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.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


widget @ surfing-waves.com




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.




    • CommentAuthorJeff B
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2017
     
    Not sure I understand everything in this article but it sounds good!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40699986
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2017 edited
     
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/23/drop-in-wind-energy-costs-adds-pressure-for-government-rethink

    "the technology has become so cheap that developers could deliver turbines for a guaranteed price of power so low that it would be effectively subsidy-free in terms of the impact on household energy bills."

    "Onshore windfarms could be built in the UK for the same cost as new gas power stations and would be nearly half as expensive as the Hinkley Point C"

    “It looks increasingly absurd that the Conservatives have effectively banned Britain’s cheapest source of new power.”
    • CommentAuthorgravelld
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2017
     
    Broadly speaking more batteries would be good.

    But it's interesting how they pick what they will back with money.

    They go on about being about competition and free markets, but then they make up some competition. What's wrong with the existing competition -> the market?

    So you might say "government needs to encourage or seed the market" which I agree with, but why this one? Home energy production was on course for being a competitive market until they wrecked it a few years ago.

    Meanwhile, markets which are totally and utterly broken, like housing performance, are ignored.

    I think I know the reasons:

    - Politicians love going goo-ey eyed over "technology" - they think there's a silver bullet waiting to be discovered.
    - Money.
  1.  
    I don't see why the government should persist with onshore wind generation when it's a divisive issue for many people. Off shore generation is becoming more innovative so why not use technologies which have the support of more people.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40699979
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    ... because 'people' don't always know what is best for them, society, the country, the world.....? :devil:
  2.  
    Ahh, dictatorial world domination that's what we need!! The North Korean leadership knows what's best for their subjects and I'm sure the people love it.
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    how about a benign dictatorship model perhaps...?:cool:
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    Fergeddit - to some people Trump is just that - so who defines it?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    Gravelled said, Broadly speaking more batteries would be good. -- but they are only 80% efficient and as I have pointed out elsewhere this cannot be describes as good, 20 % waste is not good.
    • CommentAuthorgravelld
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    Depends what would have happened to the 'wasted' (and stored for that matter) energy otherwise.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    Energy that isn't generated (e.g. 'curtailed' wind farms) is bad. 80% of some energy that wouldn't otherwise exist is good. Avoiding spinning up and or loading reserve gas generators by shaving peaks saves more than 20% I expect.
    • CommentAuthorTimSmall
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2017
     
    "about 65% of respondents to the survey supported the use of onshore wind. While this was enough to beat biomass (63%), support for onshore wind lagged offshore wind (73%), wave and tidal power (74%) and solar power (81%)."

    https://fullfact.org/economy/what-do-brits-think-about-wind-farms/

    In order of cost per kWh we have approximately cheapest to most expensive in the UK:

    Onshore wind
    Solar
    Biomass
    Offshore wind
    Tidal

    With wind you get another 8% of people on board by putting it off shore and doubling the price. Now if only they'd hurry up with kitegen. New nuclear is somewhere between future offshore wind (i.e. contracts being signed now for new offshore wind farms - not just predictions) and Tidal. One of the largish channel wind farms was turned down on aesthetic grounds.
Add your comments

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

© Green Building Press