Re: Coldest start to winter for over 30 years
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:24 pm
Reggie Perrin wrote:
> Fossil and nuclear power plants do go offline for repairs and
> when there are faults, but are generally quite reliable.
Exactly, that's why they provide the baseline load. They are needed however many windmills are built, because they only provide electricity about 30% of the time.
> The real reason for nuclear power is to make isotopes for
> medical use and to make plutonium for nuclear weapons.
Not any more it isn't. Windscale was built to make plutonium for atomic bombs, but modern nuclear power is not used to make weapons grade material, it is purely about making electricity.
> I'm quite happy to pay a subsidy to finance sensible sources of
> energy like wind, wave or bio-power.
Good for you, but I'm not. The bottom line is the renewables obligation adds to the cost of electricity. It makes it harder for people to heat their homes. It will without doubt lead to more deaths in the cold weather in vulnerable groups such as the old. I don't want any part of that thanks.
> I take my hat off to people, usually farmers and people on
> industrial estates (in Europe) who have invested in wind power,
> not on a whim but because it makes money.
It's not a whim, it's a shakedown. The taxpayer is getting screwed to pay for these bastard windmills. The companies building them are pissing themselves at our expense.
> The Dutch plan to be able to power 100 K homes with wind
> turbines, better to think of it as something which takes up the
> slack, rather than something which sometimes doesn't work
> because it isn't windy.
There isn't any slack! That's the point. You have to build conventional power stations anyway, to provide the base load, because windmills will never do this. They only provide power 20 to 30% of the time, so they cannot be relied on. They are a complete waste of time and money, and money spent on them is money that can't be spent in other more useful ways.
> Fossil and nuclear power plants do go offline for repairs and
> when there are faults, but are generally quite reliable.
Exactly, that's why they provide the baseline load. They are needed however many windmills are built, because they only provide electricity about 30% of the time.
> The real reason for nuclear power is to make isotopes for
> medical use and to make plutonium for nuclear weapons.
Not any more it isn't. Windscale was built to make plutonium for atomic bombs, but modern nuclear power is not used to make weapons grade material, it is purely about making electricity.
> I'm quite happy to pay a subsidy to finance sensible sources of
> energy like wind, wave or bio-power.
Good for you, but I'm not. The bottom line is the renewables obligation adds to the cost of electricity. It makes it harder for people to heat their homes. It will without doubt lead to more deaths in the cold weather in vulnerable groups such as the old. I don't want any part of that thanks.
> I take my hat off to people, usually farmers and people on
> industrial estates (in Europe) who have invested in wind power,
> not on a whim but because it makes money.
It's not a whim, it's a shakedown. The taxpayer is getting screwed to pay for these bastard windmills. The companies building them are pissing themselves at our expense.
> The Dutch plan to be able to power 100 K homes with wind
> turbines, better to think of it as something which takes up the
> slack, rather than something which sometimes doesn't work
> because it isn't windy.
There isn't any slack! That's the point. You have to build conventional power stations anyway, to provide the base load, because windmills will never do this. They only provide power 20 to 30% of the time, so they cannot be relied on. They are a complete waste of time and money, and money spent on them is money that can't be spent in other more useful ways.