Given that fracking in Lancashire and other places would reduce our need to expensively import Coal and gas - how can we shift the Overton window on fracking so that we can get it going again?
Perhaps we should focus on cultural spaces. :) :) I loved how in Battlestar Galactica they always substitured "Frack" for the F-word. Maybe we can solve the demographic issues AND the energy problem with one unified policy....Make Fracking Great Again!!
Our two key political parties here in Australia are basing the justification for their policy toward nuclear energy on contradictory assessments of whether it is financially feasible.
Please settle the argument with an answer to this question.
Is it financially viable to build nuclear reactors?
Hi Kathryn, its my thought that if you could get more electricity out of a small windmill generator over time than it took to build them then they would be everywhere and would not need subsidies.
Why is it that the cost of manufacture, cost of concrete pads etc for wind turbines or maintenance never seem to be included in Ed Milibands figures?
surely nuclear is the way to go long term, small local reactors like they have in submarines?
A small windmill likely won't keep you fully in the modern world, but it is sufficient to power low-demand uses for a small family. Individual-home electical-generation was the initial norm, visible in early 1900s NYC, where thick masses of lines cross overhead between buildings. The big power plants were made to power industrial activity, and providing residential power is only a secondary purpose, and not the primary demand for their electricity product.
Heavy industry is shutting down or relocating because of high energy costs. Isn’t net zero accelerating de-industrialisation, hollowing out jobs and supply chains?
Hahaha, you know what? I was thinking of that movie when I posed the question. Politicians pursuing net zero targets (or clinging to them) without admitting the costs or the consequences if/when the system fails - just as depicted in Don't Look Up - it smacks of wilful blindness.
Oh man, that's too funny. G_d love the Zeitgeist. :) If Triggernometry fans get their way I reckon the elites exit strategy will involve being eaten by a Bronteroc. :) :)
Labour say Net Zero will create jobs and growth but given the UK’s useless track record on big infrastructure projects and industrial strategy is there a danger we end up offshoring green industries while paying more for imported energy and technology
Do politicians even understand the physics of the energy system? Or is net zero being pursued as a virtue-signalling exercise divorced from engineering reality?
Technology becoming autonomous and intergalactic requires more (and ever-renewing) power - that is why there is a push to spread forever-replenishing energy sources. There will be no so-called "green energy" replacement of all the old fuels, the new and supposedly clean sources only *add* to existing fuels, until they're fully depleted.
Kathryn Rolls Royce are touting their SNR development as a future solution for energy needs in the UK and perhaps the wider world, and most analysts say a mix of renewables and fossil fuels will be needed until such tech comes online. What do you think is the timeline for this transition, and do you think Fusion Reactors might supersede it, and what might that look like?
The UK is shutting down reliable baseload generation while becoming more dependent on intermittent renewables. How can we square the circle of energy security with legally binding net zero targets?
Would our electricity price domestic and industrial significantly reduce if the Combined Cycle Plants were allowed run at base load. My concern is that CCPP plants cycling to meet demands of green energy is costing the user and giving Ed Milliband reason Gas Power Plants are expensive. Also cost of Distribution network to meet a zero carbon infrastructure that would be required??
Why did the government remove support for the Xlinks project involving solar energy transmission from Morocco, when it ticked so many of the ‘net zero’ boxes?
Given that fracking in Lancashire and other places would reduce our need to expensively import Coal and gas - how can we shift the Overton window on fracking so that we can get it going again?
Perhaps we should focus on cultural spaces. :) :) I loved how in Battlestar Galactica they always substitured "Frack" for the F-word. Maybe we can solve the demographic issues AND the energy problem with one unified policy....Make Fracking Great Again!!
Our two key political parties here in Australia are basing the justification for their policy toward nuclear energy on contradictory assessments of whether it is financially feasible.
Please settle the argument with an answer to this question.
Is it financially viable to build nuclear reactors?
Hi Kathryn, its my thought that if you could get more electricity out of a small windmill generator over time than it took to build them then they would be everywhere and would not need subsidies.
Why is it that the cost of manufacture, cost of concrete pads etc for wind turbines or maintenance never seem to be included in Ed Milibands figures?
surely nuclear is the way to go long term, small local reactors like they have in submarines?
A small windmill likely won't keep you fully in the modern world, but it is sufficient to power low-demand uses for a small family. Individual-home electical-generation was the initial norm, visible in early 1900s NYC, where thick masses of lines cross overhead between buildings. The big power plants were made to power industrial activity, and providing residential power is only a secondary purpose, and not the primary demand for their electricity product.
Heavy industry is shutting down or relocating because of high energy costs. Isn’t net zero accelerating de-industrialisation, hollowing out jobs and supply chains?
If, or when, the public finally revolts against rising bills and unreliable power, what is the government’s exit strategy for net zero?
Good question! Did you ever see the movie "Don't look up?" :) :)
Hahaha, you know what? I was thinking of that movie when I posed the question. Politicians pursuing net zero targets (or clinging to them) without admitting the costs or the consequences if/when the system fails - just as depicted in Don't Look Up - it smacks of wilful blindness.
Oh man, that's too funny. G_d love the Zeitgeist. :) If Triggernometry fans get their way I reckon the elites exit strategy will involve being eaten by a Bronteroc. :) :)
Labour say Net Zero will create jobs and growth but given the UK’s useless track record on big infrastructure projects and industrial strategy is there a danger we end up offshoring green industries while paying more for imported energy and technology
Do politicians even understand the physics of the energy system? Or is net zero being pursued as a virtue-signalling exercise divorced from engineering reality?
Technology becoming autonomous and intergalactic requires more (and ever-renewing) power - that is why there is a push to spread forever-replenishing energy sources. There will be no so-called "green energy" replacement of all the old fuels, the new and supposedly clean sources only *add* to existing fuels, until they're fully depleted.
Kathryn Rolls Royce are touting their SNR development as a future solution for energy needs in the UK and perhaps the wider world, and most analysts say a mix of renewables and fossil fuels will be needed until such tech comes online. What do you think is the timeline for this transition, and do you think Fusion Reactors might supersede it, and what might that look like?
Which political party do you think understands Britain's energy needs and what it's people need best?
What financial interests do Ed Miliband and other politicians etc have in “green” energy?
The UK is shutting down reliable baseload generation while becoming more dependent on intermittent renewables. How can we square the circle of energy security with legally binding net zero targets?
Would our electricity price domestic and industrial significantly reduce if the Combined Cycle Plants were allowed run at base load. My concern is that CCPP plants cycling to meet demands of green energy is costing the user and giving Ed Milliband reason Gas Power Plants are expensive. Also cost of Distribution network to meet a zero carbon infrastructure that would be required??
that's an excellent question.
Why did the government remove support for the Xlinks project involving solar energy transmission from Morocco, when it ticked so many of the ‘net zero’ boxes?
Is anyone in Whitehall listening to you?
What has been your favourite wacky way to produce energy you've seen? (Doesn't necessarily have to feasible now or ever)
Experts have compared recycling a modern lithium battery to unscrambling an omelet. Will car batteries ever become completely recyclable?