Quantcast

a little 'crude' viewing

Beekeeping Forum

Help Support Beekeeping Forum:

Baggyone 

House Bee
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
490
Reaction score
0
Location
South Lincs, uk
Hive Type
14x12
Number of Hives
12
Man's reliance on oil....................

Can anyone tell me that the nuclear option is worse than this?
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS2_RL_CzQc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS2_RL_CzQc[/ame]
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
it isn't just the choice of energy source, it's our stupidity and greed that causes these disasters......... and unless we really grasp "less is more", and do something about it, there is no hope for all life on earth
 
Last edited:

jimbeekeeper 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,470
Reaction score
1
Location
East Yorkshire
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
1
I don’t agree with that Brosvile, technology will advance and energy will not be an issue.


But until then, we need to keep burning the fossil fuels to keep advancing.
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
sorry that's utter nonsense - I've worked for long enough in the renewables field to know that we're reaching the "tipping" point in many things, beyond which it's runaway time downhill.... Species and habitats are dying out rapidly, oil is at or past "peak", the whole environment is polluted to hell, and worst of all we're breeding like proverbial bunny rabits - there's no possible technological scientific "fixes" anywhere on the horizon - if we are to save life on earth (and it's a bloody big "if"), we need to get to grips with overpopulation, pollution, and most of all, greed...........
Many believe that it is already too late - whether it be through climate change (up, down or sideways), pollution or any one of many eco-horsemen of our collective apocalypse hurtling towards us- thinking that technology will save us is plain Canutism (if you look at the history of "science and technology" in the round, and it's effect over time, most of the benefits are outweighed by the damage in it's wake)
It's simple- here in the UK we're living as if there were 3 planets, in the US as if there were 5, we have to learn very rapidly how to live on one (and if you think the present government belt tightening is bad, you ain't seen nothing yet!)- the Catch 22 situation working towards life on earth being doomed is that for any government to take the measures necessary to save us would render them unelectable.......... and sadly this society can be summed up tragically as believing "because we're worth it"..... as another polar bear cub slips off it's ice floe, too weak to get back on
 

roche 

Field Bee
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
865
Reaction score
2
Location
Newburyish
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
6
I don’t agree with that Brosvile, technology will advance and energy will not be an issue.


But until then, we need to keep burning the fossil fuels to keep advancing.
Human nature being what it is, while fossil fuels are immediately cheaper, they will continue to be used, irrespective of the damage they do. Punitive taxation on waste (poorly insulated housing stock, transport of goods by road, water use) to curb the profligate use of energy has got to be the first step. Technology will move on, but realistic usage is vital.

Western economies are predicated on growth, not sustainability and until that changes (and the accountants are reined in) then I think Brosvilles view is pretty much right.
 

jimbeekeeper 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,470
Reaction score
1
Location
East Yorkshire
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
1
- I've worked for long enough in the renewables field
you mean all those point less "green" windmills that are springing up!

The problem is all those "greenines" that stopped the growth 20 years ago for nuclear that we should have been running now.

This in turn would have lead to development and improvements.

But where is everyone working?...oh they all think they can make a career on X factor or as a footballer /WAG


The technology is out there, but as with all human nature, until we really need it we will take the easer option.
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
Shows the lobbyists* are being successful trotting out the lies that large turbines don't work,(the same ones trying to flog us nukes and GM)........
Large turbines DO work, incredibly well (I've costed schemes), (roof-mounted ones don't!), nuclear is too little, too late and far too expensive to be ever done properly/safely, and GM is just to let a few US multinationals grab control of nearly all food supplies (which would hasten life on this planet's demise)


*The same ones who told us tobacco is safe, and who have bottomless pits of money to spread their poisonous lies
 

jimbeekeeper 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,470
Reaction score
1
Location
East Yorkshire
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
1
Well iam glad my power is coming from Drax, as there is the square root of jack wind blowing now.



PS Job interiview for Drax next week, so yes I have a vested intrest with them:reddevil:
 

roche 

Field Bee
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
865
Reaction score
2
Location
Newburyish
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
6
Does anyone have an idea about the carbon cost of producing nuclear energy? I seem to remember hearing it was similar to coal, just that the carbon cost was in some far off land, used during mining and refining...
 

tonybloke 

Queen Bee
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Gorleston-on-sea, Norfolk
Hive Type
commercial
Number of Hives
3 Commercial hives with National supers, Top Bee Space. + 2 Nucs
a lot of the carbon cost is in creating the concrete, and that's mostly here, in the UK
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
Having been deeply into the matter of nuclear power, it would appear that the most we could realistically ever generate from nukes is around 8% of our needs, which is about clutter all, and then for only a very short time (around 35 years) before the supplies run out, and the cost per KW generated is far higher than other forms of generation IF all the costs are included (there has never been a scheme without massive public subsidy, and they have never cleared up properly afterwards.... as it's too costly!). Just to put the cherry on top of it's icing, it can't be brought onstream fast enough to fill the yawning "energy gap" which we're hurtling rapidly towards......
In other words, it's a waste of time, a great deal of money and effort, which would be far better spent on real renewables which are genuinely sustainable, and will last for centuries, not decades.........
What we really need are deep cuts in consumption, and some "joined up thinking". What is ironic is that many EU countries would kill for our wind resource (which is the best in this part of the world), and here we are bogged down in nimbyism, and people believing the untrue propaganda (funded by Exxon and their ilk) that somehow claims "wind doesn't work"

Should anyone doubt wind's efficacy, (and yes, we know they only go round for about 30% or so of the time - the sums are done using real world results), a land-based "titchy" turbine in "big wind" terms a 250Kw job will pay back it's original costs completely within around 6 years, even down here in the relatively windless south - all without a jot of subsidy or grant!
As a pure aside - wind is always blowing somewhere round the UK, I've just had a couple of hours beach fishing, and a smallish Proven turbine mounted close to the beach was hurtling round the whole time..........
 

Brosville 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,132
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Hive Type
tbh
Number of Hives
4
All depends on your definition of "good" - it is also the UK's single largest emitter of carbon dioxide :biggrinjester:

However, it does illustrate rather well just how little nukes could contribute - not as much as one old-fashioned coal plant..... Sadly, politicians are very good at clutching at straws and pronouncing them to be "the answer", usually as a direct result of too many free lunches from the lobbyists......
 

jimbeekeeper 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,470
Reaction score
1
Location
East Yorkshire
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
1
of carbon dioxide :biggrinjester:
Yes and also more radiation than an nuclear power station:svengo:

- not as much as one old-fashioned coal plant..... ....
You will be surprised how efficient these plants have become over the last few years with 90-95% conversion of energy to electricity within the plant...most of the losses being in the distribution of the power there after.


But remembering that both a coal and nuclear plant produce power in the same way i.e steam, it is just the way in which the steam is generated that is different (not teaching you to suck eggs, but a lot of people think nuclear energy is magically produced)

And another point, will not develop, but think about this, if you where to go back in time with one of the Astute class nuclear submarine only 100 years, the technology difference is so significant that it might as well be an alien space craft.


But like I say I have vested intrests
 

Poly Hive 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
13,655
Reaction score
2
Location
Scottish Borders
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
9 and 18 Nucs
The windmills are just a political show.

The real power is in the sea. Trouble is we ain't spent the money researching how to harness it and all the offshore experience this country has is going to waste.

I spent 28 years working on the sea. I knows the power is there.

PH
 

tonybloke 

Queen Bee
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Gorleston-on-sea, Norfolk
Hive Type
commercial
Number of Hives
3 Commercial hives with National supers, Top Bee Space. + 2 Nucs
and you ought to see the amount of water that flows in and out of Gt Yarmouth's estuary (breydon water) twice a day, this should be harnessed
 

jimbeekeeper 

Queen Bee
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,470
Reaction score
1
Location
East Yorkshire
Hive Type
national
Number of Hives
1
Of all the green stuff I would say wave /currents is the best bet. Until the moon stops being there, there will always be currents. Unlike sun (clouds) and wind or no wind.

I think the bottom line is the people talent has been lost / not encourage to take up these roles / research





BUT, as the UK STILL has one of the largest coal reserves of much of Europe, we do not need to worry about power???

Only problem is we are running out of time for the people skills to get at it as very new people going into mining and the old timers rapidly retiring/dieing.


But (again) we have missed the boat on any new stuff by 15+ years mainly due to the greenies nagging about anything new. Rather than letting people get on with it.

So expect all the brown and black outs soon. Do I care? No! I have a full 6Kva house back up generation system and 2000L storage tanks for diesel or any similar fuel. Solar water heating and considering a wind turbine.

Does this contradict my opinion of green energy? No, because in my view green micro generation is different to achieving this on large scale and supplying the grid.
 

Hivemaker. 

Queen Bee
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
14,310
Reaction score
1
Location
Exmoor.
Hive Type
national
I believe both hydro electric and wind turbines are the most sensible, sustainable forms of generating electric. Lots of rivers just flowing out to sea that could be put to good use,and no pollution.
 

Latest posts

Top