or that batteries will never ever be able to hold sufficient charge to back up intermittent production even if you spend Billions of pounds on it.
The answer is Nuclear.
Did you see the latest puff piece by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard who also does not have an engineering background, in the Telegraph yesterday about the IEA report? One of his comments was this "Net zero does not cost jobs: it replaces five million lost in oil, gas, and coal with eight times as many jobs for engineers, electrical experts, offshore operators, solar technicians, or lithium and rare earth miners, whether directly or indirectly. " So to produce the same amount of energy they are going to need 40 million people employed instead of 5 million. So are they going to all be working on 1/8 of the wages that the 5 million are earning now? This comes from a "business editor", how doesn't he know anything about economics that he thinks replacing 5 workers with 40 workers is a good idea?
Well we are in the UK for a start. In the last ten years I've dealt with two peaking gas power stations, purely to switch on when renewables aren't available. Providing less than 600 kW between them.
Neither of which have actually been built, or even started to be built.
I've genuinely lost count of the renewable schemes I've worked on. Definitely in excess of 50. Many of which are operational.
There's likely to always be a need for a back up to renewables. But that need is diminishing and will continue to do so.
How can it possibly diminish when the Carbon Zero programme you say we must have is going to Double or treble the current demand for elecricity.
As to your working on renewable projects you are just one of thousands jumping on the bandwagon, regardless of the financial cost to the public rate & tax payers.
How can it possibly diminish when the Carbon Zero programme you say we must have is going to Double or treble the current demand for elecricity.
As to your working on renewable projects you are just one of thousands jumping on the bandwagon, regardless of the financial cost to the public rate & tax payers.
I'm not jumping on a band wagon. I consider the proposals I'm given and my salary and opinion doesn't t change whether it's an opencast or windfarm.
Carbon zero is a massive ask, I aspire to it, but have never said its a must. In all honestly its probably a bit unrealistic. Certainly in anyone reading this lifetime.
What you think it isn't politically motivated? OK.
Have you considered the possibility that Trump is guilty of a crime. He overstated his assets to get a loan then undervalued them to avoid tax, allegedly. If that is proven in court then it's game over. Not that you accept the courts decisions because you think some stranger on the internet knows better and that all the stuff you see on non MSM sources is true.
It's what you choose to believe whether it's true or not. I can't change that so that's the end of it. You're not going to change what I believe either btw so it's pointless going around in cirlces.
Provided all my power last night and only used a third of my battery capacity.
Some people just refuse to accept that the technology will get there one day. I think it's inevitable, maybe not in my lifetime but one day it will.
Personally I think every new building should have solar panels built in. Imagine every roof in the Uk had solar panels , it would provide a lot power during the day and when battery tech improves storage we'll take a significant step.
Some people just refuse to accept that the technology will get there one day. I think it's inevitable, maybe not in my lifetime but one day it will.
Personally I think every new building should have solar panels built in. Imagine every roof in the Uk had solar panels , it would provide a lot power during the day and when battery tech improves storage we'll take a significant step.
Well, here is some more reality for you when you have too much Wind & solar, which are given preference over all other generating types. That lovely burst of wind the other night, it cost the Grid and passed on to it's cutomers, ie you and me, £8,386,636 to balance the grid. Yes 8 million quid because that burst of wind unbalanced and nearly destabilized the grid.
The second one which I mentioned before is NSW Australia also had massive problems, this time with lack of wind and solar which resulted in the Tomago aluminium smelter powering down three times in a week due to electricity shortages. You see Energy Intensive Industry cannot cope with the intermittency of Renewables. The shortages meant spot prices jumped up to 35,000 times the normal price. 4 states hit $4000, you won't read about that on your oh so green renewable sites, only in those damned Climate Denier forums. This is not the first or last time this will happen.
Well, here is some more reality for you when you have too much Wind & solar, which are given preference over all other generating types. That lovely burst of wind the other night, it cost the Grid and passed on to it's cutomers, ie you and me, £8,386,636 to balance the grid. Yes 8 million quid because that burst of wind unbalanced and nearly destabilized the grid.
The second one which I mentioned before is NSW Australia also had massive problems, this time with lack of wind and solar which resulted in the Tomago aluminium smelter powering down three times in a week due to electricity shortages. You see Energy Intensive Industry cannot cope with the intermittency of Renewables. The shortages meant spot prices jumped up to 35,000 times the normal price. 4 states hit $4000, you won't read about that on your oh so green renewable sites, only in those damned Climate Denier forums. This is not the first or last time this will happen.
But it did not. Because that is one of the functions of National Grid to ensure constancy of supply and to meet peak demands. The balance is the cost to the grid from generators. As yet this cannot be met by exclusively renewables, agreed. Whilst I would also agree nuclear is a good mid term option, it’s not acceptable for many and can go horribly wrong and dealing with waste remains a Very long term issue. But you should also come clean that the usual daily cost is 2-3 Million. Sometimes less and sometimes more. And equally someone whose opinion I would trust is highly favourable towards investment in renewables and the tech to overcome fluctuations through storage. He works for National Grid as a senior engineer. In the main control room. Making the decisions of supply.
That is how the national grid works. When demand outstrips supply the wholesale price increases and more expensive methods of producing electricity are bought online. When supply exceeds demand wholesale prices drop and expensive generating plants are shut down. Nuclear is always online as it produced cheaper electricity when running constantly.
But it did not. Because that is one of the functions of National Grid to ensure constancy of supply and to meet peak demands. The balance is the cost to the grid from generators. As yet this cannot be met by exclusively renewables, agreed. Whilst I would also agree nuclear is a good mid term option, it’s not acceptable for many and can go horribly wrong and dealing with waste remains a Very long term issue. But you should also come clean that the usual daily cost is 2-3 Million. Sometimes less and sometimes more. And equally someone whose opinion I would trust is highly favourable towards investment in renewables and the tech to overcome fluctuations through storage. He works for National Grid as a senior engineer. In the main control room. Making the decisions of supply.
Of course anybody with any sense says invest in renewables, it is money for old rope. A guaranteed income not controlled by market forces. Yes it is 2-3 million pounds per day, 365 days a year, work out what a waste of money that is. Virtually unecessary without renewable destabalisation. Local Grid stabalisation is the only thing Batteries are any use for, certainly not any kind of backup.
Here is another bit of reality for you some really useful less than 16 year wind turbines.
Of course anybody with any sense says invest in renewables, it is money for old rope. A guaranteed income not controlled by market forces. Yes it is 2-3 million pounds per day, 365 days a year, work out what a waste of money that is. Virtually unecessary without renewable destabalisation. Local Grid stabalisation is the only thing Batteries are any use for, certainly not any kind of backup.
Here is another bit of reality for you some really useful less than 16 year wind turbines.
He did not. Read the post. Not about investment but what we need to do. Not to make money but to secure long-term supply. Problem is everyone sees this and also accepts we need to make compromises. But once North Sea runs out we are completely at mercy of importation. Since we won’t invest in nuclear, a mistake I feel, for genuinely held reasons then what alternative is there? It looks very much like biomass burning is the current plan -oddly a renewable as plants grow back, unless you follow pseudoscience, oil, coal and gas do not. Keep presenting a fraction of the story. Plenty here can see the full tale.
we need to look at full lifecycle costs including the disposal of nuclear waste etc......solar is the best way forward and there is a chance that some poorer equitorial counties could prosper.
Of course anybody with any sense says invest in renewables, it is money for old rope. A guaranteed income not controlled by market forces. Yes it is 2-3 million pounds per day, 365 days a year, work out what a waste of money that is. Virtually unecessary without renewable destabalisation. Local Grid stabalisation is the only thing Batteries are any use for, certainly not any kind of backup.
Here is another bit of reality for you some really useful less than 16 year wind turbines.
You're still at it then. You'll never accept that renewable energy tech will one day improve to the point we don't need fossil fuels?
Look at it this way, way back before the industrial revolution people would never accept that many of the advancements we enjoy today were possible. I posted the link to the predictions, to the things that were considered impossible including tarvelling at speed in cars. The world moved on, technology impoved, new inventions and new ways of thinking opened up possibilites that had only been seen in science fiction books and films.
If you want to stand still, or want to believe the world will stand still then carry on. Most of the world will keep on moving though, for beter or for worse.
You're still at it then. You'll never accept that renewable energy tech will one day improve to the point we don't need fossil fuels?
Look at it this way, way back before the industrial revolution people would never accept that many of the advancements we enjoy today were possible. I posted the link to the predictions, to the things that were considered impossible including tarvelling at speed in cars. The world moved on, technology impoved, new inventions and new ways of thinking opened up possibilites that had only been seen in science fiction books and films.
If you want to stand still, or want to believe the world will stand still then carry on. Most of the world will keep on moving though, for beter or for worse.
But if you are in denial of anthropogenic climate change and believe oil renews itself from rocks that won’t happen.
and I suppose Trumps business being under criminal investigation now is a politically motivated attack too? 
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.