Carryfast:
If you’re supposedly so bothered about leaving all the fossil fuel in the ground then you’ll obviously want to live up to your ideals by doing whatever it takes to go on grid all electric at 50p per kWh like you’re telling everyone else to do.
And why exactly would it be better to go on-grid and use electricity supplied by oil-fired power stations at 50p per kWh rather than obtaining virtually all of it from solar for nothing?
Carryfast:
I also don’t believe Switch’s claim that he runs an all electric heating regime unless someone else is paying for it.
It’s about the only thing you are skilled at to be fair, inventing scenarios about people you don’t know to fit your own hilariously stupid narrative, so whatever makes you happy, knock yourself out. Surely by now we’re due an Venus vs Mars comment, you’ve posted two comments devoid of planets, you’re slipping
Harry Monk:
Carryfast:
If you’re supposedly so bothered about leaving all the fossil fuel in the ground then you’ll obviously want to live up to your ideals by doing whatever it takes to go on grid all electric at 50p per kWh like you’re telling everyone else to do.And why exactly would it be better to go on-grid and use electricity supplied by oil-fired power stations at 50p per kWh rather than obtaining virtually all of it from solar for nothing?
Because solar panels won’t provide enough output to heat or propel a boat let alone a house.
Especially during a cold long winter night and short cloudy day when the sun doesn’t get far above the horizon
So you choose coal and diesel I choose gas to fuel the house and petrol for the car.
As opposed to all that supposedly green nuke and biomass and solar fuelled mains electric at 50p per kWh.
The difference is I believe that fossil fuel and CO2 are the less of all evils and actually a good thing in the case of CO2 and to advocate its use on those grounds.
As opposed to you saying that we must leave it all in the ground.Resulting in a treeless wasteland and inevitable nuclear disaster and irradiated uninhabitable Island for future generations and root and soil structure of our farmland wrecked by being starved of light under solar panels.
While those on low incomes shiver in their unheated homes and can’t afford to travel as and when and where they wish.
Obviously you being exempt from it all as it suits you.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
A three bed semi isn’t exactly a mansion.I also love it.
I’ll now await Harry to tell us that he’s going to move into a one room apartment.
So that he can switch to all that clean green nuke, biomass and solar fuelled mains electric at 50p per kWh that, like you, he wants to impose on us all.
Good luck with that.Still 3 times too big tho. Probably worth a fortune where you are. Have you never thought about moving out into the sticks? Middle of nowhere is sort of ideal with your first class people skills. Out here in Wales you could probably buy a farm for what your house is worth, tho prices are rising.
As I said I don’t do Communism and I don’t aim to be forced out of the parental home that I contributed to and that I’ve been entrusted by my late parents to maintain what they worked for through their lives, by this clearly far left inspired wealth redistribution agenda.
Bearing in mind that I’ve actually tested the viability of using electric heating in only essential rooms as and when required.
None of which turned out to be worth it at 30p+ per kWh.
Good luck with shutting down the gas supply or equalising the price with electric as part of your crusade.
Also bearing in mind that if I move from here it won’t be by choice it’s home not a commercial asset.Ironically there are one and two bed flats locally with no off street parking which are somehow valued more.
My choice would be a two or three bed detached house in Shropshire or Lincolnshire if London gets its way here in taking out yet more of Surrey.
As I said if Harry is true to his ideals he should move to an on grid all electric location.
I’ll stay with my gas fired energy regime.
If I’m forced out as you’d obviously like then I’ll try to make sure that the place can be off grid all electric running on a diesel generator.
A decent garden will cut it no need for the farm.
Harry Monk:
Carryfast:
If you’re supposedly so bothered about leaving all the fossil fuel in the ground then you’ll obviously want to live up to your ideals by doing whatever it takes to go on grid all electric at 50p per kWh like you’re telling everyone else to do.And why exactly would it be better to go on-grid and use electricity supplied by oil-fired power stations at 50p per kWh rather than obtaining virtually all of it from solar for nothing?
You put solar panels in the UK (one of the most overcast skies in the planet) and you’re not only gonna waste your money, but you are actually increasing the “issue” of carbon emissions. With the current top technology on solar panels, all the energy input needed to create a panel from mining the minerals to placing the panel on a shelf for you to pick it up, will never be generated by the panel during its working lifetime. At best, in the UK, you’will get a 5th of the energy it took to produce the panel, out of that panel. Its a carbon bomb, all you are doing is exporting your carbon emitions half way across the globe times 5. When you talk about wind tho, then the UK is one of the best places on earth, specially if it is off shore. Check the German conundrum on solar. They’ve over the years built-up solar capacity for 200% of their peak use. Solar energy has never reached more than 10% of their use. They are heavily relient on their lignite (the dirtiest coal ever), fun times when reality punched them in the nose
osark:
You put solar panels in the UK (one of the most overcast skies in the planet) and you’re not only gonna waste your money, but you are actually increasing the “issue” of carbon emissions. With the current top technology on solar panels, all the energy input needed to create a panel from mining the minerals to placing the panel on a shelf for you to pick it up, will never be generated by the panel during its working lifetime. At best, in the UK, you’will get a 5th of the energy it took to produce the panel, out of that panel. Its a carbon bomb, all you are doing is exporting your carbon emitions half way across the globe times 5. When you talk about wind tho, then the UK is one of the best places on earth, specially if it is off shore. Check the German conundrum on solar. They’ve over the years built-up solar capacity for 200% of their peak use. Solar energy has never reached more than 10% of their use. They are heavily relient on their lignite (the dirtiest coal ever), fun times when reality punched them in the nose
Believe it or not, electricity can be transported with cables.
osark:
Harry Monk:
Carryfast:
If you’re supposedly so bothered about leaving all the fossil fuel in the ground then you’ll obviously want to live up to your ideals by doing whatever it takes to go on grid all electric at 50p per kWh like you’re telling everyone else to do.And why exactly would it be better to go on-grid and use electricity supplied by oil-fired power stations at 50p per kWh rather than obtaining virtually all of it from solar for nothing?
You put solar panels in the UK (one of the most overcast skies in the planet) and you’re not only gonna waste your money, but you are actually increasing the “issue” of carbon emissions. With the current top technology on solar panels, all the energy input needed to create a panel from mining the minerals to placing the panel on a shelf for you to pick it up, will never be generated by the panel during its working lifetime. At best, in the UK, you’will get a 5th of the energy it took to produce the panel, out of that panel. Its a carbon bomb, all you are doing is exporting your carbon emitions half way across the globe times 5. When you talk about wind tho, then the UK is one of the best places on earth, specially if it is off shore. Check the German conundrum on solar. They’ve over the years built-up solar capacity for 200% of their peak use. Solar energy has never reached more than 10% of their use. They are heavily relient on their lignite (the dirtiest coal ever), fun times when reality punched them in the nose
The UK hasnt got "one of the most overcast skies in the planet". It isnt in the top ten. It isnt even in the top 30. Even if it did, a cloud doesnt mean solar panels are useless.
In sunny climes a panel might be carbon neutral in 18months or less. Maybe 5 or 6 years in UK and Germany. They have lives of 20 or 30 years.
Osark
“At best, in the UK, you’will get a 5th of the energy it took to produce the panel, out of that panel.”
Where d`you get that?
Osark
“German conundrum on solar. They’ve over the years built-up solar capacity for 200% of their peak use. Solar energy has never reached more than 10% of their use. They are heavily relient on their lignite (the dirtiest coal ever), fun times when reality punched them in the nose”
Hmmm?
German electric production is under 10% solar, true. So what?
In fact it was about, 9.9% in 2021.
Wind, 23.1%…Brown coal 20.0%…Nuclear 13.3%…
“Punch in the nose”? What? There aren`t plans for 100% solar that have failed are there?
How many of those wind generators would we need to power the UK?
Sploom:
How many of those wind generators would we need to power the UK?
In 2022, 26.8% of UK electricity came from wind.
But having 4 times as many wind plants wouldnt mean 100% production of course! Wind is good when its windy, not so good when it isn`t.
Personally I think tidal is under estimated. Massive initial investments (cash and carbon), but very long life, and predictable, manageable production.
But a mix of different sources is the way forward, for now.
Fossil can`t be shut off overnight, and we should have started reducing it years ago, but it really needs to be reduced very quickly. Quicker than we are.
Nuclear has problems, but so does everything. Again under used in the UK.
Why? Nimbies, politics, and short-termism.
We’re slowly getting there, Coal use drops to it’s lowest level since 1757 
The last time coal demand was this low was in 1757 when George II was king.
reneweconomy.com.au/uk-emission … ince-1757/
OK guys a mixture of all renewable is the way forward
However for the UK offshore wind is the best will literally generate enough for our needs but we need to work out how to place then in the sea without corrosion salt water is nasty. Obviously some birds will die can’t have 100percent positive
Carryfast:
As I said I don’t do Communism and I don’t aim to be forced out of the parental home that I contributed to and that I’ve been entrusted by my late parents to maintain what they worked for through their lives, by this clearly far left inspired wealth redistribution agenda.
Selling your house so you can spend the money is far left communism?
Carryfast:
Bearing in mind that I’ve actually tested the viability of using electric heating in only essential rooms as and when required.
None of which turned out to be worth it at 30p+ per kWh.
Good luck with shutting down the gas supply or equalising the price with electric as part of your crusade.
Large parts of rural Wales doesn’t have mains gas. Besides, point out to me where I said ‘shutting down the gas supply’ was part of my ‘crusade’?! Still making up peoples opinions then
Carryfast:
If I’m forced out as you’d obviously like
Ah yes because me saying you should sell as you could buy a much better property in the countryside for a better standard of life is very cruel of me. Forcing you out in such a manner. To be honest I couldn’t give a rats arse what you do, just making conversation.
TruckDriverBen:
However for the UK offshore wind is the best will literally generate enough for our needs but we need to work out how to place then in the sea without corrosion salt water is nasty.
Up north we have lots of wind turbines planted on the sea bed, so I’d say we’ve already sufficiently addressed that issue
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teesside_Wind_Farm
True, a combination of technologies is required, solar, wind and hydroelectric. I heard one idea being promoted: Wind farms generate excess electricity on windy days, which could be used to pump water into a dammed reservoir with hydroelectric capability, and when the wind stops we can switch to hydroelectric. Same with solar, on sunny days excess power can be used to transport water into the reservior.
Zac_A:
TruckDriverBen:
However for the UK offshore wind is the best will literally generate enough for our needs but we need to work out how to place then in the sea without corrosion salt water is nasty.Up north we have lots of wind turbines planted on the sea bed, so I’d say we’ve already sufficiently addressed that issue
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teesside_Wind_FarmTrue, a combination of technologies is required, solar, wind and hydroelectric. I heard one idea being promoted: Wind farms generate excess electricity on windy days, which could be used to pump water into a dammed reservoir with hydroelectric capability, and when the wind stops we can switch to hydroelectric. Same with solar, on sunny days excess power can be used to transport water into the reservior.
I`m with you on storing energy in water reservoirs. 70/80% efficiency but physically large and expensive structures that get local opposition.
Not enough political appetite in the UK, same as with nuclear. Capital heavy, long term commitment needed, nimbys, but clean and long lived.
Given we are an island, we are set up to make better use of our coast, IMHO.
Franglais:
Nuclear has problems, but so does everything. Again under used in the UK.
Why? Nimbies, politics, and short-termism.
The only place for nuclear is as a weapon of mass destruction
Unsurprisingly we don’t have fossil fuel WMDs.
Nimbies as in we don’t want to nuke our own homeland with a disaster caused by a needless economically unviable source of energy.Just like Germany doesn’t.
All to meet the demands of a laughable climate cult based on the idea that CO2 cooked Venus.
As for France you mean the place that shut down loads of its nuclear plants over safety fears and doubled its UK gas imports.
Yes, we are, but the challenges of harnessing tidal power are significant and not yet resolved, but hopefully in the future there might be some progress there.
Carryfast:
Harry Monk:
Carryfast:
If you’re supposedly so bothered about leaving all the fossil fuel in the ground then you’ll obviously want to live up to your ideals by doing whatever it takes to go on grid all electric at 50p per kWh like you’re telling everyone else to do.And why exactly would it be better to go on-grid and use electricity supplied by oil-fired power stations at 50p per kWh rather than obtaining virtually all of it from solar for nothing?
Because solar panels won’t provide enough output to heat or propel a boat let alone a house.
Especially during a cold long winter night and short cloudy day when the sun doesn’t get far above the horizon
So you choose coal and diesel I choose gas to fuel the house and petrol for the car.
As opposed to all that supposedly green nuke and biomass and solar fuelled mains electric at 50p per kWh.
The difference is I believe that fossil fuel and CO2 are the less of all evils and actually a good thing in the case of CO2 and to advocate its use on those grounds.
As opposed to you saying that we must leave it all in the ground.Resulting in a treeless wasteland and inevitable nuclear disaster and irradiated uninhabitable Island for future generations and root and soil structure of our farmland wrecked by being starved of light under solar panels.
While those on low incomes shiver in their unheated homes and can’t afford to travel as and when and where they wish.
Obviously you being exempt from it all as it suits you.
Surely Venus has something to do with this.
Zac_A:
Yes, we are, but the challenges of harnessing tidal power are significant and not yet resolved, but hopefully in the future there might be some progress there.
Surely the technical challenges have been overcome elsewhere on the globe?
The Rance Barrage was built in 1966 and still produces 240 MW.
The challenges are more political, surely? Capital investment over more than one (many) Parliamentary terms needs 1cross party agreement for a long term energy policy. Too often parties are trying to win an election in 4 years time.
I’m not sure about the ins and outs of tidal power (no pun intended 
) but I believe current thinking is aimed at some kind of free floating array rather than a large fixed concrete structure. The latter would have to have the right geographical attributes, whereas the former could be deployed in a wider variety of locations. We have a barrage on the river Tees as seen in the award winning movie “1917” and other movies, but it isn’t able to generate electricity sadly. tbiwwc.com/how-does-tees-barrag … lectricity.