Protestors take over site of proposed nuclear power station Hinkley C

[revol68]

And we'll achieve that before this nuclear power station is built how exactly?

because this one nuclear power station is the difference between having electricity and falling into feudal conditions is it?

or by making it very hard for the government and their corporate mates to go down the nuclear route do we not force open the debate in such a manner as to consider both alternative renewable forms of energy and how we actually use it in a rational manner?

 

[co-op]

And we'll achieve that before this nuclear power station is built how exactly?

One problem with answering that question is that, based on the history of nuclear power plant construction to date, we have more or less no idea how long building any new plants will take. This used to be brushed off as one of those things that happens with new tech, when we get to the next generation we'll have it nailed down blah blah blah. Right now the first new nuclear power plant in Europe for 20 years is being built at Olkiluoto in Finland. Built by a French company (all that experience of nuclear, massive working programme up and running). It was commissioned in 2003, scheduled to be open in May 2009. As of November 2011, it is scheduled to open in 2014, but I wouldn't bet much on that happening. Oh yes and it's more than doubled its budget. Oh yes and the French and Finnish taxpayers are being tapped up by AREVA (the French constructors) and the Finnish electricity utility (who commissioned it) in order tocover the massive cost overruns, not least of interest payments on the massive fixed upfront costs. It's been a disaster and I'm sure we will be told how the industry has "learnt" from it and it won't happen here. Pity the scheduled cost for Hinckley C has already doubled before they've turned a sod of earth.

Things to remember when you are being told how quick and cheap it's all going to be.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

The Centre for Alternative Technology did a report back in about 2006 which demonstrated how you could move to renewable energy without building new nuclear, coal or gas power stations, whilst maintaining use for the economy (albeit with reductions.) I'll dig out the link...

 

[Brixton Hatter]

It was called "Zero Carbon Britain: An Alternative Energy Strategy" - I can't find a link for the original report from 2006 (i have a hard copy) but it seems they may have updated that report anyway

http://www.zerocarbonbritain.com/ has all the info you need

http://www.cat.org.uk/news/news_release.tmpl?command=search&db=news.db&eqSKUdatarq=37990&home=0 is the press release summary

New report says Britain could cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2030, creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs and regaining energy security.

A new report published by the Centre for Alternative Technology on Wednesday 16 June 2010, including input from thirteen universities, twelve research bodies and eight key industry players, highlights a path for a zero carbon transition by 2030. For the first time a comprehensive energy strategy has been produced that could reduce emissions to zero for all greenhouse gases and across all sectors.

“ zerocarbonbritain2030 shows how the right mix of wind power, hydro, solar, biomass - plus an intelligent grid to manage demand, can ‘keep the lights on’ and supply the energy the country needs– with major win-wins across the economy.” Paul Allen CAT

 

[teqniq]

A timely reminder, excellent photography:

Gerd Ludwig's "Long Shadow of Chernobyl" project

 

[free spirit]

Unfortunately there's a serious shortage of unicorn farts, so it's nuclear or candles.

actually, it's hinkley or the Severn Barrage as they'd use the same grid connection.

The Severn barrage would produce more than Hinkley + the other nuclear station the other side of the barrage combined both during their lifetimes and for generations afterwards.

 

[gentlegreen]

Would a barrage turn the Severn into something you could swim in ?

 

[free spirit]

Would a barrage turn the Severn into something you could swim in ?

well it would be wet and relatively deep, but other than that I doubt it'd be particularly brilliant water quality.

 

[spacemonkey]

All I know is the british public seem to hate every solution. Every decision/strategy is unpopular.

Nuclear? NO!
20,000 onshore wind turbines? NO!
Offshore? Maybe...
It's really really fucking expensive. Oh well no then!
Waste-to-energy? NO!
Severn Barrage? Too expensive. Think of the birds.
Advanced external insulation? Too expensive. I like my victorian brickwork.
Internal? Too much fuss/disruption.
How about the basics? Loft and cavities? No. Loads of hassle. Plus it's expensive.
No, it's free. Um, still no.
Solar PV? Ah we scrapped that.
Solar Thermal. Ooo that sounds good.
Erm, the payback is 30+ years. No then.
Socialism? GTFO.



And here we are today. 40% leccy from coal. 40% leccy from gas. 15% from nuclear. 5% from french nuclear and some wind for good luck.

All our heating fossil fuels.

All our transport fossil fuels.

 

[ddraig]

old thread about Severn Barrage here
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/proposed-severn-barrage.151840/

 

[spacemonkey]

Interestingly none of the Pathways looked at the question of increasing energy efficiency, i.e. doing the same but using less energy, despite the fact that this is clearly the most cost-effective route to gaining energy.

Problem with energy efficiency is that we end up doing more with the available energy and not saving any carbon. I'm sure there's a law or something...

In a recent scheme loads of families were given advanced energy efficiency measures (the same standard that will need to be rolled out country-wide) on their homes.

Some of these measures cost £15,000-20,000. In most scenarios there were very little carbon savings because the residents took the gains in the form of extra heat (previously they were underheating their properties). It's still admirable and worth pursuing but, well, it's late and I don't know where I'm going with this......

 

[co-op]

Problem with energy efficiency is that we end up doing more with the available energy and not saving any carbon. I'm sure there's a law or something...

In a recent scheme loads of families were given advanced energy efficiency measures (the same standard that will need to be rolled out country-wide) on their homes.

Some of these measures cost £15,000-20,000. In most scenarios there were very little carbon savings because the residents took the gains in the form of extra heat (previously they were underheating their properties). It's still admirable and worth pursuing but, well, it's late and I don't know where I'm going with this......

Aye, especially for domestic use, much conservation merely reveals that there is pent-up demand for greater energy use. But I guess the conservation case would really come into its own on things like transport and industry etc where (a) there is extra profit/cost reduction for shareholders to be found or (b) levels of demand are to some extent fixed by the market so conservation = less use. Basically conservation needs to be joined with increasing real prices for energy but that's not exactly a vote winner.

For me personally the conservation case is a form of personal future proofing against insane fuel prices that could appear over the next 20 years but I'm a paranoid nutter.

 

[ChrisD]

There's a lot of change required in peoples views on energy use. While it's considered irresponsible to drive your kids around without seatbelts it's socially acceptable (with a lot of people anyway) to expand one's house by adding a conservatory and then treating that as part of the (heated) space. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones heat them.

 

[gentlegreen]

I always marvel at what's considered the acceptable minimum temperature. The idea of heating bedrooms and corridors to 18 degrees C seems bonkers to me.

I suppose it's an issue with families where the members need to escape from each other into their own rooms.

For myself, I won't light my gas fire above 10 degrees in the room where I live unless I'm ill, or perhaps when stuck inside for some other reason during the day.

 

[spacemonkey]

For me personally the conservation case is a form of personal future proofing against insane fuel prices that could appear over the next 20 years but I'm a paranoid nutter.

I'm with you on that one. Nothing about being a paranoid nutter, it's just good sense.

There's a lot of change required in peoples views on energy use. While it's considered irresponsible to drive your kids around without seatbelts it's socially acceptable (with a lot of people anyway) to expand one's house by adding a conservatory and then treating that as part of the (heated) space. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones heat them.

Oh god. Don't get me started on heated conservatories. A guy I spoke to yesterday who was about to install an air-to-air heat pump to keep his conservatory warm because the electric one was 'useless' in winter. I had to very skilfully explain the many reasons why this was a bad idea.

 

[co-op]

Oh god. Don't get me started on heated conservatories. A guy I spoke to yesterday who was about to install an air-to-air heat pump to keep his conservatory warm because the electric one was 'useless' in winter. I had to very skilfully explain the many reasons why this was a bad idea.

What's so daft about this is that, built thoughtfully, a south or south west facing conservatory or glassed in porch can be a fantastic solar collector, even in the British winter, provided you think a bit about how you let the warmed air move into the house and how to "turn off" that air flow when the conservatory is colder than the house. I helped build one once and visited the house often since and it's fantastic. We are still building as though we still live in the era of cheap plentiful fuel. Crazy.

 

[spacemonkey]

What's so daft about this is that, built thoughtfully, a south or south west facing conservatory or glassed in porch can be a fantastic solar collector, even in the British winter, provided you think a bit about how you let the warmed air move into the house and how to "turn off" that air flow when the conservatory is colder than the house. I helped build one once and visited the house often since and it's fantastic. We are still building as though we still live in the era of cheap plentiful fuel. Crazy.

Yep. I read a statistic once that it only takes one heated conservatory to negate the energy savings from 10 unheated.

 

[ChrisD]

Eviction was this morning http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/707787
Footpaths still open & 10th March blockade still will happen http://stophinkley.org/

 

[andrew fanshion]

don't worry we don't need the nuclear station we will just make up for it by burning more coal

 

[BigTom]

don't worry we don't need the nuclear station we will just make up for it by burning more coal

I know you're not from round here, but if you'd read the thread you'd know that the alternative to this particular power station (and a second one) was the Severn River Barrage, a tidal generator that would have generated more electricity over its lifetime than the 2 nuclear stations, and without the difficult of nuclear waste to deal with, or the possibility of meltdown/catastrophe. Links are back in the thread.