ANTONISH wrote: ↑22 Jan 2022, 5:21pmIf I recall correctly the original link (Sellinge to Les Attaques) was meant to be a reciprocal arrangement to allow for the different periods of peak demand between the two countries.
Different timing of peak demand is a good reason for interconnects.
Different timing of supply from intermittent renewable sources is another.
Resilience after failure of a source is another.
Jonathan
PS: Sellindge IFA originally 160 MW. Now 2 GW. And now another 1 GW on IFA-2.
ANTONISH wrote: ↑22 Jan 2022, 5:21pmIf I recall correctly the original link (Sellinge to Les Attaques) was meant to be a reciprocal arrangement to allow for the different periods of peak demand between the two countries.
Different timing of peak demand is a good reason for interconnects.
Different timing of supply from intermittent renewable sources is another.
Resilience after failure of a source is another.
Jonathan
PS: Sellindge IFA originally 160 MW. Now 2 GW. And now another 1 GW on IFA-2.
Nice graphic, can I ask the source?
Also, I thought a UK Iceland connector was in the works?
I'd heard about an interconnect from Iceland using geothermal energy. But I can't find anything recent on it. There's a mention in that article. And another map!
I'd heard about an interconnect from Iceland using geothermal energy. But I can't find anything recent on it. There's a mention in that article. And another map!
Jonathan
That's a lovely picture - all we need is political stability
But in the light (!) of this week's announcements the split by party affiliation might be even more important:
"Ministers backed nuclear power but shunned new onshore wind plants as the main means for protecting the UK against future energy crises. But the new poll indicates Tory voters’ backing for wind turbines almost matches that of Labour and Lib Dem supporters – suggesting the move against onshore wind, a result of backbench Conservative pressure, runs counter to the views of the party’s own voters.
"In the Opinium poll, 79% of Tory voters said they were strongly or somewhat in favour of windfarms being installed in the UK, compared with 83% of Labour voters and 88% of Lib Dems. Two-thirds of all voters said they would be happy for a windfarm to be built near them."
Jdsk wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:22am
I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
Jdsk wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:22am
I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
People's idea of an eyesore changes over time. some bridges and viaducts etc are protected when they were once campaigned against. I was rather disappointed to see the golf balls disappear from Fylingdales.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
Jdsk wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:22am
I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
People's idea of an eyesore changes over time. some bridges and viaducts etc are protected when they were once campaigned against. I was rather disappointed to see the golf balls disappear from Fylingdales.
Agreed. A lot of it is unfamiliarity rather than anything deeper.
We had the cooling towers at Didcot. On some walks and rides I can feel their absence.
Jdsk wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:16am"Ministers backed nuclear power but shunned new onshore wind plants as the main means for protecting the UK against future energy crises. But the new poll indicates Tory voters’ backing for wind turbines almost matches that of Labour and Lib Dem supporters – suggesting the move against onshore wind, a result of backbench Conservative pressure, runs counter to the views of the party’s own voters.
"In the Opinium poll, 79% of Tory voters said they were strongly or somewhat in favour of windfarms being installed in the UK, compared with 83% of Labour voters and 88% of Lib Dems. Two-thirds of all voters said they would be happy for a windfarm to be built near them."
Sounds to me like the usual 'happy till it is actually proposed". We have had two proposals for wind turbines here, both for four of 20m (hub height). Though the view from our house is not ''spectacular" it is of uninterrupted countryside and then a range of hills in the far distance, it certainly will not be improved with wind turbines.
There were a slew of objections to the first, including from both a civil and a military airfield, from organisations ranging from the CPRE to the British Horse Society and a lot of local residents - the site is really quite close to housing. It was rejected. It's been put in again by the same landowner and the decision is still pending. Frankly l think if most people lived here and saw the proposals they'd object - whatever fine words they'd say to a pollster.
An interesting thread, wind power has come a long way since the thread was started.
My preference is small scale nuclear ( small modular reactors) built in large numbers across the country, but it ain’t going to happen ‘cause that would require investment, public support and long term planning, etc. Wind Turbines, I’m fine with them but they take a bit of getting used to. We have some stand along ones locally and I’d be happy to see more; they aren’t massive, they aren’t near to housing and they blend in with the local environment. There are also some solar farms too, and again I’ve no particular problem with them other than wondering whether good agricultural land could be better used for food production.
Energy storage is the issue and I see no solution to it in either the the near or the mid future. Yes, there are ways of storing electricity and potential energy but nothing has really scaled up and various schemes have come and gone over the years. Current U.K. nuclear doesn’t load follow, it can’t, but how much of that is due to reactor type and how much is due to it being Steam Turbine plant I’m not sure.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Carlton green wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:18pmEnergy storage is the issue and I see no solution to it in either the the near or the mid future. Yes, there are ways of storing electricity and potential energy but nothing has really scaled up and various schemes have come and gone over the years.
There are many available and working storage technologies. We haven't seen most of them at massive scale because we haven't faced up to switching off fossil fuels so that there hasn't been the economic incentive. Yet. The relevant question is whether they can scale up when we finally do. I don't see the technological barriers.