On 15/04/2012 12:23, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

"Iceland's volcanoes may power UK"

"The energy minister is to visit Iceland in May to discuss connecting the UK to
its abundant geothermal energy"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/11/iceland-volcano-green-power

Yes, I know it's the Grauniad and some here will already be clutching their Daily
Mails in horror, but the article is worth a read, if only because it has a
diagram showing the existing, under construction and proposed new power
interconnectors between the UK mainland and Europe.


One of the problems would be that there are only three manufacturers of
undersea cable in Europe, they all have full order books for a good
number of years to come and the technical problems they have had to
overcome make it highly unlikely that anyone else could enter the market
for at least a decade.

Colin Bignell

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:58:29 +0100, tony sayer
wrote:

Now assuming wind power to be your prime renewable what would you do if
the wind wasn't blowing as it can do, and the power wasn't flowing and
you in consequence had the nation up in arms .. 'cos they had no
power?...


What .. if you were in charge, would you do?..

Firstly, I wouldn't have got into such a ludicrous situation.
I'd have assumed sweeping dicatator powers, imprisoned or re-educated
the oppositions and killed all the NIMBYs.
Then, I'd have built many pumped seawater storage plants on the coasts
of Wales and Scotland.
When there's a downturn in wind, the pumped storage would suffice.

Along with this, there would be a series of new conventional nuke
plants; with the idea of moving nuke to thorium in due time.

Allied to this, of course, there would be a Draconian system of
penalties for power wasters... public flogging or losing an eye or
forehead branding might do it.

Andy Burns wrote:
Windmill wrote:

Andy writes:

That's a lot of copper

Wouldn't they use aluminium?

The raw material might be 1/3 the price, but the ongoing heating losses
would be be about double ...



they use it for catenary HV lines because of the lighter weight I
think,.. But undersea I think it seems to be copper from limited info on
the net.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Windmill wrote:
The Natural Philosopher writes:

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
"Iceland's volcanoes may power UK"

"The energy minister is to visit Iceland in May to discuss connecting the UK to
its abundant geothermal energy"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/11/iceland-volcano-green-power

Yes, I know it's the Grauniad and some here will already be clutching their Daily
Mails in horror, but the article is worth a read, if only because it has a
diagram showing the existing, under construction and proposed new power
interconnectors between the UK mainland and Europe.



'proposed' being more or less 'if the government will give us the money'

Those who keep an eye on these things will have noticed at times power
being fed From the Netherlands to the UK and then back to France..and
vices versa.

One imagines that France has noticed this and Belgium and realised that
its an expensive way to connect a European grid...when there is a
perfectly good land route over which Hitler sent his tanks,. to get e.g
French nuclear power into German homes when their energy policy falls
around their ears.

"Ve are very Green and Very Nuclear free. All our energy comes from thee
filthy Austrian braunkohle and filthy French nuclear reactors, while ve
make a ****ing fortune selling stupid windmills to the EU that we have
made mandatory. Ve Germans are so clever it hurts, Ja?"

Along with world government renewed economic growth and an end to
poverty and full unemployment, its one of those topics the Guardian
likes to talk about as if talking about it would actually make it happen.

Or work if it did.

The reality is that we will probably put in more to france belgium and
the Netherlands because there is a clear case for it, and there is
probably a clear case for a link to Eire.

But Norway and Iceland - is not as clear cut.

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty good
energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in the end a
2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be less reliable
than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.


Iceland is 1000 miles away ..5 times the britned link. so £3bn per GW is
a fair estimate.

That's the same price as a nukey.

And you still have to build a geothermal power station at the far end.

So maybe we need to drill down 60 or 70 miles until we hit lava?

Then we could put the geothermal station here!

well bury enough nuclear waste in a mine and tap the decay heat..? :-)

I sill want a nuclear aga. with a nice 'radiation' compartment for
sterilising fresh vegetables.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Nightjar wrote:
On 15/04/2012 12:23, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

"Iceland's volcanoes may power UK"

"The energy minister is to visit Iceland in May to discuss connecting
the UK to
its abundant geothermal energy"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/11/iceland-volcano-green-power


Yes, I know it's the Grauniad and some here will already be clutching
their Daily
Mails in horror, but the article is worth a read, if only because it
has a
diagram showing the existing, under construction and proposed new power
interconnectors between the UK mainland and Europe.


One of the problems would be that there are only three manufacturers of
undersea cable in Europe, they all have full order books for a good
number of years to come and the technical problems they have had to
overcome make it highly unlikely that anyone else could enter the market
for at least a decade.

I am sure the germans will do one for you...:-)


Colin Bignell


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Mike Barnes wrote:
jgharston :
Mike Barnes wrote:
OK, but AAMOI what colours do you suggest? Orange and green look pretty
different to me, and I'm in OAP territory.
I've been staring at the diagram and fiddling with the colour controls
on my monitor, and on that diagram they look identical to me.

Three colours on a grey background? How about black, white, blue, red,
(orange OR green OR yellow). That's five. There are simple tools
to work out the best contrasts between colours, but the most effective
tool is actually learning it in the first place.

Additionally they should have the description of each line pop up when
you hover the mouse over it. I realise that that's much, much too much
to expect.

JAVASCRIPT!!!??? never. people still read the Gruaniad on Lynx browsers
you know, because they can.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

En el artículo
groups.com, jgharston escribió:

I know my eyesight is getting old, but can somebody beat those
youngsers at the Gaurdian around the head until they make
diagrams where "proposed" and "in progress" don't look the
same colour.

Try degaussing your monitor :-)

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

En el artículo , David Marsden
escribió:

AIUI geothermal energy requires fracking

I don't think it's been discussed much here - would be interested to see
opinions.

I read that the stuff they pump down to do the actual fracturing isn't
plain water, but water with some pretty unpleasant chemicals added to
it. What if that gets into ground water supplies?

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 12:53:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty good
energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in the end a
2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be less reliable
than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.

Why is geothermal energy not renewable ?


it cools the earth down and that is not an infinite thing.

In short there is no renewable energy to be had anywhere - just things
that last longer than other things.


In terms of geothermal the key thing is how fast the heat is actually
replenished - there are some old flooded mines in IIRC poland and the
USA that are being used to generate hot water...but after 20 years they
reckon they will have cooled down to only produce a small fraction of
the power, because they depend on essentially draining a HUGE heatbank
faster than its being replenished.




--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:32:35 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2012-04-16, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 12:53:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty good
energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in the end
a 2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be less
reliable than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.
Why is geothermal energy not renewable ?
Because the rock around any given bore-hole eventually cools down to the
point where it's no longer usable and we have to drill another one. If
the thermal conductivity of the rock is poor, this happens sooner rather
than later.

But isn't *some* geothermal energy created by expansion/contraction of
the earth due to gravity ?

none of any note.


The earth is warm from there main ways: its still cooling from when it
was made, it has a significant amount of radioactivity in it and the
decay heat keeps it warm, and the sun shines on it.

actual squeezing it would essentially slow the moon down: that does
happen of course and it results in tides which do have a small amount of
energy in them. But not enough to make a discernible difference to
temperature.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Tim Watts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:
Windmill wrote:

Andy writes:

That's a lot of copper
Wouldn't they use aluminium?
The raw material might be 1/3 the price, but the ongoing heating losses
would be be about double ...



they use it for catenary HV lines because of the lighter weight I
think,.. But undersea I think it seems to be copper from limited info on
the net.



I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is usually ali
and has been for years.


they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

Nearly sure my underground is copper..



--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Jethro_uk wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty good
energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in the end a
2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be less reliable
than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.

Why is geothermal energy not renewable ?

Because once the earth cools down, that energy is gone.

Corse strictly speaking there is no renewable energy, because once the
sun stops forever, there is no more sunlight, or waves, or wind either.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:38:59 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

An eighth of the 70 is about 9GW, so we would get 9 when there's next to
no wind, more or less. So we could need some 40GW of pumped capacity for
several days to make up the shortfall. Perhaps you'd like to tell us
which valleys you'd block up to provide that, and to what extent, also
the cost of that and of the 66GW of wind we don't have at the moment.

You obviously didn't bother reading any further than wind.

I mentioned nukes, of course.

Jethro_uk wrote
Huge wrote
Jethro_uk wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty good
energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in the end
a 2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be less
reliable than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.

Why is geothermal energy not renewable ?

Because the rock around any given bore-hole eventually cools down to the
point where it's no longer usable and we have to drill another one. If
the thermal conductivity of the rock is poor, this happens sooner rather
than later.

But isn't *some* geothermal energy created by expansion/contraction of
the earth due to gravity ?

Not enough to matter.

wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:38:59 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

An eighth of the 70 is about 9GW, so we would get 9 when there's next to
no wind, more or less. So we could need some 40GW of pumped capacity for
several days to make up the shortfall. Perhaps you'd like to tell us
which valleys you'd block up to provide that, and to what extent, also
the cost of that and of the 66GW of wind we don't have at the moment.

You obviously didn't bother reading any further than wind.

I mentioned nukes, of course.

no point in having wind AND nukes tho, is there?

in fact there is no point in having wind, period.

As the Mercator report showed...

http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Powerful_Targets.pdf

coal for cheap, gas for low carbon reasonably cheap, nuclear for zero
carbon reasonably cheap. No need for expensive high carbon wind!



--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

SoOn Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:06:37 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:
Windmill wrote:

Andy writes:

That's a lot of copper

Wouldn't they use aluminium?

The raw material might be 1/3 the price, but the ongoing heating losses
would be be about double ...



they use it for catenary HV lines because of the lighter weight I
think,.. But undersea I think it seems to be copper from limited info on
the net.

Some 400kV underground cables in the UK are aluminium. I can't recall
aluminium being used as the conductor on any undersea ones.

Basslink and Norned are the most significant HVDC links in the last
decade or so. Both use copper.


--

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:28:15 GMT, Jethro_uk
wrote:

Isn't there a geothermal plant in Newcastle upon Tyne ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12549886


No. Just a rather deep hole.

--

"jgharston" wrote in message
...
Clive George wrote:
Serious question : Are you colour blind?

The blue is nice and clear.
I have to keep flicking between the key and the lines on the
diagram to work out whether I'm looking at "proposed" or
"in progress".

I'm not colour blind. I just do not have the perfect vision
or the huge multi-mullion colour monitor that graphic artist
media d***heads seem to think that everybody has. There are
HUGE colour sets that have high contrast and differentiability,
but of course they don't fit with the latte mocha tarquine
media cool. They need to be beated about the head with a set
of standard colours painted on a 2x4 steel bar until they
stop doing it.

They Guaridn do exactly the same thing in the TV guide in
the Informania piechart where I have to wobble the page
in the light to try and tell the difference between the
sort-of-reddy-bluey-purple segment and the
sort-of-bluey-reddy-purple segment next to it.

Bet you do have a color problem, even tho you may well not be technically
colorblind.

The original is very obviously readable to me.

"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 16/04/2012 18:27, David Marsden wrote:
On 15/04/2012 12:23, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

"Iceland's volcanoes may power UK"

"The energy minister is to visit Iceland in May to discuss connecting
the UK to
its abundant geothermal energy"


Abundant? I'm not an expert but the US is the world's largest producer
of geothermal electricity and only has 3GW of capacity in total.

AIUI geothermal energy requires fracking - I'm not sure how easily this
sits with Guardian readers' views.

Are you getting geothermal confused with gas?

Nope, just overstating it.
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=geothermal+fracking

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 22:43:38 +0100, The Other Mike wrote:

Some 400kV underground cables in the UK are aluminium. I can't recall
aluminium being used as the conductor on any undersea ones.

Can't help thinking that aluminium and salt water don't mix very
well. No that any salt water would get anywhere near the ali would
it...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:27:37 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

I read that the stuff they pump down to do the actual fracturing isn't
plain water, but water with some pretty unpleasant chemicals added to
it. What if that gets into ground water supplies?

Not sure about chemicals but it's also full of "sand" to keep the
shale layers apart once they have been split. Lots of lovely marbles
between smooth flat sheets...


--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:32:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is
usually
ali and has been for years.

they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

"in the road" I read as meaning buried.

Nearly sure my underground is copper..

All the 11kV distribution around here is copper. Nice green tinge in
the right light and when they replaced the line up the otherside of
the valley a few years back that shone a lovely copper colour for a
while. I saw some on the ground 1/2" dia copper colour all the way
through so not CCA.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
Windmill wrote:
The Natural Philosopher writes:

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
"Iceland's volcanoes may power UK"

"The energy minister is to visit Iceland in May to discuss
connecting the UK to
its abundant geothermal energy"


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...and-volcano-gr
een-power

Yes, I know it's the Grauniad and some here will already be
clutching their Daily
Mails in horror, but the article is worth a read, if only because it has a
diagram showing the existing, under construction and proposed new power
interconnectors between the UK mainland and Europe.


'proposed' being more or less 'if the government will give us the
money'

Those who keep an eye on these things will have noticed at times
power being fed From the Netherlands to the UK and then back to
France..and vices versa.

One imagines that France has noticed this and Belgium and realised
that its an expensive way to connect a European grid...when there is
a perfectly good land route over which Hitler sent his tanks,. to
get e.g French nuclear power into German homes when their energy
policy falls around their ears.

"Ve are very Green and Very Nuclear free. All our energy comes from
thee filthy Austrian braunkohle and filthy French nuclear reactors,
while ve make a ****ing fortune selling stupid windmills to the EU
that we have made mandatory. Ve Germans are so clever it hurts, Ja?"

Along with world government renewed economic growth and an end to
poverty and full unemployment, its one of those topics the Guardian
likes to talk about as if talking about it would actually make it happen.

Or work if it did.

The reality is that we will probably put in more to france belgium
and the Netherlands because there is a clear case for it, and there
is probably a clear case for a link to Eire.

But Norway and Iceland - is not as clear cut.

I'm not knocking iceland or its geothermal energy - its a pretty
good energy source even if its not renewable. But I suspect that in
the end a 2GW capable link to iceland would cost the same as and be
less reliable than a 2GW nukey stuck on the welsh coast or whatever.

Iceland is 1000 miles away ..5 times the britned link. so £3bn per
GW is a fair estimate.

That's the same price as a nukey.

And you still have to build a geothermal power station at the far
end.
So maybe we need to drill down 60 or 70 miles until we hit lava?
Then we could put the geothermal station here!

well bury enough nuclear waste in a mine and tap the decay heat..? :-)

I sill want a nuclear aga. with a nice 'radiation' compartment for
sterilising fresh vegetables.

But if it were powered from these undersea lines, it could be ...

the dawning of the aga of aquarius


--
geoff

En el artículo o.uk,
Dave Liquorice escribió:

Not sure about chemicals

http://8020vision.com/2011/04/17/con...port-on-toxic-
chemicals-used-in-fracking/

if the above line breaks, http://tinyurl.com/3qxe6cd

but it's also full of "sand" to keep the
shale layers apart once they have been split. Lots of lovely marbles
between smooth flat sheets...

If the fractures are (mostly) horizontal, would it matter?

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:38:56 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

but it's also full of "sand" to keep the shale layers apart once
they
have been split. Lots of lovely marbles between smooth flat
sheets...

If the fractures are (mostly) horizontal, would it matter?

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area. "Blamed" on a previously unknown fault and "it
will never happen again".So they know about *every* other single
fault do they? oink flap oink flap.

Can't say I'm overly enamoured about all this gas that has been
discovered. It's going to make energy cheap again and reduce
investment in other energy sources and do nothing for how much
ancient carbon is being dumped into the atmosphere. Dash for gas all
over again but maybe on a global scale.

--
Cheers
Dave.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Tim Watts wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:
Windmill wrote:

Andy writes:

That's a lot of copper
Wouldn't they use aluminium?
The raw material might be 1/3 the price, but the ongoing heating losses
would be be about double ...



they use it for catenary HV lines because of the lighter weight I
think,.. But undersea I think it seems to be copper from limited info on
the net.



I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is usually
ali and has been for years.


they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

Nearly sure my underground is copper..

I meant underground. I got an offcut of 11kV cable back in the 80's and that
was soilid ali.

--
Tim Watts

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:32:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is
usually
ali and has been for years.

they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

"in the road" I read as meaning buried.

Nearly sure my underground is copper..

All the 11kV distribution around here is copper. Nice green tinge in
the right light and when they replaced the line up the otherside of
the valley a few years back that shone a lovely copper colour for a
while. I saw some on the ground 1/2" dia copper colour all the way
through so not CCA.


Have seen Ally round these parts as I have a lump of it, given to me by
a lineman when it came off an insulator and started arcing;!.

Sometimes I believe on higher voltage lines it has a steel wire core
tho....
--
Tony Sayer

They Guaridn do exactly the same thing in the TV guide in
the Informania piechart where I have to wobble the page
in the light to try and tell the difference between the
sort-of-reddy-bluey-purple segment and the
sort-of-bluey-reddy-purple segment next to it.

Bet you do have a color problem, even tho you may well not be technically
colorblind.

The original is very obviously readable to me.



Simple online colour test here...


http://colorvisiontesting.com/online%20test.htm
--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:16:48 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area.

What magnitude were these?

Tiddly (2.3 and 1.5) but they have been directky attributted to
fracking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17726538
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-17738184

That second one raises a question about shale gas:

Friends of the Earth Cymru director Gareth Clubb "We know that shale
gas is a lot more emissions intensive than the use of conventional
gas, for example. And in many cases it would come in only slightly
better than coal, or in some places worse than coal."

Any one know what that means or the science it is based on?

--
Cheers
Dave.

tony sayer wrote:

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:32:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is
usually
ali and has been for years.

they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

"in the road" I read as meaning buried.

Nearly sure my underground is copper..

All the 11kV distribution around here is copper. Nice green tinge in
the right light and when they replaced the line up the otherside of
the valley a few years back that shone a lovely copper colour for a
while. I saw some on the ground 1/2" dia copper colour all the way
through so not CCA.


Have seen Ally round these parts as I have a lump of it, given to me by
a lineman when it came off an insulator and started arcing;!.

Sometimes I believe on higher voltage lines it has a steel wire core
tho....

Given ali is weak, I thought all lines were steel cored?


--
Tim Watts

tony sayer wrote
Rod Speed wrote

They Guaridn do exactly the same thing in the TV guide in
the Informania piechart where I have to wobble the page
in the light to try and tell the difference between the
sort-of-reddy-bluey-purple segment and the
sort-of-bluey-reddy-purple segment next to it.

Bet you do have a color problem, even tho
you may well not be technically colorblind.

The original is very obviously readable to me.

Simple online colour test here...
http://colorvisiontesting.com/online%20test.htm

Dunno, its nothing like the official colorblind tests I have
done and there is no reason for a 3 second limit either.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:25:21 +0100, Tim Watts
wrote:

tony sayer wrote:

Sometimes I believe on higher voltage lines it has a steel wire core
tho....

Given ali is weak, I thought all lines were steel cored?

Many overhead line conductors at transmission voltages (275 & 400kV)
in the UK are steel cored, but quite a lot of new build and
refurbishment over the past 20 years or so has been all aluminium.

2 x 700mm^2 all aluminium being a typical replacement for a 4 x
400mm^2 aluminium and steel.

Steel cored "ACSR"
http://www.cable.alcan.com/CablePubl...+Conductor.htm

All aluminium "AAAC"
http://www.cable.alcan.com/CablePubl...uctor+AAAC.htm


--

Tim Streater wrote:
In article o.uk,
"Dave Liquorice" wrote:

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:38:56 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

but it's also full of "sand" to keep the shale layers apart once
they have been split. Lots of lovely marbles between smooth flat
sheets...
If the fractures are (mostly) horizontal, would it matter?

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area.

What magnitude were these?

not a lot and of course 'directly related' means some bearded weirdie
with shares in a solar panel firm says so.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:16:48 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area.
What magnitude were these?

Tiddly (2.3 and 1.5) but they have been directky attributted to
fracking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17726538
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-17738184

That second one raises a question about shale gas:

Friends of the Earth Cymru director Gareth Clubb "We know that shale
gas is a lot more emissions intensive than the use of conventional
gas, for example. And in many cases it would come in only slightly
better than coal, or in some places worse than coal."

Any one know what that means or the science it is based on?

what makes you think anything FoE say is based on science?


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:19:02 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:16:48 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area.

What magnitude were these?

Tiddly (2.3 and 1.5) but they have been directky attributted to
fracking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17726538
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-17738184

That second one raises a question about shale gas:

Friends of the Earth Cymru director Gareth Clubb "We know that shale
gas is a lot more emissions intensive than the use of conventional
gas, for example. And in many cases it would come in only slightly
better than coal, or in some places worse than coal."

Any one know what that means or the science it is based on?

None, it's a Friends of the Earth quote, FoE being a faction that is
by far the biggest threat to the future of this planet.

Gareth Clubb? Has he ever considered going to protect baby seals in
Canada?


--

Tim Watts wrote:
tony sayer wrote:

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:32:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is
usually
ali and has been for years.
they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?
"in the road" I read as meaning buried.

Nearly sure my underground is copper..
All the 11kV distribution around here is copper. Nice green tinge in
the right light and when they replaced the line up the otherside of
the valley a few years back that shone a lovely copper colour for a
while. I saw some on the ground 1/2" dia copper colour all the way
through so not CCA.

Have seen Ally round these parts as I have a lump of it, given to me by
a lineman when it came off an insulator and started arcing;!.

Sometimes I believe on higher voltage lines it has a steel wire core
tho....

Given ali is weak, I thought all lines were steel cored?


all catenaries are, I am sure.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:47:57 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

all catenaries are, I am sure.

Most two conductor per phase installations or refurbishments at 275kV
and 400kV in the UK will be all aluminum.

Four conductor per phase conductors installed up to the early 90's are
mainly steel cored.


--

The Other Mike wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:19:02 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:16:48 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

That depends how big the earthquakes it releases are. Two on the
flyde coast, felt on the surface, have been directly attributed to
fracking in that area.
What magnitude were these?
Tiddly (2.3 and 1.5) but they have been directky attributted to
fracking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17726538
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-17738184

That second one raises a question about shale gas:

Friends of the Earth Cymru director Gareth Clubb "We know that shale
gas is a lot more emissions intensive than the use of conventional
gas, for example. And in many cases it would come in only slightly
better than coal, or in some places worse than coal."

Any one know what that means or the science it is based on?

None, it's a Friends of the Earth quote, FoE being a faction that is
by far the biggest threat to the future of this planet.


+1

Gareth Clubb? Has he ever considered going to protect baby seals in
Canada?

Ah, Canadian club on the rocks?




--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

The Other Mike wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:47:57 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

all catenaries are, I am sure.

Most two conductor per phase installations or refurbishments at 275kV
and 400kV in the UK will be all aluminum.


must be some kind of better alloy then.

Four conductor per phase conductors installed up to the early 90's are
mainly steel cored.




--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

In article , Tim Watts
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:32:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm not so sure - all the stuff in the road on 240V and 11kV is
usually
ali and has been for years.

they are presumably catenary..?

Or do you men underground?

"in the road" I read as meaning buried.

Nearly sure my underground is copper..

All the 11kV distribution around here is copper. Nice green tinge in
the right light and when they replaced the line up the otherside of
the valley a few years back that shone a lovely copper colour for a
while. I saw some on the ground 1/2" dia copper colour all the way
through so not CCA.


Have seen Ally round these parts as I have a lump of it, given to me by
a lineman when it came off an insulator and started arcing;!.

Sometimes I believe on higher voltage lines it has a steel wire core
tho....

Given ali is weak, I thought all lines were steel cored?



Not all of them. AIUI the local 11 kV is mainly Ally but the higher
voltage stuff (and longer spans) like 132, 275 and 400 will have steel
cores.

Ally is a better conductor but it is weak in tensile strength relative
to steel. So steel inside for strength and ally for conduction. Course
the ally will have an element of tensile strength as will the steel
conduct...
--
Tony Sayer