formatting link
>The big question is how many kWh of electricity did they consume in
A lot, I've no doubt. At last, a use for all those wind farms.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
We're saved
Loading thread data ...
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Yebbut it's like wagon wheels, isn't it? People were bigger back then... :-)
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Depends what you're growing and how intesively you maintain it. Willow is reasonably good on one acre, coppiced, to keep a modern super-insulated house going all year.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
litre litre litre litre etc etc.
Well Mr Without-the-hot-air may choose to give an opinion on the matter one of these centuries.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
with respect, anyone with a basic understanding of physics and economics can see the idea is a farce
NT
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Have you considered actually reading the article? Of course it's much easier just to make hydrogen. But it's a lot easier to transport petrol in existing tankers and use it in existing petrol engines than it is to change to using hydrogen, and making hydrogen does does nothing for carbon capture.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
They're claiming the conversions plant would run on the "lashings" of spare overnight electricity from windmills that "goes to waste" at the moment.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Have you read the article?
They do make hydrogen, but then make "petrol" from that and some CO2 from the air. Much easier to store and transport.
Now all we need is an overnight surplus from those windfarms. TBH it sounds less silly as a store than most ideas I've seen.
Andy
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
might *just* be possible. The UK has under 1 acre per person...
It actually says 1 acre per house, not per person. Anyway, we're thinking of moving to Ireland at some stage!
SteveW
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Funny some people don't understand elementary chemistry. Ie, you.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Bollocks from you. Perfect feasible. Whether it's practical or efficient is another matter.
They might do better processing combustion gases from power stations etc. I expect it would need the outputs from two or more power stations to process the gases from one. So fairly self defeating.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Depends how well insulated your house is. I already do this but I need much less than an acre.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Probably. But that will happen anyway. Probably in four or five years. Maybe in two if we have more QE, hence inflation.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
You remember?
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Half an acre. I know.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Exactly.
I.e. bollocks.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
Hint harry. I read books. Research papers and terribly boring stuff like that. And cross reference what people say in them, between them to get an idea of the actual truth, rather then believing what one solar panel salesman says.
Its all frightfully hard work and far too much for your pretty little head,. so you can go back to the Guardian now.
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
I don't remember us concurring that harry is eligible to be described as "pretty"?
- Vote on answer
- posted
11 years ago
formatting link
> "Company officials say they had produced five litres of petrol in less
Read the article !! Stop being a dork !