New figures show lights may go out sooner than we thought

[Aurora]

Christopher Booker - Sunday Telegraph - 24/04/11

Figures published last week reveal that the moment when Britain’s lights start going out may be much closer than previously predicted. Thanks in part to the hammering they took in the abnormal cold of last winter, six large coal-fired power stations which supply a fifth of Britain’s average electricity needs have now used up more than half of the 20,000 running hours they are each allowed under the EU’s Large Combustion Plants directive. When they reach that limit they will have to shut down.

Article continues ...

[biffvernon]

Health warning! That was written by Chris Booker, arch global warming denier. That man is bonkers.

[adam2]

The author does indeed seem to be biased against renewables, not exactly a balanced report.
I believe however that the principle fact is reported correctly.
"due to the recent cold weather, coal burning power plants have run much more than expected, and will therefore reach the 20,000 hour limit quicker than expected"

It remains to be seen if we will in fact shut down these coal burning power plants when the 20,000 hour limit is reached.
I suspect that we wont, I dont think that the sheeple will accept the lights going out whist serviceable power plants stand idle.
Whilst in theory a mixture of wind, hydro, other renewables, interties to Europe, and natural gas for peak load load use, could make up the shortfall, this appears unlikely in practice.
Nothing can be built without prolonged nimbyfests.
Even without nimbyfests, nuclear cant be built in time, and thats without considering the hidden costs of nuclear.

The choices appear to be
Carry on burning coal, and put two fingers up to the EU and the enviroment.
Import more power (largely nuclear) from France
Change the law to exempt all renewable power generation, including related works such as grid extensions and substations, from ALL planning enquiries, nimbyfests and consultations.

I suspect that we will choose the first option.

[Lord Beria3]

Agreed.

Renewables, even without the issue of massive NIMBYism, just doesn't cut the mustard in terms of base load.

[biffvernon]

The author does indeed seem to be biased against renewables, not exactly a balanced report......serviceable power plants stand idle.....
The choices appear to be...

Booker biased? Stark raving bonkers more like.
Serviceable? What kind of service destroys the planet's capacity to support life?
Choices? How about living without messing up the Earth?

[adam2]

By "serviceable" I meant "still capable of being used as intended" and not that it would be sensible or desirable to continue use of coal burning power stations.

Most people however would be outraged if they had to endure frequent power cuts whilst power stations were closed down "by the EU"
Climate change and concerns re the enviroment are yesterdays news. A few cold weeks are widely considered to be proof that global warming is disproved.

I agree that energy use should be reduced, and that more of the energy used should be from renewables.
This does not seem to be the view of the majority though.
Consider the screams of outrage at petrol prices, despite the FALLING costs of motoring.
Remember the howls of protest over the banning of some energy wasting light bulbs.
And as for more renewables, remember the proposed Severn barrage ?
And the scale of well funded, well organised opposition to almost everything.
"The people want cheaper gas, electricity, and petrol" and they want it now.

[biffvernon]

Yes, yes yes, but nothing is going to change unless those of us who do understand about peak oil and global warming get a lot more strident, stop muttering about 'the people' who will never accept it, and start actually pointing out the stark choice: attempt to carry on as you were and give up all hope of becoming an ancestor, or change the paradigm, utterly.

[emordnilap]

True, true. Unfortunately most people want their comforts plus and tend to listen to and believe anyone who says they can keep them without any changes.

We have more than our fair share of obfuscators, mischief makers and downright liars on this forum, one supposedly dedicated to dealing with the problems of resource depletion and coming up with workable solutions.

Maybe that's a cue to ignore them and get on with it, Biff. Many otherwise intelligent posters spend far too much of their useful time responding to them.

Edit: well put, by the way.

[Lord Beria3]

Its obvious what needs to be done!

There is nothing much to debate.

1) Get serious about conservation

2) Invest in renewables when we still have the capital

3) Aim for national self-sufficiency in terms of food etc

4) Encourage 'buying local' and organic/local businesses

5) Learning skills which should be useful in the future

There is already a consensus here, there is nothing really to debate! What is more challenging is recognising that very few people want to hear that message or take the personal financial hit that the above would involve.

They would rather vote in that politician who blames the immigrants, or the Arabs, or the greedy oil companies etc. In other words, whether you like it or not, geopolitics and geofinance will drive the future!

That WILL affect you - whatever your personal actions. This is very debatable!

[mobbsey]

six large coal-fired power stations which supply a fifth of Britain’s average electricity needs have now used up more than half of the 20,000 running hours they are each allowed under the EU’s Large Combustion Plants directive

Does anyone really think that the Government will force those plants to shut down (or more likely, bringing them out of mothballs to meet a shortfall) if we've got power supply problems, or that, in relation to the chaos it would cause to one of the largest economies in the EU, the Commission will force the UK Government to take that action?

The large combustion plants directive is a good idea, but it falls down on one important point -- political reality.

[emordnilap]

There is already a consensus here

Maybe you should read more than just your own posts.

very few people want to hear that message or take the personal financial hit that the above would involve.

Which is what was said earlier.

there is nothing really to debate

then

This is very debatable!

[Lord Beria3]

Nothing stopping you from starting that debate (which I have apparently missed out on )

You really don't seem to understand... the politics and economics of the plateau and decline are a important part of this forum and worthy of debate.

[the_lyniezian]

Its obvious what needs to be done!

There is nothing much to debate.

1) Get serious about conservation

2) Invest in renewables when we still have the capital

3) Aim for national self-sufficiency in terms of food etc

4) Encourage 'buying local' and organic/local businesses

5) Learning skills which should be useful in the future

There is already a consensus here, there is nothing really to debate! What is more challenging is recognising that very few people want to hear that message or take the personal financial hit that the above would involve.

They would rather vote in that politician who blames the immigrants, or the Arabs, or the greedy oil companies etc. In other words, whether you like it or not, geopolitics and geofinance will drive the future!

That WILL affect you - whatever your personal actions. This is very debatable!

Well of course we are not isolated from the world, and what hapens on a global scale is bound to affect us- always has, always will. The question is as to whether we just do what some on here want to do and basically write any influence we can have as individuals or a movement as useless, and think it not worth the bother, or actually try to influence things as best we can?

(The thing is, if the latter course, I need to be getting on with something and changing a few of my own habits to boot, I must admit...)

[DominicJ]

Biff, you exist in a fantasy land.

If you believe that come winter 2013, millions of people should quietly freeze to death when the electricty grid buckles, you are a genocidal maniac who should be jailed before you can get anyone killed.

If you believe that come winter 2013, millions of people will quietly freeze to death whilst the electricty grid buckles, you are delusional and should probably be commited.

Your global warming fantasies are about to run headling into reality, and they are not going to win.
So far, they have been modest and hidden expenses during an economic boom. When the shit hits the fan, the cold hungry masses are gouing to string people like you up from a lamp post.

[ziggy12345]

+1