Giant offshore wind farms to supply half of UK power

Druckles said:
Everyone has multiple methods. The problem is everyone's main sources are the ones that are going to run out. And there are still way too many hippies around to bung Nucleoid Plants everywhere.
Click to expand...

A pitty.
 
There is actually less uranium readily available than you think. It's a rare element that is only created at the end of a supernova. You can't just use any uranium either, it's got to be a particular isotope and you've got to enrich it more. There isn't enough out there to replace oil as an energy source. It's also has the same issues as mining many other metals, namely impact on the land and pollution. And then what do you do with the depleted uranium afterwards? If you want to keep putting it into munitions you might need more wars to fight.
 
Yes, I wouldn't want any bunging of Nucleoid Plants.

Clarky will win a Nobel after harnessing Zero Point Energy. Problem solved.
 
Goddamn treehugging hippies get back to San Francisco.


We should just get loads of cats in big treadmills with amber rods brushing their coats.
 
Basically all I was saying was I wouldn't want our Nucleoid Plants to be anally raped.

And don't pull any punches because I'm a woman, feel free to criticize anything I say if it's worthy of such. But nothing I say is worthy of criticism :D
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy




Theres so many viable options and up-coming options, it seems silly to just go placing wind turbines all over the place, the least efficient and reliable, and most eye sore impacting pieces of crud ever.

Out of all the options, why we seem obsessed with stone age, or at least medieval Dutch technology I don't know.

Its danger to birds, construction of them is environmentally disturbing, they cover large areas and are massive eyesores, and yeah.

And this silly notion that folk carry that Chenobyl was a massive disaster and is going to happen to every nuclear plant in the present and to come is stupid.

Its not a nuclear bomb, the area around Chenobyl is not a wasteland, its actually thriving without human disturbance, and modern reactors are most certainly NOT the poorly built and poorly maintained soviet era first generation reactor.
 
Tidal and wave energy are always overlooked but they are better than wind.
 
Unless you're in the med.
Or, uh, inland.
 
Cheomesh said:
I always figured the best approach was to go about with multiple different methods of generation. We already do it in the US with nuclear power (short drive from my house actually, Calvert Cliffs), wind, solar, coal(?), etc.
Click to expand...
I keep waiting for a meltdown there. I remember visiting it when I was in middle school and thinking nuclear power was totally awesome, mostly because it is. And then I remember thinking about it on 9/11 and wondering how vulnerable it was to terrorist attack. Talk about a scary thought.

This whole windfarm idea for Britain sounds like it was poorly thought out. Seems very reactionary. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can see this doing just as much harm as it does good. I guess we'll find out in 2020. Well, not really, since we won't be alive past 2012.

EDIT: Oh, and - http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/26/maglev-wind-turbines-1000x-more-effiencient-than-normal-windmill/

England =
facepalmsmiley1ti3.gif
 
When I worked in HVAC, there was talk of SAM sites being built around ours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top