Evil8Beezle:
Evil8Beezle:
Take your pick people!
OR
Iām leaning towards option 2!
Could i have the toffee please.Then for afters a will have the gun google must be sick of carryfast by now lmfao 
Carryfast:
boredwivdrivin:
it really doesnt matter if climate change is accelerated by mans activitiesenergy self sufficiency , as we have next to no oil left and our coal is largely unobtainable then developing renewable energy is a sensible policy . whether it hydro , tidal , wave , wind , biomass or even nuclear fusion . being energy self sufficient is good business
If the global warmist believers are prepared to admit defeat on their bs ideas then the question of coal is obviously one of freedom of choice not that we supposedly suddenly now canāt any longer āobtainā it.As for oil and gas stocks.Putting a block on all further exports of the stuff will at least add a lot more to itās ( eventual ) depletion date which certainly isnāt nowhere near yet and after which we can then use coal to provide synthetic replacements.
As for tidal and wind neither of those provide a permanent output and nuclear is expensive and dangerous.While if you donāt want to cut down trees and reduce plant life biomass is also a non starter.
IIRC the great london smog of the 1950s was caused by an oil shortage, this resulted in excessive coal burning. Many deaths from respiratory problems resulted.
Tidal is a permanent option ( as long as we have a moon of course) but often results in waterways used by shipping to be closed.
Nuclear power is less than 1% efficient and leaves a waste product our current level of technology canāt handle.
Wind and solar are unreliable. So alone they cannot meet our energy needs.
Nothing about this is black and white, yet man made climate change has been chosen as an easy and politically acceptable answer to the current situation. Allowing our governments to impose unnecassary carbon taxes whilst ignoring the bigger problems and their politically unpopular solutions.
Sorry if my last post came across as preachy or whiney. It wasnāt meant to.
Captain Caveman 76:
IIRC the great london smog of the 1950s was caused by an oil shortage, this resulted in excessive coal burning. Many deaths from respiratory problems resulted.
Tidal is a permanent option ( as long as we have a moon of course) but often results in waterways used by shipping to be closed.
Nuclear power is less than 1% efficient and leaves a waste product our current level of technology canāt handle.
Wind and solar are unreliable. So alone they cannot meet our energy needs.
Nothing about this is black and white, yet man made climate change has been chosen as an easy and politically acceptable answer to the current situation. Allowing our governments to impose unnecassary carbon taxes whilst ignoring the bigger problems and their politically unpopular solutions.
Tidal wonāt provide any power between tides like wind wonāt provide any power when the wind doesnāt blow.As for the London smog it was more case of the wrong type of coal being burnt in the wrong type of way.Combined with the same problem as now of too many people being forced to live in too small a concentrated part of the country.On that note the clean air act fixed the urban smog issue by only allowing the right type of coal to be burnt as in our family house case in which we were still using an Anthracite burning central heating system well into the 1980ās.Which would still be a more economical choice now than being lumbered with the gas supply monopoly players if only this house had a chimney to fit it.In addition to changing the combustion systems to forced air blowers which would also make the stuff burn hotter and cleaner.
Carryfast:
If the global warmist believers are prepared to admit defeat on their bs ideas then the question of coal is obviously one of freedom of choice not that we supposedly suddenly now canāt any longer āobtainā it.As for oil and gas stocks.Putting a block on all further exports of the stuff will at least add a lot more to itās ( eventual ) depletion date which certainly isnāt nowhere near yet and after which we can then use coal to provide synthetic replacements.
well ive read many times that old pits have fallen into such disrepair they are no longer workable . oil is largely in a foreign country , and the bits in england (surrey dorset) would be better used making fertilisers etc than burning for fuel . Almost all big agriculture fertilisers come from oil .
Carryfast:
As for tidal and wind neither of those provide a permanent output and nuclear is expensive and dangerous.While if you donāt want to cut down trees and reduce plant life biomass is also a non starter.
tidal is completely permanent . you can set your watch by it . it would be expensive but cheaper than nuclear fission as there are no clean up costs . severn estuary barrage is estimated to have capacity to provide 25% of englands electricity demands . similar schemes are viable in the wash and swansea . tidal lagoons are viable anywhere with a reasonable tidal range .
biomass doesnt necessarily need trees . you can use reeds , hemp , algae and fast growing poplars.
anaerobic digestion can use all mans organic waste
www2.wessexwater.co.uk/news/thre ā¦ px?id=9342
i said nuclear fusion not fission as it creates no waste . this works in various countries , but only for a nanosecond . deserves huge investment .
ccfe.ac.uk/
germany seems a step further ahead tho
sciencealert.com/first-of-it ā¦ use-energy
quite why we are allowing chinese to build yesterdays technology at Hinkley Point remains a mystery to me .
But my main point is that production of our own renewable energy , from a wide range of sources , some on a national scale and some very local , would give us freedom to decide our own destiny .
if we have the energy then food can be grown soilless and any water made potable . anything is possible
any industry using renewable energy will be truly sustainable .
at the moment we have unsustainable industries operating profitably ; but only because they pay market cost , not true cost , for their energy and waste .
there is really no need to continue planning to use polluting oil and coal into the future
Captain Caveman 76:
there is really no need to continue planning to use polluting oil and coal into the future
Tidal is a permanent option ( as long as we have a moon of course) but often results in waterways used by shipping to be closed.
in the case of severn barrage the main ports (avonmouth portbury) would be downstream .
those smaller ports up stream (sharpness)would be able to navigate on high tide through lock gates , just as they can only navigate on high tides now in fact .
boredwivdrivin:
Carryfast:
If the global warmist believers are prepared to admit defeat on their bs ideas then the question of coal is obviously one of freedom of choice not that we supposedly suddenly now canāt any longer āobtainā it.As for oil and gas stocks.Putting a block on all further exports of the stuff will at least add a lot more to itās ( eventual ) depletion date which certainly isnāt nowhere near yet and after which we can then use coal to provide synthetic replacements.well ive read many times that old pits have fallen into such disrepair they are no longer workable . oil is largely in a foreign country , and the bits in england (surrey dorset) would be better used making fertilisers etc than burning for fuel . Almost all big agriculture fertilisers come from oil .
Carryfast:
As for tidal and wind neither of those provide a permanent output and nuclear is expensive and dangerous.While if you donāt want to cut down trees and reduce plant life biomass is also a non starter.tidal is completely permanent . you can set your watch by it . it would be expensive but cheaper than nuclear fission as there are no clean up costs . severn estuary barrage is estimated to have capacity to provide 25% of englands electricity demands . similar schemes are viable in the wash and swansea . tidal lagoons are viable anywhere with a reasonable tidal range .
biomass doesnt necessarily need trees . you can use reeds , hemp , algae and fast growing poplars.
anaerobic digestion can use all mans organic waste
www2.wessexwater.co.uk/news/thre ā¦ px?id=9342i said nuclear fusion not fission as it creates no waste . this works in various countries , but only for a nanosecond . deserves huge investment .
ccfe.ac.uk/germany seems a step further ahead tho
sciencealert.com/first-of-it ā¦ use-energy
quite why we are allowing chinese to build yesterdays technology at Hinkley Point remains a mystery to me .But my main point is that production of our own renewable energy , from a wide range of sources , some on a national scale and some very local , would give us freedom to decide our own destiny .
if we have the energy then food can be grown soilless and any water made potable . anything is possible
any industry using renewable energy will be truly sustainable .
at the moment we have unsustainable industries operating profitably ; but only because they pay market cost , not true cost , for their energy and waste .
there is really no need to continue planning to use polluting oil and coal into the future
Meanwhile in the real world of actually paying the bills and reliable 24/7 electric supplies a decent coal fired power station still has all of those expensive,unreliable,or dangerous options beat.Although even in that case itās still cheaper to burn the stuff at home than pay for all the losses in the electric supply chain if you like a warm house in the winter and plenty of hot water.While an accident in a fusion reactor still creates a radiation danger and tides wonāt provide any power when they arenāt actually changing.
As for so called āpollutingā fossil fuels as I said given best practice combustion methods and/or fuelling type the cost benefits outweigh any negligible remaining emissions issues.
Meanwhile in the real world of actually paying the bills and reliable 24/7 electric supplies a decent coal fired power station still has all of those expensive,unreliable,or dangerous options beat.Although even in that case itās still cheaper to burn the stuff at home than pay for all the losses in the electric supply chain if you like a warm house in the winter and plenty of hot water.While an accident in a fusion reactor still creates a radiation danger and tides wonāt provide any power when they arenāt actually changing.
As for so called āpollutingā fossil fuels as I said given best practice combustion methods and/or fuelling type the cost benefits outweigh any negligible remaining emissions issues.
My objection to fossil fuels isnāt their supposed contribution to man made climate change, itās the fact their quantities are finite. Fossil fuels are like the cash stash under the matress, it will run out eventually. Waiting until it happens before finding alternatives is irresponsible.
You say tidal sourced power is unreliable, not true. Tides are entirely predictable including periods of slack water. Proper planning with appropriate backup negates any issues this causes. Encouraging the use of solar and wind energy in domestic and especially power hungry industrial buildings reduces dependance on the national supply with any surplus sold back to the grid (at a proper price, not the currently reduced one).
Our energy demands are directly linked to so called man made climate change, but our government still insists on doing nothing apart from increasing tax on our energy (something you complained about), especially the fuel for our vehicles.
Captain Caveman 76:
Meanwhile in the real world of actually paying the bills and reliable 24/7 electric supplies a decent coal fired power station still has all of those expensive,unreliable,or dangerous options beat.Although even in that case itās still cheaper to burn the stuff at home than pay for all the losses in the electric supply chain if you like a warm house in the winter and plenty of hot water.While an accident in a fusion reactor still creates a radiation danger and tides wonāt provide any power when they arenāt actually changing.
As for so called āpollutingā fossil fuels as I said given best practice combustion methods and/or fuelling type the cost benefits outweigh any negligible remaining emissions issues.
My objection to fossil fuels isnāt their supposed contribution to man made climate change, itās the fact their quantities are finite. Fossil fuels are like the cash stash under the matress, it will run out eventually. Waiting until it happens before finding alternatives is irresponsible.
You say tidal sourced power is unreliable, not true. Tides are entirely predictable including periods of slack water. Proper planning with appropriate backup negates any issues this causes. Encouraging the use of solar and wind energy in domestic and especially power hungry industrial buildings reduces dependance on the national supply with any surplus sold back to the grid (at a proper price, not the currently reduced one).
Our energy demands are directly linked to so called man made climate change, but our government still insists on doing nothing apart from increasing tax on our energy (something you complained about), especially the fuel for our vehicles.
Define āfiniteā when our coal reserves are stated as being at least around 1,000 years worth.While oil and gas isnāt going to run out at least for anyone alive today especially if we stop all exports of the stuff.
As for tidal exactly youāll need something else between tide changes and when the wind doesnāt blow.In which case coal fired is still cheaper than even those options let alone nuclear so why bother with 3 different more expensive options when coal will do the job 24/7 for lower cost.
Edit- Iām not getting involved. I blame Gordon Brown
CF . tell me how much of this 1000 coal is actually extractable now ? . and what cost ?
You seem to rightly have given up with oil .
So how are you going to get coal out of ground into peoples homes to cook and heat with ?
On renewable energy the great thing is that it can be āburntā more than once . So tidal barage would have tidal lagoons downstream and wave machines down from that . Cornwall is world leader in cheap simple effective wave power you know .
The same with wind and in effect solar .
I have also pointed out lots of methods that combined create an national energy network . things like above and geotherm , anaerobic and biomass , all which can be developed on local per town level . theres less need to use national grid and these things can be made to work on local grid quickly and cheaply
If this still does not provide energy at correct levels for varing demand , then nature provided a solution . you pump water up hill when you have too much energy, and let gravity do the work when more needed . see electric mountain llanberis or ffestiniog .
I notice you havent mentioned the business case that i outlined above . what are your thoughts on that
boredwivdrivin:
CF . tell me how much of this 1000 coal is actually extractable now ? . and what cost ?You seem to rightly have given up with oil .
So how are you going to get coal out of ground into peoples homes to cook and heat with ?
On renewable energy the great thing is that it can be āburntā more than once . So tidal barage would have tidal lagoons downstream and wave machines down from that . Cornwall is world leader in cheap simple effective wave power you know .
The same with wind and in effect solar .
I have also pointed out lots of methods that combined create an national energy network . things like above and geotherm , anaerobic and biomass , all which can be developed on local per town level . theres less need to use national grid and these things can be made to work on local grid quickly and cheaply
If this still does not provide energy at correct levels for varing demand , then nature provided a solution . you pump water up hill when you have too much energy, and let gravity do the work when more needed . see electric mountain llanberis or ffestiniog .
I notice you havent mentioned the business case that i outlined above . what are your thoughts on that
All the existing reference points suggest that any/all of the renewable or nuclear options are more expensive and/or less reliable than coal fired electric generation.All the moves away from coal have been for political reasons,including the bs Global Warmist agenda,in which coal has been subject to a deliberate,politically driven,artificial run down,in both its use and production,while the others have had and continue to have a fortune in subsidies put into them to compensate for their economic unviability.
As for oil as always no I havenāt said that thereās any reason why it shouldnāt be considered as an essential component in our energy provision for the foreseeable future especially in the transport sector.
What I did say is that itās economic suicide to accelerate its depletion by exporting the stuff and turning it into worthless cash to buy imported manufactured goods that we can make for ourselves.Or selling it at home at world market prices.Thereby reducing employment and adding to the trade deficit and adding to the inflation rate.
boredwivdrivin:
Carryfast:
biomass doesnt necessarily need trees . you can use reeds , hemp , algae and fast growing poplars.excuse me ,is not a fast growing poplar a tree ,my old school teacher would be so proud if they could see me now
Thats why i said necessarily !
The trees im talking about are grown and harvested in a year . so whilst they are trees they dont behave as trees normally do .
CF ignore the history of coal . we cant change that .
What i want to know is how much is actually mineable today ā ā
Is it really thousands of years worth ā ā
Because i have read that this is not the case as deep mines have been left to fall into such disrepair that its actually untouchable . mines have flooded and collapsed , so new mines would have to be dug avoiding the old mines so our extractable stock is much lower than amount in ground .
This might be totally wrong , but have seen this mentioned many times
boredwivdrivin:
CF ignore the history of coal . we cant change that .What i want to know is how much is actually mineable today ā ā
Is it really thousands of years worth ā ā
Because i have read that this is not the case as deep mines have been left to fall into such disrepair that its actually untouchable . mines have flooded and collapsed , so new mines would have to be dug avoiding the old mines so our extractable stock is much lower than amount in ground .
This might be totally wrong , but have seen this mentioned many times
Itās been mentioned āmany timesā because as I said the political agenda is all about the deliberate run down of our coal production and generation capacity.Just like deliberate mass immigration and sell out to the Chinese Communist Party.
What we havenāt heard is any case being put forward given a reversal in energy policy which ditches the global warmist bs and historic āConservativeā Party hostility towards the coal industry and its workforce.IE the question is can we reverse the damage given the political will to get back to a coal fired energy policy.Iād guess it would be doable but not under the present government. 
boredwivdrivin:
Thats why i said necessarily !The trees im talking about are grown and harvested in a year . so whilst they are trees they dont behave as trees normally do .
fast growing poplars take twelve years to fully grow slow growing [proper trees] take twenty plus years the only thing you can grow in twelve monthes would be in a vegatable patch
You want to see what its like in China. Last week came back from Zhengzhou, an industrial city southwest of Beijing. Couldnāt see more than few hundred metres at night walking around the city.
When you are over the country all you can see is endless coal fired plants. Itās amazing to see. Like an apocolyotic vision. They were burning some sort of stubble in fields too. For hundreds of kilometres, just fires. They really donāt care. After 2 days your chest feels tight and you can taste a sulphurness on your tongue. Daresay Iām up for a lecture now on it being the wrong type of coal 
Iām not saying it is changing the upper atmos but glad we do have some environmental restrictions on at least local air quality compared to that lot. They really donāt give a ā ā ā ā .
Thankfully we are not china
We live in a blessed country with incredible reserves of natural energy potential .
We just need leaders with foresight to invest in our potential and build a sustainable future for our kids and their kids .
The idea of going back to coal in a big way is laughable . especially when we have so much resources of clean energy .
Everywhere water moves , wind blows or daylight shines there is potential clean energy
boredwivdrivin:
Everywhere water moves , wind blows or daylight shines there is potential clean energy
Some of it is a bit ā ā ā ā ā though isnāt it. Be honest. Wind turbines. Bloody things take up stacks of space and contribute bugger all. Just a big PR exercise. Theyāll solve nothing of any problem (real or not).