Reply to: government approves £800m Lochaber hydro scheme

[Ticktock]

It's the same with any big project, just ask the Germans.

I'm not sure we can allow the Germans to have a series of large dams generating electricity.

[scooterscot]

I assumed you meant that the government never got behind this as it would involve a lot of money spent at the beginning without an vote gaining result before the election so they spent money on bread and circuses instead?

My belief is our governments choose to tinker with accounts & numbers to create change. Take some from this group give to them and vice versa. We all chase those polices like a dog to car thinking it'll bring us riches but in truth very little changes. Take Osbourne's housing guarantee, what a crass error of judgement.

The state should be getting behind big projects like this in a massive way. Look at the new forth road bridge crossing that's going up at the minute. Marvellous. Creating numerous jobs in the process.

Queensferry Crossing estimated cost trimmed by £145m


Thames crossing option dropped by government

[MyUserName]

It's the same with any big project, just ask the Germans.

I assumed you meant that the government never got behind this as it would involve a lot of money spent at the beginning without an vote gaining result before the election so they spent money on bread and circuses instead?

If it is the same with any big project why would any big project get started, or were there other big projects which took the budget which this one would have needed?

[scooterscot]

Ah, so this the kind of project with a lot of up front cost whereas the tangible benefits would take a few years to appear?

It's the same with any big project, just ask the Germans. (Oh and before someone jumps in here with the euro project, blame the french, they started it).

Was watching the making of Merkel the other night. Never knew she was a scientist, PhD in quantum chemistry. It is interesting the snails pace that is German politics. It makes you wonder how anything is achieved, with everything negotiated to the nth degree. But then as you watch more and more you see this coming out of 'we're here to do for the country not for ourselves' attitude, ohhhh my goodness you feel so awful when you switch channels and see our own self serving MP's arguing over 11% salary increases.

[MyUserName]

The Bristol channel is a prime spot. The capacity is astonishing. We've lost the engineering capability and we're just too expensive to do these sorts of projects in our own country anymore. Banking is far cheaper.

In a nutshell our governments have never been able to focus and deliver on long-term investment. Instead they're preferring short term strategies that'll help them win the next general election.

Ah, so this the kind of project with a lot of up front cost whereas the tangible benefits would take a few years to appear?

[scooterscot]

So the Scots have wanted to do this for years but have lacked the money to do so?
If it is such a no brainer why didn't the UK government do it themselves? There must be other places that this be done as well, why has it not?

The Bristol channel is a prime spot. The capacity is astonishing. We've lost the engineering capability and we're just too expensive to do these sorts of projects in our own country anymore. Banking is far cheaper.

In a nutshell our governments have never been able to focus and deliver on long-term investment. Instead they're preferring short term strategies that'll help them win the next general election.

[MyUserName]

Yes, it's called devolution. A while ago the UK government was petitioned to hand over the cash to build, it was turned down. The bill is now passed by the Scottish government. £800m. Why not do something similar for the Bristol channel?

Meanwhile £16,000,000,000 is approved by the UK government to build a nuclear power station to generate some really expensive electricity. Madness.

Ineos boss says Hinkley nuclear power too expensive

So the Scots have wanted to do this for years but have lacked the money to do so?
If it is such a no brainer why didn't the UK government do it themselves? There must be other places that this be done as well, why has it not?

[VectraMan]

Yes, it's called devolution. A while ago the UK government was petitioned to hand over the cash to build, it was turned down. The bill is now passed by the Scottish government. £800m. Why not do something similar for the Bristol channel?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Scottish government isn't handing over the cash to build this either; they're just not objecting to someone else paying for it.

This kind of thing is far more interesting, and actually does generate power:

BBC News - Islay to get major tidal power scheme

I found this fascinating too. Only a small amount of power, but enough of these schemes would add up.

Abingdon Hydro | Abingdon Hydro home page

[scooterscot]

If this is such a no brainer why has it not already been done?
Has there been a new invention or something that makes this easier?

Yes, it's called devolution. A while ago the UK government was petitioned to hand over the cash to build, it was turned down. The bill is now passed by the Scottish government. £800m. Why not do something similar for the Bristol channel?

Meanwhile £16,000,000,000 is approved by the UK government to build a nuclear power station to generate some really expensive electricity. Madness.

Ineos boss says Hinkley nuclear power too expensive

[scooterscot]

I would have to see the numbers but in theory I am all for this as a key problem for all electricity production is matching supply with demand. with no easy or practical way to store the leccy. Not just wind etc which blows when it wants but also nuclear and other plants which work much better when they run continuously.
So, need a way to 'store' the leccy and pumping water is one way to do it. Other is to use it to separate hydrogen from water which can then be used for fuel cells or burnt itself.
Better start praying for fusion though, only realistic solution to future energy requirements when the carbon age ends.

We're so focused on efficiency ideas like this don't get off the drawing board. For me the point here is lost, there is a remarkable amount of surplus energy generated around our shores through wave & wind. Regardless of how inefficient it is to use this power to pump water to the top of a mountain, it's still energy well spent. What else is it doing but eroding the coastline. We have to remember the first cars were no more than a few percent fuel efficient.

Spent a week in fusion lectures at the max planck institute for plasma physics last summer just north of Munich. Did this in spare time just out of interest, I was in the area why not? By the end of the week I became more of a sceptic than a hopeful. The idea in principle is fine the engineering however is beyond us and then some. For example in the plasma field they have these things called elm's, a break in the field. Were this to happen in practice, the super hot plasma would melt / destroy the vessel wall in a moment. No material on earth can tolerate it, so it must be controlled. You'd only have to have the event occur once for the facility to be scrapped, it's that serious. There's massive technical challenges and watching the physicists practice engineering is painful.

[MyUserName]

Sorry, I am late to the party. I would have been here asking stupid questions earlier but I got stuck in traffic.

Anyway, time to work:

If this is such a no brainer why has it not already been done?
Has there been a new invention or something that makes this easier?

[lukemg]

I would have to see the numbers but in theory I am all for this as a key problem for all electricity production is matching supply with demand. with no easy or practical way to store the leccy. Not just wind etc which blows when it wants but also nuclear and other plants which work much better when they run continuously.
So, need a way to 'store' the leccy and pumping water is one way to do it. Other is to use it to separate hydrogen from water which can then be used for fuel cells or burnt itself.
Better start praying for fusion though, only realistic solution to future energy requirements when the carbon age ends.

[AtW]

I think you've inadvertently answered your own question there.

Gas stations on stand-by would increase cost of airplane tickets? Gas as in gas, not petrol/gasoline.

I don't think so.

Cost of airplane travel is mainly cost of oil (not gas), local taxes (including airport duties) and actual cost of operations + profit.

[hyperD]

Why would that affect airplane tickets?

Hydro, wind should generate some decent amount of power with gas stations on standby to increase production when needed, nuclear also not bad idea just in case there are problems with gas supply.

I think you've inadvertently answered your own question there.

[AtW]

Well, we could run a slice of our power producing capacity on unicorn farts as part of a diversification package, just means your airline ticket to Paris will cost you about ten grand.

Why would that affect airplane tickets?

Hydro, wind should generate some decent amount of power with gas stations on standby to increase production when needed, nuclear also not bad idea just in case there are problems with gas supply.