Roger wrote:
The message
from "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk contains these words:

I find it silly, rather than annoying. However, this post has now moved too
far down the group for me to be bothered to keep trying to find it
again, so
he can have it to himself.

It is a pity really. I would have ben interested if there had been anything
like the scheme he described under consideration.

I suspect a number of us would be interested in details of a real scheme
but all indications are that this particular scheme exists only in
Dribble's fantasy world where the normal rules of science and commerce
do not apply.

What kills nearly all alternative energy schemes is the energy density.
You need BIG engineering to get megawatts, whereas fossil stuff and
nuclear is far more effective a use of constructional materials and land
area. And generates gigawatts.

Watt for watt, there is a lot more concrete in a windmill than a nuke..

Which makes them greater emitters of carbon..;-)