The Dispute.
Posted: Wednesday, 17 November 2004 |
Comments
IW,
鈥淭he latest prophecy is that 60% of the worlds energy needs will be meet by the year 2030.鈥.. Do you mean by renewable energy forms or do you mean that there will be a 40% shortfall in supply?
Whichever, I need to upgrade by crystal balls as either is nonsense.
But that aside, IW, even the government now accepts that windfarms (and other renewables) alone WILL NOT allow us to achieve our Kyoto commitments. Yes, they have finally conceded and agree with the scientists who have been saying, for a long time, that windfarms are ineffective at reducing green house gas emissions. The government are at last talking about CO2 sequestration, and about time too.
There is hope IW but the hope is in real technology. Windfarms are playing a part and will continue to play a part even though their contribution is (unfortunately) insignificant.
Renewables will only be significant when we, as a collective, finally accept that we must REDUCE our consumption of energy.
PS did you know that one of the renewable energy sources the government are championing (with grant aid etc..), woodchip fuel systems, is a rampant CO2 emitter? Isn鈥檛 it odd how 鈥榞reen鈥 our government鈥檚 green policies are? And one of the first of it鈥檚 kind is in Argyll !
Grant aid builds a CO2 friendly windmill and the same grant aid builds a CO2 emitter. Yes, IW we lead the world but what in, stupidity?
Tony from Arinagour
Tony,
"---60% of the worlds energy needs--- I must admit being a bit vauge about this assertion - a little error that I can't recall for correction.Anyway I believe that there is an upward trend, world wide, as regards energy provision, and I believe this includes renewables - wind etc.
As regards KYOTO commitments and wind farms not achieving them,I would just say that we are heading in the right direction and that it is early days yet to make definate and unalterable statements.
Not all scientists have said wind farms are innefective though the opposite has been stated too. But I must state definately,wind farms, are a way of dealing with the problem. The affirmative group of scientists are well clued up on this, or all would be futile
As far as I can gather wind farms are very real tecnology and their resulting provision immense, becoming more so as time passes,though I have to agree that they might prove repressed owing to lack a siginificent power capability per generator.Maybe other sources of power provision will appear in the near future, the profileration of farms will be reduced,I am certain. We must soon make an impression on the problem of the greenhouse effect or the future is going to be unreedemable.Energy reduction, yes, I would say that this is very important. I think it is a matter not putting all the eggs in the one basket,and there must be atremendous effort.
As regards what the government is doing I can only advise that the government all - to - gether goes back to school,
IW.
Island Wanderer from From Tiree
Hi Island Wanderer. Did you manage to hear the program I mention (available until last Saturday on the bbc world service web site) in which James Lovelock made his case for nuclear power? I appreciate that it may seem extremely technically challenging stuff and difficult to understand - but if you keep at it I am sure you will manage to download real player. Incidentally, did you hear any more details of the plans for a windfarm on Tiree - as mentioned on the AIE web site?
pondhead from Mull
RSS Feed