Impressed £67.5 billion... nope... 263 billion, and rising.

Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
Lol. I remember that. Was totes hilair! :)
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,446
Embattle said:
www.euronews.com

Switching off wind turbines cost Britain €1.6bn this year. Here’s why

Wind power has surged across Europe, sparking concern that billions are being wasted due to "insufficient" grid investment.
www.euronews.com www.euronews.com
Click to expand...
I am confused, they have to switch to fossil fuels when it is too windy as we generate more electricity than certain parts of the grid can handle? Useless cunts why not put isolation switches on the turbines so you restrict output at the source or am I confused?
 
Embattle

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
14,032
Deebs said:
I am confused, they have to switch to fossil fuels when it is too windy as we generate more electricity than certain parts of the grid can handle? Useless cunts why not put isolation switches on the turbines so you restrict output at the source or am I confused?
Click to expand...

In essence, there isn't enough capacity to transport all that wind energy from where the wind farms are located to where it'll be used, whereas you can stick gas plants in more favourable locations towards the areas of demand, quite often where old coal plants used to be.
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,446
Embattle said:
In essence, there isn't enough capacity to transport all that wind energy from where the wind farms are located to where it'll be used, whereas you can stick gas plants in more favourable locations towards the areas of demand, quite often where old coal plants used to be.
Click to expand...
Why not lay more cable to transport the energy? Electricity will be here till the Sun eats our planet, fossil fuels will be gone in the not too distant future.
 
Embattle

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
14,032
Deebs said:
Why not lay more cable to transport the energy? Electricity will be here till the Sun eats our planet, fossil fuels will be gone in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...

People don't want pylons, or they obstruct them so much that they take forever to build. There are plans in the works, many of them I suspect will be forced through:

The Great Grid Upgrade | Powering The Things You Love

The Great Grid Upgrade is the largest overhaul of the electricity grid in generations. Our infrastructure projects across England and Wales are helping to connect more clean, affordable energy to your homes and businesses.
www.nationalgrid.com www.nationalgrid.com

Including projects such as:

Grimsby to Walpole | National Grid

The way we generate electricity in the UK is changing rapidly, and we are transitioning to cheaper, cleaner and more secure forms of renewable energy such as new offshore windfarms. Our Grimsby to Walpole proposals are part of The Great Grid Upgrade.
www.nationalgrid.com www.nationalgrid.com

Experience

experience.arcgis.com experience.arcgis.com
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
They could spend a bit more and bury them.

I get why people don't want pylons. They're shit.
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,446
Embattle said:
It isn't a bit more, it is a lot more and slower.

Click to expand...
I get it is more expensive to go underground but over say 50 or 100 years doesn't the initial cost pay for it self as it is easier for pylons/overhead cables to suffer damage than something in reinforced underground ducting. Plus it must be easier to blow/lay/replace cables in the ducting?
 
Tom

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,564
It's an awful lot easier and cheaper to service something that's above ground and not below it. Think about how easy rewiring your house would be if all the cables hung from the ceiling.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
I cycled that route when I was in LA. Along with millions of other users I'm glad it wasn't pylons :)
 
Deebs

Deebs

Chief Arsewipe
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 1997
Messages
9,077,446
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
They have their problems. But we'd rather uglify AONB's than pay for proper infra.

Britain: as cheap as we can for everything. More money for the profiteers.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
Yes. It's more expensive. That's been said three times now.
 
Embattle

Embattle

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
14,032
Scouse said:
Yes. It's more expensive. That's been said three times now.
Click to expand...

You seem to not accept it fully though, it is more expensive to install, slower and while not needing maintenance/fixing as often as pylons when they do need it, it costs a lot more.

An MP during a discussion said something quite simple, if it was cheaper don't you think they would do underground power lines.

In the end we just need upgrades and we need them now.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
You're not getting it. And I've been very clear. I don't care that it's not cheaper.

Cost is one of the decision points. And we don't appreciate the permanent scar on our landcapes enough.

It's partly why I'm mildly anti onshore wind. We can simply make more offshore wind and not fuck our beautiful places.

As for pace - we've known we've needed massive grid upgrades (and renewables) since I started Uni. The fact that in the following 30+ years we've done fuck all about it doesn't mean, to me, that we should stick pylons everywhere.

I mean. Stick em in birmingham, it's already fucked. But we don't need another rash across the country.
 
Gwadien

Gwadien

Uneducated Northern Cretin
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
20,380
I think absolutely everyone would agree with you.

But the reality is that everybody gets upset when taxes are raised and updating our infrastructure will eclipse HS2 in terms of cost, and that's with overhead pylons.

So who pays?

I do find it a bit odd that the green energy companies are paying to use land to make more solar/wind but apparently seems pointless? Greenwashing?
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
38,150
Gwadien said:
I think absolutely everyone would agree with you.

But the reality is that everybody gets upset when taxes are raised and updating our infrastructure will eclipse HS2 in terms of cost, and that's with overhead pylons.

So who pays?

I do find it a bit odd that the green energy companies are paying to use land to make more solar/wind but apparently seems pointless? Greenwashing?
Click to expand...
We pay. We always do. And that's right.

But the government fucks the contracts - private companies make the infrastructure and *must* be paid if they can provide electricity. The public still owns the grid. So it's entirely on us if we can't utilise the energy they produce.

Basic government cross-party incompetence. Grid capacity should come ahead of generation.

We have a central bank for this. Print the money, hire the people, build the infrastructure.

"Anything we can do, we can afford"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top Bottom