Mad Dictators

[JohnMo]

22 minutes ago, Spinny said:

Interference with radar and defence operations

If that was the case there would be no wind turbines near us, but we have plenty, so maybe not that true.

23 minutes ago, Spinny said:

The culling of birds

Maybe getting towards the number cats kill, but maybe not. So we should discuss banning cats also?

23 minutes ago, Spinny said:

Fire and collapses do occur.

That's a regular occurrence - or again, maybe not

24 minutes ago, Spinny said:

Low effective efficiency given curtailment and the inability to match supply to demand

And gas doesn't have curtailment - they spend even longer offline but no one talks about it. They even have diesel generators on the same sites to allow gas turbines to start and get hot enough to bring the steam plant online in CCGT packages. A least wind can be taken on and off line very quickly by feathering the blades.

 

28 minutes ago, Spinny said:

Low effective efficiency given curtailment and the inability to match supply to demand

That's an all wind or no wind argument, which isn't being discussed. Wind is part of a diverse energy portfolio. Unfortunately as @saveasteading infers, included nuclear, which is what we should worry about.

[SteamyTea]

10 minutes ago, JohnMo said:

Iincluded nuclear, which is what we should worry about.

We are still cleaning up after a reactor was shut down and restarted incorrectly.

 

Buildings kill more birds.

[JohnMo]

5 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

We are still cleaning up after a reactor was shut down and restarted incorrectly.

Chernobyl 40 years ago, still a little bit of a no go zone

[SteamyTea]

10 minutes ago, JohnMo said:

Chernobyl 40 years ago, still a little bit of a no go zone

And an Irishman won the Tour.

Actually that was a year later.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by SteamyTea

[Ed_]

54 minutes ago, Spinny said:

Interference with radar and defence operations

Every windfarm is cleared (or not) by MOD.

55 minutes ago, Spinny said:

The culling of birds

Much overstated, see any research on the topic.

 

55 minutes ago, Spinny said:

The need for pylons everywhere blighting the scenery

Not specific to wind.

 

56 minutes ago, Spinny said:

That oil jobs will go shrinking the economy

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!

 

57 minutes ago, Spinny said:

The UK doesn't make turbines

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.

1 hour ago, Spinny said:

Fire and collapses do occur

Piper alpha?

[SteamyTea]

1 minute ago, Ed_ said:

Piper alpha

What has 4 legs and goes woof.

 

There are rig and well fired everywhere.

Kuwait had a lot.

[-rick-]

Someone mentioned the need for fuel in case of war earlier. It's been said already, but it's an awful lot easier to bomb refineries and oil pipelines than it is to bomb solar panels and windfarms. And as an importer of fuel it's also a lot easier to blockade/disrupt shipping than it is to stop the sun/wind. See Russia

[Spinny]

44 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

included nuclear, which is what we should worry about.

 

We should strive to be rational about radiation and nuclear power...

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Radiation-Reason-Impact-Science-Culture/dp/0956275613/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=bg1jN&content-id=amzn1.sym.5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_p=5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_r=262-7534544-0018501&pd_rd_wg=xTSmn&pd_rd_r=7fc92425-cede-45b3-9dab-8d1f26ca4128

 

You may enjoy listening to him...

https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/radiation-and-reason

 

Some think we should fear cow farts, some viruses, some asteroids, some free speech. Choose your poison carefully but always be afraid.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Spinny

[mjc55]

1 hour ago, Spinny said:

Good to see some recognition of the cons of wind power which include:

 

Visual and noise impacts

Interference with radar and defence operations

The culling of birds

The need for pylons everywhere blighting the scenery

That oil jobs will go shrinking the economy as there are far fewer jobs in wind (The UK doesn't make turbines, or solar panels). 

Fire and collapses do occur.

Low effective efficiency given curtailment and the inability to match supply to demand

 

Like illegal refugee camps, it is easy to say someone has to take them, until they build one next to you, devalue your house, and spoil your life. We need balance, not extremism.

 

Its a stretch to state that these are big con!

 

Visual and noise impacts - visual, don't agree, noise, the juries out and location can somewhat mitigate that.

Interference with radar and defence operations - really?

The culling of birds - presume you are in favour of the culling of cats then?

That oil jobs will go - more of a pro than a con in my opinion

Fire and collapses do occur - really, didn't know that, good job oil production is harmless then!

Low effective efficiency given curtailment and the inability to match supply to demand - the use of battery storage seemingly will help with this.

 

Listen, I get that you don't like alternative forms of energy generation, but given what we have endured for many, many years from high CO2 emissions, and given it is our descendants that will suffer the most, your defence of the status quo is just beyond the pale!

[Spinny]

It is not that I don't like alternative forms of energy generation. It is moderation, balance and diversity that we need, not religious fervour. Energy efficient houses great, the more the better. But spending vast sums on subsidising one energy source and demonising another is foolish. It assumes we know all the answers with certainty, and we are absolutely right and certain about what we are doing. I say beware the certain evangelical man because quite likely they are a bit stupid to lack doubt and uncertainty.

 

Yes in the long run fossil fuels will run low. But there has to be a balance. Making an energy transition is a 50-100 year journey. During that journey technology will advance in astonishing ways. Explore and advance all options. Nuclear fission is here and fusion will eventually come.

 

21 minutes ago, mjc55 said:

from high CO2 emissions

That is your belief, not a known proven or unchallenged scientific fact.

 

22 minutes ago, mjc55 said:

it is our descendants that will suffer the most

I am glad you care about our descendants, but there is no ''climate emergency''. Don't mistake fear and propaganda for what is really known. The IPCC have just burned the scenario all the climate emergency peddlars use as unrealistic - it aint happening - it aint necessarily so.

There are many threats to humanity, a new ice age, asteroids, global warfare, planetary pollution, pocster, etc

[mjc55]

1 hour ago, Spinny said:

It is not that I don't like alternative forms of energy generation. It is moderation, balance and diversity that we need, not religious fervour. Energy efficient houses great, the more the better. But spending vast sums on subsidising one energy source and demonising another is foolish. It assumes we know all the answers with certainty, and we are absolutely right and certain about what we are doing. I say beware the certain evangelical man because quite likely they are a bit stupid to lack doubt and uncertainty.

 

Yes in the long run fossil fuels will run low. But there has to be a balance. Making an energy transition is a 50-100 year journey. During that journey technology will advance in astonishing ways. Explore and advance all options. Nuclear fission is here and fusion will eventually come.

 

That is your belief, not a known proven or unchallenged scientific fact.

 

I am glad you care about our descendants, but there is no ''climate emergency''. Don't mistake fear and propaganda for what is really known. The IPCC have just burned the scenario all the climate emergency peddlars use as unrealistic - it aint happening - it aint necessarily so.

There are many threats to humanity, a new ice age, asteroids, global warfare, planetary pollution, pocster, etc

There is no real point in continuing to discuss with you.  we are at polar ends of the spectrum.  You think you are right as do I.  Only time will tell.

[SteamyTea]

Here is a bit about uranium reserves.

About 90 years worth at current usage.

So if we doubled (globally) nuclear generation, about 50 years.

Would be hard to build a facility when you know it will be hard to fuel it before it's end of life.

 

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium

[Spinny]

I just looked at that website and I think your chosen interpretation is a bit pessimistic.

 

Quote

about 90 years. This represents a higher level of assured resources than is normal for most minerals. Further exploration and higher prices will certainly, on the basis of present geological knowledge, yield further resources as present ones are used up.

 

[Spinny]

Where things are at...

 

https://youtu.be/nl__O_QGIR4?si=G_CGnPuO8etvYzmV