Russia-in-secret-plot-against-fracking-Nato-chief-says

[UndercoverElephant]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy ... -says.html

[vtsnowedin]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy ... -says.html

This annoys me. You could not be bothered to make a comment based on the content or even cut and paste a quote from the piece that might spark some interest? If you don't care why should I?

[UndercoverElephant]

It wasn't worthy of quoting, but at the same time may be of interest to some people here.

[emordnilap]

Someone else cares.
http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/forum/vie ... 02&#254402

[Murf]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy ... -says.html

This annoys me. You could not be bothered to make a comment based on the content or even cut and paste a quote from the piece that might spark some interest? If you don't care why should I?

Here you go:

Russia is secretly working with environmental groups campaigning against fracking in an attempt to maintain Europe's dependence on energy imports from Moscow, the secretary-general of Nato has said.

Speaking at the Chatham House foreign affairs think-tank in London, Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Russia was mounting a sophisticated disinformation campaign aimed at undermining attempts to exploit alternative energy sources such as shale gas.

He said: "I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organisations - environmental organisations working against shale gas - to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas. That is my interpretation."

I particularly like Andrew Pendleton's response!

Greenpeace dismissed Mr Rasmussen's comments as "preposterous".

A spokesman said: "Greenpeace had thirty of its people locked up in Russian prisons last year, threatened with fifteen years in jail.

"The idea we’re puppets of Putin is so preposterous that you have to wonder what they’re smoking over at Nato HQ.

"Mr Rasmussen should spend less time dreaming up conspiracy theories and more time on the facts.

"Fracked gas will probably cost more than Russian imports, there’s little chance fracking will generate more than a small fraction of Europe’s gas needs and it won’t even do that for at least ten years.

"Greenpeace has detailed plans for energy policies which would remove the need for any Russian gas imports to Europe entirely."

Andrew Pendleton, the head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said: “We’ve consistently urged the Government to end our dependence on dirty fossil fuels from abroad by developing Britain’s home-grown renewable energy.

“Perhaps the Russians are worried about our huge wind and solar potential, and have infiltrated the UK Government.”

The Department of Energy and Climate Change said it will not be commenting on the matter.

Rasmussen comes across as an absolute lunatic.

[vtsnowedin]

So Greenpeace thinks the UK can build enough windmills to replace natural gas? I think they are the ones that need to spend more time with the facts.They probably need to invest in a new abacus as well.

[emordnilap]

So Greenpeace thinks the UK can build enough windmills to replace natural gas?

No.

[vtsnowedin]

Is that not what this means?

"Greenpeace has detailed plans for energy policies which would remove the need for any Russian gas imports to Europe entirely."

Andrew Pendleton, the head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said: “We’ve consistently urged the Government to end our dependence on dirty fossil fuels from abroad by developing Britain’s home-grown renewable energy.

[emordnilap]

No. Besides, which NGO are you referring to specifically?

[careful_eugene]

So Greenpeace thinks the UK can build enough windmills to replace natural gas?

No.

Yes! Especially since the Chinese agreed to invest in our infrastructure.

[Murf]

So Greenpeace thinks the UK can build enough windmills to replace natural gas? I think they are the ones that need to spend more time with the facts.They probably need to invest in a new abacus as well.

Well I can't act as a spokesman for Greenpeace, but windmills aren't the only way to harness renewable energy.

As the point of this site implies, there might be a time when we have to rely on windmills, etc. in the absence of fossil fuels.

[vtsnowedin]

No. Besides, which NGO are you referring to specifically?

The quote above specifies imported NG from Russia. Apparently importing it from Qatar is less of a problem in their eyes.
Your available renewable domestic resources are wind ,both on and off shore ,a bit of Hydro mostly in Scotland and solar PV panels. plus some tidal power if they can work out the kinks in those systems. To replace the base load being supplied by imported Russian NG and oil today would turn the Island of Britain into a forest of windmills with every south facing surface covered in PV panels. And you still will have long winter nights that are calm so that you have neither wind or solar power being produced.
To get there will take billions invested and decades of building so you better get cracking. Also I think a few backup plants burning coal through the best available pollution controls should always be in the mix for your own security.

[RenewableCandy]

Baseload, as a concept, is so last century.

As for running the grid on renewables, it can (just!) be done, bearing in mind things like interconnectors to Ireland and the Continent, and Drax running on biofuels (which admittedly has its own issues, but having to import gas from Russia isn't one of them).

[vtsnowedin]

Baseload, as a concept, is so last century.

As for running the grid on renewables, it can (just!) be done, bearing in mind things like interconnectors to Ireland and the Continent, and Drax running on biofuels (which admittedly has its own issues, but having to import gas from Russia isn't one of them).

The appliances and lights in your home and workplace still work on oh so last centuries ways. Provide the UK's consumption of 375,000 GWH on just renewables? I have to doubt that at least in the near term.

[AndySir]

When dismissing a policy it may be helpful to actually read it.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international ... evolution/

The relevant section starts on page 55.