Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Germany Backs Off From Nuclear- Why?

Yesterday’s announcement that Germany is going to wind down its nuclear dependence for power will cause some consternation to its advocates. Patently the events in Japan are at work but perhaps Germany knows of other issues behind the scenes that it is not letting on.
As most avid nuclear proponents will be those who want to sell their technologies and hardware it is only reasonable that they will underplay, hide, obscure, and even dismiss issues that threaten their lobbying and sales – not millions – billions.
 Does the public really know what happens in nuclear power stations - it is hard to think that only the workers at Fukushima  were dilatory in their duty of care and recording - are would be whistle-blowers sworn to secrecy about near misses, mal-events ?  Perhaps Germany knows more!
Who would think that the mindless acceptance, by governments especially here in Britain, of the present wind turbine technology, as evidenced by the last decade of spending many billions for its installations, would be confounded by the obvious: that the wind does not blow at the behest of national grid needs, and that the electricity it harvests cannot, as yet, be economically stored.  Also this government still hasn’t, and the last never did, announce the cost of so called ‘on call’ gas, oil, nuclear, coal stations to ‘cover’ when the wind doesn’t blow – ‘don’t do it - it won’t be popular’.
 Super-grids and grid highways will only ameliorate peak needs, never solve them – these like so much muddled thinking around renewable energies emerge as recent innovations  to rationalise the profligate spending of what maybe, at least in all Europe, trillions.
Germany is already regretting the wind turbines it has, in economic terms at least and it is hard to believe it will risk reliance on its energy needs from nuclear Poland and France.
Is it just pressure from the Greens or is it something else?
It really does make the mind boggle as to what really is at the back of this decision.
Renewable energies make sense if their harvest can be stored.
Using wind wave and tidal power to  produce a  water – head, stored in dams,  that can be tapped to produce electricity at will makes sense.
It can be done at sea by the means of the dams I propose.
None of the technologies involved are new– but the mix and the site of application is!

Monday, May 23, 2011

When Does a Wind Turbine Pay Back its Carbon Cost?

Perhaps facietiously put but a slur against wind turbines used to be that they don't produce the energy in their life span that was taken to produce them.
In Wales it is planned to scar the country side with 800 two megawatt wind turbines at a cost of at least 2 billion pounds which will produce 300 megawatts allowing for their inherent overall inefficiency.  A new gas fired station (and therefore a lesser carbon footprint than coal ) power station in Plymouth costing a quarter of this is producing three times this output.  This means the cost of wind turbine energy is 15 times that of the gas fired station.
Allowing that a hefty component of any engineered product is the cost of the energy involved in it production it would be nice to know the energy component involved in the production of these 800 wind turbines and over what span of time will carbon pay back occur and will they start to actually be carbon free.
The slur may not now be that facietious after all. An interesting view on this comes from Christopher Booker .here