vindaloo

What we really need is a well thought out and engineered system. Like the one we have today, but skewed to allow for a different power generation strategy.

A for instance would be building dykes/dams offshore and using excess capacity to to fill the resulting lakes higher than sea level. Stick yer salmon farms in some of them too, to keep them away from the wild salmon population.

What we CANNOT allow is for a single panacea solution (especially if it relies on wind power), to totally dominate our power generation. Wind is too fickle and all it would take would be a couple of calm days in mid-winter to cause a major power shortage.

J.

Chris L

Well if the Conservatives want to be more green then just commit to building new nuclear power stations and rid this country of the green hysteria that seems to surround every decision at the moment.

I have to say that this government is making a good habit of spending vast sums of our money at the moment. Also remember that today they guaranteed the commercial commitments of Northern Rock - effectively nationalising it - a potential £100 billion liability. So that's nearly £200 billion committed this week. Exactly how big will ou tax bills have to be to cover this?

AllanB

Pathetic waste of money. If they were serious about saving the planet they'd ban imported seasonal foods like strawberries that get flown in from the USA and educate people that methane is the biggest contribution to global warming not poxy Co2 and that most of the bloody greenhouse gases come from the vast increase in the cow and sheep population and in turn the deforestation of areas now use for these cattle to grave and the growth of cash crops which in turn leads to soil errosion and further slash and burn farming techniques.

We should all buy locally grown produce that would make a huge difference.

AllanB

Chip Sengravy

Just as an aside, you would not believe the money in landfill. A site I go to has 8 Mega Watt of generation from gas drawn off the pit. They make just shy of 8 grand an hour, renewable energy fetches high prices due to the governments ROCS scheme.

With that about, why bother with wind?

OllyK

Looks like the Scotts are kicking this one in to touch!
BBC NEWS | Scotland | Highlands and Islands | Massive wind farm 'turned down'

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

We can hope so - but look at the last line... Scottish Govt gets the final say.

We're boned

OllyK

Maybe you should read the first paragraph
The council on Lewis said OK, but the Scottish parliament is looking like it will say no. Now that will be a nice kick in the pants for the Scottish PM!

Leslie

Nl loves to come out with grandiose schemes for the sake of image and to make us think that they are doing the right things to benefit us all. The problems always show up later demonstrating that they are incapable of thinking things through properly or they don't even achieve what they said they were going to do anyway.

This sounds like yet another gross and very expensive error but they won't mind because the bad effects will be felt when they are no longer in a position to be affected by it.

Interesting that on a smaller note, I hear that those fluourescent low energy bulbs that we will be forced to use actually cost more energy to make and then dispose of then they are reputed to save during their life!

Governing by committee is not the way to get it right!

Les

Brit_in_Japan

Everyone is a critic, it's easier to just criticise than come up with sensible suggestions.

Supplying electricity to meet future needs is no easy matter. There are a range of possible generation sources, each with strengths and weaknesses, and we're trying to do this against a background of reducing this country's carbon dioxide output.

You have renewable energy vs. carbon energy vs nuclear energy.

Build more nuclear power stations? You get the anti-nuclear brigade saying it's unsafe and the costs of de-commissioning are high.
Coal or gas powered stations? Again you have environmentalists complaining about carbon footprints and that carbon sequestration is not proved to work yet.
Wind turbines? Currently costly/MWatt and the uncertainty of supply presents real difficulties.
Tidal power? The Severn barrage could generate a large amount of renewable electricity, but there's no go-ahead yet and you still have problems with electricity generation synchronised to tides and not customer demand.
Bio-mass? I think burning food stuffs to generate power (for electricity or for cars or aircraft) is falling out of favour fast as it's pushing food prices up.

The move towards more micro electricity generation is causing the national grid operators real headaches and the mismatch of renewable generation and consumer demand means we will need considerable over capacity of "regular" power generation when the wind doesn't blow.

In reality we will need all these power generation capabilities with the option to make maximum use of renewables as and when we can. Without some way of storing massive amounts of energy for release when we need, renewables can never take the burden of electricity generation. I think the post carbon world will rely on nuclear generation (in this country anyway).