Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just heard a very interesting slot on R4 about sustainable energy.


Many of us in ED are rightly concerned about the environment, but perhaps like me, you are not really sure about what the most effective ways to help the planet are. For example, I have just heard that turning off our mobile phone chargers (as we are continually urged to do) saves 1% of the power used to run a 40W lightbulb all day: i.e., 1% of 1 kWh. Fair enough,, but to put that into perspective, that is the same amount of power used to run your average car for 1 second. Oh.:(


I recommend that you scamper off to www.withouthotair.com and download Professor David Mackay's book (it's free) and we can all get some urgently-needed perspective.


I thank you.

Find it on Listen again here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jvdhb


On a related note some SE22 residents can get hold of a free "show me how much electricity am I using" meter (worth about ?40) at the moment, see this thread http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?9,244688,244688#msg-244688

haha


nothing like a climate change debate to get things going on the forum


I liked the way the Ramblers objected to the placement of wind turbines in most areas becaseu it would spoil their view and their hobby. Thought, in their favor , they did intriduce the barely whispered idea that wind power, even if sexed up to make it seriously efficient, would never have much of an impact - akin to taking an aspirin to cope with your hair being on fire.


sorry

The trouble with windfarms is what everybody quite rightly says, there is no electricity without wind, you need to be able to store the energy from times of plenty?but there is a way of storing it. You use the variable energy from windfarms or solar panels etcetera to pump water up hill into a reservoir storing all that potential energy to be released controllably through hydroelectric generators to provide a consistent power source to be connected to the national grid.


Instead of the Dinorwig hydroelectric power station in Wales using spare electricity from the national gird to recharge its reservoir this could be done using a separate renewable energy gird. Piece of p?ss!

Skidmarks - your storage is sensible and already in use to store the power generated by conventional (gas, coal, nuclear, hydroelectric etc) generators which work best if kept at a steady state - so during the night and other low useage times the excess can be stored as you suggest. There is some loss of power during the process as the power recovery by hydroelectricty cannot be 100%.


However, to use the excess power from windfarms in a similar way doesn't make quite the same sense. Windfarm only generate power when the wind blows - so they are inherently inefficient already and can't provide enough power to make a substantial difference to the grid anyway. If the power they do generate is diverted to a storage facility and then recovered there is a secondary loss of power as above - making them yet more inefficient.


If you are seeking natural / renewable sources of power look at tidal and wave energy - predictable and incredibly powerful, plus the fact that nowhere in UK is more than 120 miles from the coast - much is far closer. Nuclear power also has much to recommend it.

Does the loss of energy and inefficiency matter? Now using a coal power stations energy just to pump water up hill over night is a waste considering coal is about 30% at most efficient. Using the variable output from a completely new renewable energy national grid just to top up reservoirs around the country would store lots of potential energy and be carbon free ? who cares about the losses.


The problem with renewable energy sources apart from wave and hydro-thermal is that the output is variable you need away of storing the energy. Considering we are about to go for carbon capture which makes coal plants even less efficient so the losses with what I suggest will be irrelevant considering there is no CO2 produced.

onsidering there is no CO2 produced.


Not CO2 free - remember the manufacturing of the turbines, associated machinery and the cables from the turbines to the point of transformation / storage - often excessive as the windy places are a long way from the places of use. EG: The planned Eastern Highlands windfarms with 200 miles of pylons marching across some of Scotland's most beautiful landscapes - including the Wallace Memorial.


Wind farms are inefficient AND they ruin the landscape. Nuclear and hydro (preferably tidal) are far better.

skidmarks Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So building a tidal barrier out millions of tonnes

> concrete or mining, processing and transporting

> uranium from Australia has no carbon footprint?



I didn't suggest it was carbon free - just that is was a renewable source.

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> skidmarks Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > So building a tidal barrier out millions of

> tonnes

> > concrete or mining, processing and transporting

> > uranium from Australia has no carbon footprint?

>

>

> I didn't suggest it was carbon free - just that is

> was a renewable source.


I think tidal is a great option but you do need a variety of renewable energy sources.


Nuclear I am not so sure on, we do not have our own supply of uranium so can?t be confident of security as per the situation with Russian gas and of course it is not renewable.

everyone always mentions the energy and therefore CO2 produced in manufacturing wind turbines etc so when you are figuring the efficiency of coal, nuclear, has etc you should also be including the energy needed to mine it and build the machines to mine it, plus the energy to transport it etc.


There is also energy lost from large centralised power stations sending electricity over long distances. Smaller more localised renewable electricity generation would help with that.


Comparisons that fail to look at the whole process of each method of energy generation are faulty.


Also after Chernobyl, why the hell would anyone consider more nuclear?

Chernobyl was a crap design managed by crap engineers in a crap system. Modern designs are very very much better.


I spent much of 15 years (almost) within less than 100 foot of a nuclear reactor. To date - no problems. IN fact the incidence of cancfers for nuclear submariners tends to be lower than the national average (we spent a lot of time out of natural sunshine and not close to other radiological sources such as Radon.


Nuclear isn't scary when you get to know it.


BTW - I was on duty when satellite intelligence of the Chernobyl reactor problem was detected - for a brief (very brief) moment there was a worry that it might be the presage of something far more scary - like WWIII

Ah nuclear energy - the CDO's of the energy world


Come on quids - people who raise concerns about the "challenges" around nuclear energy and the storage for generations to come have a point - and dismissing it as leftie bobbins is both a cheap shot and doesn't inform the debate in any way


If I have learned anything in life it's that anyone who is adamant that "there is nothing to worry about" is to be treated with a degree of suspicion directly connected to the size of the issue they are talking about. See also every economist over the last 10 years

er, my point is that the anti-debate is just that - "CDOs" etc being a pretty good example of it Sean. iE where the text book Guardian response starts so often prejudice dressed up as 'being right' without debate and to challenge it is the devlish work of fascists...come on, I thought you were a champion of the madness of "BadScience". I know bugger all about this but I'm sure as hell willing to listen to a rational debate about it (as far as I can see it does offer us a potential way out of the forthcoming energy holocaust) without my lefty mates, who know as little as me, taking a ooooh it's the work of the devil starting pointand defaulting to "Chernobyl" as if that's the end of the argument. Flatearthiness of the worst kind...

Hmmm - it would help your argument if you didn't follow shouting down people as thinking they are "right" by saying "I know bugger all about it. That makes it sound like chip on shoulder stuff rather than a proper debate


Maybe some of the people you deride do know more about it and your fear of an energy holocaust prejudices your judgment? I'm not saying I do.. but it's possible some people know more than us right?


I don't think either you or I trust any government or subcontracted company to not f***-up anything from medical records to ID cards. So despite any progress made in the years from chernobyl onwards, human fallacy means the likelihood of a fuck up increases with any proliferation of not just reactors but (more likely) the ongoing storage of the waste. And I don't think we are in any way equipped to deal with the fallout - people are rushing to reap the benefits and are "light" in our assesment of the risks

..and the approaching environmental holocaust? 'Cos believe me making it harder to drive in London and switching all our lights off for an hour once a year won't stop that....there's no easy answers which phillisophicaly leads me to look at Nuclear as a potential solution. I'm not a scientist,i'll let them do that, but i'm suspicious of people whose Knowledge is probably as poor as mine resorting to Student Common room default position on these important issues.


edited cos it was almost unreadable

OK - to put the question more clearly to anti nuclear team:


What are your concerns?


1. Likelihood of a reactor turning into a bomb?


2. Likelihood of a major disaster creating major nuclear fallout?


3. Likelihood of it becoming a terrorist target - with effect of 1 or 2 above?


4. Long term "pollution" of storing nuclear waste?


5. Something else entirely?


Once the questions are posed rationally then brational answers can be providedd.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...