Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... its a very expensive and environmentally dfestrictive way to generate power, It isn't. and there are only a few places where its really effective - you cant use the whole coastline, not for any decent scale and efficiency. 20% of the Irish Sea will do all of the UK and Ireland. They work great in shallow seas. |
#42
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
wrote in message ... On 25 May, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote: (tidal power) Not on anything like the scale you are discussing. UK peak demand is 60GW. Total global tidal power is 0.3GW. Total global nuclear power is around 370GW. 24/7 production, Only notionally. It varies with the tides and peak production may not be when you need it. With two sources (Morecome Bay and Severn Estuary 24/7 is easy, and will produce moer GW than any single nuclear plant. They are not lagoons. It /will/ modify marine environments. They change anyway. I can't see any overall worsening. Yep. The life of a tidal barriage (or lagoon) would be extremely long. Its construction would not be difficult, and relatively pollution free. A win-win situation once the nimbys are consoled. Yep. |
#43
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... So? we need about 100 nuclear plants to run the whole country. For everything. Using lagoons no estuary need be used. |
#44
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"David Hansen" wrote in message ... " * We currently find one barrel of oil for every four that we use Time to build tidal lagoons while oil is cheap enough to build them. |
#45
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... At $50-60 a barrel nuclear electric heating with heatpumps is cost competitive.At over $150 a barrel even windmills can be argued for.. Electric trains start to be really cost competitive over diesel and short haul flights. Rail freight starts to be cheap, although rail pricing is such a complete muddle due to the way its subsidised (or not) that it makes it very hard to say. Rail freight is cheap when shifted in bulk. It is increasing and if the rail infrastructure is there it would be used more. The port of Liverpool now only has one rail line in to the port, when it had countless lines only a few decades ago. The old Canada Dock tunnel and from it to the docks is not being built on to give scope for re-use. The rail line into the container terminal may require electrification to use the west coast main line when the post-Panamax terminal is operational - ships too large for the Panama canal. Only about 4 or 5 miles of electrification can put the trains on the west coast main line, which means very fast overnight usage, and using surplus power from power stations running at night - more eco and economical in many ways. Higher commuter costs for many people will switch the housing market away from suburbia, back to short to medium inner city rental properties. Rapid transit rail systems contributed to the decline of the inner-cities. People could buy new homes on green-field sites on the outskirts get to and from the centre super fast by rail and by-passing the inner-cities. For e.g., the creation of Merseyrail (Liverpool's underground/overground metro system) accelerated greatly in the inner-city decline around it's centre. They never put stations in the inner-city districts, despite having countless tunnels under the city and some under inner-city districts - the tunnels were left unused while stations could have been cut into them. London was not immune as Tower Hamlets and Hackney suffered the same fate. This was predicted and councils/governments did not do enough for the inner-cities when it was obvious they would become bottomless pits for money in social handouts. Those are the reasons I consider that oil has already passed its peak in production. Not because its not still there, but because its getting too expensive to be worth using. So, get people living back in the city centres to avoid travelling. Manchester and Liverpool are doing this, but both ignoring the immediate inner-cities, which will come on-line eventually as energy gets expensive. |
#46
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message ll.net... The planet will survive and sort itself out over time, possible rather a lot of time but wether we as a species and lots of other species are part of that is another matter. Yep. |
#47
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
On May 24, 11:43*am, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk
wrote: ...., given that the rate of discovery has consistently increased faster than the rate of increase in use. But it hasn't. the rate of discovery has FALLEN steadily over the last 50 years and rate of consumption has increased. Robert |
#48
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
On Tue, 26 May 2009 02:23:50 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be RobertL
wrote this:- ..., given that the rate of discovery has consistently increased faster than the rate of increase in use. But it hasn't. the rate of discovery has FALLEN steadily over the last 50 years and rate of consumption has increased. Indeed. As I quoted earlier in the thread: "The oil we have built our societies on was actually created one hundred million years ago. More of it is not now going to suddenly appear 10,000 feet underground just because economists say the price is too high." " * There were enormous early discoveries (in the Middle East) in the late 1930's and late 1940's " * Worldwide oil discovery peaked in 1964 and has been falling ever since " * Every year since 1984, we have been discovered less oil than we have produced " * We currently find one barrel of oil for every four that we use" http://philhart.com/content/introduction-peak-oil Perhaps mere facts cause some to put their fingers in their ears and shout loudly that they can't hear. That certainly seems to be the approach of many governments. However, just as with climate change, ignoring peak oil does not make it go away. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#49
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... I was specifically addressing DD's suggestion that the entire power supply for the UK could be derived from tidal power in the Irish Sea. It can. Understand what a tidal lagoon is. I do and I also understand their limitations, which is why I question the claim. I think a lot of work still needs to be done on the effects of the lagoons on marine environments. The lagoons will protect it and act as fish farms too. I doubt you will find many supporters for that claim around the Severn Estuary, which also stands to lose some important archaelogical sites if the proposals go ahead. Colin Bignell |
#50
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"David Hansen" wrote in message ... On Tue, 26 May 2009 00:01:02 +0100 someone who may be "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote this:- I was specifically addressing DD's suggestion that the entire power supply for the UK could be derived from tidal power in the Irish Sea. I agree that distributed systems around the UK would alleviate the problem, but I think a lot of work still needs to be done on the effects of the lagoons on marine environments. Are you suggesting that the only way to extract electricity from the tides is to build lagoons? No. If you followed the thread, you would see that DD was suggesting they were the answer to supplying the UK with electricity. Colin Bignell |
#51
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"David Hansen" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 May 2009 18:37:59 +0100 someone who may be "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote this:- You only have to read the post that started this thread to see that some, at least, actively promote that view. I did read it. I didn't notice anything in that post which said that oil would run out suddenly. The bit about the entire structure of society as we know it collapsing in four years' time obviously passed you by. Colin Bignell |
#52
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... nightjar cpb@ wrote: "The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... nightjar cpb@ wrote: "Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message news We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk saying something like: There is a lot more oil in the ground that we can extract than the peak oil adherents would like us to believe. Ah, but. Are you an advocate of sitting on our arses and doing nothing because you say there's more there than we think there is? Doesn't matter when it will run out, it will run out for sure at some point and if we haven't got off our arses and got something in place to compensate, we will have a very bleak future indeed. One of the fallacies is that oil will run out suddenly. Last year it did run out suddenly. Not as 'in the ground' but as refinery and extraction capacity. With the result that prices rose, various non-conventional sources became worth while exploiting, giving some increase in capacity, while demand reduced until it matched supply. It is a self-limiting system and quite different from the question of oil reserves. There are complex reasons why its actually less profitable to pump more oil. Or build more capacity. We have decades, possibly a century or more, to do something, even after supplies start to fail. For my money, that ought to be investing in algal oil, which uses human and animal waste to replicate how nature created oil, without the multi-million year wait, without the need to take up any fertile land, with lots of CO2 being consumed from the atmosphere and with fertiliser as a by-product. Colin Bignell Figures dont add up sadly. The only figures that don't add up at the moment are the costs - currently $800 a barrel. However, that is for a laboratory level production and a ten-fold reduction in cost for full production is not an unrealistic target. At $50-60 a barrel nuclear electric heating with heatpumps is cost competitive.At over $150 a barrel even windmills can be argued for.. Electric trains start to be really cost competitive over diesel and short haul flights. Rail freight starts to be cheap, although rail pricing is such a complete muddle due to the way its subsidised (or not) that it makes it very hard to say. At around $100 a barrel many industrial heating processes are cheaper with nuclear electric than carbon fuels.. Higher commuter costs for many people will switch the housing market away from suburbia, back to short to medium inner city rental properties. Online shopping replaces going to the supermarket. Those are the reasons I consider that oil has already passed its peak in production. Not because its not still there, but because its getting too expensive to be worth using. My apologies. I thought you were supporting Hubbert's theory. Your arguments are more logical, although I question whether, once we get clear of the current blip, China (in particular) or India would simply sit back and allow their economic growth to be held back by something as basic as a lack of refining capacity. Colin Bignell |
#53
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... .... Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure. Nothing is zero risk. We can all form a list on nuclear disasters. We can also note how short it is and how the accidents all relate to outdated systems. Nuclear power stations are a front for atomic weapons. Even if that were true, my answer would be so what? I don't believe that, if we bury our heads in the sand and pretend nuclear weapons don't exist, our enemies will do the same Magnox and RBMK reactors were built to produce nuclear weapon material, which is why they were built with fewer safety precautions and why they became involved in significant nuclear accidents. Modern designs are optimised for power generation and are not only much safer, they are also less suitable for producing weapon grade material. Colin Bignell |
#54
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"RobertL" wrote in message ... On May 24, 11:43 am, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote: .... given that the rate of discovery has consistently increased faster than the rate of increase in use. But it hasn't. the rate of discovery has FALLEN steadily over the last 50 years and rate of consumption has increased. If you take only the discovery of entirely new fields, that is correct. If you count all new discoveries, including the extension of existing fields, oil reserves have been consistently growing faster than the rate of increase of consumption. Oddly enough, it is easier to find oil where you already know it exists than in entirely new areas. Colin Bignell |
#55
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
its a very expensive and environmentally dfestrictive (sic) way to generate power, and there are only a few places where its really effective - you cant use the whole coastline, not for any decent scale and efficiency. Sure. In the short term I agree with your position - we can either go fission, or have no power. But I think tidal is probably a better bet than wind, and it could provide part of a balanced system. It was only the single point - that it is not tidally variable, when you look at the whole country - that I was picking him up on. Andy |
#56
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... I was specifically addressing DD's suggestion that the entire power supply for the UK could be derived from tidal power in the Irish Sea. It can. Understand what a tidal lagoon is. I do and I also understand their limitations, which is why I question the claim. Those who know think differently. I think a lot of work still needs to be done on the effects of the lagoons on marine environments. The lagoons will protect it and act as fish farms too. I doubt you will find many supporters for that claim around the Severn Estuary, which also stands to lose some important archaelogical sites if the proposals go ahead. Once again, the estuaries will not be touched. The lagoons are away from them. The Mersey estuary can be left as it sees a hell of a lot of shipping traffic. |
#57
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... ... . Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure Nothing is zero risk. Once again, "Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure". We can all form a list on nuclear disasters. We can also note how short it is and how the accidents all relate to outdated systems. Once again, "We can all form a list on nuclear disasters". |
#58
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... ... . Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure Nothing is zero risk. Once again, "Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure". Repeating something wrong does not make it true. Colin Bignell |
#59
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... I was specifically addressing DD's suggestion that the entire power supply for the UK could be derived from tidal power in the Irish Sea. It can. Understand what a tidal lagoon is. I do and I also understand their limitations, which is why I question the claim. Those who know think differently. So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. BTW my degree included oceanic sciences and I was looking at tidal models 40 years ago, although then model really meant a model - a scale model of the area under study (with vertical scale exaggerated) which we moved water in and out of, by dipping a weight into it. Colin Bignell |
#60
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... I was specifically addressing DD's suggestion that the entire power supply for the UK could be derived from tidal power in the Irish Sea. It can. Understand what a tidal lagoon is. I do and I also understand their limitations, which is why I question the claim. Those who know think differently. So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. BTW my degree included oceanic sciences and I was looking at tidal models 40 years ago, although then model really meant a model - a scale model of the area under study (with vertical scale exaggerated) which we moved water in and out of, by dipping a weight into it. Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. |
#61
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... ... . Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure Nothing is zero risk. Once again, "Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure". Repeating something wrong does not make it true. People will not glow. |
#62
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... .... So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. .... Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. It is you making the claims. It is up to you to provide the sources you are relying upon, not for me to call up every possible link to anything to do with the subject. Colin Bignell |
#63
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
The message
from "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk contains these words: Those who know think differently. That excludes Dribble then. He has demonstrated time and time again that he doesn't think. So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. BTW my degree included oceanic sciences and I was looking at tidal models 40 years ago, although then model really meant a model - a scale model of the area under study (with vertical scale exaggerated) which we moved water in and out of, by dipping a weight into it. Dribble used to claim he had a degree. Curiously he would never admit which discipline. Do degree certificates bought over the Internet neglect to mention such a vital fact? -- Roger Chapman |
#64
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
nightjar cpb@ wrote:
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... ... Tidal lagoons have zero risk on failure. Nothing is zero risk. We can all form a list on nuclear disasters. We can also note how short it is and how the accidents all relate to outdated systems. Nuclear power stations are a front for atomic weapons. Even if that were true, my answer would be so what? I don't believe that, if we bury our heads in the sand and pretend nuclear weapons don't exist, our enemies will do the same Magnox and RBMK reactors were built to produce nuclear weapon material, which is why they were built with fewer safety precautions and why they became involved in significant nuclear accidents. Modern designs are optimised for power generation and are not only much safer, they are also less suitable for producing weapon grade material. More to the point, they are almost totally unable to produce weapons grade material at all. To get a reactor going requires material at about 1% of the concentration needed to make a bomb. Bomb making material is massively hard to refine, hence you build a fast breededr to make plutonium, BUT a fast breeder is a uniquely different animal, and easy to spot under international inspection. This is why the international community is more bothered about refinement capability than about reactors. Colin Bignell |
#65
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
On May 26, 6:40*pm, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk
wrote: "RobertL" wrote in message ... On May 24, 11:43 am, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote: ... given that the rate of discovery has consistently increased faster than the rate of increase in use. But it hasn't. *the rate of discovery has FALLEN steadily over the last 50 years and rate of consumption has increased. If you take only the discovery of entirely new fields, that is correct. If you count all new discoveries, including the extension of existing fields, oil reserves have been consistently growing faster than the rate of increase of consumption. Oddly enough, it is easier to find oil where you already know it exists than in entirely new areas. Colin Bignell My understanding was that those figures for discoveries were for "all known reserveves" and did include extensions to existing oilfields. I mean the ones used he http://www.oilposter.org/ Do you have a reference for total reserves growing faster than consumption? I'd like to take a look. I Of course, there is a big problem getting reliable figures, especially from national oil companies, about what their reserves are, but that's a different matter. thanks, Robert |
#66
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... ... So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. .... Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. It is you making the claims. It is up to you to provide the sources you are relying upon, not for me to call up every possible link to anything to do with the subject. You say you were in to Oceanography, then you would look, instead of trying to make out you know it all. Things have moved on in 40 years, as they don't drop weights in baths any more. |
#67
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Roger" wrote in message k... The message from "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk contains these words: Those who know think differently. That excludes Dribble This man is clearly a plantpot. |
#68
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
RobertL wrote:
On May 26, 6:40 pm, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote: "RobertL" wrote in message ... On May 24, 11:43 am, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk wrote: ... given that the rate of discovery has consistently increased faster than the rate of increase in use. But it hasn't. the rate of discovery has FALLEN steadily over the last 50 years and rate of consumption has increased. If you take only the discovery of entirely new fields, that is correct. If you count all new discoveries, including the extension of existing fields, oil reserves have been consistently growing faster than the rate of increase of consumption. Oddly enough, it is easier to find oil where you already know it exists than in entirely new areas. Colin Bignell My understanding was that those figures for discoveries were for "all known reserveves" and did include extensions to existing oilfields. I mean the ones used he http://www.oilposter.org/ Do you have a reference for total reserves growing faster than consumption? I'd like to take a look. I Of course, there is a big problem getting reliable figures, especially from national oil companies, about what their reserves are, but that's a different matter. thanks, Robert I think another issue that needs highlighting is that once oil gets more expensive, and technology improves, how much oil you can extract from known reserves at economic prices, also increases. This also gets into oil company known reserve figures. Of course, what is published by oil companies reflects not only what they actually know, but what they can credibly claim, in order to improve share prices etc. I.e. being flexible with the truth is distinctly, if not to the oil companies long term advantage, at least to those due to retire in 5 years with stock options.. Cui bono. |
#69
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
On Tue, 26 May 2009 20:42:41 +0100 someone who may be Andy Champ
wrote this:- The Natural Philosopher wrote: its a very expensive and environmentally dfestrictive (sic) way to generate power, and there are only a few places where its really effective - you cant use the whole coastline, not for any decent scale and efficiency. Sure. Expensive? Compared to nuclear most things are cheap. Environmentally destructive? What sort of system? A Severn barrage would certainly largely destroy internationally important wildlife habitats, though climate change will do that too. Build lagoons instead and, the proponents say, one can generate at least as much electricity while still preserving the habitats. The reports at http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/tidal-power.html discuss the issues. Offshore lagoons are probably not the thing, but that is where turbines come in, of which the most well known is probably http://www.marineturbines.com. Using the whole coastline? "The strength of the tidal current varies depending on the position of the site on the earth, the shape of the coastline, and the bathymetry (shape of the sea bed). Areas that have high tidal currents are in narrow straits, between islands, around headlands, entrances to lochs, bays and large harbours. This flow is cyclical, first increasing in velocity and then decreasing before switching to the opposite direction. "The generation of energy from tidal currents is therefore very site specific. The World Offshore Renewable Energy Report 2002-2007 , released by the DTI, suggests that while a staggering 3000GW of tidal energy is estimated to be available, less than 3% of this is located in areas suitable for power generation. A number of possible sites have been identified in Scotland. The Pentland Firth has been described as the Saudi Arabia of the world's future tidal industry, which is capable of providing up to 10% of the UK's energy demand alone. Scottish Enterprise has estimated that 34% of the UK's electricity demand could be generated by tidal currents." http://www.scottishrenewables.com/Default.aspx?DocumentID=27e58172-d6f0-4968-a2ee-3db723d6c093 In the short term I agree with your position - we can either go fission, or have no power. If built it would be too little too late. The SD Commission report I have referred to before explains why. But I think tidal is probably a better bet than wind, and it could provide part of a balanced system. Wind works now, there is no large scale tidal scheme in the UK (despite the ROC system being neutral about what form of generation is used). In the future both will be used, which is great. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#70
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"David Hansen" wrote in message news In the short term I agree with your position - we can either go fission, or have no power. If built it would be too little too late. The lead time for nuclear stations is long. You could have a large tidal lagoons, employing far more people, in less time. I posted this a few months back... Tidal lagoons are being looked into. If they come about then forget gas and oil and all will be, hopefully cheap electricity. 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. |
#71
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2009 20:42:41 +0100 someone who may be Andy Champ wrote this:- The Natural Philosopher wrote: its a very expensive and environmentally dfestrictive (sic) way to generate power, and there are only a few places where its really effective - you cant use the whole coastline, not for any decent scale and efficiency. Sure. Expensive? Compared to nuclear most things are cheap. No, compared to nuclear every single alternative energy source is *way* more expensive. Nuclear electricity generally 2-3p/unit. Wind about 10p.Once the cost of the transmission lines and grid balancing is costed in (which its protagonists NEVER do). Uses roughly ten times as much concrete per average watt delivered as nuclear too. Environmentally destructive? What sort of system? A Severn barrage would certainly largely destroy internationally important wildlife habitats, though climate change will do that too. Build lagoons instead and, the proponents say, one can generate at least as much electricity while still preserving the habitats. The reports at http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/tidal-power.html discuss the issues. Offshore lagoons are probably not the thing, but that is where turbines come in, of which the most well known is probably http://www.marineturbines.com. Using the whole coastline? "The strength of the tidal current varies depending on the position of the site on the earth, the shape of the coastline, and the bathymetry (shape of the sea bed). Areas that have high tidal currents are in narrow straits, between islands, around headlands, entrances to lochs, bays and large harbours. This flow is cyclical, first increasing in velocity and then decreasing before switching to the opposite direction. "The generation of energy from tidal currents is therefore very site specific. The World Offshore Renewable Energy Report 2002-2007 , released by the DTI, suggests that while a staggering 3000GW of tidal energy is estimated to be available, less than 3% of this is located in areas suitable for power generation. A number of possible sites have been identified in Scotland. The Pentland Firth has been described as the Saudi Arabia of the world's future tidal industry, which is capable of providing up to 10% of the UK's energy demand alone. Scottish Enterprise has estimated that 34% of the UK's electricity demand could be generated by tidal currents." http://www.scottishrenewables.com/Default.aspx?DocumentID=27e58172-d6f0-4968-a2ee-3db723d6c093 In the short term I agree with your position - we can either go fission, or have no power. If built it would be too little too late. The SD Commission report I have referred to before explains why. Same applies to any alternative energy. But I think tidal is probably a better bet than wind, and it could provide part of a balanced system. Wind works now, there is no large scale tidal scheme in the UK (despite the ROC system being neutral about what form of generation is used). In the future both will be used, which is great. Wind doesnt really work at all. That's the problem. |
#72
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... 25 Year Project It will take 25 years. However benefits will come quicker than expected. Lets see.. 4.5 million trains at one per hour 24x7 is about 500 years. |
#73
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"dennis@home" wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... 25 Year Project It will take 25 years. However benefits will come quicker than expected. Lets see.. 4.5 million trains at one per hour 24x7 is about 500 years. Wrong. |
#74
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"David Hansen" wrote in message
news The reports at http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/tidal-power.html discuss the issues. Offshore lagoons are probably not the thing, It states its finings on not enough practical evidence of tidal lagoons. One was to be trialled off Swansea. Modelling is very upbeat on them - then there is the knock-on effects. The following is just barrages, not lagoons. ---------- Liverpool, UK - 25 March 2009: Engineers at the University of Liverpool claim that building estuary barrages in the North West could provide more than 5% of the UK's electricity. http://www.liv.ac.uk/news/press_rele...r-barrages.htm Joe Flanagan, Head of Energy and Environmental Technologies at the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) said: "The NWDA is pleased to have supported this project, which has provided an important stimulus to the concept of tidal power in England's Northwest. There are a variety of groups and individuals promoting a number of schemes in the region, which have now been brought together under the Northwest Tidal Energy Group." ------------ This is very interesting indeed... A pilot scheme is about to be tested in Norway and the Dutch are very serious about it wanting one in the mouth of the Rhine. They can be merged into desalination plants too, so fresh water as well. Looks good and all eco. http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ers-mouth.html Most UK river mouths could have these plants. Yep. No dams either. It appears feasible in large estuaries where there is a lot of fresh water flowing into the sea. Could be a power station in each estuary where salt and fresh water meet. Cities like Liverpool, Bristol, etc, could take all their power from these local station with little line losses. |
#75
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "dennis@home" wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... 25 Year Project It will take 25 years. However benefits will come quicker than expected. Lets see.. 4.5 million trains at one per hour 24x7 is about 500 years. Wrong. Ok so its actually 513.34 (24x7x365) years. Is that better? |
#76
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"dennis@home" wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "dennis@home" wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... 25 Year Project It will take 25 years. However benefits will come quicker than expected. Lets see.. 4.5 million trains at one per hour 24x7 is about 500 years. Wrong. Ok so its actually 513.34 (24x7x365) years. Is that better? I can see why Maxie thinks you are barking mad. Maxie does know some things. |
#77
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... ... So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. .... Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. It is you making the claims. It is up to you to provide the sources you are relying upon, not for me to call up every possible link to anything to do with the subject. You say you were in to Oceanography, then you would look, instead of trying to make out you know it all. Things have moved on in 40 years, as they don't drop weights in baths any more. Suggesting that I trawl through everything on the internet on the off chance I will find the same articles as you is ridiculous. I can only assume that your reluctance to give your sources means you don't think they will stand up to close scrutiny. Colin Bignell |
#78
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... ... So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. .... Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. It is you making the claims. It is up to you to provide the sources you are relying upon, not for me to call up every possible link to anything to do with the subject. You say you were in to Oceanography, then you would look, instead of trying to make out you know it all. Things have moved on in 40 years, as they don't drop weights in baths any more. Suggesting that I trawl through everything on the internet It takes less far less keystokes on google to get it all that the tripe you typed here. |
#79
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... "Doctor Drivel" wrote in message ... "nightjar .me.uk" cpb@insert my surname here wrote in message ... ... So, post your sources and let's look at the figures. .... Cambridge feel confident. Do a Google. It is you making the claims. It is up to you to provide the sources you are relying upon, not for me to call up every possible link to anything to do with the subject. You say you were in to Oceanography, then you would look, instead of trying to make out you know it all. Things have moved on in 40 years, as they don't drop weights in baths any more. Suggesting that I trawl through everything on the internet It takes less far less keystokes on google to get it all that the tripe you typed here. In other words, you cannot provide any documentary evidence to support your claims. Colin Bignell |
#80
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
World Oil Production to Peak in 2013
The message
from "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk contains these words: It takes less far less keystokes on google to get it all that the tripe you typed here. In other words, you cannot provide any documentary evidence to support your claims. I think you may have underestimated Dribble. It is not that he can't provide any evidence - the chances are that it would be the easiest thing in the world to provide the link to his source - it is just that he would rather leave the source a mystery than expose the gap between his claims and the reality, which may be no more than a sales brochure for a novel pumped storage scheme. We have seen that behaviour before with the degree he claims to have. No doubt we will see it again in the future with any number of his wacky ideas. -- Roger Chapman |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
WORLD TOURSIM WORLD TRAVEL WORLD PACKAGE | Home Repair | |||
Grid current peak?? | Electronic Schematics | |||
Peak DCA55 Tester | Electronics Repair | |||
New ESR meter from Peak | Electronics Repair | |||
Off peak electricity | UK diy |