13 Nov 2009
Yes, Windpower COULD play a very large role in Britain's energy supply IF non self-sustaining systems are Diss-allowed. Current "technology" is about 1/50 "as sustainable" as sensibly designed systems. I put "as sustainable" in quotes because at such a low rate (a small fraction of one percent of its cost returned annually) it is not sustainable At All !! This fact, it seems, doesn't stop the government from trying to instantly build enuf to get itself off the hook at the conferences. The physical facts are that, despite what the "wind-bizniss" tries to tell us (that their systems make oil and gold, and diamond mines look a relatively silly waste of money) the return from the vast rotating punk haircuts on collosal sticks is a small fraction of one percent p.a.. There are very simple reasons for this
One is that the cost of facing any given area of wind is a necklace-shaped function of (log) size of TADs deployed, the lowest cost ocurring at sizes where the T costs about the same as the A - which happens at around a metre diameter. Now the editor has broken again
21 Nov 2009
The REC is 100% spot on - why develop the nuclear energy again when we don't have to. Even if we have some 'lights out' over the coming years we should head straight for the end game - 100% renewables: NOW
What happens if the new nuclear power stations let their UK companies go bust when they have to pay for decommissioning. then we are left with a 70bn debt we can ill afford. we cannot afford the current decommissioning.
I would like to see a link to norway to harness their hydro power, so that it can plug the gaps in the wind energy system and have an inteligent grid combined with as many barrages and tidal devices and wave energy converters as possible. Building regs should force solar solutions and insulation requirements, etc as they have in northern europe. Existing house stock should be 100% thermally lined, somehow, etc, etc.