Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2014
     
    Why not leave the wood as wood? It has already captured the carbon!

    If we need energy then we could use tidal which has no downsides

    300m could be used to much better effect elsewhere.
    • CommentAuthorjamesingram
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2014 edited
     
    yep, make buildings and furniture out of it.
    new tescos superstore up the road from me using wood as structural beam by the looks of it. At least that's a slight positive :bigsmile::confused:
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2014
     
    I have often wondered this. It could be cut down and buried in salt mines (or similar dry places) or even buried deep at sea.

    Does seem hard work to capture CO2, process it, transport it and then bury it. Why not just have better (from a CO2 sequestration) management. Actually a bit in this weeks comic about Australia doing this (partly, via bio-fuel).
  1.  
    300 million pounds to sequester 0.3% of the UK's annual carbon foot print....
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    Insanity
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    Posted By: bot de paille300 million pounds to sequester 0.3% of the UK's annual carbon foot print.
    With which technology?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    Carbon capture and storage under the North Sea, govt announced in the last couple of days.
  2.  
    Just another subsidy to keep Drax generating. The Germans have already solved the problem of carbon capture by converting into gas.
  3.  
    Posted By: SteamyTea
    Posted By: bot de paille300 million pounds to sequester 0.3% of the UK's annual carbon foot print.
    With which technology?



    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27063796

    Usual BBC "journalism" explaining how wonderful this project is without putting it in any critical context.

    how many homes with OAPs living in fuel poverty would 300 million insulate??
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    Posted By: bot de paille: “300 million pounds to sequester 0.3% of the UK's annual carbon foot print....”

    It's more of a technology development thing, though, isn't it? Presumably the expectation would be that the next 0.3% would be a bit cheaper and so on.

    Not convinced about CCS, yet, but it does need to be looked into as an option.

    For context, €300e6 would be €476 for each of the 630 000 houses this plant will supply. Or, to put it another way, this is a 426 MW plant so it's €0.70/W so not so ridiculous in comparison to the general costs of energy plant.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/White_Rose_CCS_Project#Drax_Carbon_Capture_and_Storage_project
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    But if that were to added to the cost of the energy supplied it would cause riots in the streets!
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
     
    Really?

    So why haven't the announced nuclear prices caused the same?

    Current wholesale prices of electricity are around £0.04/kWh or £40/MWh so I guess that's about the price that current gas plants sell at whereas nuclear is being offered £95/MWh. So how long would this plant have to run at at about half way between these prices, say £65/MWh to make back £300e6 (round up from €300e6)?

    The extra income is £25/MWh. To make £300e6 it'd have to sell 12e6 MWh. At 426 MW that's 28'169 hours which is 3.2 years. After that it could afford to sell at normal gas prices.

    Nuclear will stick at £95/MWh until inflation makes it worthless.
    • CommentAuthorSeret
    • CommentTimeApr 22nd 2014
     
    Technology demonstrators for CCS are a good idea, we do need a better handle on how viable it as an approach, since many of the projected strategies for meeting out 2050 objectives (or even coming close...) do rely on it. I'm not convinced how practical or economic it will be TBH, but there are some powerful interests lobbying for it as it allows them to continue their business largely as usual.
    • CommentAuthorJonti
    • CommentTimeApr 22nd 2014
     
    Posted By: renewablejohnJust another subsidy to keep Drax generating. The Germans have already solved the problem of carbon capture by converting into gas.


    Which is a good thing seeing that they are building new coal powered power stations and accelerating their coal extraction as we speak. They like the world to think that they are sticklers for the rules but really if there is a buck to be made......

    Jonti
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press