In terms of Generation of Power, surely Tidal power offers a better long term prospect than wind or solar power, as it has a certain reliability, and power can be extracted for most of the cycle
No disagreement with that, it's only the true costs that I've illustrated that change the economics. Government is being willfully dishonest since they are so dependant on their wind strategy. One day we'll have to foot the true bill.the UK offshore wind farms can't compete against onshore wind farms yet, but I have been told last year by my son's friend that the cost of installed MWH in the North Sea is coming down much faster than projected now, driven by better reliability and lower construction cost. He works for Vestas and Dong.
And not only avoiding the blame, but making us pay far more for the same utility!This news regarding the banning of the ICE by 2040 stands no chance of happening. The national grid will melt at the end of rush hour when everyone begins recharging for the following day's commute. How will the millions of people who park on the street charge their cars? With millions of kerb side charges? What about trucks, vans and coaches? Will these be electric too? What makes the government think that we are going to solve a problem which has eluded mankind for a hundred years within the next 10 to 15 years.....high energy density batteries?
I'm affraid this is all propaganda intended to soften us up for the coming assault on the Diesel powered car. After years of encouraging us to switch to Diesel, the penny has finally dropped and now the useless clowns are looking for a face saving way out of their error.
Tidal power is a more logical answer in all respectsBut only initially when new. The earlier ones are already proving very expensive due to gearbox repair and renewal costs and the tech in the new ones is no different. And the costs of carrying out that work are very high. All too frequently in our sea conditions it has to be carried out by helicopter at high personnel risks.
The end costs of wind are high, and then there's the poor utilisation. Few realise that the USA was the early entrant to wind power, having so many ideal sites. The best generation utilisation from any turbines there is 26% and many operate as low as 13%. Here in Britain many of our onshore ones have been criticised for generation time yields as low as 8% over a whole year.
And it's here that your figures fail, since for the other 80% or so of time when other methods have to produce the power, those costs are also wind ones, since they are due to wind absence or unsuitability. Add in those generation support costs for four-fifths of the time and wind is the most expensive of all generation methods.
Remember, we only need Hinckley because the wind cannot be relied on, so it's arguable that all the Hinckley costs are due to wind's failings.
.
Indeed, ideally two barriers in the Bristol Channel could generate 24 hours a day by phasing releases. It would be immensely costly to enclose enough of it, but I'd rather have seen all the huge wind expenditure used on that instead.In terms of Generation of Power, surely Tidal power offers a better long term prospect than wind or solar power, as it has a certain reliability, and power can be extracted for most of the cycle
Quite probably, but there's a joke that twice as many claim to been there as actually were. I was around at the time too, but I've only been afloat in a few of the Dunkirk boats after the event.I am sure they took part in Dunkirk too.
Don't forget the Humber, so few ships travel into and out of it these days a simple lock gate system could accomodate them, and The Humber is a macrotidal estuary with at mean tidal conditions a tidal range of 4.3 m at the mouth.Indeed, ideally two barriers in the Bristol Channel could generate 24 hours a day by phasing releases. It would be immensely costly to enclose enough of it, but I'd rather have seen all the huge wind expenditure used on that instead.
.
There's plenty, The Wash and the Thames Estuary for example, and those would be power where it's needed, not hundreds of miles away in Scotland or at sea.Don't forget the Humber, so few ships travel into and out of it these days a simple lock gate system could accomodate them, and The Humber is a macrotidal estuary with at mean tidal conditions a tidal range of 4.3 m at the mouth.
That's a heck of a lot of energy there for the taking even with simple submerged turbines never mind a Dam
With our governments we'll be damned rather than dammed.never mind a Dam
Too late flecc it's the PAST tense now. not "be" but "are"With our governments we'll be damned rather than dammed.
.
You still can flecc, the Regal Lady (Formerly the Oulton Belle) is one of the little ships and is currently running pleasure trips out of Scarborough harbour.Quite probably, but there's a joke that twice as many claim to been there as actually were. I was around at the time too, but I've only been afloat in a few of the Dunkirk boats after the event.
.
you know very well that the fundamental reasons for leaving have not changed.- surely no-one who thought secession from the EU would be a good idea still believes that the UK stands to be better off in any way at all?
Scotland will happily settle for just making another World Cup, I am starting to forget the last time, nineties right sure we always went home after the opening stages but it's good to be there, our game just isn't producing the talent and the people running it are clueless on how to improve things.Cartoons have always reflected pretty accurately the general mood of the public at large. I think this one captures the current situation very well and I have to imagine there must be an awful lot of really disgruntled 'Leave' voters out there - surely no-one who thought secession from the EU would be a good idea still believes that the UK stands to be better off in any way at all?
View attachment 20486
Tom
.. flecc, I often agree with you, but this topic is too broad for simple soundbites.Not really true, wind power is proving more expensive than thought at first, and the turbine positions are also problematic. Scotland and Wales are not where the current is needed and occasion up to 7% current loss in transmission to where it is needed. There's also a limit to how many turbines can be installed in those relatively small areas.
We're relying on large turbine fields at sea now to overcome that last problem, but again we are back to transmission losses and the maintenance costs of the seaborn ones are extremely high. Dangerous too, the risks very high.
And of course what happens when the wind doesn't blow or blows too hard? Their wind speed operating range is narrow.
.