JackGreen Renewable Energy

[GK]

Originally Posted by PHATXR8

A lot of Eurpean countries have a large amount of their electricity being produced by wind turbines, and are actually de-commissioning their nuclear power plants and are replacing them with wind turbines!!

Do you have a link to a source that confirms this please? Such info would be very good for some of my secondary classes next year! LOL!

Yep, I am a teacher!

GK

[MeestaNob!]

I'm dead keen on small windfarms and nuclear power whereever possible.

Solar setups per household should be the main focus of peoples efforts I reckon. A new house without at least some solar panels is retarded in my opinion. Your house costs $400K, whats another $10K to get free electricity and maybe even sell a bit back to the grid in the future?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by MeestaNob!

I'm dead keen on small windfarms and nuclear power whereever possible.

Solar setups per household should be the main focus of peoples efforts I reckon. A new house without at least some solar panels is retarded in my opinion. Your house costs $400K, whats another $10K to get free electricity and maybe even sell a bit back to the grid in the future?

A few minor problems with the solar solution:

1) solar panel cost a lots and use more energy in their manufacture than they can produce in years.
2) They break easily.
3) Most domestic energy is used at night so the energy has to be stored.
4) The storage systems are also very expensive and use lots of energy to make.
5) The stored energy is DC, all out stuff uses AC, inverters are very inefficent.


A few minor problems with the wind generator solution:

1) It only works when the wind blows
2) It can only generate power relative to the wind and usage varies at different times. e.g. when it is stinking hot at still eveyone has their aircon on but their is no wind.
3) The frequency is variable with the wind rate and although this variance can be reduced it is still enough to upset things
4) Wind generators are bloody noisy.
5) Wind generators kill lots of wildlife. (This will be fun watching the animal lovers declare war on the greenies)

Having once worked in the power industry in situations where there was private generation fed back into the grid (sugar mills) and extremely varied loads (arc furnaces, huge DOL irrigation pump etc.) I know it is nowhere near as easy as the utopians would like.

Nuclear is the go. Yes there is dangerous waste but we have lots of room to store it until we understand how to make it not dangerous.

A very good idea was suggested to me last night. European countries have a problem in that by law they now must dispose on any of their radioactive waste created by their fissile operations within their own borders.

We have lots of uranium.

If we were to lease it to them rather than sell it then we would:
a) make lots of money because they give it back at the end of the lease and do not have to dispose of it and will pay a premium for this.
b) ensure it is not used for weapons as WE GET IT BACK.
c) ensure that it is disposed of safely.
d) have lots of money to put into research on how to make it safe.
e) reduce global warming.

Now for the greeny freaks among us. The uranium is already HERE, we dig it up, lease it out, bring it back and then treat it. So it is still HERE.

[Interceptor]

actually..... screw the energy part..... zetec, i hope you had the brains to get a photo and phone number for that scots saleswoman!

[Hunter]

At this stage there is no 'ultimate' solution other than to REDUCE OUR ENERGY CONSUMPTION. I don't have the exact figure on hand right now but I do know that since 1990 the average energy usage per person has risen dramatically. Until we can work out how a cleaner/more efficient way of storing/transporting/using energy, we really should focus on not using so much... It isn't hard to do. Hell even turning off unused lights and not using standby mode on your appliances is a big start! OH and its also safer, how many house fires are caused by faulty electrical devices...

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by Wokkas

If Australia pulled it's head out of it's a*se, we'd build one nuclear power station. Problem solved. It needs to happen.

Lol, im not sure if its an excercise in pulling our heads out of anywhere... but rather, addressing the MANY questions which need to be answered.

Even at its best... nuclear energy is a band aid fix to a septic, infected wound. Look up the stats on uranium supplies... the stuff aint gonna last too long.

I apologise i dont have the reference, i will endeavour to find the source of this info, but considering increasing demand and assuming considerable uranium discovery... we'll be lucky to get 50 years out of it.

As for Jackgreen... id better put some money aside... im a sucker for a scottish lassie!!!

[MeestaNob!]

I'm keen on nuclear power, but it's location is the only real sticking point. Points taken re cost of solar and impracticality of wind farms. I still reckon solar should be invested in as well anyway though.

Stuff it, why dont we just hook Laminge's car up to a treadmill and start running our christmas lights all year round!

[Bill_R]

Originally Posted by Wokkas

No worries mate. I'd rather have a properly build/maintained atomic power staion in my back yard than a coal burner firing off toxic gas for my kids to breathe in.

I'd wait for fusion reactors to get up and running. I know fission reactors are relativly safe but I stil dont' want one in my back yard.

ITER ( http://www.iter.org ) are establishing a test plant but by the time it goes commercial I think we'll all be dead. The future is there.

[svo347]

Originally Posted by Wokkas

If Australia pulled it's head out of it's a*se, we'd build one nuclear power station. Problem solved. It needs to happen.

What a marvellous idea.... Lets build it in YOUR backyard
:lookedat: