|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
 Posted -
19/01/2006
:
21:33
|
|
Environmental groups have today called for extensive public consultation following the Government's announcement that a major power station is to be built to the west of Barnoldswick, Lancashire, in a largely uninhabited area of moorland known as Middop*. "It is now almost universally accepted that Britain's power requirements outstrip current capacity," said a senior government source at a news conference in Westminster today. "If we are to remain a force in the world's economy we must ensure that we can meet the demand for power on both an industrial and domestic front, although it has not yet been decided in what form this power will be generated - nuclear, renewable or fossil." Environmental campaigners are demanding that the local population be consulted to gauge their opinion on the matter. A questionnaire is to be issued to each household in the area asking the following simple question: If you had a choice, which kind of power generation plant would you find least objectionable if it were situated 'in your back yard': 1. Nuclear (similar to Windscale and Sizewell)
2. Renewable (similar to wind farms at Cliviger)
3. Fossil (electricity generated by coal/gas) * Needless to say, this posting is not, thank god, actually true! I just thought I'd use a bit of literary licence to set the scene. The basic question is: Given that the UK will have to build more power stations, what solution would YOU be happy with? And given that such a plant would have to be built SOMEwhere, how would you feel if it were next to Barlick 
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
michaeltapper
New Member
48 Posts
|
|
 Posted - 23/01/2006 : 13:24
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4620350.stm
very interesting topic,maybe we should all start with this
 |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 24/01/2006 : 06:20
My own opinion about this is that they are all clutching at straws. Energy problems will never be solved by nibbling at the edges. Notice that all these ideas are quick fixes and involve no long term investment. The bottom line is that we are in trouble now and the powers that be are still arguing what we should do about it. We need to bite the bullet and do everything technologically possible to ensure an independent electricity generation infrastructure. The long term goal is the perfection of fusion. It will never be cheap. The days of cheap energy are over and we haven't woken up yet. It will be economics that drives the war on waste, that will switch off all the non-essential drainers of power.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
handlamp
|
Posted - 24/01/2006 : 14:50
I agree, Stanley. Apart from nuclear, we should be getting stuck into the much improved clean coal technology whilst we've still got plenty of ex NCB people still around with the necessary mining knowledge. The dash for gas was a VERY short term fix.
Ted |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 24/01/2006 : 16:59
News item today in the YP that Ferrybridge and Fiddler's Farry in Cheshire are to be fitted with sulphur scrubbing technology which means their life can be extended to at least 2015. The flue gases are scrubbed by passing through a slurry of ground lime and water. The SO2 reacts with the water and lime and produces Gypsum which is the base material for plaster and plasterboard and is saleable. This is fairly low level technology compared with possible hydrogenation but is a step in the right direction. R4 today had an interesting programme where they were talking about the CO2 load produced by smouldering forest floor litter in Indonesia which is the aftermath of the great biomass fires in the area. It produces a fifth of the CO2 burden emitted annually by the rest of the world. The point being that in terms of economics, we'd be far better off subsidising developed coutries to enable them to stop forest clearance which is eventually fruitless as the reason trees were there in the first place is that the soils are useless. As soon as the nutrients built up by the trees are exhausted the land reverts to desert. Places like the Painted Desert in America are old denuded forests. Complicated init......
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 27/01/2006 : 12:03
I agree that the world's power needs must be tackled by governments etc, but that doesn't absolve each and every individual from their responsibility too. What bugs me is the attitude from many folks that "Something should be done" then they sit back and expect someone else (local council, government, charity etc) to do it for them. Now of course I can't build an energy efficient power station, but I CAN turn off the TV standby button, use energy saving bulbs and recycle as much refuse as possible. As an individual this won't help the world's situation one jot, but multiply me by 60 million and suddenly there's a substantial impact. As always, it's a combination of methods. There's no one single answer. But while the Powers That Be are deciding what the global solution will be, we should do our bit - however small it seems - in the meantime. If this means just one extra power station needn't be built, then it's worth it. |
tripps
|
Posted - 27/01/2006 : 14:01
I saw a reporter doing an outside broadcast at about 10:30 pm outside the M.O.D building in Whitehall the other night. Every single light in the building was on. What's that all about? All the staff working? I doubt it. Cleaners? Probably to make the building look good. Not a good example from government.
|
|
|
|
|
Page load time - 0.406 |
|
Power station to be built near Barnoldswick
