Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
Here's a transcript on the BBC News website, with Jon Sopel interviewing David Cameron in 2006, just before the publication of the Stern report:news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/6084628.stm
David Cameron: Well what we, and Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth agree about is that we should have a Climate Change Bill...
Before "I agree with Nick", there was "I agree with Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth". :o)
New transcript: Owen Paterson being interviewed on the Today programme last Thursday:https://sites.google.com/site/mytranscriptbox/2014/20141016_op
Green Actvists had their hands around the Conservatives members in 2008Bish just tweeted a Wayback machine schedule page from the 2008 Conservative party conference
Greenpeace's decentralised energy campaign rocked fundamental assumptions underlying the recent Energy Review with David Cameron declaring "the future is decentralised".- a meeting featuring Simon Reddy (Greenpeace UK); Greg Barker (Shadow Minister for the Environment); Matthew Anderson (Communications Director, BSkyB)..Greg Barker MP and Greenpeace rehearse the inherent advantages of a decentralised system ...
Didcot local paper had the story first , BBC was later ..says that it's the cooling Tower ..I imagine that it can be contained just to that
Didcot is 1.36GW station, so thats only 7 London Arrays worth
- blokes at the steelworks say don't worry, if the power drops tonight we'll be able to power the furnaces with a few solar panels.. ha ha ha
Watching China and 3 Gorges Dam on BBC2 , power is 22GW (they say 7 nuclear power stations in size) ..they didn't say that the world's largest wind farm The Thames Array produces less than 1% of that . (630mW at arounf 30% load factor is 0.2GW)
..British people are totally unaware of how huge huge the population and construction is in China and how miniscule the whole UK is in comparison ..No wonder that CO2 has gone up 10% in the last 20 years
Major fire at Didcot B gas power station.
Good job you gave EM a new topic his old one is finishing as predictedlast Friday's news : "17/10/2014 17h28 - Atualizado em 17/10/2014 18h55Após calor recorde, chuva rápida atinge bairros de São Paulo" Translation
Does anyone find it weird that warmists don't seem to know what CAGW is ?- don't they ever consider a scenario where AGW is at such a low level that we don't need to panic ?.. do they use AGW only to mean the scenario that catastrophe is highly likely ?
The ironically named Rationalwiki
"catastrophic anthropogenic global warming," is a snarl word derogatory label that can be attached to something, in order to dismiss its importance or worth, without guilt
The 250 mbar is looking quite dramatic just now: http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/250hPa/orthographic=-50.79,80.54,357
Robert ChristopherThanks for that link.
The availability of tidal power has been of interested to me for a while, in as much as I can't see it being any more useful than wind or solar (and my memories of the Falls of Lora) . Its only saving grace is that it is predictable and never turns off. So I did a little bit of research.The range for Swansea Bay is a maximum of 10M. The rule of thumb for tide rise and fall is the "Rule of Twelfths" using the explanation on Wiki:-
The rule states that in the first hour after low tide the water level will rise by one twelfth of the range, in the second hour two twelfths, and so on according to the sequence - 1:2:3:3:2:1
.83M: 1.66M; 2.5M; 2.5M; 1.66M; 0.83M; -0.83M; -1.66M; -2.5M; -2.5M; -1.66M; -0.83M.Which as you'd expect there are two 2-3 hour periods in the 12+ hours where the power output will be at capacity or close to it, four 1 hour periods where it will be ~66% maximum and four 1 hour periods where it will be close to and actually zero. Predictable but pretty useless especially as times are about 12 hours 20 minutes. I haven't worked it out but the number of days per year when peak demand matches peak tidal output must be pretty low.
The Guardian gives more technical information than the Telegraph, all be it in an article from February.
The project, which envisages an area of 11.5 sq km cordoned off by a breakwater, would have an installed capacity of 320MW with an annual output of 420GWh and a design life of 120 years.
From that it appears that the system is going to actually operate at about 15% of capacity over a year.
Apparently there are plans for 4 more, even bigger. at a cost of £11 billion. and a 7,300MW capacity. Two of the four are also in Wales meaning peak output will be at the same hour as this one. The four would produce about 9500GWh annually. The potential being 65TWh
So there you have it £12 billion to build an electricity generating system guaranteed to switch off twice a day and work at an incredibly low efficiency for the rest of the time. Still requiring conventional backup as the off times can coincide with off times of other renewables.
It still appears to be the scheme of a madman to me.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.