Categories
Should Rishi support onshore wind farms or oppose? – politicalbetting.com
Should Rishi support onshore wind farms or oppose? – politicalbetting.com
There is nothing like an energy crisis with predicted soaring costs that causes politicians to look at alternative sources which in the past have been a opposed.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind...
(I claim first post privilege to absolve me from any criticism for a comment that is, I accept, a long way from representing the epitome of good humour)
I have big problems with large tranches of moorland being permanently scarred by windfarms.
So yes, we should allow onshore wind; but we should sure as heck consider *all* environmental considerations when placing them.
Here in Spain my solar hot water panel has given me free hot water almost continuously since April and even before only needed the electric boost for half an hour or so a day. This morning I get 12 panels on my south facing roof - we get well over 320 sunny days a year here.......
And by the way, Scotland leads the world in offshore wind. England doesn’t.
Then there are other aspects: those same haul roads make access much easier, converting wilderness into anything-but-wilderness. Or the alteration of drainage patterns caused by the haul roads.
We've mucked about with our moorlands for decades now: e.g. EU subsidies to improve drainage (which just increased erosion), or planting loads of ecologically-nasty dense coniferous plantations over them. We need to be showing them more care.
There are seven in Scotland generating around 2GW of electricity.
The balance is in Wales.
If you’re going to tell lies to support your obsessive xenophobia at least try to make them intelligent ones.
Got it.
TBF, that does give Scotland (360kW) over twice as much per capita as England (175kW)
The blue circles are being built or going to be built
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23154879.alex-cole-hamilton-contacts-stats-authority-snp-wind-power-claim/
The other issue with wind power is transmission over distance costs money - so while Scotland has a lot of wind potential (though nothing like as much as Nats claim) most of it is distant from the electricity demand.
Senior Whitehall officials are examining whether Scottish civil servants should be allowed to keep working on the SNP’s independence plans following the landmark court decision. Simon Case, who as cabinet secretary is the UK’s most senior civil servant, and Sue Gray, the permanent secretary to the Cabinet Office are looking at what effect the decision has on officials north of the border. Gray led the so-called “Partygate” investigation into Boris Johnson,
The court verdict led to Nicola Sturgeon pledging that the next general election in Scotland will be a de facto referendum on independence . Questions have been raised since the ruling about whether it is legitimate for public money to continue to be spent making the case for independence.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6fb75fcc-6f58-11ed-8a5b-f385de7508fe
360Wpp Scotland
175Wpp England
Partly that's about reducing the intermittency problem, and partly it's because the resources are so diffuse. We're going to need a lot of machines to tap into them.
Scottish Open: Ronnie O'Sullivan misses fastest TV century break by three seconds
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/63784265
We deserve better than a government that cannot govern, so Labour will step up and lend our votes. There’s no excuse for more delay
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/levelling-up-bill-is-just-another-broken-tory-promise-vq0szdpfs
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1597405399040217088
He's lost it.
https://awol.com.au/5-bars-that-prove-berlin-has-the-best-nightlife-in-the-world/12156 https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1597486415256113162/photo/1
Wind is reliable over long periods, it's just not reliable for today or next Thursday. (And, for that matter, tidal is great for knowing you'll get power today... But it won't necessarily be at the time of maximum demand.)
Every kilowatt hour of electricity generated by wind is an mmbru of gas we don't need to import.
Also, this is maximum capacity, not actual power generation which is where the Scottish Natural Awesomeness Factor Unleashed comes into play
And the devices we are merrily posting away on. Like 18th century Britons liking a little sugar in their tea.
That's progress, of a sort.
The US / Europe have a different economic tradition to China, namely one of private sector monopolies or oligopolies. But it should be very clear to anyone paying the slightest attention that social media in the West is at the top of the same slope that China has already descended down.
People like to argue that it doesn’t impact free speech if Twitter or Facebook or Apple choose to block perfectly legal statements from their platforms. But that rather overlooks the monopolies they enjoy, especially when looked at as a Silicon Valley blob.
If true that Apple has threatened to remove Twitter from the App Store that would be a pretty scary revelation indeed. And almost certainly a counterproductive one, given you really don’t want to give Musk the bit between his teeth to go after you. Hopefully Tim Cook realises this and calms his people down a bit.
When the blame lies solely with him.
But who knows, he might turn Twitter around and make it insanely profitable. But he seems to be going a very odd way about it.
Do other Scottish Nationalists behave the same way? Or can they not recall?
As for Apple: they would be perfectly within their rights to remove the Twitter app.
Have you seen Tesla's market capitalisation compared to Apple's? Apple is worth 2.29 trillion. Tesla is 573.17 billion. Apple is far bigger, and has a much bigger and rabid fanbase (as we see on here).
I am not a fan of Apple, but Musk is bang out of order on this. And as for the Musk Fanbois who suggest Musk is going to produce a smartphone... I fear they're a little deluded.
The most entertaining thing in that battle will be all the people who wanted the walled garden broken down, who will suddenly support it to the death.
The problems with onshore have been mentioned - the main one is the damage done getting the turbines in place. The other is the limitation to smaller, less efficient turbines.
Moving a 50m turbine blade on land is stretching what is possible. On the sea, a 100m blade is a not especially large or heavy cargo. The cranes to lift the parts into place are even more of an issue. At sea you can get multi-thousand ton lift cranes easily. On land a crane that can lift 10 tons that high is a big production to get in place.
There is no shortage of offshore wind farm sites. Enough to provide x times the entire grid consumption of the U.K.
Do you think Twitters cash flow has improved these last few weeks?
Though efficient use of renewable generation requires international cooperation.
In addition, depending how it is designed and built, it can actually act as storage for other generation sources - pump extra water into the ponds.
That's added to the 'problem'.
But they need to factor in such damage.
Parler and Gettr and Truthsocial are on Apple stores. Why wouldn't twitter be.
Conversation on Sky this morning between Burley and Jonathan Ashworth
Burley - 'they were talking of rationing energy during the England v Wales match tonight - what is all that about?'
Ashworth - 'it is due to 12 years of Tory neglect and lack of onshore wind farms'
The question and answer demonstrates terrible journalism and party politics response
Burley should have referred to the windfarms providing just 2% of our energy yesterday, threatening the electricity supply, and even with more onshore windfarms just how would labour address the issue that 63% of energy yesterday came from gas
Burley is not the only journalist who really does not provide serious discussion on complex matters
And I agree tidal is needed
1) Big Project Syndrome. Wind farms scale from on turbine etc
2) which leads into the “needs 2 decades of planning enquiries” thing. Some people believe this is a moral right. The anger produced by the streamlining of onshore wind
applications and those for small power storage is amusing.
3) Persistent opposition in the permanent government apparatus. Dr Palmer tells us if a report on the cost of tidal, which he saw as an MP. If it the same report I have seen, it is based on a number of untruths about tidal. So for decades, both Labour and Conservative governments have been told debatable facts by the… experts.
Perhaps Tesla has widened its market enough to embrace more people. But they're probably pi**ing off some owners and would-be owners.
Ashworth is just trotting out the same pre prepared lines Nandy was trotting out on the Andrew Neil show. Expect far more of it and it will be effective. It may not be true but it will be effective.
Blair and Brown ducked the building of new nuclear plants in the 1990s. Cameron and Clegg made the decision to go for gas and wind instead of tidal and nuclear, apart from a rather half-arsed sop to the latter in the form of Sizewell C. May dithered in much the same way, and Johnson never even got started.
But then, why limit it to energy? Similar criticisms could be made about transport, or phone infrastructure, or water.
The payment structure is important though - particularly if we're overabundant with power (Yes yes that's clearly not now on a foggy still day near the winter solstice)
It is nearly impossible for an app to do much to the overall phone in iOS.
Onshore wind is the cheapest way to generate electricity in the UK, constraint payments (with which you seem strangely obsessed) included.
Any significant tidal capacity will take a decade or more (once approved) to build; onshore wind a year or so.
There was also an EU project which I think still exists as a long-term concept as links are gradually developed - linking energy supply across the continent and across the Med to North Africa, on the basis that you'd almost never get a situation where there was a shortage of wind in Norway and sun in Algeria at the same time. Loss on energy in transit as an issue, but a surprisingly small one. It's the kind of pan-European project where we should be happy to take part regardless of our views on Brexit.
https://twitter.com/kevinaschofield/status/1597505299963064330
Journalists are only interested in drama, facts don't matter. Many don't know any facts. Twenty-four hour news has made things worse. From the famous quote in 'The man who shot Liberty Valance.' 'When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.'
Politicians are elected for five years as a maximum. Tidal energy is front-loaded with costs before the benefits kick in. Why spend vast sums for the opposition to gain the benefit?
You have to treat both occupations as being small children, because they act like them.
Mattia Binotto quits.
We should never have bet on wind, and now that we have, the focus needs to be overwhelmingly on power storage, and incentivising low cost power generation, not people chucking up wind farms the same way that they've chucked up university accommodation - because ultimately it is a Government backed get rich quick scheme.
F1: while Ferrari did make strategy screwups, the drivers also made more errors than the Red Bull pair. And, more importantly, they lost the development race by a mile.
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/23154308.ai-generated-images-reveal-brighton-pavilion-new-light/
We should absolutely be building more onshore wind farms, although the first and second priorities should be offshore wind and tidal. The problem with building onshore wind farms is peat destruction. However, not all high, windy ground is peaty. There are plenty of places that are suitable, and not all need damaging access, especially if built close to existing infrastructure.
I accept, however, that I may be in a minority in thinking that the turbines are attractive.