Jump to content

Fossil fuels should be 'phased out by 2100' says IPCC


Elixir

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 268
  • Created
  • Last Reply

not an expert, but I don't recall ther ever being plans to try and run a surplus straight off the bat - which is the fundamental of his entire argument, that borrowing would be fixed, surely, by the interest rate set by the BoE and that in any case a soverign fund was mean tto build up the oil assets over time rather than use them to prop up the economy. I'm not an epxert obviously, but you can always find one economist to disagree with another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, come early-mid 2016 oil prices are still this low, then and only then can the SNP's forecasts be fully judged.

Unionists simply hate the fact that Scotland has had so much oil wealth over the years. They want people to continue believing that Scotland has to rely on sucking the UK tit to survive.

The renewable energy industry should be the main focus now anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/business/news/renewable-and-fossil-fuel-power-generation-on-a-par-in-scotland-in-2013-1.744233

New figures released by the Department of Climate Change and Energy show that 32% of the electricity generated in Scotland in 2013 came from a renewable energy source.

Coal and gas-fired generation amounted to 31.7% of the total while nuclear remained the singlest largest electricity provider north of the border with a 34.9% share of the market.

The data also showed that scotland remained a net exporter of electricity in 2013 with a record 28% of overall generation being exported - a figure that has increased by 2% in comparison to the year previous.

When the electricity exported is taken into consideration, renewable sources of electricity accounted for 44.4% of Scotland’s power consumption in 2013, up from 38.8% in 2012.

Reynard and that Clarkston fud will be gutted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/305208-december-hailed-as-record-output-month-for-wind-power-in-scotland/

The charity said wind turbines generated enough power to supply over 100% of Scottish households on 25 out of the 31 days of December.

December turned out to be a record-breaking month for wind power, with enough green energy generated to supply a record 164% of Scottish households with the electricity they need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

http://order-order.com/2015/01/13/so-much-for-green-crap-cams-cash-from-sam-dads-wind-farm/#disqus_thread

Just thought the green idiots would like to see how the money is getting funnelled directly out of their pockets and directly into the pockets of wealthy landowners. I'm sure they havent realised yet that they are having the pish utterly ripped out of them. Maybe someday it will sink into their thick skulls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://order-order.com/2015/01/13/so-much-for-green-crap-cams-cash-from-sam-dads-wind-farm/#disqus_thread

Just thought the green idiots would like to see how the money is getting funnelled directly out of their pockets and directly into the pockets of wealthy landowners. I'm sure they havent realised yet that they are having the pish utterly ripped out of them. Maybe someday it will sink into their thick skulls.

Whereas you'd rather we handed over tens of billions to big companies like EDF for a new round of nuclear power plants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whereas you'd rather we handed over tens of billions to big companies like EDF for a new round of nuclear power plants.

I would, yes. Nuclear is actually carbon free and it actually works. Unlike wind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And costs an absolute fortune. How much will Sellafield cost to clean up ?

That's only one site.

Wind works fine in Scotland :)

If part of the national grid and with back up from conventional energy (gas). As explained to you before, for every POTENTIAL GWh of capacity that wind is supposed to supply it needs backed up by the exact same in gas for when the wind doesnt blow, or for when the wind blows too much and they need to be shit down.

Nuclear is cheaper than wind.

How much will it cost to return the countryside to ts original state when the wind turbines are scrapped? Who's paying for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If part of the national grid and with back up from conventional energy (gas). As explained to you before, for every POTENTIAL GWh of capacity that wind is supposed to supply it needs backed up by the exact same in gas for when the wind doesnt blow, or for when the wind blows too much and they need to be shit down.

Nuclear is cheaper than wind.

How much will it cost to return the countryside to ts original state when the wind turbines are scrapped? Who's paying for that?

Given the price gaurantees that EDF have received from the government, it is nearly the equivalent of having 100% backup from fossil fuels anyway. £92.50/MWh.

Index-linked FFS, so absolutely nothing to do with the wholesale market price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If part of the national grid and with back up from conventional energy (gas). As explained to you before, for every POTENTIAL GWh of capacity that wind is supposed to supply it needs backed up by the exact same in gas for when the wind doesnt blow, or for when the wind blows too much and they need to be shit down.

Nuclear is cheaper than wind.

How much will it cost to return the countryside to ts original state when the wind turbines are scrapped? Who's paying for that?

Nuclear isn't cheaper than wind when you factor in the clean up costs. 100 billion to clean up Sellafield and that's just one site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuclear isn't cheaper than wind when you factor in the clean up costs. 100 billion to clean up Sellafield and that's just one site.

What are the clean up costs for restoring the countryside to its original condition once the wind turbines are dismantled? Bearing in mind they sit on massive concrete plinths.

Nuclear plants lifespans are also WAY longer than any windmill and once up and running the cost to produce energy is actually next to nothing. Whats the strike price on both land based and sea based wind turbines? I believe Ive provided this to you several times already so hopefully you'll remember. And whats the strike price on nuclear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the clean up costs for restoring the countryside to its original condition once the wind turbines are dismantled? Bearing in mind they sit on massive concrete plinths.

Nuclear plants lifespans are also WAY longer than any windmill and once up and running the cost to produce energy is actually next to nothing. Whats the strike price on both land based and sea based wind turbines? I believe Ive provided this to you several times already so hopefully you'll remember. And whats the strike price on nuclear?

Yeah coz wind is really expensive once the mills are built :lol:

A 100billion to clean up one nuclear power sit, one.

How much renewable capacity could the UK buy for 100 billion ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah coz wind is really expensive once the mills are built :lol:

A 100billion to clean up one nuclear power sit, one.

How much renewable capacity could the UK buy for 100 billion ?

I,m afraid its colossally expensive as its subsidised to the hilt, far from being free, its actually the most expensive method of generating paltry amounts of electricity that we have got. Do you know how much is given to wind farm operators when they have to shut down operations due to it being a bit windy for example? Or do the puff pieces released by the wind lobby groups never give that information?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I,m afraid its colossally expensive as its subsidised to the hilt, far from being free, its actually the most expensive method of generating paltry amounts of electricity that we have got. Do you know how much is given to wind farm operators when they have to shut down operations due to it being a bit windy for example? Or do the puff pieces released by the wind lobby groups never give that information?

100 billion for to clean up one site.

100 billion

100 billion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I,m afraid its colossally expensive as its subsidised to the hilt, far from being free, its actually the most expensive method of generating paltry amounts of electricity that we have got. Do you know how much is given to wind farm operators when they have to shut down operations due to it being a bit windy for example? Or do the puff pieces released by the wind lobby groups never give that information?

Subsidies for Nuclear will be higher than than wind

The new price for onshore wind is less than EDF, the French power giant, will receive for four decades for its new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset, where it has agreed a strike price of £92.50.

Source

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I,m afraid its colossally expensive as its subsidised to the hilt, far from being free, its actually the most expensive method of generating paltry amounts of electricity that we have got. Do you know how much is given to wind farm operators when they have to shut down operations due to it being a bit windy for example? Or do the puff pieces released by the wind lobby groups never give that information?

What was that about "colossally expensive" and "subsidised to the hilt".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10525538/Subsidies-for-UK-nuclear-plant-could-reach-17bn-and-may-be-unnecessary.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/08/hinkley-point-european-commission-nuclear-power-station-somerset

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/documents/nuclear_power/nuclear_subsidies_report.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strike price on nuclear (when it becomes operational in a few years. Is still cheaper than the strike price currently set for onshore wind, and much less than the strike price for offshore.

THATS what I was saying you twat. And of course, the life expectancy of a nuclear power station is massively longer than a windwill. And the windmills oitput degrades basically as soon as it starts to operate.

And they don't provide energy as and when you need it.

Apart from that. You havent got a clue what youre talking about on this issue. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strike price on nuclear (when it becomes operational in a few years. Is still cheaper than the strike price currently set for onshore wind, and much less than the strike price for offshore.

That's as mis-leading a statement as you could make. The current strike price for wind is irrelevant when comparing to nuclear until the nuclear plants are up and running. At this point nuclear will be more heavily subsidised than onshore wind.

For someone on here telling us how cheap nuclear is, perhaps you can explain why EDF even need a guaranteed price. I would like to see someone as right wing as yourself tell us why market forces appear to not work in a de-regulated business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...