The good life tv comedy programme could this be done today

rhiwfield

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I think it was the BBC who had a whole room full of push bike aficionados and their bikes connected up to a houses electricity supply, I think it was about 60 people, all that was just to power one house and they struggled sometimes. At the end they were all done in.

This just shows the amount of energy we use in our everyday life. Lets face it, we've become power hungry on cheap and easy power, aka, oil and gas. We've squandered the easy oil on stupid things that we shouldn't have done and now we are running out of time to get something sorted out, to continue our life the way we know it.

Despite having friends that work in the nuclear industry, I can't stand it and I hope we don't go that way.

Farming wise, I don't know what the answer is, Cuba managed it without oil, but it involved a change to the entire way of life for the population, I can't see us doing that without a massive disaster.

Saw that too, fascinating program! Was it when the wife left the oven door open she finally used up the cyclists remaining energy (after a hard day's graft) and triggered a blackout

Totally agree that our current way of life is not sustainable, but there are so many energy junkies out there who only see things in terms of wanting extra power generated rather than tackling demand.

VinceNoir

rhiwfield wrote: »

Did you look at Annex E which refers to consumption, not capacity?

The notes to Annex E refer to Dukes (Digest of UK Energy Statistics) chapter 5 and I quote from Dukes:

"In Chapter 5 Declared Net Capacity (DNC) is used, ie the maximum continuous rating of the generating sets in the stations, less the power consumed by the plant itself, and reduced by a specified factor to take into account the intermittent nature of the energy source e.g. 0.43 for wind, 0.365 for small hydro and 0.33 for shoreline wave. DNC represents the nominal maximum capability of a generating set to supply electricity to consumers."

so they think they're going to get 43% of capacity? good luck there.

I didn't read it in detail, I can't open .xslx files, so only looked at the PDF files. Does it say how many turbines need to be built to produce their estimated capacity? And at what cost?

Aspiring_Writer

Ah the Good Life! Felicity Kendal....mind you, I also found Margot strangley erotic...oh dear

rhiwfield

VinceNoir wrote: »

so they think they're going to get 43% of capacity? good luck there.

I didn't read it in detail, I can't open .xslx files, so only looked at the PDF files. Does it say how many turbines need to be built to produce their estimated capacity? And at what cost?

AFAIK, the increase in efficiency is as a result of the increased size of the turbines.

The capacity figures for offshore wind (gross in this case, I think) were referred in the round 3 licences, 32 GW for round 3 on top of 8GW for rounds 1 & 2. See Crown Estates for details. I think that a figure of £100bn was mentioned for round 3 investment but as the licences are now held by energy consortia, not sure if we'll know costings (bit similar to nuclear decommisioning and long life storage of materails)

Re .xslx files open office can handle these fine and its free!

cootambear

I found this piece on the BBC website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10654599

Apparently those god playing scientists have created a GM mosquito that will not allow the malaria parasite to breed within it. They will give it a competitive advantage and release it to the wild to out compete its malaria ridden opponents.

I for one am sickened by this meddling with nature, and if I`m going to be bitten I want it to be by a natural mosquito, thank you very much. If I die of malaria like Billions before me, that is Gias way of telling me I`m using too much power.

cootambear

Aspiring_Writer wrote: »

Ah the Good Life! Felicity Kendal....mind you, I also found Margot strangley erotic...oh dear

She has a touch of the femdom about her. Not my cup of tea, I hasten to add.

cootambear

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I think it was the BBC who had a whole room full of push bike aficionados and their bikes connected up to a houses electricity supply, I think it was about 60 people, all that was just to power one house and they struggled sometimes. At the end they were all done in.

Which just goes to show the total inefficiency of brute force labour. What should we use to build our next hospital? Diggers, cranes, drills, and cement mixers, or 10,000 chained slaves under the command of the Pharoes?

This just shows the amount of energy we use in our everyday life. Lets face it, we've become power hungry on cheap and easy power, aka, oil and gas. We've squandered the easy oil on stupid things that we shouldn't have done

Oil that is now easy wasn`t easy 10 years ago. What stupid things? Doubling life expectancy. Eliminating smallpox. Putting a man on the Moon? Plenty of cheap food? Domestic appliances abolishing household drudgery? Tractors abolishing the back breaking toil of the peasant?

and now we are running out of time to get something sorted out, to continue our life the way we know it.

No we are not. The end of the world is not nigh. Y2K anyone? Like fools we had made the computers our masters and the sky would fall in. All the doom mongers predictions are based on resources identified now, technologies we have now. They never take into account human creativity. Humans are not the problem, we are the problem solvers.

Despite having friends that work in the nuclear industry, I can't stand it and I hope we don't go that way.

We`ve had it for 50 years, and it will continue to grow and become more efficient.

Farming wise, I don't know what the answer is, Cuba managed it without oil, but it involved a change to the entire way of life for the population, I can't see us doing that without a massive disaster.

I know what the answer is if we dont invest in energy resources and development - mass starvation. However, thankfully I dont think the greens have quite that much influence - yet.
Cuba got oil from the USSR until it collapsed and gets it now from Veneuzala. The hiatus in the middle was not caused by an oil shortage but by a US economic blockade.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

MrsBartolozzi

wssla00 wrote: »

I found this article really interesting- this man lived almost a year without money. Very interesting!

Is that the guy who was on Martin's programme the other night?
I thought the whole premise of him using "no money" was pretty farcical. While he, himself used no cold, hard cash he bartered his time for the right to live on the land and chop wood for heat; where did the caravan come from? What will he do when his caravan needs fixing/needs new clothes - I mean the t-shirt he was wearing was purchased from somewhere with money etc etc.
While I think the idea of being less materialistic has its merits this is just unsustainable.

Lotus-eater

Lets do a you shall we.

cootambear wrote: »

Which just goes to show the total inefficiency of brute force labour. What should we use to build our next hospital? Diggers, cranes, drills, and cement mixers, or 10,000 chained slaves under the command of the Pharoes?

I haven't suggested anything, I merely pointed out how many people it took to power a house.



Oil that is now easy wasn`t easy 10 years ago. What stupid things? Doubling life expectancy. Eliminating smallpox. Putting a man on the Moon? Plenty of cheap food? Domestic appliances abolishing household drudgery? Tractors abolishing the back breaking toil of the peasant?

How about all the unwanted packaging, how about the millions of things made of plastic that aren't needed to be made of plastic. Putting a man on the moon probably was a waste. I don't know if oil ever doubled life expectancy, probably works the other way. I also don't see how oil cured smallpox, but I'm sure you will elaborate.

and now we are running out of time to get something sorted out, to continue our life the way we know it.

No we are not. The end of the world is not nigh. Y2K anyone? Like fools we had made the computers our masters and the sky would fall in. All the doom mongers predictions are based on resources identified now, technologies we have now. They never take into account human creativity. Humans are not the problem, we are the problem solvers.

Y2K wasn't a problem because hundreds of thousands of coders worked on it for years. As usual you don't seem to be able to stay on the subject.


I know what the answer is if we dont invest in energy resources and development - mass starvation. However, thankfully I dont think the greens have quite that much influence - yet.
Cuba got oil from the USSR until it collapsed and gets it now from Veneuzala. The hiatus in the middle was not caused by an oil shortage but by a US economic blockade.

I didn't ask nor comment on how Cuba lost it's oil. I'm sure we all know that thanks. There wasn't mass starvation in Cuba, was there, maybe with all of your experience you can tell us why?

Funny isn't it, I say we're running out of time to do something and you say, no we are not, the end of the world is not nigh. You say if we don't invest in energy resources there will be mass starvation................ Mmmm

RAS

I have just been to this island http://www.enlli.org/

It is does not grow there, is has to be imported by one small boat or the landing craft, so you become really concious of the dependency factors. Exports go the same way.

A very interesting week; the rental houses have no electricity, limited spring water, rainwater butts and outside composting privies. Heating is very limited. It is amazing how little was actually needed of all these. There are a tractor, quad bike and three small motorised carts.

But:

1. All the rental houses had bottled gas cookers and refridgerators, despite there being very good slate slab larders.
2. The farmer's wife grows vegetables and you can also buy honey and lobsters. There is some soft fruit and herbs in the gardens. Fishing off the island has been poor for the last two years. Everything else is imported. If push came to shove, there are other gardens that could provide a lot more food but they do not have the population needed to prepare or maintain them.
3. There is little timber of any sort. The old islanders used to burn furze stems and coal. So they would have to plant trees for fuel to provide fuel for cooking to lead any sort of good life.
4. getting people and goods to and from the island requires a lot of fuel to run the catarman and landing craft.
5. All the houses need work doing on things like draught proofing and insulation, which have to be funded and imported.

All the islanders have additional income streams aimed at getting as much as they can during the tourist season (except the two youngest children).