On Wednesday, 5 October 2016 22:46:37 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On 5 Oct 2016 18:09:57 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2016 08:56:10 -0700, harry wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environ...ctricity-coal-
power-stations-uk-sun-a7344326.html

Real partial statistics. What about gas and nuclear?

A how much did this 'solar electricity' *cost* us (where us is not
including those with no ethics or morals etc). ;-)

And winter is coming. Anyone spouting the benefits of solar as a
real-world solution to anything (especially one that is creating a
cutback in anything more reliable) should be made to 1) rely on it
100% 24/7 and 2) not be subsidised by other electricity users.

PV has it's uses ... like trickle charging a battery or running a
wireless shed light but till the sun stops disappearing for quite a
percentage of every 24 hours or we find a realistic / efficient way of
storing the energy ... it's not a practical solution to anything and
is never likely to be positive environmentally (even if / when we run
out of fossil fuels). ;-(

Cheers, T i m

It means less crap in the atmosphere.
And less dependency of foreign fuel.
It's all happening whether you like it or not/capable of understanding it ****-fer-brains