Electricity Supply

Even in Scotland, Hydro Electric is very small. Not even as much as we get from average wind.

Mr Cameron is begging the Frogs to take our money and sell us electricity at more than the market price, to persuade them to build some atomic boilers here.

On windy days, we have recently been getting more from wind than from Nuclear (but several reactors have been closed down for repair or maintenance this autumn, as they are all old and wearing out).

See here:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
 
Sponsored Links
Mr Cameron is begging the Frogs to take our money and sell us electricity at more than the market price, to persuade them to build some atomic boilers here.

Time was we were able to build our own. What on earth has happened to this country? (Rhetorical question.)
 
The biggest problem at the moment with wind power is the fact that we can't store the electricity produced from them, very efficiently. Denmark had this problem, but partially solved it by exporting electricity to Germany (then importing electricity when they needed it . (still very inefficient though) I personally think we need to be building nuclear facilities, and possibly tidal and solar generators, to keep the lights lit and kettles boiling. ;) ;)
 
Sponsored Links
The whole leccy market is screwed.

Privatisation worked well, prices went down, infrastructure was built, all was well.

Then the government decided to impose carbon taxes, ok fine, let the market sort it out.

Then they started throwing subsidies left right and centre at anything that could tag 'green' to it's name, or 'low carbon'. So now companies won't even think of building without subsidies, and from a commercial point of view why not, the government seems perfectly willing to throw money at you if you just hold out, and stick a low carbon or green tag onto your proposals.

And of course we have Germany, suddenly deciding "screw nuclear", no phase out, just 'screw it', and sod all the companies that built infrastructure with long payback periods (and they are now suing the government for loss of earnings, which they are right to do). Our own government keeps wibbling about how much companies will be taxed, leaving people nervous about investing in new power infrastructure without even further guaranteed subs and income.

All they needed to do was set a carbon tax, and just make it clear it would ramp up by X over X years, this would give companies a clear idea what future markets would be like and invest accordingly.

But this Tory government are just Labour by another name, can't resist fiddling with the market to the point it is no longer a market.

Then idiots come along and wibble about 'failure of the free market'.
 
The biggest problem at the moment with wind power is the fact that we can't store the electricity produced from them, very efficiently. Denmark had this problem, but partially solved it by exporting electricity to Germany (then importing electricity when they needed it . (still very inefficient though) I personally think we need to be building nuclear facilities, and possibly tidal and solar generators, to keep the lights lit and kettles boiling. ;) ;)

Solar? In Britain?

Of course, nuclear is the only practical way forward. It does, however, have one drawback in that it is not able to respond quickly to sudden changes in energy demand. For that reason, I believe it is still necessary to have some fossil-fuelled power stations, not as the primary source of energy, but as a back-up to a strong foundation of nuclear power production, and if that upsets the Greenies, they should go and live on some little island somewhere and make use of little (carbon neutral?!) camp fires.

For the same reason, windmills and solar power are right out!
 
Solar? In Britain?

Obviously you live in a dark and cloudy part of the country.

Solar power varies, as does wind, but can make a useful contribution. They can both be used with a regulated power supply on resistive loads like immersion heaters and storage heaters or thermal stores, where it doesn't much matter if generation fluctuates during the day.
 
the sooner we move on to barrages across the Severn and Thames estuaries, and Morecambe Bay, the sooner we'll have a massive and reliable source of power that won't wreck the planet, and won't take as long to clear up as Fukushima or Chernobyl.

Are you intimating nuclear wrecks the planet? Its not as if they use or make anything that wasn't already here. Making reference to chernobyl and fukushima is not really helpful, a modern reactor cannot go into meltdown and britain is very stable geologically having not experienced a tsunami in recorded history.

A modern thorium reactor produces very small quantites of low level short half life waste for example.

Has anyone for instance investigated what, if indeed any, ecological or geographical impact on harnessing tidal power might have?
 
Making reference to chernobyl and fukushima is not really helpful

Yes it is.

Just in case anybody ever falls for the "nothing can possibly go wrong" fib.

What will happen if Welsh Separatists hijack a plane and crash it into Sizewell?

Will 100 years be long enough for the area to become safe? Ukraine now has a very large nature reserve of 1,000 square miles and the forest is taking over.
http://www.ibtimes.com/wildlife-nuclear-wasteland-28-years-after-chernobyl-disaster-1576660
 
Making reference to chernobyl and fukushima is not really helpful

Yes it is.

Just in case anybody ever falls for the "nothing can possibly go wrong" fib.

What will happen if Welsh Separatists hijack a plane and crash it into Sizewell?

Will 100 years be long enough for the area to become safe? Ukraine now has a very large nature reserve of 1,000 square miles and the forest is taking over.
http://www.ibtimes.com/wildlife-nuclear-wasteland-28-years-after-chernobyl-disaster-1576660[/QUOTE]

Ummm ok :D
 

Ha, ha, ha

You are suggesting they can be persuaded to hijack only a very small, very light plane.

The F4 in your video has a takeoff weight (excluding weapons which I did not see) of about 20,000 kg

A 747 has a takeoff weight of about 440,000 kg

It might be carrying 240,000 litres of fuel, which could cause a very destructive fire and spread radioactive particles widely, as well as interfering with recovery and repair, and destroying control and safety systems.
 
Nuclear power is the safest system we have as an option for energy.

I'll let that sink in.
 

Ha, ha, ha

You are suggesting they can be persuaded to hijack only a very small, very light plane.

The F4 in your video has a takeoff weight (excluding weapons which I did not see) of about 20,000 kg

A 747 has a takeoff weight of about 440,000 kg

It might be carrying 240,000 litres of fuel, which could cause a very destructive fire and spread radioactive particles widely, as well as interfering with recovery and repair, and destroying control and safety systems.

Don't you think that the designers of nuclear power plants have considered the possibility of such terrorist attacks, and why Welsh for that matter? I'm sure they're all very happy as they are (with their sheep!).

Just out of interest, which part of the power plant would you aim for, if you were a terrorist (Welsh or otherwise), and what would you hope to achieve?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top