The Future of Power Generation in Great Britain

[LoonyTunes]

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

[turbobloke]

Great news, almost: a research team led by RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, has discovered a new method of taking carbon dioxide in its gas form and converting it into solid coal. As long as governments pay people to dig holes to bury the coal, rather than burn it, given that the process also produces synthetic industrial fuel as a byproduct. Carbon dioxide is a future renewable energy source



See Esrafilzadeh et al in Nafure Communications (2019)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08824-8

There's always a downside. 626 environmental groups, including Greenpeace and the Center for Biological Diversity, have sent a letter to US legislators saying that they will “vigorously oppose” strategies of CO2 mitigation, among them the process of carbon capture and storage which they say poses significant risks to the planet. As it happens, they have a point.



Fortunately alarmist predictions based on carbon dioxide climate fairytales go wrong, so as CMD would say, chillax.

[jet_noise]

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

[LoonyTunes]

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

[Jinx]

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

Of course when future generations are freezing under another ice age we may have prevented I suspect we won't be foremost in their thoughts.....

[LoonyTunes]

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

Of course when future generations are freezing under another ice age we may have prevented I suspect we won't be foremost in their thoughts.....

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

2. I'd like to see some evidence for the switch to renewables bringing about another ice age

[PRTVR]

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

[LoonyTunes]

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

I think that is being answered by the co2 figures for 1888 vs 2019 (above) is it not?

[Jambo85]

LoonyTunes said:

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

Quite, those 66 m pretty much all have electricity and central heating also. A relevant comparison would surely be CO2 per capita from a time when standard of living was broadly the same, i.e. within the last 30-40 yrs I'd have thought.

[anonymous-user]

Jambo85 said:

LoonyTunes said:

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

Quite, those 66 m pretty much all have electricity and central heating also. A relevant comparison would surely be CO2 per capita from a time when standard of living was broadly the same, i.e. within the last 30-40 yrs I'd have thought.

I think it’s safe to say that didn’t go as well as jinx was hoping.

[Jinx]

Jambo85 said:

Quite, those 66 m pretty much all have electricity and central heating also. A relevant comparison would surely be CO2 per capita from a time when standard of living was broadly the same, i.e. within the last 30-40 yrs I'd have thought.

Why? - the atmosphere doesn't care about per-capita.

[LoonyTunes]

El stovey said:

Jambo85 said:

LoonyTunes said:

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

Quite, those 66 m pretty much all have electricity and central heating also. A relevant comparison would surely be CO2 per capita from a time when standard of living was broadly the same, i.e. within the last 30-40 yrs I'd have thought.

I think it’s safe to say that didn’t go as well as jinx was hoping.

Watching the politics thread from the side lines now it never does go the way they want. Throw st and hope some of it sticks seems to be the plan.

[Jambo85]

Jinx said:

Jambo85 said:

Quite, those 66 m pretty much all have electricity and central heating also. A relevant comparison would surely be CO2 per capita from a time when standard of living was broadly the same, i.e. within the last 30-40 yrs I'd have thought.

Why? - the atmosphere doesn't care about per-capita.

Is that a serious point? We have to be practical. CO2 emissions of a country are related to energy consumption and that is proportional to population. The population has a standard of living which they expect to at least keep constant, ideally improve.

Standard of living has a lot to do with energy consumption per capita and therefore CO2 emissions per capita. If we can be more efficient - i.e. use less energy per capita and/or derive energy from non-CO2 producing sources then CO2 per capita will decrease, and we can say we have made a meaningful improvement, or not as the case may be.

To go back to your flippant point, yes - of course what matters is total emissions, but in a debate about power generation and whether we are making progress or not, to ignore a massive variable like the doubling of the number of consumers is ridiculous. The fact that electricity generation in its current form didn't exist on the date you put forward for comparison compounds this.

[PRTVR]

LoonyTunes said:

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

I think that is being answered by the co2 figures for 1888 vs 2019 (above) is it not?

So we are saved then ? What difference has it made globally.

[LoonyTunes]

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

I think that is being answered by the co2 figures for 1888 vs 2019 (above) is it not?

So we are saved then ? What difference has it made globally.

Strawman.

You can only do what is within your power to do whilst trying to convince others to put their own house in order. Everyone else has to play their part too .

This is simple stuff PRTVR, why do you persist with such spurious points?

[jet_noise]

LoonyTunes said:

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

Of course when future generations are freezing under another ice age we may have prevented I suspect we won't be foremost in their thoughts.....

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

2. I'd like to see some evidence for the switch to renewables bringing about another ice age

I'd like to see some evidence that not switching to renewables will bring about thermageddon.

[PRTVR]

LoonyTunes said:

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

I think that is being answered by the co2 figures for 1888 vs 2019 (above) is it not?

So we are saved then ? What difference has it made globally.

Strawman.

You can only do what is within your power to do whilst trying to convince others to put their own house in order. Everyone else has to play their part too .

This is simple stuff PRTVR, why do you persist with such spurious points?

Simple stuff I agree, why do things that cost you money that make no difference,
the effect that the UK can make is so small as to be insignificant. All the cheering over UK
CO2 production levels being low comes at a cost ,steel works shut down, aluminium plants shut down, any business that is power hungry will die in the UK, but that's OK we can import it all from China, where they have no problems with cheap coal power. This appears madness to me.

[LoonyTunes]

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Jinx said:

LoonyTunes said:

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

Cough - last year the UK produced as much CO2 as in 1888.

Of course when future generations are freezing under another ice age we may have prevented I suspect we won't be foremost in their thoughts.....

1. That's a remarkable achievement. Very good news indeed considering the difference in population 36m vs 66m

2. I'd like to see some evidence for the switch to renewables bringing about another ice age

I'd like to see some evidence that not switching to renewables will bring about thermageddon.

Another Strawman.

Try answering my question

[Jinx]

Jambo85 said:

Is that a serious point? We have to be practical. CO2 emissions of a country are related to energy consumption and that is proportional to population. The population has a standard of living which they expect to at least keep constant, ideally improve.

Standard of living has a lot to do with energy consumption per capita and therefore CO2 emissions per capita. If we can be more efficient - i.e. use less energy per capita and/or derive energy from non-CO2 producing sources then CO2 per capita will decrease, and we can say we have made a meaningful improvement, or not as the case may be.

To go back to your flippant point, yes - of course what matters is total emissions, but in a debate about power generation and whether we are making progress or not, to ignore a massive variable like the doubling of the number of consumers is ridiculous. The fact that electricity generation in its current form didn't exist on the date you put forward for comparison compounds this.

Countries have different climates and therefore different requirements for the populations to survive and thrive. So per capita is a meaningless measure in the scheme of climate change (and most things really) . The reason the CO2 emission levels have dropped to the level they have in the UK is our switch from coal and our dearth of heavy industry - and this is the total CO2 from the UK with it's much higher than 1888 population levels.
I'm all for efficiency and detest waste hence my objection to wind farms and Solar in the UK.

[alangla]

PRTVR said:

LoonyTunes said:

jet_noise said:

LoonyTunes said:

Good news.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-targets-a-third-of-p...

Except for the poor who will suffer the most from the higher energy prices that will result.
And industry who will suffer from the higher energy prices that will result.

You forgot future generations who will one day thank us for cutting back on our burning of fossil fuels. As a side note, nobody said it was going to be cheap.

I would not be sure of that, the head of Scottish power thinks it will reduce bills, although when asked about price rises on bills he was none committal about when.
So all this money we are spending what difference has it made ?

This is the same bloke that sold all his hydro and pumped storage capability to Drax to concentrate on windmills (discussed a few pages back). A bizarre decision on the face of it unless the hydro equipment is all reaching end of life at roughly the same time.