My local newspaper claims that lights will be placed onto the sea turbines in the area, in order to promote local tourism. Is this an abuse of their supposed function? Regularly, in very varied wind conditions, neither slight, nor above the safe level of turbine operation, many of the mills do not seem to be productive. Yet, very large vehicles are regularly seen transporting further turbines to the port for erection.
A recent 'Coast' television programme repetition , placed the cost of decomissioning the 'failed' Douneray nuclear plant at £3 billion.
What will be the cost to the taxpayer of removing the windturbines?

Stephen, as I understand it the owner of the turbines has to pay for the decommissioning. I have a feeling some local authorities have had an up front fee to gaurantee this, but I can't find any mention of it now.

In any case, how expensive is it to take down a number of simple, if large, structures compared to dealing with the radioactive mess that is Dounreay.

Hi JH , thanks for the reply.
Does this mean that windfarms will need decomissioning!

I'm not a nuclear fan either, in the wrong part of the world.

Lets have an analogy regards electicity useage /supply.
There are 3 men, Johnny(an Englishman living in a large conurbation), Jimmy and Dai (Scottish and Welsh respectively living in their relatively unspoiled countryside).
Each has 10 litres of water in their lofts draining into a colander (multiple holes representing household wasteage of water/electricity)in their sinks)
What should Johnny do to ensure that his 10L lasts? Should he
a) plug the holes(ie reduce individual household wasteage) in order to turn down his tap? or
b)go to Jimmy and Dai's house to nick his water, walk up his stairs, nick his resources in his muddy boots(ie despoiling the view of his relatives/visitors and generally p---n him off) in order to maintain supply to his sink?
I don't think that either would thank Johnny for that.?

I have a household of 2+3kids. On last pre bed check there were 7 energy efficient lamps on, 4 phone chargers, and 2 teles on standby.
The answer has got to be in conservation of energy.
On last count today, in a moderate breeze, 4 out of 30 mills were turning in my area.
What about rationing,per capita per household, ie your supply switches off, as opposed to increased taxation, as a way to limiting useage?

"The answer has got to be in conservation of energy."

There is no one answer Stephen, but conservation gives the most bang for the buck. I'm sure we'll see an increasing number of energy saving devices as energy becomes increasingly expensive.

"What about rationing,per capita per household, ie your supply switches off, as opposed to increased taxation, as a way to limiting useage?"

Try it on your kids first ;) . Would all your frozen food melt? But there has been talk of personal CO2 quotas - sell your excess quota to those who want to polute more. I think "rationing" will happen because electric becomes increasingly expensive. The government will have to subsidise those less well off.

More likely than personal CO2 quotas is "smart metering". Here the price of electricity to the consumer varies according to supply and demand; appliances are smart enough to turn on/off according to price. Of course you don't want the TGO forum to go down just when your reading my post :) , but freezers, fridges, etc could do this. This would be of enormous benefit.

Hi JH, My opinion is that nobody should need to be subserdised, because an effective management plan is based on not using the energy in the first instance. Frozen foods, why? I don't know your age, but, if you're nearly forty , like me, can you remember your granny having a freezer? They cooked fresh produce bought from local markets, in bulk, and ate the same meal several nights on the run. Did your grandparents have to put 50 p in the meter when the power ran out? When it ran out,it ran out, promoting conservation. From my experience as a health care professional, elderly people are much more frugal with usage of power, not just due to shortage of money, than, younger folk. Is energy conservation a part of the national curriculum in schools? I feel that energy conservation issues are wasted on most of this generation, and that education of our children is the only hope. How refreshing would it be to be for kids to come back from school and turn things off, instead of turning them on?:)

Stephen, I agree with your preference for conservation, but if you want to see how hard it is to wean people off their addiction to excessive energy use visit the "Should TGO promote flying?" thread in the Travel section of this forum.

You think it's okay if the electricity stops and the house is dark and cold for the night; most people don't even want to lose their holiday flight let alone cut back on motoring or turn out one of their tvs.

I'm not necessarily in favour of a market led solution to the energy problem (letting price stimulate conservation), but for better or worse we find ourselves in a market driven society, so generally that's how we let things (with a bit of guidance) sort themselves out.

This probably isn't the place to speculate whether the credit bubble/crunch will be repeated in an energy bubble/crunch, but just as the credit bubble was obviously unsustainable, so is the energy bubble. You argue that our grandparents managed to live a more energy frugal lifestyle, and you might also have said that they lived a more £ frugal lifstyle. I don't see people wanting to go back to either of those levels of wealth.

The analogy also raises the question of whether the govenment should do anything now to soften an energy crunch should it come, or whether it should stand back and let us have our way, and then when the crunch comes we can point the finger at them for not doing something.

I don't think the connection between refusing to give up flying and giving up things at home to reduce energy use holds true. There are alternatives at home like using low energy bulbs, using the off button, public transport, etc. Consequently it's easier to do these than to committ to never using a plane again. What other reasonable way is there to get to Kathmandhu. The choice is either to fly (however occasionally) or give up on ever visiting these far flung, but stunning regions again. At the moment I'm not going to say I'll never fly again, but I've cut down enery useage at home :)

I'm not sure what you mean by "connection" Ian. Reducing number of flights and cutting down energy usage at home both reduce CO2, isn't that connection enough?


"The choice is either to fly (however occasionally) or give up on ever visiting these far flung, but stunning regions again."

I can't agree. I don't see that coming up with a scheme to light your room using half as much energy (low energy lightbulbs) is any different to coming up with a scheme to visit Kathmandu using half as much energy (making one trip instead of two).

To say that "The choice is either to fly or give up on ever visiting these far flung, but stunning regions again." is akin to saying "The choice is to have a flourescent bulb or be in in complete darkness".

There is a middle way.....[huh] (A bit of Buddhism creeping in there. That's spooky).

Sorry for not being clear. I was referring to the connection you made in an earlier post:

Quote: "if you want to see how hard it is to wean people off their addiction to excessive energy use visit the "Should TGO promote flying?" ".

I took this to mean that because some folks won't say no to flying that they will therefore not cut back in other areas.

Also I was referring to technologies we have today. Nothing would please me more than having a reasonable alternative to flying that's more energy efficient, but until that day I can't say I'll never fly again - even though my last flight must have been over five years ago.

Keep up with the Buddhism - it's good stuff :)

Oh I see. If I understand Stephen correctly he wonders why we can't cut back electricity consumption to levels similar, or maybe a bit higher, to those of our grandparents. This would be an enormous cutback in energy consumption, and an enormous change in lifestyle. This isn't turning the TV off, buying an A rated freezer and installing a few low energy bulbs, it's much more serious stuff - travelling very little by any means (working near home), eating locally grown food, making things last years instead of months etc. Not just trimming away at the luxeries, but cutting deeply into what we see as necessities.

I see flying to Nepal as a luxury only available to a few. It's not a necessity in the same way that heat and food are. If people aren't even prepared to give up flying to Nepal for a holiday, how are they going to give up central heating and make do with a 1kw heater in one room?