Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

pile-o-stone

Here's a good news story to get us back on track:

https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate-change/nant-llesg-climatewrecking-welsh-opencast-coal-mine-rejected

GreatApe

Exiled_Tyke wrote: »

Is this an admission of creating multiple accounts to argue anti-RE cases (which wasn't the purpose of these particularly discussion threads)? I note that this particular flounce has attracted previous anit RE trolls. Once and for all I ask can't we simply use these threads for the purpose they were intended. If you want to argue points which aren't about Green and Ethical energy in the news, just go somewhere else: find somewhere where people want to hear that the earth is flat, that global warming is good for the planet, that fossil fuels will save us all from the scourge of wind turbines and solar panels. I come to this thread to read about interesting stuff on green and ethical energy which contributors make the effort to offer, not to find yet another pointless argument that flies in the face of logic and science.

I think less than 5% of my posts are anything to do with energy or green topics so dont think yourself all that important to me

This sub forum is a waste of my time whatever I say I get the gatekeepers of truth quoting Testiclease at me. Someone I once knew quoted someone a long time ago that truth is better than non truth and I am the gatekeeper of truth on these subforums :rotfl: sure you are

NigeWick

There's a problem with quoting, so:-

GreatApe wrote: »

If autonomous BEVs happen we will need far fewer cars but each car will do more miles than the average car does today. overall mileage probably wont go down

Incorrect as there will be a lot more journey sharing to save even more money.



Maybe 25% can be local solar most the rest will have to be wind power ideally offshore for the uk

I disagree. I now use about 4,000kWh per year including charging the car. When my solar system was 4kW it produced a little over 4,000kWh per year. When I had the PW2 fitted, I added 600W to the system. This means part of my problem is adequate storage. I readily admit that for some four months a year, the solar may not cope and that's where the large scale wind generation comes in.


The UK can and probably will be mostly wind powered by the 2050s but we will still need some FF but much less than today probably 80-90% less.

Once again, I disagree. This country has the capacity to produce so much wind energy that we could power the whole country and export electricity.

All it would take is the political will to legislate solar and batteries with every new build and encourage wind generation.

GreatApe

All it would take is the political will to legislate solar and batteries with every new build and encourage wind generation.

Almost everything can be done that is not the important question. The UK could put a man on mars the question is not can we put a man on mars but if the overall economic well being of the people of the UK is served by dedicating the capital time and resources into putting a man on mars?
That is an example where the answer is probably no we could use the resources better elsewhere

With regards to getting rid of every last drop of NG in the UK electricity sector can it be done? Sure. But is it worth it? Probably not

The UK will go towards 75% green and that is probably worth it.
The next 10% you can make a reasonable argument for but the last 10% and especially the last 5% is probably not going to be worthwhile

silverwhistle

I haven't put anybody on ignore on these boards, but use the technique of a quick skim to confirm that a poster is still posting innumerate c*** in some painfully constructed language and rapidly move on. Thanks to all with the patience of pointing out said innumeracy and inconsistency with references and logic.



I have an arts degree of dubious utility but of many years standing and make no claims for its value but find it quite worrying the claims of expertise that many people make when they show no evidence in their posts.

GreatApe

silverwhistle wrote: »

I haven't put anybody on ignore on these boards, but use the technique of a quick skim to confirm that a poster is still posting innumerate c*** in some painfully constructed language and rapidly move on. Thanks to all with the patience of pointing out said innumeracy and inconsistency with references and logic.

I have an arts degree of dubious utility but of many years standing and make no claims for its value but find it quite worrying the claims of expertise that many people make when they show no evidence in their posts.

Thanks for this vitally important post it has enriched so many of our lives and was totally necessary and full of so much substance and worth if only you where next to me right now so I could bask in your glow

Martyn1981

Three interesting (I think) articles from Cleantechnica today, the first two on batteries and RE and the last on predicted energy demand changes to 2050.

The World Bank is recognising the need for storage to help speed up RE deployment, which can only be a good thing.

World Bank Commits $1 Billion To Battery Storage In Developing Countries


.... and speaking of batts, the biggie in Australia is doing well economically:

1st Year Income From @Tesla Battery In South Australia Equals ⅓ Of Its Cost


... and some nice graphs showing how the provision and amount of leccy the world uses will change, with a large growth in leccy, but also a levelling out now in total energy consumed as RE generation is very efficient, whereas FF generation consumes far more primary energy than you get out. Also transport is a major user of primary energy but is extremely inefficient at say 20-40% of energy to wheels from the petrol/diesel.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/09/27/solar-wind-energy-destined-to-expand-faster-than-other-global-energy-sources-cleantechnica-at-spi2018/

NigeWick

GreatApe wrote: »

With regards to getting rid of every last drop of NG in the UK electricity sector can it be done? Sure. But is it worth it? Probably not

The UK will go towards 75% green and that is probably worth it.
The next 10% you can make a reasonable argument for but the last 10% and especially the last 5% is probably not going to be worthwhile

We'll have to agree to disagree then, as I believe having a totally renewable energy infrastructure is essential for resilience and saving money in the long run. Then there's the added benefit of not causing so much pollution and having to care for nuclear waste over the next 20,000 years.

GreatApe

NigeWick wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree then, as I believe having a totally renewable energy infrastructure is essential for resilience and saving money in the long run. Then there's the added benefit of not causing so much pollution and having to care for nuclear waste over the next 20,000 years.

Does natural gas though gas turbines produce nuclear waste?

Do a few CCGTs used a few hundred hours a year located a hundred miles away produce more harmful pollution to your good self than say the cooking you do in your kitchen?

There is nothing to agree to disagree about its obvious the task gets harder and harder the closer to attempt to go for 100% and also you get lessor and lessor security of supply if you aim to close down all your secure supply of CCGTs

I also assume you must be very anti biomass burning as that causes a lot of local pollution surely more than CCGTs and nukes

Anyway this is a long way off we are still probably 20+ years away from getting anywhere near to 80% green grid you can start considering the last 20% when we get closer to having to consider it

zeupater

NigeWick wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree then, as I believe having a totally renewable energy infrastructure is essential for resilience and saving money in the long run. Then there's the added benefit of not causing so much pollution and having to care for nuclear waste over the next 20,000 years.

Hi

You could look to disagree on perfectly sound grounds as tidal flow, barrages and enclosed lagoons as well as pumped storage need to be considered in the mix too ... all being sources of schedulable or dispatchable power which could displace much of the FF & nuclear capacity being discussed ...

If course, this would require a central strategy to support the required investment & political will to counter a wide range of lobbyists & pressure groups.

HTH
Z