Not As Environmentally Friendly As Promised

[Floyd]

Seeing as we're getting more frequent, heavier rains, it would seem far more sensible (not so sure about it being overly practical in some areas) if as a country we had plans for building more dams for hydro, and hydro screw systems, small scale and larger generators, we get it all for free! (apart from the initial builds.)

Reservoirs also provide large areas for wildlife.

 

[Sid]

Reservoirs also provide large areas for wildlife.

Yes, both for Wildlife, and if they are open for use to the public, for people too!

 

[Floyd]

Yes, both for Wildlife, and if they are open for use to the public, for people too!

Definitely.
I was lucky enough to have these three on my doorstep to walk round;

 

[Tunn11]

Reservoirs also provide large areas for wildlife.

They also collect water which we seem to run out of every Summer. Perhaps we could keep some of the Winter flood water and use it then.

 

[Stormkhan]

I always think that it's shortsighted to back all on one generation method.
Wind farms (off-shore and on) aren't the only alternative. You've got wave or tide generation, solar panels (which generate eve on overcast days), even geothermal - where suitable of course.
Isn't there a place for 'horses for courses' attitude?

 

[Mythopoeika]

I always think that it's shortsighted to back all on one generation method.
Wind farms (off-shore and on) aren't the only alternative. You've got wave or tide generation, solar panels (which generate eve on overcast days), even geothermal - where suitable of course.
Isn't there a place for 'horses for courses' attitude?

Indeed. We probably shouldn't force everybody to go down one path.
Eggs and baskets, etc.

 

[ramonmercado]

I think this fits here.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1755865749481034221

 

[hunck]

I always think that it's shortsighted to back all on one generation method.
Wind farms (off-shore and on) aren't the only alternative. You've got wave or tide generation, solar panels (which generate eve on overcast days), even geothermal - where suitable of course.
Isn't there a place for 'horses for courses' attitude?

From the National Grid:

In 2023, individual renewables contributed the following:

• Wind power contributed 29.4% of the UK’s total electricity generation.
• Biomass energy, the burning of renewable organic materials, contributed 5% to the renewable mix.
• Solar power contributed 4.9% to the renewable mix
• Hydropower, including tidal, contributed 1.8% to the renewable mix.
  

So wind is the main one at present.

 

[Analogue Boy]

Meanwhile, Germany is planning more gas power stations with the aim of transforming them to hydrogen plants in the future.
Yeah. Right.

 

[Sid]

Meanwhile, Germany is planning more gas power stations with the aim of transforming them to hydrogen plants in the future.
Yeah. Right.

Apparently, it would need three times more hydrogen gas to bring it to equal gas power output!

 

[maximus otter]

The UK is much closer to blackouts than anyone dares to admit.

We are heading for a big electricity crunch as it is. Whoever wins the general election, the next government will be committed to decarbonising the National Grid [by 2035 at the latest]. That means either closing all the gas power stations or fitting them with carbon capture and storage technology – which does not yet exist on scale in Britain and whose costs are likely to be massive.

At the same time every single one of our existing nuclear power stations is currently due to reach the end of its life by 2035. If Hinkley C is delayed much beyond its latest estimated completion, we could end up with no nuclear at all.

That could leave us trying to power the country pretty much with intermittent wind and solar energy alone – and this at a time when politicians want millions more of us to be driving electric cars and heating our homes with heat pumps, thus substantially increasing demand. How will we keep the lights on? One struggles to find satisfactory explanation from the National Grid ESO, which is trusted with this task.

...another large part of the picture seems to be “demand flexibility” – a polite term for rationing energy through smart meters, jacking up the price whenever supply is short. No wonder the Government seems keener than ever to force smart meters on us.

But even if your meter is working, don’t be fooled by the claim that it will save you money. When we get “dynamic tariffs”, they are unlikely to be anything like Economy 7 where the daytime and nighttime prices are fixed and easy to understand. When the wind drops and the sun goes down, it will require eye-watering electricity prices to persuade enough people to turn off their appliances to avoid blackouts.

It won’t take an enemy power to put us all in the dark – just energy customers doing normal things on a normal winter’s evening.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/25/uk-closer-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

Paywalled, but quoted here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/02...oser-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

maximus otter

 

[MorningAngel]

‘A power company that has received £6bn in UK green subsidies has kept burning wood from some of the world's most precious forests, the BBC has found.’

Drax: UK power station still burning rare forest wood https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68381160

 

[Sid]

The UK is much closer to blackouts than anyone dares to admit.

...another large part of the picture seems to be “demand flexibility” – a polite term for rationing energy through smart meters, jacking up the price whenever supply is short. No wonder the Government seems keener than ever to force smart meters on us.

But even if your meter is working, don’t be fooled by the claim that it will save you money. When we get “dynamic tariffs”, they are unlikely to be anything like Economy 7 where the daytime and nighttime prices are fixed and easy to understand. When the wind drops and the sun goes down, it will require eye-watering electricity prices to persuade enough people to turn off their appliances to avoid blackouts.

It won’t take an enemy power to put us all in the dark – just energy customers doing normal things on a normal winter’s evening.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/25/uk-closer-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

Paywalled, but quoted here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/02...oser-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

maximus otter

No wonder the Government seems keener than ever to 'try to' force smart meters on us!

 

[Mythopoeika]

The UK is much closer to blackouts than anyone dares to admit.

We are heading for a big electricity crunch as it is. Whoever wins the general election, the next government will be committed to decarbonising the National Grid [by 2035 at the latest]. That means either closing all the gas power stations or fitting them with carbon capture and storage technology – which does not yet exist on scale in Britain and whose costs are likely to be massive.

At the same time every single one of our existing nuclear power stations is currently due to reach the end of its life by 2035. If Hinkley C is delayed much beyond its latest estimated completion, we could end up with no nuclear at all.

That could leave us trying to power the country pretty much with intermittent wind and solar energy alone – and this at a time when politicians want millions more of us to be driving electric cars and heating our homes with heat pumps, thus substantially increasing demand. How will we keep the lights on? One struggles to find satisfactory explanation from the National Grid ESO, which is trusted with this task.

...another large part of the picture seems to be “demand flexibility” – a polite term for rationing energy through smart meters, jacking up the price whenever supply is short. No wonder the Government seems keener than ever to force smart meters on us.

But even if your meter is working, don’t be fooled by the claim that it will save you money. When we get “dynamic tariffs”, they are unlikely to be anything like Economy 7 where the daytime and nighttime prices are fixed and easy to understand. When the wind drops and the sun goes down, it will require eye-watering electricity prices to persuade enough people to turn off their appliances to avoid blackouts.

It won’t take an enemy power to put us all in the dark – just energy customers doing normal things on a normal winter’s evening.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/25/uk-closer-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

Paywalled, but quoted here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/02...oser-to-blackouts-than-anyone-dares-to-admit/

maximus otter

This is why we should be buying a 'plan B' system for these eventualities... perhaps one of those paraffin heaters that old people used to use back in the day? They stink the house out, but may be the only way if they won't let us use coal, wood fires, or even electricity.

 

[PeteS]

This is why we should be buying a 'plan B' system for these eventualities... perhaps one of those paraffin heaters that old people used to use back in the day? They stink the house out, but may be the only way if they won't let us use coal, wood fires, or even electricity.

Have you tried to buy paraffin recently - rare as hen's teeth in my neck of the woods. Those heaters were gigantic fire risks - I wonder how my parents survived (and me come to think of it).

 

[Mythopoeika]

Have you tried to buy paraffin recently - rare as hen's teeth in my neck of the woods. Those heaters were gigantic fire risks - I wonder how my parents survived (and me come to think of it).

Any DIY centre, apparently. Or even Amazon.
Yes, they were hazardous, but people used them because they had no central heating.
The heaters available today seem to be a lot safer.

 

[Stormkhan]

We've all our camping gear to use, plus candles, plus propane heaters.
We can't afford to run our (electric) central heating.

 

[Analogue Boy]

What about them big calor gas heaters?

 

[Mythopoeika]

What about them big calor gas heaters?
View attachment 74385

Definitely a viable option... while bottled gas is still available.
Possibly more potentially dangerous than the paraffin ones?

I guess the gas bottles could also be used for cooking.

 

[Analogue Boy]

AMOS Portable Calor Gas Heater, a high-performance heating solution designed for both indoor and outdoor use. With a maximum heat output of 4.2KW and three adjustable settings (low at 1.4KW, medium at 2.5KW, high at 4.2KW), this heater efficiently warms spaces up to 80 square meters, making it ideal for homes, offices, or outdoor areas. Its compatibility with various fuels and the capacity to hold up to a 15kg gas container, ensures versatility and prolonged heating. Safety is paramount with this heater, featuring a Piezoelectric ignition for easy start-up and a flame-failure safety mechanism for automatic shut-off in case of flame extinguishment.

https://www.diy.com/departments/amo...VwqODBx04oQu5EAQYAyABEgKCS_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

Never pictured myself as a heating consultant but these work indoors and outdoors and seem a safer solution to paraffin heaters and the base unit seems relatively cheap for an indoor heating solution. Don’t know about the gas cost and usage time though. Still. When the power goes down…..

 

[Stormkhan]

The only downside to propane/paraffin heaters is the condensation caused. Especially as when the heaters are used, we're disinclined to open a window slightly for ventilation.
As well as free-standing heater (as illustrated above), we have a small 'space' heater - like a propane-powered jet - which is fantastic to heat a room in a few moments but is incredibly noisy. The amount of condensation it creates is quickly visible.

 

[maximus otter]

The American revolt against green energy has begun​

In a story filled with all the standard climate alarmist narratives, USA Today recently reported on the rising movement by local governments in the United States to refuse to permit unwanted wind and solar industrial sites in their jurisdictions.

After setting the stage by parroting the Biden administration goals of “100 per cent clean energy by 2035, a goal that depends on the building of large-scale solar and wind,” USA Today points to the reality that such big, intrusive, ugly, and destructive industrial sites have been rejected by twice as many county governments as approved them. The writers complain that the rejections come about by some combination of “outright bans, moratoriums, construction impediments and other conditions that make green energy difficult to build,” but don’t go on to describe why the rejections are taking place.

Simply put, these huge industrial sites – we simply must stop using the friendly-sounding term “farms” to describe them – create all manner of negative consequences for local communities. Consequences like loud noise from wind turbines, hundreds of dead birds and bats sprinkled across the countryside, thousands of acres of productive farm or ranchlands taken out of production for many years if not permanently, spoiled views, enormous “graveyards” filled with 150-foot blades and solar panels popping up all over the place, and impacts to local wind and weather patterns that are only now beginning to be understood.

The only real way to protect a city or county from these myriad impacts is to refuse to allow them to be built.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/ar-BB1jbhhO

maximus otter

 

[Floyd]

The only downside to propane/paraffin heaters is the condensation caused. Especially as when the heaters are used, we're disinclined to open a window slightly for ventilation.
As well as free-standing heater (as illustrated above), we have a small 'space' heater - like a propane-powered jet - which is fantastic to heat a room in a few moments but is incredibly noisy. The amount of condensation it creates is quickly visible.

These are my preferred heater.
Quiet and with a thermostat so you can keep the temp constant (some also have timers).
Ideal for warming one room.
Also the heat given off, somehow seems more 'comfortable' to me than radiators.

 

[Mythopoeika]

These are my preferred heater.
Quiet and with a thermostat so you can keep the temp constant (some also have timers).
Ideal for warming one room.
Also the heat given off, somehow seems more 'comfortable' to me than radiators.
View attachment 74401

It's electric, isn't it?

 

[Mythopoeika]

https://www.diy.com/departments/amo...VwqODBx04oQu5EAQYAyABEgKCS_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

Never pictured myself as a heating consultant but these work indoors and outdoors and seem a safer solution to paraffin heaters and the base unit seems relatively cheap for an indoor heating solution. Don’t know about the gas cost and usage time though. Still. When the power goes down…..

I have done a bit of digging on the web, and it looks like Calor gas (or any butane/propane gas) puts out less carbon monoxide and particulates than with paraffin.
So yes, probably a safer option. The bottles are refillable, so no wastage.
The other thing is the cost of a heater. That one you linked to looks good and is really cheap, compared with a modern paraffin heater.

At some point, my fear is that TPTB may ban the sale of gas, paraffin, wood, smokeless fuel, etc. They don't want us to survive a harsh winter.

 

[Mythopoeika]

Another option in case of power blackouts is a portable power station. These aren't cheap, costing between £1000 and £2000.
You wouldn't use it for heating, but you could run a light, radio/TV, computer, microwave from it for a few hours.
Bluetti and Jackery seem to be the top brands.
Some of these power stations can be recharged with solar panels, which is handy.
As with anything on charge, it's probably best to take the necessary precautions.

 

[Analogue Boy]

Nearly a million Brits face being forced onto controversial smart meters as the BBC longwave radio service that tells devices when to switch to low fees is switched off​

• The BBC has broadcast the Radio Teleswitch Service (RTS) since the 1980s
• The decision to close RTS has been taken by Energy UK as the system reaches the end of its operational life

Almost a million households will be forced to switch to smart meters or risk paying higher heating bills when the BBC stops transmitting a 40-year-old long-wave radio service.

Since the late 1980s, the BBC has broadcast the Radio Teleswitch Service (RTS) which tells meters across the country when to change their fees from high to low.

Around 900,000 households, mostly those that are off the gas network and use electricity for heating and hot water, use tariffs such as Economy 7 or Economy 10 which offer cheaper power at night.

The signal is broadcast from a BBC transmitter at Droitwich in Worcestershire telling meters across the whole of the UK when to switch tariffs on and off.

So much for choice. And thanks for nothing BBC.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...io-service-tells-devices-switch-low-fees.html

 

[Mungoman]

The American revolt against green energy has begun​

In a story filled with all the standard climate alarmist narratives, USA Today recently reported on the rising movement by local governments in the United States to refuse to permit unwanted wind and solar industrial sites in their jurisdictions.

After setting the stage by parroting the Biden administration goals of “100 per cent clean energy by 2035, a goal that depends on the building of large-scale solar and wind,” USA Today points to the reality that such big, intrusive, ugly, and destructive industrial sites have been rejected by twice as many county governments as approved them. The writers complain that the rejections come about by some combination of “outright bans, moratoriums, construction impediments and other conditions that make green energy difficult to build,” but don’t go on to describe why the rejections are taking place.

Simply put, these huge industrial sites – we simply must stop using the friendly-sounding term “farms” to describe them – create all manner of negative consequences for local communities. Consequences like loud noise from wind turbines, hundreds of dead birds and bats sprinkled across the countryside, thousands of acres of productive farm or ranchlands taken out of production for many years if not permanently, spoiled views, enormous “graveyards” filled with 150-foot blades and solar panels popping up all over the place, and impacts to local wind and weather patterns that are only now beginning to be understood.

The only real way to protect a city or county from these myriad impacts is to refuse to allow them to be built.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/ar-BB1jbhhO

maximus otter

I'm all for any kind of renewable energy source - to be perfectly candid, In a nation run by Capitalism, this response doesn't surprise me.

 

[Sharon Hill]

The American revolt against green energy has begun​

In a story filled with all the standard climate alarmist narratives, USA Today recently reported on the rising movement by local governments in the United States to refuse to permit unwanted wind and solar industrial sites in their jurisdictions.

After setting the stage by parroting the Biden administration goals of “100 per cent clean energy by 2035, a goal that depends on the building of large-scale solar and wind,” USA Today points to the reality that such big, intrusive, ugly, and destructive industrial sites have been rejected by twice as many county governments as approved them. The writers complain that the rejections come about by some combination of “outright bans, moratoriums, construction impediments and other conditions that make green energy difficult to build,” but don’t go on to describe why the rejections are taking place.

Simply put, these huge industrial sites – we simply must stop using the friendly-sounding term “farms” to describe them – create all manner of negative consequences for local communities. Consequences like loud noise from wind turbines, hundreds of dead birds and bats sprinkled across the countryside, thousands of acres of productive farm or ranchlands taken out of production for many years if not permanently, spoiled views, enormous “graveyards” filled with 150-foot blades and solar panels popping up all over the place, and impacts to local wind and weather patterns that are only now beginning to be understood.

The only real way to protect a city or county from these myriad impacts is to refuse to allow them to be built.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/ar-BB1jbhhO

maximus otter

There are many pitfalls with this unrealistic approach. First, lots of exaggerations in there. But no activity is harmless. However, are nuclear plants, hydroelectric dams, gas and oil pads, and coal mines less onerous? Certainly not. Electricity must be generated somehow. In many states, you may not be able to limit land uses to refuse it. If the jurisdiction forbids that use, they can be sued and may lose. Economics will win out.

 

[Mythopoeika]

However, are nuclear plants, hydroelectric dams, gas and oil pads, and coal mines less onerous?

True, they do have their downsides. However, apart from hydroelectric dams, the ones you mention don't use up huge tracts of land that could be used for farming. Solar is the worst for that - it occupies land formerly used for crop-growing or as pasture land.