If we're going to be honest about energy, I think we should at least stop calling oil 'fossil' fuel. There are those that doubt dinosaurs even existed, let alone died and turned into energy sources.
"The Scottish government" best solution to reach the CO2 SCAM targets is to deploy mandatory rounds of m[RNA] COVIDIUS and BIRDIUS FLU jabs in order to CULL as many heads of the populace herd as possible... Less populace Heads means Less Emissions so the Targets can be reached!
A COMBO C&B PCR KIT PANDEMIC is what They need to deploy.
Myself and many others certainly wish we could. The final last straw has been Welsh Labour using their huge majority with their partners in crime, Plaid Cymru (until that ended recently...) to unilaterally decide with their majority together that all of the constituency boundaries should be enlarged such as our area of Radnorshire now also includes a huge Welsh Labour constituency. As a coalition, Welsh Labour and Plaid with the support of the Lib Dems voted to also add more members to the Senedd increasing the number from 60 to 96 along with making "reforms" to the voting system.
The "reforms" involve adopting a closed list system, which means voters won't be able to vote for individual candidates, only for the party's pre-selected list!
Wales was also extremely proud to be the first ones allegedly to declare a "climate emergency" and become a sanctuary nation for climate refugees.
Unless things change very drastically, residents in Wales will continue to be used as guinea pigs for the Orwellian cull and control Agenda 2030/Great Reset programme.
It's very clear that the majority of animals from the herds of modern moron slaves (MMS) of the Western Plantations are fully engaged in this lunacy. We Today have the FACTS and PROOF (thanks to OPERATION COVIDIUS) that the herds of MMS are so easily fooled that [I]one can only laugh if we Think that we'll do anything against the SRF & Billionaires DESIRES and ACTIONS.
I posted your substack (thanks) around Facebook, and shared it elsewhere with this comment.
Examine the substack, and my Thoughts: It has been my view for some time that without question climate change is real and also without question we are not approaching the problem properly. I do not think wind and our current way of capturing the Sun with solar panels makes much sense. I observe the Future in my mind's eye, and I see arrays of shattered solar panels unreclaimed, and as in the novel Doggerland (which was set in/on The North Sea) acres of moribund windmills, their turbines broken, their wires dangling, untended to, and unremoved or repaired by the socialism for the rich folks who backed this approach to solving climate change. Remember when asked, If Al Gore was a prophet Richard Branson said 'it depends what kind of profit you're speaking of.' That sums it up in my mind, inadequate and maybe a scam, in that big bucks are being made from government contributions without coming near to solving the problem. We need and have needed a new Manhattan project to find a real source of energy for the world and not the band-aid solutions, of wind a solar.
I need to emphasize, does anyone think that these wind companies once they fail, or once the turbines and windmills wear out in 20 to 25 years, that corporate America is going to pay to remove them from the landscape, or the seabed.
Agreed. I think nuclear is the answer - I don't think we have time for another Manhattan project. As I said in https://alchristie.substack.com/p/why-we-need-more-nuclear-power, "Billions and billions of dollars are being spent on renewables and backup batteries...Imagine if that same amount of money for all the above was spent instead on building nuclear power plants, with much longer useful lifetimes and except for occasional maintenance, providing available power 24/7 in all seasons regardless of weather events. The folks who are very concerned about carbon emissions would at the same time be satisfied because nuclear has no carbon emissions."
It is the nuclear industry that has failed us as they still haven’t cracked the flexibility issue. They either become far more flexible or far cheaper as no one can afford to constrain nuclear plants with current design/costs
In the U.K. the ESO (grid operator) plans to have nuclear cover only the minimum summer demand as renewables (mainly offshore wind) are cheaper
I admit I don't understand quite what you mean by a nuclear "flexibility issue", nor do I understand what you mean by "constrain" nuclear plants.
As for offshore wind being cheaper, that's questionable if you take into consideration the difference between a lifetime of 15-20 years for wind turbines and the cost of removing, replacing, and recycling; and 80 years for nuclear.
Nuclear is great at constant baseload, and currently gets its flexibility from gas, but I’ve yet to see nuclear that can rapidly load follow
By constrain I mean switch them off, as there is no use for them
U.K. government figures show nuclear to be the most expensive form of generation, and offshore wind to be one of the cheapest
The U.K. grid operator, the ESO, projects the U.K. needs 120 GW offshore wind and no more than 15 GW nuclear. There are currently 100 GW offshore wind either existing or in the planning process
Thank you for answering my questions. I understand that nuclear cannot rapidly adjust to increases and decreases in demand, but was thinking that it's ok for a baseload to be constant - that's why we call it a baseload. I seriously question that offshore wind is cheap - I've been reading quite the opposite, and I'm not impressed by whatever the government says about it, based on their track record. Orsted and Seimens are backing away from offshore wind largely because of costs.
Why do you assume “doggerland” will be filled with abandoned turbines. It’s not filled with abandoned gas platforms and it’s the like of BP who are building/built both
Thanks - very interesting. Glad to see some are beginning to face reality. As for Scotland, however, it does little good to acknowledge goal failure without also making actual policy changes. So far, it doesn't sound like they've changed their destructive course.
I don’t speak Dutch, but using google translate it says this is a temporary measure to use gas and batteries during peak times only due to short term capacity problems on the distribution grid. It is not due to the method of generation and the Dutch are not “ditching renewables”
If we're going to be honest about energy, I think we should at least stop calling oil 'fossil' fuel. There are those that doubt dinosaurs even existed, let alone died and turned into energy sources.
"The Scottish government" best solution to reach the CO2 SCAM targets is to deploy mandatory rounds of m[RNA] COVIDIUS and BIRDIUS FLU jabs in order to CULL as many heads of the populace herd as possible... Less populace Heads means Less Emissions so the Targets can be reached!
A COMBO C&B PCR KIT PANDEMIC is what They need to deploy.
Argh. It's impossible to tell who is worse, the Welsh Labour snouts in trough government that has been in power for far too long, or Scotland's.
Yes… Maybe the way out is no more of them!
Myself and many others certainly wish we could. The final last straw has been Welsh Labour using their huge majority with their partners in crime, Plaid Cymru (until that ended recently...) to unilaterally decide with their majority together that all of the constituency boundaries should be enlarged such as our area of Radnorshire now also includes a huge Welsh Labour constituency. As a coalition, Welsh Labour and Plaid with the support of the Lib Dems voted to also add more members to the Senedd increasing the number from 60 to 96 along with making "reforms" to the voting system.
The "reforms" involve adopting a closed list system, which means voters won't be able to vote for individual candidates, only for the party's pre-selected list!
Wales was also extremely proud to be the first ones allegedly to declare a "climate emergency" and become a sanctuary nation for climate refugees.
Unless things change very drastically, residents in Wales will continue to be used as guinea pigs for the Orwellian cull and control Agenda 2030/Great Reset programme.
That's the scam running around in the Plantation I slave around... Portoikal!
Party associates are cooked into a list by regions (districts) and the herd votes for the party (the same as a football club) they enjoy.
Don't count on drastic CHANGE. We are unable to do it by our own Free Will.
It's very clear that the majority of animals from the herds of modern moron slaves (MMS) of the Western Plantations are fully engaged in this lunacy. We Today have the FACTS and PROOF (thanks to OPERATION COVIDIUS) that the herds of MMS are so easily fooled that [I]one can only laugh if we Think that we'll do anything against the SRF & Billionaires DESIRES and ACTIONS.
I posted your substack (thanks) around Facebook, and shared it elsewhere with this comment.
Examine the substack, and my Thoughts: It has been my view for some time that without question climate change is real and also without question we are not approaching the problem properly. I do not think wind and our current way of capturing the Sun with solar panels makes much sense. I observe the Future in my mind's eye, and I see arrays of shattered solar panels unreclaimed, and as in the novel Doggerland (which was set in/on The North Sea) acres of moribund windmills, their turbines broken, their wires dangling, untended to, and unremoved or repaired by the socialism for the rich folks who backed this approach to solving climate change. Remember when asked, If Al Gore was a prophet Richard Branson said 'it depends what kind of profit you're speaking of.' That sums it up in my mind, inadequate and maybe a scam, in that big bucks are being made from government contributions without coming near to solving the problem. We need and have needed a new Manhattan project to find a real source of energy for the world and not the band-aid solutions, of wind a solar.
I need to emphasize, does anyone think that these wind companies once they fail, or once the turbines and windmills wear out in 20 to 25 years, that corporate America is going to pay to remove them from the landscape, or the seabed.
Agreed. I think nuclear is the answer - I don't think we have time for another Manhattan project. As I said in https://alchristie.substack.com/p/why-we-need-more-nuclear-power, "Billions and billions of dollars are being spent on renewables and backup batteries...Imagine if that same amount of money for all the above was spent instead on building nuclear power plants, with much longer useful lifetimes and except for occasional maintenance, providing available power 24/7 in all seasons regardless of weather events. The folks who are very concerned about carbon emissions would at the same time be satisfied because nuclear has no carbon emissions."
It is the nuclear industry that has failed us as they still haven’t cracked the flexibility issue. They either become far more flexible or far cheaper as no one can afford to constrain nuclear plants with current design/costs
In the U.K. the ESO (grid operator) plans to have nuclear cover only the minimum summer demand as renewables (mainly offshore wind) are cheaper
I admit I don't understand quite what you mean by a nuclear "flexibility issue", nor do I understand what you mean by "constrain" nuclear plants.
As for offshore wind being cheaper, that's questionable if you take into consideration the difference between a lifetime of 15-20 years for wind turbines and the cost of removing, replacing, and recycling; and 80 years for nuclear.
Nuclear is great at constant baseload, and currently gets its flexibility from gas, but I’ve yet to see nuclear that can rapidly load follow
By constrain I mean switch them off, as there is no use for them
U.K. government figures show nuclear to be the most expensive form of generation, and offshore wind to be one of the cheapest
The U.K. grid operator, the ESO, projects the U.K. needs 120 GW offshore wind and no more than 15 GW nuclear. There are currently 100 GW offshore wind either existing or in the planning process
Thank you for answering my questions. I understand that nuclear cannot rapidly adjust to increases and decreases in demand, but was thinking that it's ok for a baseload to be constant - that's why we call it a baseload. I seriously question that offshore wind is cheap - I've been reading quite the opposite, and I'm not impressed by whatever the government says about it, based on their track record. Orsted and Seimens are backing away from offshore wind largely because of costs.
Quick example, roughly for the U.K., if annual demand is X, peak winter demand is 2X and minimum summer demand X/8
If you have a nuclear fleet designed for summer they will always be operating flat out, which is best for economics and long life
Why do you assume “doggerland” will be filled with abandoned turbines. It’s not filled with abandoned gas platforms and it’s the like of BP who are building/built both
Read the novel, these things break, they require maintenance, they require parts..
So do gas platforms! They get fixed then decommissioned
Thanks - very interesting. Glad to see some are beginning to face reality. As for Scotland, however, it does little good to acknowledge goal failure without also making actual policy changes. So far, it doesn't sound like they've changed their destructive course.
I don’t speak Dutch, but using google translate it says this is a temporary measure to use gas and batteries during peak times only due to short term capacity problems on the distribution grid. It is not due to the method of generation and the Dutch are not “ditching renewables”