Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Nuclear power is as clean if not more so than wind power!!!!!! You can tell you live in Millom...Millomite!!! Nuclear as clean as wind power...surely your having a laugh?!?! You call burying our highly toxic problems "clean"...you might as well bury your head in the ground with it! Wind farms have to be part of a joined up approach, combining different sources of power...this country's previous power problem has been becasue it put all it's egg's in one basket. 70 to 90% of electricity is lost in transmission (in the movement of electric from source to supply) - more, smaller scale, greener power creation is needed, reducing this massive waste . My brother carries out bird surveys to compile Environmental Impact Assessments for wind farms...he always agrees...they have no impact on bird life. They nest around their base, they avoid the blades (they simply aren't going fast enough) and don't disrupt their migration patterns. Like some here I too am fasinated by their movement, I live near some and it certainly gives me a boost everytime I see, and walk among them. They're not too noisy either...although I do believe in the vibration effects if you are in the wrong place downwind of them...although this is supposed to effect a very small minority of people. In this case they should get compensation and compulsory purchase orders on thier property - harsh but for a greater good. The one thing I disagree with is that locals who may have knock on reduction in house prices because of the wind turbines (generally in direct line of sight/sound) are not compensated for the reduction in value of their property...then all would be fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Nuclear power is as clean if not more so than wind power!!!!!! You can tell you live in Millom...Millomite!!! Nuclear as clean as wind power...surely your having a laugh?!?! You call burying our highly toxic problems "clean"...you might as well bury your head in the ground with it! Wind farms have to be part of a joined up approach, combining different sources of power...this country's previous power problem has been becasue it put all it's egg's in one basket. 70 to 90% of electricity is lost in transmission (in the movement of electric from source to supply) - more, smaller scale, greener power creation is needed, reducing this massive waste . My brother carries out bird surveys to compile Environmental Impact Assessments for wind farms...he always agrees...they have no impact on bird life. They nest around their base, they avoid the blades (they simply aren't going fast enough) and don't disrupt their migration patterns. Like some here I too am fasinated by their movement, I live near some and it certainly gives me a boost everytime I see, and walk among them. They're not too noisy either...although I do believe in the vibration effects if you are in the wrong place downwind of them...although this is supposed to effect a very small minority of people. In this case they should get compensation and compulsory purchase orders on thier property - harsh but for a greater good. The one thing I disagree with is that locals who may have knock on reduction in house prices because of the wind turbines (generally in direct line of sight/sound) are not compensated for the reduction in value of their property...then all would be fair. Whereabouts you from Oly? In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean!!!! A large part of my MSc course was based on sustainable development and one project we did looked at the pros and cons of wind v nuclear. Installing a wind turbine is an incredibly intensive process:- tonnes of concrete to provide a base, implementation of infrastructure such as roads etc to access the turbines (which are often in remote areas). They are also just ineffecient, if the wind isn't strong enough they don't work, if the wind is too strong they cut out. We did a Life Cycle Analysis which looked at meeting the UK energy demand by usely either solely wind or nuclear. We would need 20 nuclear power stations or an area the size of Wales with turbines at a density of 10 per square mile. Some might agree that covering Wales with all these turbines might not be a good idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Whereabouts you from Oly? In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean!!!! A large part of my MSc course was based on sustainable development and one project we did looked at the pros and cons of wind v nuclear. Installing a wind turbine is an incredibly intensive process:- tonnes of concrete to provide a base, implementation of infrastructure such as roads etc to access the turbines (which are often in remote areas). They are also just ineffecient, if the wind isn't strong enough they don't work, if the wind is too strong they cut out. We did a Life Cycle Analysis which looked at meeting the UK energy demand by usely either solely wind or nuclear. We would need 20 nuclear power stations or an area the size of Wales with turbines at a density of 10 per square mile. Some might agree that covering Wales with all these turbines might not be a good idea I too live in Cumbria, I worked for many years for the government in the environment sector (including regulation of nuclear), did my undergrad in the environment sector and am a signed up member (and ex committee member) of a national Chartered Environmental Institute...but these are just my humble views! Some flaws in you arguement: In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean - what about disposal, building and decommsioning? Wind turbines can always be removed cleanly leaving no evidence of their being there Not sure when you did you MSc but they are not inefficient compared to most other power supplies...about 60% being around the norm. A life cycle analysis of one form of energy or another is wasted, and very simplistic, study...like I said a joined up approach of different energy creation is required, not just one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I too live in Cumbria, I worked for many years for the government in the environment sector (including regulation of nuclear), did my undergrad in the environment sector and am a signed up member (and ex committee member) of a national Chartered Environmental Institute...but these are just my humble views! Some flaws in you arguement: In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean - what about disposal, building and decommsioning? Wind turbines can always be removed cleanly leaving no evidence of their being there Not sure when you did you MSc but they are not inefficient compared to most other power supplies...about 60% being around the norm. A life cycle analysis of one form of energy or another is wasted, and very simplistic, study...like I said a joined up approach of different energy creation is required, not just one. Disposal, building and commissioning create jobs, boosting the local economy. I think these benefits far outweigh the negatives in terms of the environment. Thousands of people work at Sellafield, for years and years, windfarms have maintenance guys and thats really about it. I did my MSc at Newcastle. I'd disagree with the efficiency figure too. I think you are referring to the Betz limit, of about 59% efficiency. As this is a theoreticaly maximum it is very unlikely that this will be consistently achieved. A much more valid unit of comparison is the capacity factor. This gives a better indication of how good they actually are. This is the energy generated during a given period divided by the energy that would have been generated if the wind farm was running at maximum output. Capacity factors for the UK vary between 15% and 45%, with a European average of 30%. Nuclear plants typically have the highest capacity factor of any generating source with capacity factors of about 90 percent. In my eyes a much more valuable option is solar panels on everyones roof. Generatign electricity for their own house and selling some back to the national grid. If the price of the equipment comes down I can see many people taking up this option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Disposal, building and commissioning create jobs, boosting the local economy. I think these benefits far outweigh the negatives in terms of the environment. Thousands of people work at Sellafield, for years and years, windfarms have maintenance guys and thats really about it. I did my MSc at Newcastle. I'd disagree with the efficiency figure too. I think you are referring to the Betz limit, of about 59% efficiency. As this is a theoreticaly maximum it is very unlikely that this will be consistently achieved. A much more valid unit of comparison is the capacity factor. This gives a better indication of how good they actually are. This is the energy generated during a given period divided by the energy that would have been generated if the wind farm was running at maximum output. Capacity factors for the UK vary between 15% and 45%, with a European average of 30%. Nuclear plants typically have the highest capacity factor of any generating source with capacity factors of about 90 percent. In my eyes a much more valuable option is solar panels on everyones roof. Generatign electricity for their own house and selling some back to the national grid. If the price of the equipment comes down I can see many people taking up this option. Disposal, building and commissioning may well create jobs and boost the local economy but it's only temporary...the lasting damaging effects to the environment...and subsequently the ecomony is massive...notice how the only major emplyer in west cumbria is Sellafield...there's a reason for that...no other major company else wants to be there because of sellafield! I'm not talking about that Betz limit...I'm talking about what is published in journals within this financial year. I agree on the solar front...that's exactly what I'm talking about many, small scale energy generation...through solar, wind, wave, water and latent heat power. Look at http://www.windsave.com/ - only £900 with current subsidies...this should be brought down by the government to more like £500 and the savings will come from the power they create. Also look at air and ground heat pumps...for every 1Kw of eneergy put in they create 4Kw out...this is free energy we're talking about...sack nuclear! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodmedod.one Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean - what about disposal, building and decommsioning? Package into small cylindrical containers and drop onto Iraq or Afghanistan. Sorted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 In operation Nuclear Power is extremely clean - what about disposal, building and decommsioning? Package into small cylindrical containers and drop onto Iraq or Afghanistan. Sorted. I don't think we should even subject them to that rubbish! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Disposal, building and commissioning may well create jobs and boost the local economy but it's only temporary...the lasting damaging effects to the environment...and subsequently the ecomony is massive...notice how the only major emplyer in west cumbria is Sellafield...there's a reason for that...no other major company else wants to be there because of sellafield! I'm not talking about that Betz limit...I'm talking about what is published in journals within this financial year. I agree on the solar front...that's exactly what I'm talking about many, small scale energy generation...through solar, wind, wave, water and latent heat power. Look at http://www.windsave.com/ - only £900 with current subsidies...this should be brought down by the government to more like £500 and the savings will come from the power they create. Also look at air and ground heat pumps...for every 1Kw of eneergy put in they create 4Kw out...this is free energy we're talking about...sack nuclear! How you can class 50+ years of employment as temporary I'll never know. The only major employer in South Cumbria is the Shipyard? Why? Infrastructure. If you live in either West or South Cumbria, it becomes very expensive to trade with poor rail and road links. West and South Cumbria are outposts, companies moving into the area would find it very difficult to offset transportation costs if they were to match the wages of Sellafield workers for similarly skilled people. The lasting major damage to the environment is likely to be an area (depends on the size of the plant how big and contaminated this is) which can't be used and resource use. With wind turbines 1000 tonnes of concrete is left in the ground - effect on watercourses and hydrology etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 How you can class 50+ years of employment as temporary I'll never know. The only major employer in South Cumbria is the Shipyard? Why? Infrastructure. If you live in either West or South Cumbria, it becomes very expensive to trade with poor rail and road links. West and South Cumbria are outposts, companies moving into the area would find it very difficult to offset transportation costs if they were to match the wages of Sellafield workers for similarly skilled people. The lasting major damage to the environment is likely to be an area (depends on the size of the plant how big and contaminated this is) which can't be used and resource use. With wind turbines 1000 tonnes of concrete is left in the ground - effect on watercourses and hydrology etc. You think 50 years is a long time? Think of the bigger picture and you'll realise it's nothing. The shipyard was there pre Sellafield and is hanging on for the next big government contract...which is a bit precarious. Your right, there are poor road and rail links...but that's only because there isn't the demand for it. If there was it would be installed. Wind turbine bases are generally removed if a site is decommissioned thereby removing the issue. Besides concrete is generally inactive as a substance...so there is no pollution issue. Concrete cancer is tested for periodically so anything that is found is dealt with accordingly - very rare though in the bases as concrete cancer generally requires contact with the atmosphere and car pollution inparticular. Try telling sellafield about effects on watercourse and hydrology...nastier stuff there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 You think 50 years is a long time? Think of the bigger picture and you'll realise it's nothing. The shipyard was there pre Sellafield and is hanging on for the next big government contract...which is a bit precarious. Your right, there are poor road and rail links...but that's only because there isn't the demand for it. If there was it would be installed. Wind turbine bases are generally removed if a site is decommissioned thereby removing the issue. Besides concrete is generally inactive as a substance...so there is no pollution issue. Concrete cancer is tested for periodically so anything that is found is dealt with accordingly - very rare though in the bases as concrete cancer generally requires contact with the atmosphere and car pollution inparticular. Try telling sellafield about effects on watercourse and hydrology...nastier stuff there! I'm only here for circa 70 years mate, I do not worry! There is no demand because no one wants to chance it. Think about it. Would you risk spending millions on a factory etc with the 'hope' of getting better infrastructure? Noone here worries about Sellafield, I've lived here since I was born and have no worries at all. Working in the Nuclear sector as an Environmental Consultant I know that things arent as bad as the press portray them to be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I'm only here for circa 70 years mate, I do not worry! There is no demand because no one wants to chance it. Think about it. Would you risk spending millions on a factory etc with the 'hope' of getting better infrastructure? Noone here worries about Sellafield, I've lived here since I was born and have no worries at all. Working in the Nuclear sector as an Environmental Consultant I know that things arent as bad as the press portray them to be "I'm only here for circa 70 years mate, I do not worry!" - that's exactly the problem...people's mentality...it doesn't effect me Jack - I come across it alot and to be perfectly honest it makes me sick! Can't believe you profess to be a Environmental Consultant...I trust your not Chartered!? If a large organisation wanted to invest in the area they would be in talks with the government - those talks would then assess the demand for further infrastructure...the process is just not as simple as you think. Nobody around Sellafield worries about it as most of them are employed by them...and they aren't about to bite the hand that feeds them are they?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 "I'm only here for circa 70 years mate, I do not worry!" - that's exactly the problem...people's mentality...it doesn't effect me Jack - I come across it alot and to be perfectly honest it makes me sick! Can't believe you profess to be a Environmental Consultant...I trust your not Chartered!? If a large organisation wanted to invest in the area they would be in talks with the government - those talks would then assess the demand for further infrastructure...the process is just not as simple as you think. Nobody around Sellafield worries about it as most of them are employed by them...and they aren't about to bite the hand that feeds them are they?! I know I probably should care but I don't. At the end of the day I do my job for a job, to pay the bills. I'd quite happily be a bin man if it paid the same!!! I am on the way to becoming Chartered yes. Just because I have opinions does not affect becoming chartered. Chartership is what your experience is and what ******** you can spount in the interviews etc. I know all about the process etc, but regeneration of South and West Cumbria is a very complicated issue. I have seen first hand the difficulties faced in South Cumbria having worked for a government funded regeneration company. You only have to look at the amount of time it has taken for the A590 bypass to take off to understand Cumbrian issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oly Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I know I probably should care but I don't. At the end of the day I do my job for a job, to pay the bills. I'd quite happily be a bin man if it paid the same!!! I am on the way to becoming Chartered yes. Just because I have opinions does not affect becoming chartered. Chartership is what your experience is and what ******** you can spount in the interviews etc. I know all about the process etc, but regeneration of South and West Cumbria is a very complicated issue. I have seen first hand the difficulties faced in South Cumbria having worked for a government funded regeneration company. You only have to look at the amount of time it has taken for the A590 bypass to take off to understand Cumbrian issues. I don't think the environmental sector is for you mate...I love my job and wouldn't have any other, and most of my colleagues are the same...there's just no room for pretenders. I would get out now...otherwise you'll get half way through your career and realise that you have wasted your life on something you don't care about...it would probably be better for the sector as well as you. Chartership isn't just about your experience and what is said in the interviews etc...you'll see!! Catch you later, Oly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millomite Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I don't think the environmental sector is for you mate...I love my job and wouldn't have any other, and most of my colleagues are the same...there's just no room for pretenders. I would get out now...otherwise you'll get half way through your career and realise that you have wasted your life on something you don't care about...it would probably be better for the sector as well as you. Chartership isn't just about your experience and what is said in the interviews etc...you'll see!! Catch you later, Oly. Depends what you mean by the environmental sector mate. I am an environmentalist working in the nuclear sector Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlander Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Green energy my **** it's all just another way of taxing us to the hilt. If they were ever to build enough wind turbines to provide power to all they'd have to cover the country with them and bang would go ANY country sports but then maybe that's what Mr Bliar and his mates want...you can either play golf OR watch football! Personally I don't like 'em, I also don't like nuclear but hey better one block of concret building in some obscure place than 1000's of bloody turbines on every skyline. The nuclear industry does have a pretty good safety record and serves it's purpose. Lovelock rules OK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKEBITE Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Enviromental sector worker? Who let the bloody tree huggers in then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 If you want to decommission a nuclear power station, just chain it to a lamp post outside Sparkie's house. One way or another it won't be there the next day - job done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Mungler It's funny cos it's true, from reports! They tried to put a nuclear plant in Wexford years back before I was even here, "they" were told where they could shove it, and rightly so. I object to Sellafield, or what ever it's being called today. It's not safe, there are and have been numerous leaks (which don't just affect your country if you live in England, but also Ireland and elsewhere when those leaks reach the Irish Sea). Some have gone on unnoticed for weeks and months in some cases. Don't believe me? Look up the reports, also been spoken of in the Dail (Parliment) over here, again on record. The very simple fact of the matter is this, in the context of this thread only mind, wind turbines won't explode and wipe out half the county, and spread that pollution across the globe as Chernobyl did. There are cleaner and greener alternatives already out there, just that the will isn't yet as strong as it should be. Anyway, I'd much rather have a wind turbine or two hundred in my back yard or offshore than a nuclear reactor or three. Simple as. If that makes me a tree hugger so be it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirky640 Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Nuclear power is as clean if not more so than wind power!!!!!! yes rite thats why sheep in cumbria were poluted with radiation when chernovel (spelling i know)went tits up its not safe ! kirky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Ah yes the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster is a bit of a trump card in the 'ol nuclear debate. I make that game set and match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirky640 Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Ah yes the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster is a bit of a trump card in the 'ol nuclear debate. I make that game set and match. yes so dont complain about windy millers houses going up around the hills of the uk then Nuclear power is as clean if not more so than wind power!!!!!! yes rite thats why sheep in cumbria were poluted with radiation when chernovel (spelling i know)went tits up its not safe ! kirky ps and could explain the rise in cancers and related diseases Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il cacciatore Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Nuclear power is not 'clean' as in production it uses conventional transport methods to both transport the raw materials and mine for the uranium. If something goes wrong then radioactive deposits will be released that are long lived in their radioactivity causing all sorts of health problems and the actual fuel itself is not infinite and as such one day will run out. The waste is radioactive for 1000's of years too which amounts in costs for looking after it and storage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noddy without Bigears Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Maybe we could use all the windfarms as dual purpose, just a long shot, like grinding wheat, oops sorry somebody already done it, what's the name, ermm, got it - a Windmill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkshire Pudding Posted January 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I've enjoyed that debate fella's . An here are my findings , i've applied to have some wind turbines put on my land , these are not going to be your run of the mill turbines , but the tallest turbines in the country with a tower hight of 125 meters . If the planning is granted you should be able to see these lovely towers for miles around !! all the best yis yp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirky640 Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I've enjoyed that debate fella's . An here are my findings , i've applied to have some wind turbines put on my land , these are not going to be your run of the mill turbines , but the tallest turbines in the country with a tower hight of 125 meters . If the planning is granted you should be able to see these lovely towers for miles around !! all the best yis yp i like it ya bam pot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.