Windpower

[The Natural Philosopher]

You havce totally missed the point The nukes are steam turbines. The rotational inertia will cover the grid for a minute or twow while Dinorwig spools up.

With luck it will neverget built...

[Andrew]

Rolls Royce aero-engines (who design and build the UK nuclear sub power plants) are already suggesting this.

[Andrew]

Hydro *is* renewable. So is nuclear if the fuel is reprocessed and used again.

[Andrew]

Unless an electrical fault stops the power reaching the grid. Unless it occurs at a time when the mountain reservoir has already been used up.

The windmills didn't suddenly stop turning, an electrical 'situation' took that farm off line.

And it's August, so most if not all the coal generators are off for cleaning and maintenance.

[Andrew]

Replying to yourself again ???

[Roland Perry]

In message <qioogp$1fq5$ [e-mail]>, at 10:52:21 on Sun, 11 Aug

2019, Andrew [e-mail] remarked:

And either of those co-inciding with one of these 10-yr events of two generators going offline in a matter of minutes.

Have they published something about that (genuine question).

My own theory is that they weren't initially running flat out, but did respond to a greater demand, which due to the high winds took some part of the installation to the point it shut down for safety reasons. It could have been the sails running away too fast.

[The Natural Philosopher]

You know what I meant.

0% INTERMITTENT renewables

And nuclear is NOT renewable. The uranium does get 'burnt'

The iunuverse is not renewable.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I am flattered that you think 'jleikppkywk' is in fact me, but sadly I have to say that it is not.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Except in France where it had to be stopped on a hot day.

Thanks for confirming your tunnel vision.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Neither did I. Or do you think one wind farm could too? Or one gas fired station?

[Dave Plowman (News]

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the difference between an egg and eggs.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Why do you think 'eggs' refers to one?

[Dave Plowman (News]

FFS. Hydro isn't a renewable now in Turnip's world. Means we are going to run out of water at some point. Then, power will be the least of your worries.

[Fredxx]

That also depends on whether you think your basket should include all the nukes over the UK.

You must have one big basket in mind.

[Roger Hayter]

You miss the point. It is the increased vulnerability of the one basket we are querying.

[Fredxx]

And in terms of dependency of supply, nukes can make their own fuel up to a point. The sea is also said to contain some 4,500 tons of Uranium.

Lots of eggs and numerous baskets come to mind.

[The Natural Philosopher]

yep. Like when radioactive materials all cease to fission one day.

And you wish you had some gas.

It's the plowcunt really that stupid? Like advocating in addition to round wheels, square wheels and triangular wheels for 'diversity'

and advocating driving not just on the left, but the right and down the middle of the road as well?

One presumes he has rtead that 'dibersity' addresses te 'wingle point of failure' mode of multiple units.

I.e. when the wind doesnt blow and the sun doesnt shinbe, or we run out of stored gas, or coal.

But there is no single point of failure fior all nuclear grids.

Or does he know he is telling lies?

[The Natural Philosopher]

Wrong, The sea contains 4,500 MILLION tonnes of uranium. Enough for abput 5000 years of use at economically extractable rates.

Ther is 10 years worth of plutonium sitting at Sellafield

[Fredxx]

I was aware of the numbers but missed out the 'millions'! Expensive to extract but only 10 times the current market rates for Uranium.

There is also the consideration that more Uranium is leached out of rocks such it would take longer than 5,000 years to deplete.

[Chris Hogg]

<chuckle> A touch more than that. How about four billion tons?