"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Bruce wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
You don't research the facts.


You take blatant propaganda at face value.

Er, no, you do.

The actual facts on CANDU reactors around the world are fairly easy to
come by.

Right now with materials and credit at a very low cost, is the ideal time
to build.

Look guys,

There's an easy way to solve this "what costs the least" argument.

It's offer everyone the same guaranteed deal (lets say 10p per unit, indexed
for 20 years) and see which ones the banks will finance.

(Not forgetting that the Carbon unfriendly ones will have to pay the Carbon
tax out of that 10p)

tim

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Not at all. Everyone knows how cheap it really is. They also know that a
campaign was launched against it by people with extreme vested interests.

Originally of course, because it was being used to drive atomic weapons
there was an intense interest in slagging it off by certain cold war
opponents.

That is why anti-nuclear is very largely associated with the Left, and
its often why nuclear is NOT cost effective, because the political
restrictions imposed on it and the intense antipathy generated by it
costs a lot to fight.

Hahahahaha.
Next, you'll be telling us how safe it is to back to Chernobyl, and how
much of it was overstated, just like some of the other rabidly
pro-nukers.

I suspect the truth lies somewhere between the two.

Fwiw, I like nukes, I was born and brought up with them - the only thing
I don't like about them is the disposal of wastes problem.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Ed Sirett
saying something like:

I'd guess that the reason for filling them with oil, rather than water,
has more to do with keeping the weight of a portable heating device down
than anything else.


Could it also be a means of avoiding internal corrosion?

And avoiding pressure build up or more likely kettling noises caused by
localized boiling.

Insulating properties too.
http://ecmweb.com/mag/electric_analy...er_insulating/

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.


Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.


Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

The estimates of total wave or wind power potential are so vague and so
dependant on initial assumptions it's almost impossible to evaluate them.
Near-coast wave power potential could be as much as 25% of the UK energy
requirement and deep sea wave power potential is many times higher. Total
global wind power is much higher than total world energy usage by a huge
factor in most estimates. It just needs harnessing. It already accounts for
20% of Denmark's energy requirement and that's factored to grow to 50% in
the next 15 years. If we need to do anything it's reduce population. There
are too many of us plundering the Earth's resources. Put the global
population back to 1960 levels of 3 billion instead of the current 6 billion
plus and we'd be laughing. Instead of the government giving out child
allowances they should be penalising births like they do in China.
--
Dave Baker

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the UKs
energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.


Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

It can. Source: Marks Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 11th Ed.
2006

Average tidal ranges:

Irish Sea 6.7m
Parts of the West coast of India 7m
Kimberly coast (Australia) 12m
San Jose, Argentina 7m
Kislaya Guba and Menzen, North West Russia, (unknown range)
Sea of Okhotsk, Russian Far East (unknown/secret sites)
Rance, France 8m
Bristol Channel 9.8m (highest in Europe but not scalable enough)
Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick, Canada 12m
Passantaquoddy Bay, Maine, USA 5.5m
Surprisingly that's about it, excluding sparsely populated parts of the
world that are nowhere near demand.

For comparison only -
North Sea 3.6m (from Marks)
Average of all the earth's seas and oceans 0.6m (not from Marks)
Lower Galveston Bay, USA, 0.2m (not from Marks)

Of these only the Irish Sea offers vast scalability in proximity to demand.
The most-cited objection to large scale development is that deployment of
multiple large lagoons will produce dangerous strong currents and modelling
of them has not been done. Those are not valid objections.

20% of the Irish Sea needed to meet 100% of British demand is probably more
than 50% of the good shallow exploitable parts of the British share of the
Irish Sea. The deepest waters will be left for shipping, and the beaches
and inshore boating zones left so there is plenty of space in all. They will
need to build railway bridges not causeways from the shore to the first
lagoon wall in each region to facilitate cheaper bridge construction from
Britain to Ireland and the Isle of Man.

----------------
How Lagoons Work

There are a number of them at various states of water levels. There will
always be power generated. Think of one large dam wall in a circle in a
shallow sea, split it into three sections. The centre section could be 30
foot below the outer two and the high tide level, and fill up via the other
two or the high tide.

It is a matter of having the lagoons filling and emptying at different times
to ensure full power production 24/7. A test lagoon is being suggested at
Swansea in South Wales.

This is different to tidal only at La Rance, France. La Rance is just one
power station. It only generates when the tide is running one-way. It is
quite old now - 1966. Pioneering it is.

Political Spite Makes Matters Worse

Hard nosed cost/benefit eliminated the British coal industry (or more
political spite by Thatcher hating miners). Middle Eastern oil was buttons
to buy and the North Sea was full of cheap gas. Mrs Thatcher was told to
reserve the gas for primarily domestic use and not use it to generate
electricity - use the masses of coal we have under the country to only
generate electricity. She never. The coal industry disappeared with amazing
stocks still under our feet. The North Sea is running out of oil and gas.

Fuel Poverty is a major Problem

Domestic gas prices went through the roof because of world market
conditions - the Uks gas is mainly imported. Fuel poverty is now a major
problem.

Long Term Political View is Important

We are now are semi-dependent on Russian gas as we used a lot of our own
reserves needlessly. Russia refused to supply gas to the Ukraine a few years
ago, so alarm bells rang. We need stable fuel supplies. We get oil and gas
from the politically unstable Middle East and Russia - which is a political
concern over cost/benefit. They have to look at the long term and stability,
not short term gains of utility companies. Then there is the important eco
angle too. Tidal lagoons are both the long-term practical answer and
politically acceptable.

25 Year Project

It will take 25 years. However benefits will come quicker than expected.

The electricity will be introduced in phases,
Knock-on effect fresh water reservoirs from rock excavations to combat water
shortages, bridges, etc, by rock excavations.
Increased insulation levels in buildings at the same would reduce oil, coal
and gas dependency rather quicker than expected.
Coal, gas and nuclear stations can be decommissioned and any planned costs
in introducing nuclear stations will off-set the lagoons building costs.
Such a scheme would bring zero unemployment, saving on public social
benefits over 25 years.
There is the comfort of not being under the reliance of foreign countries
for energy, and being over-friendly with countries you would rather not be.
Savings on military as the world will be a more peaceful place - oil has
created wars.
The UK over 25 years can easily construct and afford such a scheme. Advances
in rock cutting & transporting machines and methods would ensue. The
technology and design and build can be exported elsewhere for others too.

Unprecedented Project

To meet 100% of Britain and Ireland's need for energy, this is clearly
possible and mostly involves hauling rock from mountains and valleys to the
sea on an unprecedented scale.

The British Isles geography is the best in the world for such an undertaking
with its high tidal rises and falls.
It involves moving about 2,500 million tons of rock to the Irish Sea
Tidal lagoons created out of about 20% of the Irish Sea
100% of Britain and Ireland's electricity needs met.
The numbers are staggering but possible:
A heavy train can move perhaps 500 plus tons of rock
About 4 or 5 million train loads are needed
The UKs waste can be dumped into the lagoon walls while under construction,
saving on landfill and re-cycling costs.
It would take maybe 30 railways to haul rock from say 30 large quarries over
25 years

There Are Many Knock-On Benefits

The insides of hills and mountains can be cut out for the rock and lakes
constructed top and bottom to make provision for instant use peak time hydro
stations for half time energy peaks in major football games on TV.
New valleys can be created
New lakes
Fresh water reservoirs
Rail and road tunnels through mountains
Rail and road bridges across the Irish Sea
Deep water ship canals can be cut inland, reducing rail and road transport
of goods - good result for quarried rock.
Some lagoons can be supertanker harbour/terminals, keeping these massive
pollution risk vessels away from the shore.
The lagoon walls built can also be bridges
The lagoons can also be anti tidal surge barriers. Empty the lagoons at low
tide when a surge is expected and allow the lagoons to fill taking excess
water - London will go under if nothing is done.
Fish can be farmed inside the lagoons preventing foreign trawlers
overfishing and all fish goes to the UK.

Fuel Poverty & Pollution Eliminated

Fuel poverty and pollution will be a thing of the past.

Cheap Fast Transport

The EU has a transport dept that looks at transport for the EU 20, 30, 40
years hence. The aim is super fast intercity trains between all major
cities/centres. One idea is a tunnel between Liverpool and Dublin. As
Holyhead is the halfway point between the two cities that appears a dumb
suggestion and a loooooong expensive tunnel. But a tunnel from Ireland to
North Wales at the shortest point and then a fast link to Liverpool,
Manchester, Birmingham, London is feasible.

However, damming in the Irish Sea to make lagoons to produce all the power
for the UK and Ireland would create maybe two land links anyhow and maybe
one to the Isle of Man. This gives high speed transport bridges. Super fast
Maglev trains between major centres and to Ireland become feasible as
running cost are low.

All cars can be electric, and the auto industry is currently moving that
way.

Overall the lagoon project is well worth looking much deeper into, and
clearly looks highly feasible when all points are viewed.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

However, damming in the Irish Sea to make lagoons to produce all the power
for the UK and Ireland would create maybe two land links anyhow and maybe
one to the Isle of Man.

Why stop there?

A dam from Holyhead to Rosslare and one from the Giant's Causeway over
to Stranraer and fill in a substantial part of the middle with mountains
moved from the Highlands.
A tremendous project - creates thousands of square miles of new land,
makes the majority of Scotland useable for high-speed links to the
fishing and watersports arenas to be built on the west coast.

The filled-in bit in the middle could be claimed by the IoM out to at
least the old international boundary and could be home to several TT
circuits or simply be a huge area of unrestricted speeding.

Well done, Drivel, you've cracked it.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...

Well done, Drivel, you've cracked it.

Thank you.

"Dave Baker" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.

Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

The estimates of total wave or wind power potential are so vague and so
dependant on initial assumptions it's almost impossible to evaluate them.

"tidal lagoons" are very predictable. The tides and their heights are
predicted to the minute many years ahead. Power output can be equally
predictable too. It will be 24/7 as lagoons empty and fill.

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Well done, Drivel, you've cracked it.

Minor edit needed.

s/ it//
s/\'v/\'r/

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Well done, Drivel, you've cracked it.

Minor edit needed.

s/ it//
s/\'v/\'r/

This one needs tagging.

In article ,
"Dave Baker" writes:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.


Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

The estimates of total wave or wind power potential are so vague and so
dependant on initial assumptions it's almost impossible to evaluate them.
Near-coast wave power potential could be as much as 25% of the UK energy
requirement and deep sea wave power potential is many times higher. Total
global wind power is much higher than total world energy usage by a huge
factor in most estimates. It just needs harnessing. It already accounts for
20% of Denmark's energy requirement and that's factored to grow to 50% in
the next 15 years. If we need to do anything it's reduce population. There

Danish government recently pulled the plug on financing wind,
after realising that although in theory it provided a significant
percentage, they've not managed to switch off a single power
station due to its unreliability as a stable and predictable
power source. They simply end up with almost the same excess
power to sell, which no one will buy because no one has any use
for an unreliable power source. This was not a decision taken
lightly, as wind power construction was a significant Danish
export, which is expected to be severely clobbered by this.
Indeed, the Danish decision has caused a number of other European
governments to rethink their spend on wind too. Over reliance
on wind across several continental EU countries was a
contributory factor to the large blackout across chunks of
continental EU. The idea that "when our wind stops blowing, we'll
buy power from next door" didn't work when no-one's wind was
blowing.

are too many of us plundering the Earth's resources. Put the global
population back to 1960 levels of 3 billion instead of the current 6 billion
plus and we'd be laughing. Instead of the government giving out child
allowances they should be penalising births like they do in China.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Andrew Gabriel wrote:


Danish government recently pulled the plug on financing wind,
after realising that although in theory it provided a significant
percentage, they've not managed to switch off a single power
station due to its unreliability as a stable and predictable
power source. They simply end up with almost the same excess
power to sell, which no one will buy because no one has any use
for an unreliable power source. This was not a decision taken
lightly, as wind power construction was a significant Danish
export, which is expected to be severely clobbered by this.
Indeed, the Danish decision has caused a number of other European
governments to rethink their spend on wind too. Over reliance
on wind across several continental EU countries was a
contributory factor to the large blackout across chunks of
continental EU. The idea that "when our wind stops blowing, we'll
buy power from next door" didn't work when no-one's wind was
blowing.




Or when there simply weren't enough extremely expensive trans-national
power lines to make it a practical proposition.


People can always be relied upon to do the right thing-after they have
exhausted every other possible alternative.

Even the Danes.

You only need go back 150 years or so when ships sailed and windmills
drained the east anglian fens.


The thousands of windmills were replaced by dozens of steam pumps, then
by a few dozen diesel pumps, and finally by a very few very reliable
electric pumps.

Of course thousands of people who used to work on the windmills, are now
a few people who maintain the electric pumps.

A point made brilliantly on the beeb when some airhead spluttered on
about 'every terawatt of wind power creates 75,000 jobs, but every
terawatt of nuclear power generates just 75 jobs'

AS if that made windpower somehow better rather than merely 1000 times
more expensive..

The disjunct between people who think that creating jobs is a Good Thing
*per se*, and those who understand that the wealth of a nation consists
in creating wealth, not jobs, and that once you have a cake to slice,
THEN you can argue about who gets invited to the party..seems too broad
to be bridged.

Any Fule can create a job. Even the Laber Guvmint has been doing it for
ten years..

It takes a lot more intelligence to create an industry that does more
than be a complete public sector parasite on those who DO generate wealth.

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Dave Baker" writes:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.


Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.

The estimates of total wave or wind power potential are so vague and so
dependant on initial assumptions it's almost impossible to evaluate them.
Near-coast wave power potential could be as much as 25% of the UK energy
requirement and deep sea wave power potential is many times higher. Total
global wind power is much higher than total world energy usage by a huge
factor in most estimates. It just needs harnessing. It already accounts
for
20% of Denmark's energy requirement and that's factored to grow to 50% in
the next 15 years. If we need to do anything it's reduce population.
There

Danish government recently pulled the plug on financing wind,
after realising that although in theory it provided a significant
percentage, they've not managed to switch off a single power
station due to its unreliability as a stable and predictable
power source. They simply end up with almost the same excess
power to sell, which no one will buy because no one has any use
for an unreliable power source. This was not a decision taken
lightly, as wind power construction was a significant Danish
export, which is expected to be severely clobbered by this.
Indeed, the Danish decision has caused a number of other European
governments to rethink their spend on wind too. Over reliance
on wind across several continental EU countries was a
contributory factor to the large blackout across chunks of
continental EU. The idea that "when our wind stops blowing, we'll
buy power from next door" didn't work when no-one's wind was
blowing.

This is not necessary the "blow" that people are portraying it as.

Denmark's problem is, as an almost completely flat country, it has
absolutely nowhere to build the "stored power" installations that are
necessary to complement an unpredictable source.

tim

tim..... wrote:
"Andrew Gabriel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Dave Baker" writes:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "Doctor Drivel"
saying something like:

20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the
UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).
Ding!

All that craggy coastline of W.Ireland, W.Scotland, and the S.W of
England could be put to good use instead of wasting it on seagulls.
Not a chance of that happening while there are nimbys in the world.

Sadly it cant supply anything LIKE all of the UK's energy needs.
The estimates of total wave or wind power potential are so vague and so
dependant on initial assumptions it's almost impossible to evaluate them.
Near-coast wave power potential could be as much as 25% of the UK energy
requirement and deep sea wave power potential is many times higher. Total
global wind power is much higher than total world energy usage by a huge
factor in most estimates. It just needs harnessing. It already accounts
for
20% of Denmark's energy requirement and that's factored to grow to 50% in
the next 15 years. If we need to do anything it's reduce population.
There
Danish government recently pulled the plug on financing wind,
after realising that although in theory it provided a significant
percentage, they've not managed to switch off a single power
station due to its unreliability as a stable and predictable
power source. They simply end up with almost the same excess
power to sell, which no one will buy because no one has any use
for an unreliable power source. This was not a decision taken
lightly, as wind power construction was a significant Danish
export, which is expected to be severely clobbered by this.
Indeed, the Danish decision has caused a number of other European
governments to rethink their spend on wind too. Over reliance
on wind across several continental EU countries was a
contributory factor to the large blackout across chunks of
continental EU. The idea that "when our wind stops blowing, we'll
buy power from next door" didn't work when no-one's wind was
blowing.

This is not necessary the "blow" that people are portraying it as.

Denmark's problem is, as an almost completely flat country, it has
absolutely nowhere to build the "stored power" installations that are
necessary to complement an unpredictable source.

MM. I calculated that to use windpower in this country we needed a lake
the size of Loch Ness 1000 feet up a mountain.

That would keep us going just 24 hours..

And there ain't no location here either.

And essentially - apart from the three times as mych generating capacity
you need with wind, versus conventional or nuclear (to cope with the 30%
load average of windmills even when working) add another one as well,
making the total capacity 4 time peak requirements.

Now lets look at a grid that can take all that power from Loch Ness, or
whereber, down to london..so we might as well double the cost of the
grid as well..

Add in the 100,000 windmills you need, and england is going to look like
an industrial site wherever you stand on it. If indeed there is room to
stand anywhere..

With respect tim, your answer is rather typical of people who haven't
actually done the sums. Or most of the windmill people.


tim