Ed_

Every windfarm is cleared (or not) by MOD. Much overstated, see any research on the topic. Not specific to wind. They are going regardless. North sea is a declining basin and fewer fields are cost competitive. Oil can be sold regardless of whether it is used in the UK - see Norway! Blade factories in Hull & IoW. Vestas Nacelle factory coming to Scotland Monopile fabrication facility on Teeside JDR Cables at Hartlepool, multiple Prysmian cable factories We probably make as much of wind farms as we do oil and gas facilities. Piper alpha?

Presumably their house was cheaper on account of the proximity to noisy kids?

Hmmm so back of the envelope water is about 4000J/kg K. Lets say 100kWh a day in heat energy absorbed (e.g 8kW of cooling on average over 12 hours), thats 360000000 Joules Water at 15 degrees and say useable up to 25 degrees, so 10 degrees delta. 3.6e8 / 10 / 4000 = 9000 litres. Basically tap wide open all day. My water is £2.75 / 1000l so £25 on a meter.

Losing a chunk of power for a period is normal for war time- look at Ukraine. Conversely look at Russia, floating on oil but can't get petrol at the pump due to the concentrated nature of fossil fuel refinement. Electricity grids are highly resilient, particularly once rolling blackouts become acceptable, as they are in wartime. Fossil fuel supply chain? Not nearly so much. You could argue nuclear is best as no one would dare to attack it... I can assure you that no one will build a wind farm unless they have a grid offer. Frequently the grid connection is delayed so a wind farm could be dormant for a short period, but no one gets the finance to build a project without a grid connection date.

To an extent, outside of a very small number, none of us, no matter how well read are able to be experts on any particular topic, so we have to take our views from those who we see as experts. I have not read all of the source material, conducted my own experiments or submitted my theories to scientific challenge so any assertion I make is potentially a call to authority. The same is true for the other side of the argument. All any of us can do is weigh the situation in front of us, which seems to be following a common playbook. First - deny. Next, obfuscate - its not anthropogonic etc. Finally, fatalism - we cant do anything anyway. Some things are clear however: It is hot. Much hotter than when I was young, and hotter every year. There is a physical mechanism for this heat being caused by C02 emissions Modelling and predictions of the C02 effect are matching reality If it is C02 and if we don't do anything we are in for a very bad time If it isn't C02, and we reach net zero, we are in for a pretty good time still It does make me laugh (cry) when people blame renewables for high prices. The UK spent at least £75 billion on supporting energy prices just during 2022-23 due to gas prices. It is also the case that renewables knock out the most expensive conventional electricity generators, so the wholesale price of electricity is reduced by renewables, which gives the impression of a subsidy but the reality is the reverse - https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/oct/wind-power-delivers-ps104-billion-net-benefit-uk-consumers I do get frustrated with people who just raise problems like there will never be a solution. The nature of progress is you don't always have all the answers, if you never started a journey unless you knew how it could be done then nothing new would ever be invented. It is also a demonstrable fact that renewables are more suitable from a security perspective. More distributed generation, less reliance on critical things like pipelines, LNG facilities and so on - we're literally right in the middle of 2 wars that are being defined by attacks on energy infrastructure. Really?

Quite an acheivement to buckle that column, it doesn't seem that slender. Surprised that column can be totally lost without other damage being immediately apparent.

Oh we are doing pretty well at that in europe....

Is it always the same height? Could be a drawing error in the app, where even 0 shows up?

😮 With spraying I think the masking time is the killer. It might be you can accept some comprimises to get it done. For example if you don't have floor finishings /electrics in and your ceiling is white and you are at least misting the walls white then maybe you can get away with just masking the windows and doors and treat the white as undercoat for any skirting or woodwork you have installed.

Do you mean 1500m2 not 1.5km2?! I have sprayed before with a low quality DIY sprayer and I would not do it again, that was slower than rollering in the end I think. Check out youtube to see what a good quality sprayer does, easy to see why its 3 times the setup compared to the spraying time.

Thanks, on digging further I think it should be sufficient to list the systems and that they will be commissioned by the installer under competent persons scheme or similar.

Part L seems to want me to submit a commissioning plan before construction: 8.2 A commissioning plan should be produced, identifying both of the following. a. Systems that need to be tested. b. How these systems will be tested. For new dwellings, the commissioning plan should be given to the building control body with the design stage dwelling primary energy rate, dwelling emission rate and dwelling fabric energy efficiency rate calculations. Seems quite sensible but do people actually do this in practice? I want to get my submission in asap and thought I'd work out these details as I go along but maybe that is not possible anymore.

I think my point is that the amount of work flying someone does is less likely to be affected by their environmental ideals than their personal flying. For example a company CEO could choose to never fly for personal reasons but is unlikely to be able to do the same regarding work travel regardless of their personal beliefs, so not considering this distinction introduces a source of bias into the analysis.

I too want to know the answer to this and haven't been able to find it. The principle of SUDS is that the sub base acts like a water tank, storing the water until it can drain away into the underlying ground. As soon as you put that on a slope, you are tilting the tank and reducing the amount of water it can store - like tipping a tray of water. Logically there is no solution to this other than make the bottom of the "tank" level, which hugely increases the volume and cost, or an ACO drain at the bottom to a soak away.

I notice a lot of cognitive dissonance around the impact of flying. It's not clear in this study whether they count flying for work and pleasure as the same, I expect that people earning more generally are required to fly more.