- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Drax
Old growth forests from North America, other side of the ocean. Use fossil fuel to cut down, move and process the timber.
Use fossil fuel to move that fuel across the Atlantic Ocean.
Use fossil fuel to cart it from the port in England to Drax.
This is sustainability, in action.
Quote BBC
“The Drax power station, a converted coal plant in North Yorkshire, generates approximately 6% of the U.K.’s electricity and has received billions of pounds in subsidies from the government and bill-payers because wood-burning is classed as a source of renewable energy.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxnpzzjed1oThis is like standing on your head to prove some point.
What is that point.Is that point box ticking to prove we have Green Energy?
“We have been lied to that Green Policies will reduce bills.
Bills are going up, continuously.”However, at the same time, 85% of our energy is fossil fuels. You can’t have it both ways.
Hello ET,
I would like some realism from our political leaders.
Half a century ago, 85% of World energy was from Hydrocarbons, today it is still 85%.
Yes, it is a good idea to have some renewable energy schemes but we should not pretend that in less than five years, the U.K. can produce 95% of our electricity from renewables.
The greater the proportion of renewables, the greater the size of the National Grid will need to be to balance.
10% of World Carbon use is in the Iron and Steel business. 5-8% of World Carbon is in Cement production and use.
We cannot do without Limestone, Coal, Iron or Steel.
I know there are Arc production systems for turning scrap steel into different steel but I believe it is still true that new steel needs to be made with Limestone, Coal and Iron.
Just because some Arc systems are running, does not mean we will no longer mine Iron ore.
We will still need to mine Limestone.
We will still need to mine Coal.The Unpopular Reality about Energy Transitions with Jean-Baptiste Fressoz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-7MPU109fY&t=3743sMichael, the point of my previous post was to say that it’s the cost of fossil fuels (geopolitical reasons plus increasing cost to extract) that has driven up energy costs not renewables.
Also, however non-sensible government policies for the energy transition are, the fact that they are so and complaining about them being so doesn’t make the underlying issue of increasing green house gases in the atmosphere disappear.
You continue to state things like “we aren’t going to burn up in a fireball any time soon.” No climate science is saying that. Sensational exaggerated statement to attempt to ridicule.
The extra heat represents extra energy. Given the enormous volumes of the atmosphere and oceans small increases in temperatures implying gigantic extra energy. You can work this out using the physics of specific heat. That energy will alter things.ET crude oil is around $71 dollars for a barrel of West Texas crude.
That’s more or less normal.
In the U.K. we seem to be closing down the North Sea, so I expect we will import more North Sea Gas from Norway or the Netherlands.
I expect we will import more American Oil.
However, I do think the reason energy prices are reaching for the sky in the U.K. is Net Zero.
We will need to increase the size of the National Grid by four or five times, to cope with net Zero.
