For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882410
We need energy sovereignty, like steel sovereignty and defence.

Shame bojo has joined the green party. I thought we were going to get on with gas fracturing. Heh ho

We still need fossil fuels in any case. All these green technologies still need electronics and plastics which is essentially fossil fuel. I suppose you aren't burning it and just forming lumps of hydrocarbons instead.

I thought America got pretty close hence less acting as world's policeman.

On a less serious note they said gas fracturing caused an earthquake in Blackpool. (It was like a bus going by the house) Surely that's a win though. You get energy and Blackpool gets demolished. What's there not to like.

My wife is from Hull for some strange reason they like it. In order to restore balance I loathe it. :lol:

P.s. why is f r a c k i n g a swear word? Gas fracturing is awfully formal lol.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882429
StratoTramp wrote:We need energy sovereignty, like steel sovereignty and defence.


Well, that isn't going to ever happen is it?

How about working with some other like minded folks and do an exchange of desirables?
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882445
Well tbh the UK works with the French, Germans and Italians on defence with workshare. A lot of that is outside eu/EC treaties.

But certain things are key capabilities that you should be able to do for yourself worst comes to the worst.

Energy generation is obviously pretty high up. Becauas you cant do anything else without it.

Macron has not been behaving much better than Lukashenko recently tbh. Threatening energy supplies... weaponising refugees :lol: and that's one of the countries that like us 1/3rd of the time
User avatar
By kanga
#1882452
StratoTramp wrote:..

My wife is from Hull ..


.. which, coincidentally (?), is the UK conurbation which is (after Greater London) most vulnerable to phenomena (rising sea levels, storm surges, heavy localised rainfall upstream) associated with climate change :? :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-59208096
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1882462
The thing about energy sovereignty (ie domestic coal / gas / oil etc) is that WE can choose how it's extracted, how much WE use, when WE0 stop doing it and how WE remediate afterwards.

All those options are pretty much off the table right now.
User avatar
By kanga
#1882465
StratoTramp wrote:..Hull ..

Looks like they are creating engineering solutions to it. It's just like any other problem.

..


It remains surprising to me that (Central) UK government has been consistently unwilling to back Severn Estuary tidal power schemes in South Wales, while enthusiastically (and, to the foreign consortia concerned, apparently generously) backing new nuclear on the other side of the estuary .. Both are now proven technologies, AIUI

[Tidal there, and as a byproduct of any major seawall flood protection schemes in Hull, might also yield sheltered seaplane bases :wink: ]
StratoTramp liked this
By Bill McCarthy
#1882472
The Maygen project is well under way in the Pentland Firth - taking advantage of the rapid tidal flows. Tidal, being much more dependable than wind.
kanga liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882479
I've been a bit puzzled that tidal technologies haven't got more traction as there are some very promising undersea turbines which are low risk to wildlife and essentially work on tidal currents and have been successfully tested in Orkney I believe....
By Bill McCarthy
#1882489
There are two tidal generating methods in use in the Pentland Firth. Subsurface, where they are basically a smaller version of the wind turbine and anchored floating devices where they have propellorlike blades driving inboard generators. I think wave motion generators have been abandoned. The thing is tidal times are different round our coasts, therefore we could capture more continuous power output.
On nuclear power - every generating installation will require quite a heavy (armed) security force along with special fire services on site to deal with the out of the ordinary events relating to nuc radiation and contamination.
johnm liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882500
I was struck watching the Earthshot programme by the clear message that the issue is about much more than climate change and energy efficiency and the way in which a few folk are trying to mimic nature by creating closed loop systems to eliminate waste was very heartening, some good people with clever ideas and quite a lot of it starting up as essentially self help in the third world.
By LowNSlow1
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1882529
OCB, I've got no aversion to green tech at all far from it. Unfortunately the basic fact is that the current generation of renewables are unable to maintain base load 100% of the time. In fact they are unable to maintain base load full stop.
There is always a minimum of 10% generated by our ageing nuclear plants only one of which is remotely modern (Sizewell B). These will be phased out over the coming decade thus making the problem worse.
On average 40% of our generation is done by CCGT units burning natural gas.
Even if masses of battery storage plants spring up all over the UK, we haven't built one yet, they will still not be able to pick up the shortfall created by reduced windspeeds in the short term or maybe never as they are horrifically expensive to build.
Until tidal power, small nuclear reactors or other yet to be commercialised methods of generation are actually in place and proven to be functional then we have to face the fact that we WILL be burning gas like it or not. That is, unless you want us all to turn the lights off and literally return to the dark ages.
Which comes back to my original point which was well explained by skydriller: why not produce our own gas and oil to our production standards instead of shipping it from around the world causing more pollution than necessary?

Have a look at Gridwatch for accurate splits of generating methods in the UK https://gridwatch.co.uk/. Currently (18:11 on 13-Nov-21), the overall demand is 38.21GW of which 46% is covered by CCGT (gas), 15% nuclear, 1.5% coal and 10% is coming across from Europe on the interlinks. Renewables are therefore supplying 27.5% of the demand. Based on these figures I think it's reasonable to assume that gas is going to be with us for at least the next 10-20 years wouldn't you agree?
Flying_john liked this
By Spooky
#1882530
Bill McCarthy wrote: If the world is serious about taking radical measures, then it’s going to hurt, a lot, in the pocket and in lifestyles, long before it has any effect.


It’ll hurt for the general population. I doubt it’ll make much difference for those in control, the billionaires etc (well apart from getting wealthier) :?
StratoTramp liked this
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14