www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41484153
Not a surprise as it's unlikely to be a big earner, and has all the popularity of a fart in a spacesuit.
More onshore windmills please - cheapest form of electricity generation you know.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#United_Kingdom
|
Wind may be the cheapest using the figures you quoted in the link but it is unreliable.
At peak demand, in the depths of winter the UK needs some 60MW - High pressure over the UK means windspeed is zero - so to give us 60MW we need Nuclear 8MW, GAS & more GAS (Hydro is for short peeks) Inter connector from France (Nuclear) Holland (gas).
So if you have wind you also have to build Gas to cover the blanks of no wind.
In the depths of winter Scotland will depend on power from England - & they have little or no spare capacity!
I have 2 sons in the oil industry, one of whom is in charge exploration, drilling, commissioning & production (gas & oil)) in a few of the states in the US where his company operates.
North Dakota has come from almost zero to 4th largest state producer of oil/gas in then last 30 years.
Increased economic activity based on gas, engineering & support services. Increased employment directly & indirectly, increased tax take for the state, investment in infrastructure etc etc. Population has risen as companies move in & people earn "good money" in a bouyant NDakota economy.
It is all very well to sit back & say we do not need a growing economy (Low gas prices has spurred on US activity @ home), we do not want lower gas & electricity prices for our homes.
Scotland runs at a loss, government spends more than we earn in taxes- how nice would it be to increase money for Education, Health, Pensions, Roads, Telecoms etc etc with the influx of tax from gas?
You never know we might attract back some manufacturing (these are real jobs - not flipping burgers) instead of paying somebody, with money we do not have, in China, India or Korea?
The Victorians built Scotland on Coal & iron, engineering & shipbuilding - should we not try & build a new Scotland based on the people, technologies & resources we have?
|
|
Shock! horror! - think of the Carbon footprint that will leave - I can hear them screamin now (the Greenies), Nuclear is the only viable way forward!
|
As someone who loves the wild places of Scotland the desecration, and I don’t use the word lightly, of such places by wind turbine farms really upsets me.
I’m no tree hugger but some of the most stunning scenery and views in the U.K. have been destroyed by these things.
|
All energy sources have problems. Wind turbines at least have the merit that they do little damage to the environment other that the visual impact. I guess that or we want a modern economy we sometimes have to accept some of the downsides. Around here we have a lot of huge solar arrays on south facing slopes.
|
>>Around here we have a lot of huge solar arrays on south facing slopes.
Scotland & sunshine rarely appear in the same sentence.
|
|
If you could generate energy from cold grey skies and drizzle I guess Scotland would be a wealthy nation. :-)
|
|
Well said FB though I must say that I don't find wind turbines to a blot on the landscape, in many places they provide a stark contrast that is attractive in it's own right. Rather like Victorian viaducts across highland valleys or mid 20th century suspension bridges across the great rivers.
|
Lots of NIMBYS, currently wittering on about fracking, in Yorkshire, particularly.
Fracking is just one of the ways for the UK to become self sufficient in reliable energy, as I believe we must.
OK it, even if the success it is in the USA is not replicated, will only last for a few years, but breathing space is what we need to commission nuclear stations.
Energy is so basic to life these days, that I believe nuclear is the only viable option - but it takes a long, long, time to come on stream from even the agreement to build stage.
|
We don't want it here Roger nothing to do with being a nimby.
It is a outdated energy source which will cause more harm than good regarding environmental damage.
Energy is vital yes but not this way.Yanks don't care it is all about money the last people we need advice from.
|
>> We don't want it here Roger nothing to do with being a nimby.
>>
Speak for yourself, I broadly agree with Roger.
Unless revolutionary developments come on stream quite soon such as thermonuclear fusion power generation then nuclear fission plants are the only viable mainstream power source, supplemented by solar, wind and hydro. Though we do need to explore all available hydro carbons if only as a stop gap.
|
|
According to Orkney folklore, you can recognise Orcadians by their forward-leaning stance, developed against high winds. I don't know what applies otherwise north of the border but during our two weeks on Orkney, the wind turbines scarcely moved a wing. Sunlight is more reliable although sun farms are scarcely less of an eyesore than turbines.
|
>> I don't know what applies otherwise north of the border but during our two
>> weeks on Orkney, the wind turbines scarcely moved a wing. >>
I have sailed around Orkney, there was certainly enough wind.
>> light is more reliable >>
Not in Orkney ;-)
I do think that tidal schemes should be developed further bit it the Bristol Channel, Pentland Firth etc.
|
Orkney is now able to produce a lot more electricity than it needs with its turbines and has limited connection to the Grid so can struggle to use the power it produces
There are schemes being developed such as hydrogen generation to make use of the excess power but static wind farms sometimes mean there is no demand for the power that could have been produced.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXe1hBvlylw
|
Fracking banned in Scotland - Falkirk Bairn
