INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

The future of energy (if any)

...on serious topics that don't fit anywhere else at present.
Message
Author
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#61 Postby Alan H » January 11th, 2016, 11:29 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Energy boost as London Array wind farm smashes clean electricity record
A wind farm located 12 miles off the coast of Margate in the outer Thames Estuary has set a new record for the amount of clean electricity produced by an offshore farm in a single month.

In December, the 175 turbines owned by London Array - the world’s largest operational offshore wind farm - generated 369,000 MhW of electricity - considerably above target and well above the previous best of 317,000 MWh set last November.

The two successive months of production brought net overall output for the year to some 2,500,000 MWh, enough to meet the needs of more than 600,000 UK households.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#62 Postby Alan H » January 11th, 2016, 11:38 pm

Australia First to Receive Electricity Using Zero-emission Wave Energy Generators
Wave energy technology has finally proved its feasibility to provide renewable, clean energy on a mass scale.

The Perth Wave Energy Project has demonstrated that the CETO 5 wave energy generators, developed by Carnegie Wave Energy Limited, are capable of using the movement of the ocean to provide electricity to a naval base near Garden Island in Western Australia. The site is the first commercial ocean wave energy installation. It has channeled zero-emissions energy from three CETO 5 units into a functioning power grid for 14000 cumulative hours.

Below is a short video that explains the process of how the fully-submerged CETO 5 system, made up of a 240kW bouy tethered to a water pump, converts the movements of the ocean into a stream of high-powered water, which is then is used to create hydroelecticity and power a reverse-osmosis desalination plant.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#63 Postby Dave B » January 12th, 2016, 10:37 am

Hmm, interesting.

I always understood that wave action was only present in the top part of the water column, basically between crest and trough. Below that there was some lateral movement but little vertical.

This implies that tides will have a serious effect, thus the Med would be great if it also had a good swell.

So I wonder how they have allowed for this, or if the power only available part of the day? The surface buoy system I can understand. Other systems make use of the lateral wave motion to directly drive bi-directional turbines mounted in barriers.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#64 Postby Alan H » April 5th, 2016, 7:22 pm

Scrapping Hinkley for renewable alternatives would save 'tens of billions'
Scrapping plans for new nuclear reactors at Hinkley Point in Somerset and building huge amounts of renewable power instead would save the UK tens of billions of pounds, according to an analysis that compares likely future costs.

The Intergenerational Foundation thinktank calculated that Britain would pay up to £40bn less for renewable alternatives that would generate the equivalent power to Hinkley over the plant’s planned lifetime.

A final investment decision by EDF on the nuclear power plant’s expansion is expected in May. The deal involves the government committing £92.50 per megawatt hour over 35 years for its electricity output, more than twice the current wholesale price.

But a report published on Tuesday by the thinktank, which campaigns on fairness between generations, found that onshore windfarms would cost £31.2bn less than Hinkley, and solar photovoltaic power £39.9bn less over 35 years to build and run. The estimate is based on both the value of subsidies paid by the taxpayer for the electricity and the cost of building the infrastructure.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#65 Postby Nick » April 6th, 2016, 1:39 am

But what do you do when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow? Like a nice, cold, crisp day in January? If it's so much cheaper, where are the filthy greedy capitalists, with their green energy contracts....?

Any evidence? Any evidence whatsoever?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#66 Postby Dave B » April 6th, 2016, 8:40 am

I have not heard the arguenent about "small modular reactors" yet.

These small units have less than a third the capacity of a small standard reactor but big advantages in: they are cheap, pre-fabricated and road/rail transportable. Often placed in underground chambers the also have less visual impact.

Not sure if they need more frequent fuel changes etc. Guess they are similar to naval units.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#67 Postby Alan H » April 6th, 2016, 10:27 am

Nick wrote:But what do you do when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow? Like a nice, cold, crisp day in January? If it's so much cheaper, where are the filthy greedy capitalists, with their green energy contracts....?

Any evidence? Any evidence whatsoever?
Oh, please Nick...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#68 Postby Nick » April 6th, 2016, 6:24 pm

Yes, Alan? What?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#69 Postby Alan H » April 6th, 2016, 10:27 pm

Nick wrote:Yes, Alan? What?
Evidence for what, Nick?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#70 Postby Nick » April 6th, 2016, 11:59 pm

Oh! Not exactly obvious. Evidence that it would be cheaper, bearing in mind that substitute energy would be required when the sun doesn't shine or wind blow.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#71 Postby Alan H » April 7th, 2016, 12:17 am

Nick wrote:Oh! Not exactly obvious. Evidence that it would be cheaper, bearing in mind that substitute energy would be required when the sun doesn't shine or wind blow.
Perhaps you haven't read the report?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#72 Postby Nick » April 7th, 2016, 8:09 am

As you obviously have, please point out to me where it takes into account the costs of the energy supplies necessary for the times when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing.

User avatar
lewist
Posts: 4402
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 8:53 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#73 Postby lewist » April 7th, 2016, 8:52 am

Nick wrote:As you obviously have, please point out to me where it takes into account the costs of the energy supplies necessary for the times when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing.
Whereas I haven't read the report you are bickering over, you need to add or the tides don't flow, Nick.

Tidal barrage is the future baseload in the system.
Carpe diem. Savour every moment.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#74 Postby Dave B » April 7th, 2016, 9:25 am

^
+1
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#75 Postby Alan H » April 7th, 2016, 9:31 am

lewist wrote:
Nick wrote:As you obviously have, please point out to me where it takes into account the costs of the energy supplies necessary for the times when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing.
Whereas I haven't read the report you are bickering over, you need to add or the tides don't flow, Nick.

Tidal barrage is the future baseload in the system.

Not to mention biomass, geothermal, hydropower... then there's energy storage technologies and demand management...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#76 Postby Dave B » April 7th, 2016, 10:17 am

And, I am sure, the filthy rich will find ways of getting even filthier on these industries :D
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#77 Postby Nick » April 7th, 2016, 4:38 pm

Alan H wrote:
lewist wrote:
Nick wrote:As you obviously have, please point out to me where it takes into account the costs of the energy supplies necessary for the times when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing.
Whereas I haven't read the report you are bickering over, you need to add or the tides don't flow, Nick.

Tidal barrage is the future baseload in the system.

Not to mention biomass, geothermal, hydropower... then there's energy storage technologies and demand management...
And where is all that I the report? I don't see it even mentioned, let alone costed. If it is in the report, please point it out to me. If not, then the report is lacking, in a major, terminal way. Which is the point I was making. Certainly, it would be great to have other green technologies, but at the moment sun and wind, the two energy sources you quoted, are not viable without baseload, nor are they viable "on demand" sources (or whatever the phrase is). So other sources (probably gas, if my understanding is right) are still required. And such other "green" alternatives have not been included in the costings, so far as I can see. Tidal barrage is certainly reliable and predictable, so could act as a baseload provider of energy, but, again, as far as I can make out, because the energy is so dissipated, it is even more expensive to capture and convert to electricity (and never mind the adverse effects of destroying tidal eco-systems....) I'd be delighted if other sources of power were able to challenge polluting oil and gas, and potentially dangerous nuclear, but so far, the technology is not sufficiently advanced.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#78 Postby Alan H » April 7th, 2016, 4:50 pm

Nick wrote:
Alan H wrote:
lewist wrote:Whereas I haven't read the report you are bickering over, you need to add or the tides don't flow, Nick.

Tidal barrage is the future baseload in the system.

Not to mention biomass, geothermal, hydropower... then there's energy storage technologies and demand management...
And where is all that I the report? I don't see it even mentioned, let alone costed. If it is in the report, please point it out to me. If not, then the report is lacking, in a major, terminal way. Which is the point I was making. Certainly, it would be great to have other green technologies, but at the moment sun and wind, the two energy sources you quoted, are not viable without baseload, nor are they viable "on demand" sources (or whatever the phrase is). So other sources (probably gas, if my understanding is right) are still required. And such other "green" alternatives have not been included in the costings, so far as I can see. Tidal barrage is certainly reliable and predictable, so could act as a baseload provider of energy, but, again, as far as I can make out, because the energy is so dissipated, it is even more expensive to capture and convert to electricity (and never mind the adverse effects of destroying tidal eco-systems....) I'd be delighted if other sources of power were able to challenge polluting oil and gas, and potentially dangerous nuclear, but so far, the technology is not sufficiently advanced.
I'm not going to read the report for you, Nick.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#79 Postby Nick » April 7th, 2016, 5:46 pm

Then I will continue to think that either you haven't read it, or the evidence isn't there.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#80 Postby Alan H » April 7th, 2016, 5:52 pm

Nick wrote:Then I will continue to think that either you haven't read it, or the evidence isn't there.
Feel free.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22933
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of energy (if any)

#81 Postby Alan H » April 13th, 2016, 10:45 am

Why it's time to dispel the myths about nuclear powe
Thirty years has passed since events in Chernobyl, while Japan marks the fifth anniversary of the Fukushima disaster. We need more than ever to have a reasoned discussion on the issues
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?


Return to “Miscellaneous Discussions...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests