Sellafield

[Jdsk]

"People will need to change" is about as much of a solution as "let's get hydrogen atoms to fuse" unless it's accompanied by some detail of how that will be achieved.

Jonathan

[Biospace]

"People will need to change" is about as much of a solution as "let's get hydrogen atoms to fuse" unless it's accompanied by some detail of how that will be achieved.

I took Stradageek's inference to be that human energy consumption needs to fall significantly for our habitation of this planet to become sustainable, if it's his words you refer to. I might be wrong, of course.

[ANTONISH]

How do you think your ideas would go down with the "consumption addicts" using your local food bank?

My thinking about energy use?

I agree that we will need nuclear energy for the foreseeable future - at least until the problem of storing renewable energy is solved.

[the snail]

"People will need to change" is about as much of a solution as "let's get hydrogen atoms to fuse" unless it's accompanied by some detail of how that will be achieved.

I took Stradageek's inference to be that human energy consumption needs to fall significantly for our habitation of this planet to become sustainable, if it's his words you refer to. I might be wrong, of course.

There seems to be an assumption by some that change is impossible. As if increasing supply is not possible, despite production having been increased in the past. Similarly it's apparently impossible to reduce demand, despite demand having been reduced recently by energy efficiency. It's as much about having the will to change things as anything.

[geomannie]

How do you think your ideas would go down with the "consumption addicts" using your local food bank?

My thinking about energy use?

I agree that we will need nuclear energy for the foreseeable future - at least until the problem of storing renewable energy is solved.

I'm afraid that position doesn't consider the storage issue or nuclear waste and arguably the issue of of renewable energy storage is well on the way to being solved. It isn't quite there yet but the rate of technology progress in battery storage far exceeds the build time of a nuclear power plant, so what is the point of the latter?

For example, a recent news report from Scotland
"Each site [battery] will have the capacity to power around 800,000 homes in Scotland, for up to two hours, when required"
https://www.heraldscotland.com/business ... bles-boom/

(My note: Scotland only has 2.5 million home thus these 3 batteries alone can power them for nearly 2 hours)

Safer, much cheaper, much faster to build. What's not to like?

[Biospace]

I agree that we will need nuclear energy for the foreseeable future - at least until the problem of storing renewable energy is solved.

I'm afraid that position doesn't consider the storage issue or nuclear waste and arguably the issue of of renewable energy storage is well on the way to being solved. It isn't quite there yet but the rate of technology progress in battery storage far exceeds the build time of a nuclear power plant, so what is the point of the latter?
...
Safer, much cheaper, much faster to build. What's not to like?

Yes, safer, cheaper, much faster to come online - there's nothing not to like. The only potential snag is that it appears the thinking is if we build enough wind capacity and erect many more solar panels, we'll be fine once storage is built. I disagree.

The reason I highlight the importance of spreading demand load across as many and varied forms of RE as possible, including tidal, geothermal and other neglected resources, is that when renewable energy is buffered the EROI falls well below what modern economies require. Which means an economically efficient model such as we're building with mostly wind and solar, there would likely be serious energy shortages unless we're prepared to pay increasingly high prices to import large amounts of products, technologies and infrastructure.

As Stradageek picks up on above, there is going to have to be a significant change in lifestyle, probably larger than most can imagine if we're not going to require mini-nukes around each large city or a score of expensive HinkleyC-sized plants which would mean very expensive electricity and create more national security vulnerabilities.

Currently, the demand for energy is vastly beyond what should be necessary, whether it's in agribusiness and the food industry, healthcare or the production of consumer electronics. Decoupling economic output from energy consumption (to a much greater extent than Sweden and Denmark have achieved) is likely a good route out of the problems humans are presently creating.

[Jdsk]

...
I agree that we will need nuclear energy for the foreseeable future - at least until the problem of storing renewable energy is solved.

I used to think that we could get away with no new fission plants but unfortunately it no longer looks possible. We still don't have the insulation in either new or old buildings that would have made the difference, or even the future standards.

There's lots of technology available for storage but amazingly we're held up by planning issues getting in the way of connections. The Labour policy specifically identifies this.

From there on... the discussion needs numbers to make any progress, as it does in all of the other threads on the same subject.

Jonathan

[853]

I used to think that we could get away with no new fission plants but unfortunately it no longer looks possible. We still don't have the insulation in either new or old buildings that would have made the difference, or even the future standards.

The 2022 Building Regulations introduced insulation levels that mean a new-build mid-terrace house, or flat, is approaching Passivhaus standards, with the promise of even better standards being introduced in 2025.

https://www.planradar.com/gb/new-buildi ... %20devices)%20are%20introduced.

[Jdsk]

"Sellafield Ltd pleads guilty to cyber security offences":
https://www.onr.org.uk/news/all-news/20 ... -offences/

Jonathan

[Biospace]

I used to think that we could get away with no new fission plants but unfortunately it no longer looks possible. We still don't have the insulation in either new or old buildings that would have made the difference, or even the future standards.

The 2022 Building Regulations introduced insulation levels that mean a new-build mid-terrace house, or flat, is approaching Passivhaus standards, with the promise of even better standards being introduced in 2025.

https://www.planradar.com/gb/new-buildi ... %20devices)%20are%20introduced.

Yes, upcoming regs mean excellent insulation, but is there any account taken of summer overheating?

The other challenge is to improve old buildings as much as is reasonably possible. Council planning departments have often prevented owners from fitting double glazing, even when appearances would be little or no different - an absurdity.

The other challenge for space heating is to work out the best inter-seasonal storage of (renewable supplied) energy.

[Cugel]

Yes, upcoming regs mean excellent insulation, but is there any account taken of summer overheating?

The other challenge is to improve old buildings as much as is reasonably possible. Council planning departments have often prevented owners from fitting double glazing, even when appearances would be little or no different - an absurdity.

The other challenge for space heating is to work out the best inter-seasonal storage of (renewable supplied) energy.

Solar panels + batteries + mini-split heat pumps will work in any house to reduce the energy costs (and provide aircon) especially if everything's electric, including the car or other transport. They'd also reduce the amount of extra cross-country grid infrastructure needed.

Of course they won't provide all the energy requirements of the nation - but they would make a very significant reduction in the need for centralised electricity generation and the wires to transport it lots of miles to elsewhere.

Add retrospective insulation, as far as practical, for each and every house - the need for central electricity generation and gridwork is further reduced.

Add localised storage, for every village or parish, to collect and retain excess summer solar (or even excess winter wind) and the need for central power stations and cross-country gridwork reduces even more.

Yes, it all costs money. Get it from the vast subsidies currently paid to the oily-gassy industries and from the reduction in health & pollution costs they generate, that the taxpayers currently have to meet. Or buy it yourself instead of that new car.

Yes, some big consumers will need more than can be generated as an excess from house roofs and the local windmills - so let them have their own scaled-up local energy generators and storage.

Still a need for large central power stations and some cross-country grid? Yes, but far, far less than if local energy generation and storage is not implemented.

*************
After 5 months with the latest solar and battery installations on our house, the projection shows us generating 1000 - 1500 KwH more than we use each year. We'll end up paying £1000 per year for winter electricity downloaded at a cheap rate overnight but get over £2000 back from the FiT that came with the house and has been retained as a separate system from the new solar and batteries.

If only they'd get on with making low wind speed windmills that would obviate the need for that winter lecky ..... Off-grid! Huzzah!

[Biospace]

Solar panels + batteries + mini-split heat pumps will work in any house to reduce the energy costs (and provide aircon) ...

It's several times less polluting and less carbon intensive to store energy to be used for heat as heat, rather than using batteries for this purpose. Batteries are great for lower intensity demands, such as LED lighting, computers, smaller TVs and so on.

Storing heat energy for inter-seasonal use (economically and environmentally) is much more of a challenge.

Using excess PV electricity to blow cooled air makes sense if you already have an A2A heat pump. I think it's also possible to cool the water in wet central heating systems, depending on the model. Condensation could be an issue, especially in hidden pipe runs.

By the way Mr Cugel, I remember your interest in VAWTs a little while ago (and my generally sceptical stance) so it many interest you to hear I spied many of the blighters to power small roadside beacons last week while navigating the M62. I imagine the DfT will have them on trial, somewhere online there should be something about this.