What can we do to change the minds of decision makers and people in general to actually do something about preparing for the forthcoming economic/energy crises (the ones after this one!)?
clv101 wrote:
No, it's a lot more sensible. The CO2 breathed out by animals, is just the same CO2 that was taken in from the atmosphere months earlier by the plants they ate. Carbohydrate + Oxygen = CO2 + Water. There's no net atmospheric CO2 increased from breathing! The CO2 from the SUV is totally different - millions of years old and is a net increase to the atmosphere.
This is not true given that much of the food is grown using fossil fuel derived fertilizers. It is also grown and harvested using machinery that runs on fossil fuels.
woodburner wrote:Can anyone explain the greenness of these turbines when they are being built on boggy ground in Wales and Ireland, where the bog has to be drained and the resulting CO2 emissions are greater than the supposed savings by wind generation.
The paper I linked to refs to building turbines on peat and the substantial carbon released from that - still comfortably paid back.
woodburner wrote:
clv101 wrote:
No, it's a lot more sensible. The CO2 breathed out by animals, is just the same CO2 that was taken in from the atmosphere months earlier by the plants they ate. Carbohydrate + Oxygen = CO2 + Water. There's no net atmospheric CO2 increased from breathing! The CO2 from the SUV is totally different - millions of years old and is a net increase to the atmosphere.
This is not true given that much of the food is grown using fossil fuel derived fertilizers. It is also grown and harvested using machinery that runs on fossil fuels.
It's still true. The carbon atoms we breath out, are the same carbon atoms that the plant took in from the air. The carbon in the fossil fuel driven machinery came out of the exhaust.
clv101 wrote:
The paper I linked to refs to building turbines on peat and the substantial carbon released from that - still comfortably paid back
.
They also issued a cautionary note applying to wet bog areas IIRCC.
It's still true. The carbon atoms we breath out, are the same carbon atoms that the plant took in from the air. The carbon in the fossil fuel driven machinery came out of the exhaust.
The plant wasn't differentiating whether the CO2 was from plant origins or from tractor exhaust. It just took in CO2. It remains that the fertilisers are substantially derived from fossil fuels, the production of which produces CO2 amongst other things.
How are you suggesting this be factored in? How should we factor in the thousands of fatalities each year on the UK roads?
I suggest you start a new topic if you want to discuss road fatalities.
Every unit of wind generated electricity results in a unit of fossil fuel generated electricity not happening. The grid-wide generation from wind, though locally variable, can be forecast accurately well within the time-frame needed for gas turbine management.
True, jsd, off shore seems to be somewhere around twice the cost at the moment. I guess the balance will change with scale. There are prodigious plans afoot for developments towards and on the Dogger Bank but it will take time and capital, two things in short supply. With on shore one can be up and running and receiving an income in months (once planning permission is granted).
I learnt today from someone who was there, that on a day when I did not attend the Inquiry, even a Council Official slandered me, attempting to lesson the impact of my testimony by saying that I was not local.
biffvernon wrote:......
I learnt today from someone who was there, that on a day when I did not attend the Inquiry, even a Council Official slandered me, attempting to lesson the impact of my testimony by saying that I was not local.
.........
Only lived there ten years!!! Can't be local, then.
YES! The Inspector agreed with us. East Lindsey District Council wasted so much of our money fighting it and they still can't give in gracefully. They say in their press release:
Planning Inspector approves Gayton Wind Farm development
THE Government’s Planning Inspector has approved a planning application for eight 115m wind turbines and a substation at Carlton Grange, Thacker Bank, Near Louth. The application is known as the ‘Gayton Wind Farm application’
The District Council’s Planning Committee refused the application in June 2012 but it was approved by the Inspector following an Inquiry in January 2013.
Portfolio Holder for Economic Regeneration at the District Council, Councillor Craig Leyland, said: “We strongly feel that the Inspector has made the wrong decision. Along with the community, the Council put forward what we felt was a robust argument for this not to be approved. The basis of the argument was the impact these 115m turbines are likely to have on the local area, affecting the quality of life for local people and landscape. We are already looking closely at the appeal outcome and considering what options are available to us.
It is a very instructive read for all interested in how the process works. The Inspector is clearly a man of great sagacity and has a dry wit, with which he wipes the floor with the local council.
