Scottish Elises

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39675418


Steve.

This actually worries me a little as the biomass that is replacing it has a 'double whammy' carbon penalty.

Not only are you still releasing CO2, but nature's mechanism for removing is being destroyed too. You can't replace a mature tree in less time than CO2 is likely to become a real problem. And planting thousands of saplings still won't replace a single mature tree's uptake of CO2. There just isn't enough free land to make this more carbon neutral than burning coal.

I imagine that when they say it was a coal free day they mean they didn't use any of the power from coal generation rather than there was no coal burnt for electricity generation. Given that you cant just turn a coal power station on and off, they'll have still been burning the coal. A bit like turning your heating on and opening all your doors and windows.

Jesus David and Neil - don't go ruining a great green story with the truth now or, heaven forbid, common sense facts! If you're not careful you'll have the greens campaigning outside your houses and egg bombing you for telling the truth and shattering their fantasies. It's a bit like the carbon neutral flight schemes - pay an extra £££ on your flight cost and the airline promises to do stuff to make your travel greener. What utter nonsense. I'm off for a 3 hour drive to nowhere in my Evora to burn some carbon based fuels. Just because I can...

Passed a big hydro Loch on way back from Harris today canny mind the name about 50-80mile north west of Fort Bill, it was nearly empty 8-10 meters of head dropped was my guess given how much of the banks was showing. The must have been trying hard!

Isn't Hydro just used for pump storage and to fill up the gaps?

I don't think Drax uses much coal anymore it's mainly burning pellets imported for abroad. I read somewhere that Drax was a less polouting power station that the ones they have been throwing up in China at the rate of one a week.

I recon flywheel storage for wind turbines is the way to go. You need something with a bit of mass behind for quick spool up of power, that you can't get from wind.

Look at what Tesla are doing with grid level batteries the wind being part of our future energy might be closer then you think.

The pumping of water to the top is pretty err damn inefficient As you say, flywheels, or grid batteries are the solution. It's a real shame that Scotland imported lots and lots of wind turbines in the last decade or so rather than invest in building a Scottish industry with expertise looking at solving the renewable's problem.

The China thing is interesting too, I remember reading an article on a UK coal power station being decommissioned and referring to a Russian station which 'experts' referred to as on a par with a Victorian England power station.

The inefficiency of pumping water to the top is one of the reasons why it works so well. It allows the big base load per stations to work flat out where they're most efficient. The pumped storage then uses any excess to pump the water up the hill. The beauty of pumped storage is it can go from using to producing electricity in a very short time.

Corranga wrote:The pumping of water to the top is pretty err damn inefficient As you say, flywheels, or grid batteries are the solution. It's a real shame that Scotland imported lots and lots of wind turbines in the last decade or so rather than invest in building a Scottish industry with expertise looking at solving the renewable's problem.

The China thing is interesting too, I remember reading an article on a UK coal power station being decommissioned and referring to a Russian station which 'experts' referred to as on a par with a Victorian England power station.

really?

Dinorwig plant runs on average at 74–76% efficiency, which when you compare it to battery/inverter/etc it's actually pretty dam good (also, rainfall actually improves this figure)

other big upside is it's VERY fast, as in idle to full load in ~16 seconds (0 - 1.6GW) and has an almost infinite life compared to batteries (Dinorwig's been running since 1984)

back to the so called coal free day, anybody that thinks shipping millions of tonnes of wood from the US to burn (at Drax) is better than burning coal really needs to re-think their green credentials.

Pumped storage is great if you have a big hole in the top of a hill

If you don't then it is difficult to do


So instead lets lift big lumps of rock

http://www.heindl-energy.com/gravity-st ... ction.html


or lots of little rocks

http://www.aresnorthamerica.com

That looks like a really bad idea...

you can just imagine the potential disaters

true

The dam could fail letting thousands of tons of water come tumbling down the valley towards a village.


Or are you talking about the lifting rocks?

thinfourth wrote:Look at what Tesla are doing with grid level batteries the wind being part of our future energy might be closer then you think.

they are, but that does not address the root problem of where the power comes from n the first place.

Re,ember, pump-storage was built to support the nuclear plan...