Energy and the Environment

[fruitvilla]

24 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Compared to lithium/graphite mining (solar), micro plastics and aerosols (wind), boiling the planet (oil, gas) or extreme habitat change (hydro)?

Energy is inherently messy. Compared to oil and gas nuclear is only second to hydro in cleanliness. We’ve had two episodes in 60 years of the tech being in place, meanwhile we’ve lost 20-30% of all life on earth because we’re too worried about a meltdown that never happens.

Just an aside - lithium is not "energy" but energy storage. Not sure where graphite fits into all this though. But you are right energy is potentially a dirty/dangerous business, locally decreasing entropy but overall increasing it. To replace fossil fuels for our land transportation we are going to need vast sources of alternative energy. Having got the energy we will need to get the capability to store the vast store of energy and transport it.

[magnkarl]

18 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Just an aside - lithium is not "energy" but energy storage. Not sure where graphite fits into all this though. But you are right energy is potentially a dirty/dangerous business, locally decreasing entropy but overall increasing it. To replace fossil fuels for our land transportation we are going to need vast sources of alternative energy. Having got the energy we will need to get the capability to store the vast store of energy and transport it.

Graphite is used to manufacture panels, and in some higher voltage systems to shield systems from heat. In order for solar to be effective we need storage for stable supply, and hence the lithium.

In fact, looking at the production materials for the panels on my roof it looks like it’s not exactly good for the environment where these things are taken from either.

[chrisp65]

4 minutes ago, sidcow said:

During the transition to renewables we still need something to take up the slack when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining. 

I don't see another intermediate power source that can fill that gap in the medium term. 

Eventually we will have grid scale storage including long term solutions, but thats going to be a long way away. 

We had 3 coal plants fired up on standby today. 

I totally agree we should be throwing money at heat pumps but they still need clean electricity to power them, electric cars still. Need clean electricity. All our offices and factories need clean electricity. 

We've got gigantic power needs beyond just heating homes. 

I don't see a way through without at least another generation of nuclear power stations. 

Hopefully Nuclear Fusion becomes a reality in the near future and gives us the best of all worlds. 

If it was up to me to work out the energy policy, I wouldn’t start from here. 

Perhaps all that energy we’re burning through, perhaps we’re looking at it wrong. Perhaps we need to make things more efficient, insulate things, reduce waste. We’re switching to electric cars, because quite rightly we shouldn’t be burning petrol and diesel. But we’re ok with people driving at 80mph on the motorway and we sell cars based on acceleration statistics. 

We do have gigantic power needs right now, but the Chinese nuclear design is not the right solution and our demand will never make it the right solution. There are so many things we could be doing, small scale and large. From sheeps wool insulation to straw bale construction and triple glazing and loft insulation and local power generation. 

With Wylfa and Trawsfynydd nuclear power stations being decommissioned Wales currently has no nuclear power, but it does have steel plants and aircraft factories and consumers that want to charge phones and leave lights on. Yet Wales is currently a net exporter of energy, producing more than it consumes. That’s not a boast, it just shows it can be done.

If we rely on another generation of nuclear it just kicks the can down the road, and guess what, in twenty years time when we have to pay billions to decommission them, there won’t be the spare money to invest in geothermal and ground source, and we’ll decide we need one more generation of nuclear.

[blandy]

On 23/01/2023 at 22:19, chrisp65 said:

From sheeps wool insulation

Not sure about that. Eating less meat, returning the barren hills and fens to a more natural condition, which sheeps prevent needs to happen too. Yes there's loads of wool available, and it costs more to shear the sheep that the farmers get for the wool right now (and for a few years), but the scale of sheep farming is way too high and unsustainable for the environment.

[chrisp65]

36 minutes ago, blandy said:

Not sure about that. Eating less meat, returning the barren hills and fens to a more natural condition, which sheeps prevent needs to happen too. Yes there's loads of wool available, and it costs more to shear the sheep that the farmers get for the wool right now (and for a few years), but the scale of sheep farming is way too high and unsustainable for the environment.

Oh for definite. The best option is no sheep farming. No cows either.

But whilst there are sheep, let’s make insulation.

[blandy]

42 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

The best option is no sheep farming

Only Because of the thread subject, I don’t agree here, either. Some sheep farming is necessary and beneficial. Some habitats and species are wholly dependent upon it. Various butterflies, tiny plants and insects and so on. It’s just the widespread nature of it currently which is such a problem for flooding, for diversity in a lot of areas, and so on. 

[chrisp65]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Only Because of the thread subject, I don’t agree here, either. Some sheep farming is necessary and beneficial. Some habitats and species are wholly dependent upon it. Various butterflies, tiny plants and insects and so on. It’s just the widespread nature of it currently which is such a problem for flooding, for diversity in a lot of areas, and so on. 

Yes, I didn’t mean we completely extinct sheep and cows. 

[magnkarl]

15 hours ago, blandy said:

Only Because of the thread subject, I don’t agree here, either. Some sheep farming is necessary and beneficial. Some habitats and species are wholly dependent upon it. Various butterflies, tiny plants and insects and so on. It’s just the widespread nature of it currently which is such a problem for flooding, for diversity in a lot of areas, and so on. 

This exactly.

The answer is less sheep and rotational grazing. Many species need the grasslands to grow, set seed and then be eaten. Not permanently eaten to stubble. From the few years I've now tended to a pollinator 'field' out back of our rows of houses I'm seeing incredible diversity from letting it grow to maturity, chopping it down, allowing the seeds to spread and then removing the waste. High impact grazing is murder to biodiversity. 

We severely need predators to scare and reduce the amount of herbivores in Scotland and Wales, or else reducing the sheep will just lead to it being eaten to a pulp by deer\roe deer instead. The wolf\lynx would ensure that herbivores don't stay in an area too long and ensure all trees are kept down. Fencing is proving very successful in the highlands.