Prepare for problems this winter

[Topper]

08.42 Sun Nov 05 2006 ITN News
Power cuts have struck several countries in western Europe, leaving millions of people without electricity.
Power companies said the outage started in Germany with a surge in demand prompted by cold weather, and then spread to other parts of Europe.
Some five million people in France lost power, mainly in the east of the country and including parts of Paris.
Automatic security systems cut supplies to some customers to avoid a complete blackout.
Italy, Belgium and Spain were also affected by the power cuts.
Most electricity supplies were restored within two hours of the outage, and so far no injuries or accidents have been reported.
Fire brigades in France said they had to answer several calls from people stuck in lifts.
High speed rail links were also disrupted.

 

[Channel Hopper]

Time to buy a diesel generator.

Most don't realise that the modern gas central heating system needs electricity to function, so it's worth looking at buying an inverter circuit and having a car battery handy under the stairs.

You never know.

 

[Analoguesat]

We have a good old coal fire in the living room so we wont be cold if the power goes off

 

[rolfw]

Same here, but a gas fire.

This is the big argument for Nuclear power, expensive, but very flexible and the output can be increased very quickly.

 

[Salty25]

We need to go green long term though - where do you put the waste from nuclear?

Face it, the way we live is gonna have to change, esp short haul flights.

We've been living on borrowed time for way too long, so I say bring on the wind turbines, solar panels, and the little wind mills on the top of our houses, and develop new fuels for cars and force manufactuers and the fuel companies to use them immediately (apparently they are looking into way of developing a fuel made from yeast, which would be an absolute God send if they make it work).

The government needs to act NOW and help everyone to get this technology. Once the US (who need to get rid of their politicians who are corrupted by the oil companies - fingers crossed), China, and India are on board, and realise the market potentail of this new technology, we're half way there.

 

[rolfw]

Lovely idea Salty, but in real terms polution is going to be far worse in ten years time than it is now, the Chinese are commissioning one coal fired power station per week, showing no signs of slowing down and India are close on their heels.

If we want to secure our power generation needs in the coming 30 years, then whichever route we take, it should already be under way. Although wind turbines have a strong case for them, they are not reliable as a constant source of supply, tidal generators seem more dependable, but perhaps limited in application.

Yes there is always going to be a potential problem with disposal of nuclear waste, but we need solutions now, not ten years from now.

At the moment the UK apparently produce 2% of the world's greenhouse gasses, but even if we make no reductions whatsoever, in ten years time it will certainly be less than 1%, due to the meteoric expansion of the far East industrial landscape. Whatever we do will make little difference to the overall figure.

 

[stuzeeuk]

I agree we need solutions now however it has to be Green !.

We have to start looking after the environment or it will come back and kick our ass.

The latest report on the environment discussed global warming stating weather systems are becoming more erratic ..... thus in the longer term reducing food security.

One of the scenarios was the possibility of being in 'food deficit'........ lack of electricity would be the least of our problems !!! .

In my home town they are building a wind farm and the company I work for also asked to have its wind turnbine to reduce electricity costs........

The coucil knocked them back for planning permission ...... sad but true !

 

[rolfw]

It is an incredibly difficult situation, but the more I think of it, the more I believe that nuclear generation is the medium term answer, the more we use, the cheaper it becomes and leaves the way open for a huge increase in electric and hybrid vehicles.

It may also be the case that technology regarding treatment of nuclear waste improves, making it a greener option.

 

[Salty25]

The other problem with nuclear, apart from the waste which I think is a huge problem on its own, is the security aspect of nuclear - it would be one the most obvious things to attack for terrorists.

My way of thinking is that if the US/Nasa got to the moon on their own in the 60's, surely the combined effort of the US/Nasa, China, Russia, India, and the EU, and well as private sector research - basically everyone - can come up with some technologies which will be sustainable.

 

[rolfw]

My way of thinking is that if the US/Nasa got to the moon on their own in the 60's, surely the combined effort of the US/Nasa, China, Russia, India, and the EU, and well as private sector research - basically everyone - can come up with some technologies which will be sustainable.

Given the will they possibly could, you missed out Japan by the way, unfortunately you will have more chance of being bitten by a daffodil than that happening.;)

I appreciate the security fears with nuclear power, but if we want to decrease our dependence on Oil and fossil fuels, it is the most reliable and possibly only solution and will just have to be properly secured.

Regarding the moon, hmmm, nuclear waste dump? Sounds good. ;)

 

[T_G]

I think a moon all shining all nuclear green would look lovely. If they get the rockets out that far they might as well send them to the direction of the sun...don't want to start polluting the moon only to find out that we need it for some other thing later!

 

[Raasay]

Err... I think we depend more on the sun than the moon?

 

[2cvbloke]

Err... I think we depend more on the sun than the moon?

Er, you do realise the sun is billions of times larger than the moon, so a tiny rocket with a speck of nuclear waste wouldn't bother it in the slightest, a bit like a speck of dust landing on your body, you wouldn't even notice it...

As for going green, if I had the money, I'd be running my TV stuff off solar power (there's a clause in the TV Licence stating that if a TV reveiver runs off batteries then a licence is not required, so there's a money saver... ), I'd have a wind turbine charging a bank of 12v batteries, several invertors running off the battery bank to generate 240V and a seperate 12V feed to power the lights (like on a narrowboat on the canal, the lights, as far as I'm aware, are 12v, some may be 24v or even 240v, but as I have no narrowboat, I couldn't say for sure...), and if necessary, an ethanol-fueled (that's that magic yeast fuel... ) generator...

As for heating, I'm a bit of a Pyromaniac, I'd find a way...

 

[PoloMint]

My main concern about nuclear is the potential for damage caused by an accident, but if you include global warming as part of the damage caused by coal/oil/gas then perhaps nuclear doesn't seem that bad.

...I'd be running my TV stuff off solar power (there's a clause in the TV Licence stating that if a TV reveiver runs off batteries then a licence is not required, so there's a money saver... )

Nice idea, but the clause says 'internal batteries'

 

[2cvbloke]

Nice idea, but the clause says 'internal batteries'

Nuts!!! They changed it the sneaky sods!!! 'O'-red

Ah well, I'll just build a TV in a cabinet and fit the batteries inside...

 

[Sir Bronking]

Nuts!!! They changed it the sneaky sods!!! 'O'-red

Ah well, I'll just build a TV in a cabinet and fit the batteries inside...

 

[Raasay]

Er, you do realise the sun is billions of times larger than the moon, so a tiny rocket with a speck of nuclear waste wouldn't bother it in the slightest, a bit like a speck of dust landing on your body, you wouldn't even notice it...

Oh! They appear to be about the same size from here! And how would you deliver the material to something with a surface temperature of 5500 celsius? Why land it anywhere - just send out in a direction where we can't find anything else - by the time it does reach something it will probably be harmless anyway!

Still, I don't find the idea of dumping it here, there or any where else very 'green'.

 

[rolfw]

LOL, you don't have to land it on the sun, you just send it in the general direction, the immense gravity will do the rest.

Unfortunately, until we can achieve 100% reliable launch vehicles, the idea of launching a couple of Tonnes of radioactive waste high into the atmosphere is something which cannot be contemplated.

 

[Yeshi]

ummm your missing the point here... to get rid of waste into space we would have to create waste lol... jet propelled shuttles create more pollution than planes lol... and who wants to protect the sun?? its got more toxic chemicals on it than my farts do first thing in the morning...

 

[rolfw]

Whatever method you use to get rid of waste will involve some use of fuel, but I'm pretty sure that getting rid of the waste would more than compensate for the relatively small amount of gases caused by rocket burns, which would probably be less than sending 3 plane loads of Brits to Torremolinos for the weekend. ;)