Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About
Waterloo Campaign
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 01:35 30 Sep 2022
- Windsor Castle: People travel hundreds of miles to say farewell to the Queen
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/10/22 - ClimateFest, Melksham
21/10/22 - TWSW General Meeting
02/11/22 - WWRUG / Trowbridge

On this day
30th Sep (2013)
BRB Residuary Body abolished (*)

Train RunningNo cancellations or delays
PollsOpen and recent polls
Open to 04/10 08:15 Airport closure (Doncaster) - what to you think?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
September 30, 2022, 01:46:58 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[84] ClimateFest, Melksham, 17th September 2022 - Electric Bus pres...
[76] Elizabeth Line - ongoing discussion
[57] East - West Rail update (Oxford to Bedford) - ongoing discussi...
[56] Channel 5 series - Paddington Station 24/7, starting 11 Septem...
[48] Airport Closure - Doncaster / Sheffield / Robin Hood
[44] Every cloud ...
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
  Print  
Author Topic: Extinction Rebellion UK - May 2020  (Read 18395 times)
GBM
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 972


View Profile Email
« Reply #75 on: April 05, 2022, 06:55:30 am »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-57156482
Cornwall Wave Hub to be sold for offshore wind farm
Published18 May 2021

A £42m wave energy facility launched 11 years ago is to be sold to an offshore wind farm company.

Wave Hub, an undersea "socket" located off Hayle in Cornwall, is meant to transfer electricity from wave energy producers to the National Grid.

So far no firms have used the facility for that purpose.

Owner Cornwall Council said it would be sold for an undisclosed sum to Swedish firm Hexicon in a deal expected to be completed at the end of May.
(Continues)..........
Logged

Personal opinion only.  Writings not representative of any union, collective, management or employer. (Think that absolves me...........)
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6108


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: April 05, 2022, 03:57:33 pm »

Tidal is more than barriers and lagoons. The current projects in the Solent and Anglesey do not have lagoons or barriers they are tidal turbines.  The Solent is under construction and funding for the land works on Anglesey has been secured sop construction can start.  Assuming these systems function reliably then it could be a game changer for tidal power as it substantially reduces the investment and lead times. 

Good news then. Let's see how well this goes, in the hope that it does prove a game changer.


A £42m wave energy facility launched 11 years ago is to be sold to an offshore wind farm company.

That's £42 million, plus the £14 million spent on maintenance.
Logged

Now, please!
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5032



View Profile
« Reply #77 on: April 07, 2022, 08:31:05 pm »

Boris should please them then as he’sannouncing policy of nuclear & windfarms next week

The announcement has now been made. The main points are.

More offshore wind farms.
Eight new nuclear reactors at existing nuclear sites.
More drilling for oil and gas in the North sea.
Domestic heat pumps to be encouraged.
Little mention of onshore wind farms.
Little mention of solar energy.
Almost no mention of reducing consumption.

My own views may be sumarised as;

More off shore wind--------- excellent as this is a proven technology available right now.
New nuclear--------------Neutral, due to concerns about ever extending completion dates and ever inflating costs.
More drilling for oil and gas-------Regrettable, we should be reducing use of these fossil fuels, not looking for more.
More heat pumps--------Neutral, they have their merits but are costly and complicated.
Little mention of ONshore wind--------Regrettable as this is the cheapest source of electricity.
Little mention of solar------------Regrettable as more use of this proven and quick to implement technology is desirable.

Almost no mention of reducing consumption, understandable as most people hate it !
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4216


View Profile
« Reply #78 on: April 07, 2022, 10:34:19 pm »

Big nuclear won't deliver till about 2035 at the earliest.
Domestic heat pumps won't be any good if there is not enough electricity to power them.
No mention of insulation which could actually reduce demand

So in the short term we emit more carbon and push loads of people into poverty, but hey it might be ok in 20 years if the country lasts that long. 
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5032



View Profile
« Reply #79 on: April 09, 2022, 07:49:04 am »

"If the country lasts that long" ! Careful or you will start to sound like me !

Nuclear MIGHT produce economical electric power one day, but I share your concerns about the time that it will take.

Domestic heat pumps show some promise but as you point out require electricity. A heat pump is inherently costly and complicated.

My preferred heating system for new homes would be such good insulation that very little heating is needed. A small enough heating demand can be met affordably from electricity.

For existing homes that can not be affordably improved, then I favour a log burning stove for the most used room.

Another possibility would be wet central heating from a large hot water tank that is heated by off peak electricity.

Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4216


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: April 09, 2022, 08:48:52 am »

My preferred heating system for new homes would be such good insulation that very little heating is needed. A small enough heating demand can be met affordably from electricity.

Totally agree

For existing homes that can not be affordably improved, then I favour a log burning stove for the most used room.

There I would disagree the air quality implications of this are very damaging.  see this from the Guardian

Another possibility would be wet central heating from a large hot water tank that is heated by off peak electricity.

Thermal heatstores as they have become known are becoming more widespread. Some more modern ones do not use water as the storage medium - rather like the old nightstore heaters.  They benefit from high temperature heat sources so not so good for heat pumps at the moment.  Very useful complement to a solar roof though! Can be topped up from the grid when necessary. 
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1366


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: April 09, 2022, 12:03:36 pm »

In my view wood burning stoves need to be discouraged and eventually phased out. They were promoted from 20 years or so ago on the concept of biofuel being good on a nett carbon perspective ignoring the particulate problem, similar in some respects to preferring diesel fuel for cars. Although this can be mitigated to some extent by stove design, eliminating open fires, and by the use only of properly dried wood this cannot be removed altogether. Presently wood burning in London is the cause of 2.5 times the particulates produced by road transport.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4720


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: April 09, 2022, 02:40:00 pm »

In my view wood burning stoves need to be discouraged and eventually phased out. They were promoted from 20 years or so ago on the concept of biofuel being good on a nett carbon perspective ignoring the particulate problem, similar in some respects to preferring diesel fuel for cars. Although this can be mitigated to some extent by stove design, eliminating open fires, and by the use only of properly dried wood this cannot be removed altogether. Presently wood burning in London is the cause of 2.5 times the particulates produced by road transport.

Maybe someone can answer this question: I can see that it may be possible to identify which particulates come from burning wood, but is it possible to tell what proportion of these emissions come from burning properly dried wood in 'ecodesign' stoves? Is it possible that it might be a very small proportion?
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1366


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: April 09, 2022, 03:27:52 pm »

The figure I quoted above is one from analysis of PM2.5 emissions done for DEFRA from the UK (United Kingdom) National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. This  was done on 2016 data so not right up to date but not terribly old either. London is a smokeless zone pretty much completely and so no wood should be being burnt on an open fire in homes there.

This report may have more detail: https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat05/1801301017_KCL_WoodBurningReport_2017_FINAL.pdf
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6108


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: April 10, 2022, 01:04:51 pm »


Nuclear MIGHT produce economical electric power one day, but I share your concerns about the time that it will take.

Rome wasn't built in a day, and Hinkley C certainly isn't going to be. Yes, it takes a long time, but I wouldn't want people 20 years from now saying "If only the government had started the process of building new nuclear in 2022, we wouldn't be in this mess now". I'm still annoyed with Margaret Beckett, who in 2002 decided no new nuclear should be built because it would cost votes, and threw all the money at wind instead. (Currently supplying a not-so-massive 4% of our electricity, and yes I know it does better some days.) Straight after that, the pipeline from Milford Haven to Gloucestershire was built, opening in 2007, intended to allow a fifth of the gas we use to be imported. So we said no to nuclear, yes to renewables, and built a huge fossil fuel facility. Had we said yes to nuclear and some renewables instead, we would probably have burnt a lot more coal in power stations for a decade and had three or four gleaming new nukes chucking out vast amounts of green electricity, and be about to demolish the coal plants. Then again, we might have had the wrong nuclear technology, although not the old Magnox plants, meant for plutonium production first. Then again, if my auntie had nuts...

Quote
Domestic heat pumps show some promise but as you point out require electricity. A heat pump is inherently costly and complicated.

My preferred heating system for new homes would be such good insulation that very little heating is needed. A small enough heating demand can be met affordably from electricity.

For existing homes that can not be affordably improved, then I favour a log burning stove for the most used room.

Another possibility would be wet central heating from a large hot water tank that is heated by off peak electricity.

I've gone off heat pumps of late, as I research them for a new build property with plenty of land. The physics is sound, but the engineering less so, as you infer. I am hopeful that the technology will improve greatly, although I am not sure what research is going on, and I am not giving up my (4 year old and regularly services) gas boiler just yet. District heating will be better in the urban setting, so long as people can be sure it will always be cheap and reliable. It is in Iceland, although they have obvious advantages. Geothermal should work nicely in some places, so long as nobody realises that the warmth comes from nuclear decay heating water running through fractured rocks.

I certainly can't argue with the idea of good insulation. I am hoping that if no other good comes out of the recent price increases, it will be that people without good insulation stop wating for the government to do something, and get on with the job themselves. There are a lot of relatively low-cost fixes. I'm not so sure about log burning stoves from an environmental point of view, though I would have one myself if I were to move elsewhere.

The large hot water tank is an interesting idea, at least for anyone with room for one, but I wonder how long we will have off-peak electricity when everything is electric?

On your earlier post, I think I would be quite happy for onshore wind nearby if everyone local supported the idea, as that would mean there wouldn't be any. Polls show 3-1 support for onshore wind, but not if you ask the people who live where they would be built. Conversely, nuclear tends to be more popular in its own back yard than elsewhere. I don't know if that is because of the well-paid jobs, or because it's statistically a lot less dangerous than wind energy, but the neighbours don't seem to feel they are living in the shadow of looming disaster.

Maybe someone can answer this question: I can see that it may be possible to identify which particulates come from burning wood, but is it possible to tell what proportion of these emissions come from burning properly dried wood in 'ecodesign' stoves? Is it possible that it might be a very small proportion?

If there is research data to answer your question, I haven't been able to find it either. Neither DEFRA nor HETAS gives figures on their website. It's possible that they have found through limited investigation that even some owners of the most advanced eco-burners are not against rummaging through skips or chopping up used pallets when times are a little on the hard side, and their policy is based on the assumption that all behave in similar fashion when no-one is watching.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2022, 04:05:24 pm by TonyK » Logged

Now, please!
Oxonhutch
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1092



View Profile
« Reply #85 on: April 10, 2022, 01:16:15 pm »

Geothermal should work nicely in some places, so long as nobody realises that the warmth comes from nuclear decay heating water running through fractured rocks.

Luckily the nuclear decay is a long way away from the water being heated by it! That decay is also making Iceland and the Atlantic, and subducting the Pacific along the 'Ring of Fire'.

Although since the 1920's (and earlier), visionaries could see evidence that the continents must all have at one time been conjoined and have therefore must have drifted to their current positions. The idea was strongly condemned at the time as there was then no viable means of powering the process. It was Arthur Holmes of Durham University in the 1930s that realised it was nuclear decay in the mantle driving continental scale convection cells therein. Plate tectonics was born.

HOLMES, A. (1931). Radioactivity and Earth movements:
Transactions of the Geological Society of Glasgow, 18 (3), pp. 559-606.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2022, 01:34:44 pm by Oxonhutch » Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1366


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: April 10, 2022, 04:16:58 pm »

There has been a lot of mention in the media about Rolls-Royce's 'small' modular nuclear power plants and their potential advantages. Much less if any that they were proposing these back in the early 1990s, albeit a somewhat different design concept, in association with the UKAEA and a couple of American partners and could get no financial support from the government of the day or for that matter the electricity industry although they were in the midst of privatisation.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6108


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: April 10, 2022, 06:18:24 pm »

There has been a lot of mention in the media about Rolls-Royce's 'small' modular nuclear power plants and their potential advantages. Much less if any that they were proposing these back in the early 1990s, albeit a somewhat different design concept, in association with the UKAEA and a couple of American partners and could get no financial support from the government of the day or for that matter the electricity industry although they were in the midst of privatisation.

Whether that proved to be a lucky break, allowing the technology to develop before building the first, or yet another example of government procrastination, I am not sure. Possibly a bit of both. Rolls Royce have form in the small modular market to a degree, with submarine systems going back nearly 60 years. The small modular reactor is also a pressurised water design, now in the process of generic design assessment by the regulators, as of last month.
Logged

Now, please!
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1366


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: April 11, 2022, 09:08:50 am »

The current Rolls-Royce design is if anything rather more 'conventional' than the 1990 one, although that too was a PWR concept. This may have the benefit through being closer to deployed plant of having a more similar safety case but can't on the other hand benefit from shifting the 'economy of scale' line of something a bit more innovative.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page