Renewable energy

[Velma's Dad]

Hmm. Not too sure about that. Are you talking of land based or offshore because there is a big difference?

I'm not sure the difference is all that great. Offshore turbines do require more steel to make, although have a higher generation output on average. There are also some differences in energy consumption for maintenance ops. Still I haven't spotted a figure greater than 18 months, and most analyses say less than that even for offshore.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

I’ve re-read the article (Telegraph Magazine - Saturday) and to be perfectly honest i don’t see any political bias in it. It’s certainly not ‘dissing’ renewables in favour of oil, so no obvious vested interests being promoted.

View attachment 72190

View attachment 72191

For anybody interested, the article was effectively a summary/review of the book ‘The rare metals war’ by Guillaume Pitron.

 

[Velma's Dad]

I’ve re-read the article (Telegraph Magazine - Saturday) and to be perfectly honest i don’t see any political bias in it. It’s certainly not ‘dissing’ renewables in favour of oil, so no obvious vested interests being promoted.

View attachment 72190

View attachment 72191

It's all just journalism at the end of the day but I always have a bit of an eye-roll when I see the "Takes XXX megatonnes of rock to produce XXX micrograms of unobtainium" etc.

You have to ask the "is that actually a big number?" question (as Tim Harford on More or Less says) ,and against meaningful comparators. For conventional incandescent lightbulbs, how many tonnes of rock had to be mined to extract one kg (or, more usefully, one light bulb's worth) of tungsten, for example? And what harm might/is done by that mining?

 

[AndyP12345]

This whole situation is very complex and very polarised. The current focus on renewables and EV as the solution to the problem is far too simplistic.

-rare earth mining causes environmental issues and exploits those that are mining it
-the cabling necessary to upgrade the grid requires metals for the conductors and non conducting materials for the insulation
-the components that enable the internet and the devices we use to post our comments here cause environmental damage. The energy used to power the internet and the consequential emissions will soon exceed the emissions generated by air travel
- over population and population growth rates contribute to consumption, deforestation etc etc

Big political statements are easy to make as the politicians change every 4 years or so....

China has played the long game and now control 85% plus of the world Rare Earths and minerals required for device manufacture. They also control majority of the device manufacture. Also building and polluting at an incredible rate

norway held up as a leading light in renewables and in the introduction of EV remains the 13 largest oil producer and in its own budgets demostrates that it will need to continue exploitation of oil for another 25 years plus

we all need to do our part... all my devices are more than 7 years old and am about to upgrade wifes phone as its hit 10 years old and the speaker has stopped working

It’s amazing this thread is here.. when we are driving polluting diesel vehicles. That said I am not giving up my camper

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

It's all just journalism at the end of the day but I always have a bit of an eye-roll when I see the "Takes XXX megatonnes of rock to produce XXX micrograms of unobtainium" etc.

You have to ask the "is that actually a big number?" question (as Tim Harford on More or Less says) ,and against meaningful comparators. For conventional incandescent lightbulbs, how many tonnes of rock had to be mined to extract one kg (or, more usefully, one light bulb's worth) of tungsten, for example? And what harm might/is done by that mining?

Totally agree but nevertheless it’s important to be aware that ‘green’ has a dirty side.

 

[66tim99]

The point is that the devastating pollution being caused in a growing number of locations around the globe from the extraction of Rare Earths is indisputable.

Will now let you get back to your highly ‘objective’ media feeds - maybe The Guardian or the BBC.

Whahaha love it!

Helpful site assessing media bias, and Fake Noos.
BBC (High factual reporting, slightly left of centre) more objective than the Telegraph ('mixed' factual reporting, Right wing)and the Guardian ('mixed' factual, Centre-left). All more objective than the Daily Mail (Low factual reporting, further right than the Telegraph, bordering on Extreme)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph/

 

[66tim99]

That is quite possible, but a question remains: where is the hydrogen to come from? Most will say via hydrolysis of water, ok where is the electricity to come from? Nuclear - ok that works. Wind - ummmm? How many thousands of wind turbines would be needed? Solar - ummmm? How many thousands of acres of land would need to be covered? Cover all roofs with panels - would that work? - it might. Other technology? Splitting of water using sunlight with a catalyst - TiO2?

Suspect Nuclear baseload with offshore wind and solar will make up the largest proportion. Reducing carbon emissions, partly through reduction in consumption of course, has to be the goal now. When there's an alternative fuel Cali, I'm first in the queue.

 

[Sunstoner]

Like the Nordic country’s. @Sunstoner
Drill a hole down 200m, send water down one pipe, get steam back in the return pipe.
Free ish power.
Electric from generators.
Hot water for everything that’s needing hot water and also heat exchanger to heat fresh water to drink.

Although not for power but for heating, we're looking at doing similar by installing a ground source heat pump. Local council told us to sod off re solar panels, which isnt at all helpful.

Does feel like all of these solutions need some serious consideration moving forward.

 

[66tim99]

Although not for power but for heating, we're looking at doing similar by installing a ground source heat pump. Local council told us to sod off re solar panels, which isnt at all helpful.

Does feel like all of these solutions need some serious consideration moving forward.

Planning permission refused as you're in a conservation area, or its a listed building? Often they are not as precious about rear roof slopes in CAs (not helpful if that slope is north facing!) but listed buildings are tricky. I had success in City of Westminster getting planning using solar roof tiles rather than panels, though cost and efficiency are downsides...
https://www.solarguide.co.uk/solar-roof-tile-manufacturers#/

 

[Sunstoner]

Planning permission refused as you're in a conservation area, or its a listed building? Often they are not as precious about rear roof slopes in CAs (not helpful if that slope is north facing!) but listed buildings are tricky. I had success in City of Westminster getting planning using solar roof tiles rather than panels, though cost and efficiency are downsides...
https://www.solarguide.co.uk/solar-roof-tile-manufacturers#/

Yes its 2(3) fold. The rear of our property faces a Grade2 listed property and own property is marked as being an English Heritage asset and we're in a conservation area, so we've no chance. Apparently we can place them in the garden but we're not quite over moon about that one just yet.

 

[T6 CFO]

Although not for power but for heating, we're looking at doing similar by installing a ground source heat pump. Local council told us to sod off re solar panels, which isnt at all helpful.

Does feel like all of these solutions need some serious consideration moving forward.

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

 

[Wildcamper]

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

When I look at a problem I like to fix that issue but then look deeper as to the underlying cause. Just mending is often just papering over the crack, it will reopen. As I see it the environmental problems we face all stem from a single cause - a singularity. Be it shortages of, water, housing, energy, wild spaces, clean air ....
Why are there a shortages, it's overconsumption and consumption is people using stuff. The planet is very well balanced if we treat it well. If I want some wood I might go into the woods and cut a branch. That branch will regrow, 10, 25 or more year required. But if 1000 people all chop a branch off then the tree is dead. So stepping backwards through the questions starting from any of the above - take water. Why are we short of drinking water = overconsumption. Overconsuming because too many people. Reduce people = reduced consumption = water supply restored. Reducing the population (very unpopular) will remove the housing shortage, reduce pollution of all sorts, clean water for all (or many more), will give wild spaces more chance to recover, help wildlife .. you get the idea. Will it be easy - heck no! But also think virus. Viruses love warm crowded spaces. Nature has warned mankind since the Black Death and before that it holds the upper hand - recently SARS, MERS, Bird Flu, Covid etc. The more humanity disturbs the wild places the more likely a virus, far more deadly than Covid, will be released. The end of humanity will most likely come from a virus not a planetary impact. Somehow the people of this planet need to look in the mirror and ask how to reduce population by about 1/3. Beyond my pay grade!

 

[Velma's Dad]

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

Are you dead set on solar thermal? We had it at our last house but now I'd be more inclined to look at PV for UK domestic use-case.

 

[66tim99]

Yes its 2(3) fold. The rear of our property faces a Grade2 listed property and own property is marked as being an English Heritage asset and we're in a conservation area, so we've no chance. Apparently we can place them in the garden but we're not quite over moon about that one just yet.

You might have luck with the tiles rather than panels

 

[Sunstoner]

You might have luck with the tiles rather than panels

It shows you where Im at......they do solar tiles now? (please dont say they've been around for yonks! lol)

Are they comparable ?

 

[Sunstoner]

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

Its well worth it. My friend loves to tell me and share screenshots about how much 'leccy' he's not paying for when running his appliances. Its pretty bonkers tbh.

Getting knocked back was an arse. Anything to get the bills down and be a tiny bit more self-sufficient. We applied when we moved in 10 years back got the same response but thought times had changed. Apparently not.

 

[T6 CFO]

Are you dead set on solar thermal? We had it at our last house but now I'd be more inclined to look at PV for UK domestic use-case.

No we are open minded and was partly the reason for my post as it’s not something I know a great deal about. Thanks

This gives me a starter for ten on the subject.

Solar Panels vs Solar Thermal Technology (2024) | GreenMatch

Is it the same? Take a closer look at Solar thermal vs Solar photovoltaic (PV) expert comparison about the efficiency, advantages and disadvantages of the technologies. Get quotes from suppliers in the UK.

www.greenmatch.co.uk

Bought this Victorian house just over 2 years ago and completely renovated it structurally and cosmetically except for the out of character sun room on the back.
House is a forever family house with the effort we’ve put into it so doing the right thing long term is key.
Only changes so far have been up rating power to allow for the induction cooker and some underfloor heating. Thinking has been to move away from reliance on gas and go all electric when boiler technology allows it so PV could be the answer.




Mike

 

[66tim99]

It shows you where Im at......they do solar tiles now? (please dont say they've been around for yonks! lol)

Are they comparable ?

They have been around for around 10 years. They are more expensive and less efficient than panels, but look much betterhttps://www.solarguide.co.uk/solar-roof-tile-manufacturers#/

 

[T6 CFO]

Its well worth it. My friend loves to tell me and share screenshots about how much 'leccy' he's not paying for when running his appliances. Its pretty bonkers tbh.

Getting knocked back was an arse. Anything to get the bills down and be a tiny bit more self-sufficient. We applied when we moved in 10 years back got the same response but thought times had changed. Apparently not.

That’s a pity. Fortunately our conservation officer has been sensible so far and rightly so as all we’ve done is restore the house to its former glory from a sorry state. I’ll get my ducks lined up before approaching them on this.


Mike

 

[Sunstoner]

That’s a pity. Fortunately our conservation officer has been sensible so far and rightly so as all we’ve done is restore the house to its former glory from a sorry state. I’ll get my ducks lined up before approaching them on this.


Mike

Hopefully your planning officer will be more forward thinking and give you the green light.

I'll give it another go in a few years. Seems daft not getting the ok in the current climate.

 

[WelshGas]

Once upon a time, in the not too distant past it was thought that Diesel would be the climate saviour and we all know what happened there.

 

[Wildcamper]

From what I read there is very little wrong with a well maintained Euro 6 diesel with Adblue and particulate filter. What has given diesels a bad name is the old smoky engines that are neglected.

 

[Velma's Dad]

Helpful site assessing media bias, and Fake Noos.
BBC (High factual reporting, slightly left of centre) more objective than the Telegraph ('mixed' factual reporting, Right wing)and the Guardian ('mixed' factual, Centre-left). All more objective than the Daily Mail (Low factual reporting, further right than the Telegraph, bordering on Extreme)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph/

Anyways... slightly(!) off topic but as we were talking about the media and The Telegraph specifically. Some searingly insightful journalistic analysis from its chief political correspondent in today's edition:


(I can only hope - even though I couldn't detect - that's meant sarcastically. The alternative is too stupid to contemplate).

 

[soulstyledevon]

When I look at a problem I like to fix that issue but then look deeper as to the underlying cause. Just mending is often just papering over the crack, it will reopen. As I see it the environmental problems we face all stem from a single cause - a singularity. Be it shortages of, water, housing, energy, wild spaces, clean air ....
Why are there a shortages, it's overconsumption and consumption is people using stuff. The planet is very well balanced if we treat it well. If I want some wood I might go into the woods and cut a branch. That branch will regrow, 10, 25 or more year required. But if 1000 people all chop a branch off then the tree is dead. So stepping backwards through the questions starting from any of the above - take water. Why are we short of drinking water = overconsumption. Overconsuming because too many people. Reduce people = reduced consumption = water supply restored. Reducing the population (very unpopular) will remove the housing shortage, reduce pollution of all sorts, clean water for all (or many more), will give wild spaces more chance to recover, help wildlife .. you get the idea. Will it be easy - heck no! But also think virus. Viruses love warm crowded spaces. Nature has warned mankind since the Black Death and before that it holds the upper hand - recently SARS, MERS, Bird Flu, Covid etc. The more humanity disturbs the wild places the more likely a virus, far more deadly than Covid, will be released. The end of humanity will most likely come from a virus not a planetary impact. Somehow the people of this planet need to look in the mirror and ask how to reduce population by about 1/3. Beyond my pay grade!

Population growth rate is declining.
Experts predict a peak of about 10billion people and then quite a rapid drop off from there.

That’s why it’s key now, to consume less...

 

[Wildcamper]

Population growth rate is declining.
Experts predict a peak of about 10billion people and then quite a rapid drop off from there.

That’s why it’s key now, to consume less...

I treat population modelling with a large degree of distrust. As with all mathematical models "garbage in garbage out". The population in Africa is likely to quadruple between now and 2100. Look at how the population has grown since 2000. Also S America. All these new people will want to indulge in consumerism.

Agree with consume less.