The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 15    Average: 2.6/5]
29 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 7382
Rating: 2.6
Category: Tech
Date: 07/14/13 03:31 PM

29 Responses to Dirty Secret Of Britian`s Power Madness [Pic+]

  1. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33117 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 3:31 pm
    Link: Dirty Secret Of Britian`s Power Madness - 8 GW of new dirty, diesel power = it`s all about money.
  2. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 3:41 pm
    Daily mail.... It`s pretty safe to say you can treat this the same way as you can treat Fox news.
  3. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7751 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 3:55 pm
    And this is why I don`t give a s*** when the government of rip-off Britain tells me how important it is that I separate my paper from my plastic from my cardboard...f*** you!
  4. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33117 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 3:59 pm
    @tedgp: Your avid aversion to facts is amazing.

    I thought the Brits were going to build Natural Gas powered back-ups, which is bad enough!

    But DIESEL? And at that cost? Good heavens!

    Has one, single part of "green power" actually lowered pollution? Lord knows it`s driven UP the cost of electricity! And everything else too...

    If Germany`s "Green Experiment" isn`t a sure disaster? Britain`s will fail TWICE as hard! And possibly cost twice as much...
  5. Profile photo of Andrew155
    Andrew155 Male 18-29
    2579 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 4:14 pm
    tedgp, you have a strange aversion to the only news sources that are out of lock step with your world view.
  6. Profile photo of whodat6484
    whodat6484 Male 30-39
    3909 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    "...it`s all about money"



  7. Profile photo of Bakcagain21
    Bakcagain21 Male 18-29
    560 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:12 pm
    @tedgp Daily Mail is not the Onion it skews the hell out of stuff but you can usually find the original sources if you search and see what the situation is.

    The National Grid consultation

    STOR is old and has been around for when Power plants go offline etc in emergencies. It`s being increased massively for renewable "In 2012 we anticipate the cost of this contingency to be £18 million / year and if the Government’s 2020 target for wind power is realised, we anticipate it will rise to £299 million / year."

    That although the wind turbines stand ready to generate 365 days/year the annual wind speed across the UK means that they can only generate electricity for around 100 days or around 3 days out of every 10. A utilisation efficiency of just 27%.
  8. Profile photo of Bakcagain21
    Bakcagain21 Male 18-29
    560 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:17 pm
    The expensive subsidy and costs are passed onto the taxpayer and in the form of higher cost bills by guaranteed prices. Using Diesel to fill the stop gap will likely add more pollutants then traditonal power generation.

    We are already starting to get fuel poverty int he UK with the old unable to heat theirhomes.

    Just bring on Nuclear power FFS. Am I the only one who saw what happened in Japan. A Nuclear station survived a Tsunami and an earthquake. Went into Chernobyl power meltdown. And it`s estimated 150 people were exposed to dangerous radiation and after treatment unclear if they`ll have long term damage. It`s soo much safer then people realise.
  9. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:21 pm
    The only "Green" politicians and bureaucrats really care about is the green in their wallets.

    Windmills and solar will never have the capacity to replace coal and natural gas. Only nuclear has a chance of accomplishing that task.

    Thorium is the future, we should be investing in it, instead of these "Green" boondoggles.
  10. Profile photo of Tacos4Brkfst
    Tacos4Brkfst Male 18-29
    620 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:26 pm
    Daily reminder that nuclear power is safe.
  11. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33117 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:43 pm
    Just bring on Nuclear power FFS.
    @Bakcagain21: Darn tootin! But of course? Politics!!!

    If they paid 12X the price for Nuclear electric power? It would be a "cash machine" for the next 30+ years. :-) 24/7/365 Baby!

    All these wind farms? Lose money, work for 12-18 years (NOT 25 years as promised!) then costly junk.

    I submitted an article about the "Official Total Loss Of Life" at Fu-kushima: 0 dead, 0 injured, 0 sickened.

    The worst does of radiation (a single guy got it) was lower than "safe" levels...

    Sure: the place needs cleaning up before people can move back there again.
    So does that town in Quebec... 50 Dead there...
  12. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 5:58 pm
    Daily mail.... It`s pretty safe to say you can treat this the same way as you can treat Fox news.

    That`s true, but that just means that 5Cats picked the wrong source because he`s ignorant of UK media (reasonable, considering he`s Canadian). His ignorance of the subject is reinforced by his reply to you.

    But even the Daily Mail accidentally stumbles over the truth sometimes, and this is one of those times.

    Ground-level wind power is appropriate for a small percentage of generation. It`s downright stupid to use it for more than that because it`s not controllable. Mass-scale storage of electricity is wildly expensive and inefficient and it takes a lot of space (you have to build lakes), so a functioning national grid must ensure constant matching of supply and demand. That can`t be done without enough control over generation, which you can`t have with ground-level wind power (or solar, etc).
  13. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 6:07 pm
    The only *potentially* viable (with current technology) source of large-scale generation with renewables in the UK is wave power, and even that`s pretty limited because while the waves are constant the magnitude of them isn`t.

    Other than that, you`ve got stuff which is theoretically viable but not with current technology: high-altitude wind power using the jetstream and space-based solar power. Neither of which we can do yet...and if you`re considering power generation we can`t do yet but may be able to do so in the future, fusion is by far a better option because it`s closer to being possible and it`s more controllable.

    Another theoretically viable option is CSP in north Africa and an HVDC link to the UK national grid, but then you`re very dependent on other countries for survival.

    This stupidly expensive fake green power generation is the worst of all worlds - expensive, dirty, unsustainable.
  14. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 6:15 pm
    Just bring on Nuclear power FFS. Am I the only one who saw what happened in Japan. A Nuclear station survived a Tsunami and an earthquake. Went into Chernobyl power meltdown. And it`s estimated 150 people were exposed to dangerous radiation and after treatment unclear if they`ll have long term damage. It`s soo much safer then people realise.

    It`s even clearer than that - the failure was in the cooling system, which was an obsolete design in an old power station.

    With a modern fission power station, even a very powerful earthquake and a tsunami wouldn`t have been dangerous. It would probably put a modern fission power station into a controlled shutdown and be expensive, but it wouldn`t have been dangerous.

    The UK has trivial earthquakes and only one tsunami in recorded history (which was too small to do any serious damage anyway).

    Build the nuclear plants now, we need them ASAP to bridge us until fusion.
  15. Profile photo of schuey63
    schuey63 Male 18-29
    179 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 6:24 pm
    @tedgp - "Daily mail.... It`s pretty safe to say you can treat this the same way as you can treat Fox news."

    Took the words right out of my mouth man.
  16. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33117 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 7:15 pm
    His ignorance of the subject is reinforced by his reply to you.
    @Angilion: It`s true, I cannot tell the "tabloids" from the "news papers" over there, but hey! A fact is a fact!

    Who broke the story of John Edwards` Mistresses` Love Child?
    The National Inquirer... One of the worst "American News Rags". But they got it 100% correct!

    In this case it`s an "open story" that the British MSM refuses to report on, for whatever reason. The facts are all there, just line those ducks up and Presto! The truth.

    This stupidly expensive fake green power generation is the worst of all worlds - expensive, dirty, unsustainable.

    Which is something I`ve been saying all along! But Al Gore won the *Nobel Peace Prize* and I did not...

    I have NO PROBLEM with "green energy" if it works... but it (currently) does not!
  17. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 10:36 pm
    I have NO PROBLEM with "green energy" if it works... but it (currently) does not!

    That`s over-stating the case. It works within limits in some circumstances.

    The extreme case is Iceland - 99.9% of its electricity is "green". That`s only possible because of the peculiar geography - huge quantities of water going downhill and enough underground heat to make Hephaestus envious.

    But it also works to a much lesser extent in other areas. CSP, for example, is viable in places that are hot and sparsely inhabited (it requires a lot of space). It`s far cheaper than PV, so it`s actually viable in limited circumstances. Wave and tidal power could be useful in Britain, since it`s a long, thin island with very powerful sea movement.

    It`s not that it doesn`t work at all, it`s that it`s being implemented badly and excessively.
  18. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 10:44 pm
    Britain is a perfect example of that.

    What actually works here is wave and tidal...but what`s being forced into use is solar and wind.

    Solar...in the UK? Hi, politicians, look at a map of the world. See where the UK is? Is it near the equator? Do we have large amounts of empty space to build collectors? No and no? So why are you forcing solar power, fools?

    Wind...yes, it`s often windy here. In an unreliable, gusty way, and often too windy for wind turbines to work. Unreliable power generation is worse than useless for more than a couple of percent of generation even if it`s economically viable for any amount - and it isn`t.

    Implemented badly and excessively. 25% is a ludicrous target from people ignorant of how electricity generation and distribution works and ignorant of the relevant technology and ignorant of economics. Even wave and tidal wouldn`t be reliable enough for that amount.
  19. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2013 at 10:49 pm
    I`ve just re-read something I wrote:

    Mass-scale storage of electricity is wildly expensive and inefficient and it takes a lot of space (you have to build lakes)

    and realised that it might be a good idea to explain it because the connection isn`t obvious.

    Currently, the only way to store large amounts of electricity is to build two lakes, one on higher ground than the other, and a hydroelectric power station in between. You "store" electricity by using it to pump water uphill to the upper lake and "retrieve" electricty by letting the water fall back again, through the hydroelectric power station.
  20. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 8:00 am
    DOn`t worry guys the National Grid is inept and sucks ass here too amazing we let them take over..... Hmm now why does this wind turbine have a choke and pull start!
  21. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 8:23 am
    National grid in MA decided to stop cutting tree branches away from power line to be "green." In reality it was to save green because the next ice storms we got huge portions of MA lost power for over a week. So then everyone went out and bought and ran generators yep that really helps be "green" there the company is a joke. This happened more than once BTW.
  22. Profile photo of furryblob
    furryblob Male 18-29
    574 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 1:48 pm
    Not surprised to see Scats linking to the daily mail, terrible source of news.
  23. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33117 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 3:44 pm
    @furryblob: So you admit that it`s 100% factual? You just don`t like the source & that`s THE ONLY complaint you`ve got?

    Cool!
  24. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 4:33 pm
    DOn`t worry guys the National Grid is inept and sucks ass here too

    The National Grid is fine here. They do an excellent job of continuously matching supply to demand and maintaining distribution infrastructure. I don`t even remember the last time I had a power cut.

    The problem here is the government, not the National Grid. They impose this crap on the National Grid, which has to deal with the results.
  25. Profile photo of whodat6484
    whodat6484 Male 30-39
    3909 posts
    July 15, 2013 at 11:14 pm
    "National grid in MA decided to stop cutting tree branches away from power line to be "green."

    Wanna know the real reason they don`t trim the trees around the power lines as preventative maintenance? The answer`s quite simple, when a storm comes through and takes down trees & tree limbs that subsequently take power lines down, the lineman get paid $$-Double Time-$$ for "storm work."
  26. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    July 16, 2013 at 5:53 am
    @whodat6484

    Ya that too and in the mean time it got people killed.
  27. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    July 16, 2013 at 5:55 am
    @Angilion

    Well you probably live in quite a developed area and alot of the wires there are buried. Here they aren`t cause they don`t want to invest because they dont make enough money...... ROFL!!
  28. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    July 16, 2013 at 6:21 am
    * I should say died not killed * "In the meantime people actually died!" *
  29. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 16, 2013 at 7:08 pm
    Well you probably live in quite a developed area and alot of the wires there are buried.

    All of them around here, as far as I know. One advantage of a small, densely populated country. There are overhead power lines in England, but not that much length of them and multiple redundancy is built into the grid. If a line goes down, others will take the load with minimal loss of efficiency.

    What we get here is an excellent distribution system hampered by politics. For years now, the national grid has been telling governments that shortages are going to happen because power stations are going to be decommissioned in the near future and replacements aren`t being built and renewables are being over-used and stressing the system beyond sensible limits. Governments have mostly been ignoring them.

Leave a Reply