Archive for the ‘Solar Energy’ Category

Open Question Interview with local represetatives ..

Europe: Never was so much owed by so many to so few

Yes – this is indeed a tale about the few and the many

and what’s sauce for the goose ‘over there’ ..

Complementing the National Debate ahead of the Referendum: –

Stop Press! Oxford University Mathematics and Economics Professors Support Cottingham.tv’s assertions

UK Economy ‘has blossomed within the EU’

J DOYNE FARMER (Professor of Mathematics), Sir DAVID HENDRY (Professor of Economics), DR MAX ROSER (Project Director, Institute for New Economics Thinking), Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.

Letters to the Editor, The Times, Thursday, June 7th, 2016

Oxford Professors support Cottingham.tv’s assertions – we’re better off staying in!

With barely 3 weeks to go – do you think the mainstream broadcasters havn’t quite got it yet? 

12 (more) questions Cottingham.tv puts to ….

Q 1. Should we place our blind faith and trust the UK National Democracy to manage our affairs?

Q 2. And particularly ask: are our elected representatives with all their vested interests going to protect the public interest or place their own first?

Q 3. We should further ask: why would those with certain vested political interests seek to abolish the European Bill of Human Rights and replace it with our own, further to going without one, whilst our neighbours have enshrined theirs in Law for decades?

Q 4. Why has the UK establishment repeatedly failed to manage its economy over the decades since WW2?

Q 5. We should further ask: under existing (UK) democratic governance our aviation industry severely declined in the ’60s, the automotive industry followed in the ’70s, all the strife and class-ridden inequality in the ’80s, with issues of corruption abuse and bribery in other organisations only now surfacing, several decades later?

Q 6. Would those priviliged ‘the few’ who insist they are ‘on the side of the many’ risk plunging us back into all the post-war austerity decades we suffered prior to joining Europe?

A. For those of you who can remember, it took a good decade before the benefits of European membership started to become widespread over here

Q 7. We should further ask: subsequently to joining Europe in the mid-70s did not our economy turn the tide and economic conditions for the many get significantly better?

Q 8. Is the reason our manufacturing industry (especially automotive) is so successful today precisely because we have enjoyed substantial foreign investment and management practises as well as worker migration into the UK, not in spite of it?

Q 9. If we vote to leave the EU, would our industry base, seen as a gateway into Europe by many international foreign investors manufacturers and exporters from further afield be deserted, causing collapse of our financial services industry?

Q 10. If we vote to leave, will the Humber Region with its Billion Pound Inward European Investment from Siemens and Dong Energy turn into a decline – and would those “I’m alright Jack”, little Englander Exiteers with their vested interests even care?

Q 11. Back to trust: just why are some of our democratic representatives assumedly with those same vested self-interests supporting an escallating £ 78 billion ‘cost-plus’ investment in our future UK nuclear power station and placing their blind trust in an un-democratic unaccountable foreign power to build it?

A. If you do the maths, you can buy an awful lot of solar panels for this which now cost less than $1.0 per watt of solar electricity generated! I can take you through the costings step by step as an experienced environmental technology businessman

Q 12. If Germany can opt out of nuclear, why can’t we?

A 1. Germany can rely on the collective will of Europe to defend its economic and social interests, whereas if we go it alone, we may be left with the enormous £78bn bill to find – how would we finance such a sum? Would ‘the few’ be prepared to foot the bill for ‘the many’?!

A 2. What’s sauce for the gander: Germany and Northern Europe generally have a more scientific and technically literate democratic leadership than we do the UK, so I tend to believe them on balance when they say they can manage without nuclear!

A 3. If we left Europe, our Pound will likely plummet internationally and we would then not be able to pay for our escallating nuclear programme! The Chinese would indeed then have us over a barrel! If we vote to stay in Europe, we can hold onto our hard-won right to wield the nuclear deterrent by proxy as currently, thereby helping to retain our global policeman’s role in the World, military intelligence, armed forces, respect from the other super-powers.

Nick

Who will you vote for next month?

Why do the political parties continue to steal each others credentials and continue to get it wrong?

Editor’s Comment: In our brave new world of coalitions, surely the Greens should be responsible for representing green issues, Lib Dems for fairness and education, Cons for Business and Enterprise, Lab for equality and employment and UKIP and the others .. well for independence and injecting a modicum of oversight and commonsense at least!

Are the ‘arms-length’ Lib Dem solutions including locations for green technologies simply missing the point – or merely passing the buck by aligning themselves with the Conservatives?

With the early mismanagement of government grants for installing domestic solar panel systems in 2011, we ended up with vast solar farms built by large investors stuck far away from consumers in remote fields instead of on rooftops locally! Thus resulted in a lost opportunity stimulate small businesses like builders and roofers and as a consequence and we ended up with more expensive wind farms located far out to sea and a continued lack if investment in tidal and water flow and wasted opportunities! “More walking the walk and less talking the talk there please Ed!”

To their credit, they recognized the problems with coal-fired power stations, retained overseas aid and famine relief but never really get their heads around carbon capture and storage and ended-up burning straw biomass and green timber sourced thousands of miles away from Canada instead, whilst exporting much of our waste to China as our landfill sites became full to capacity! Again to their credit, recycling has taken off and we do by and large sort our rubbish now, but how much really ends up being processed appropriately? Most is simply bundled up and dumped in landfill sites or sent out to sea in ships – hopefully never to be seen or dealt with again..

One can’t help asking who were the real beneficiaries of these policies favouring large business interests.. which leads us on to ..

UKIPs ‘head in the sand’ Problem

read on

 

As the demand for cleaner fuels rises, many of us will be running fossil fuel-free within the next 25 years!

Inevitably this will mean moving over to electric vehicles EVs, deploying solar rooftop energy generation with solar panels and “Home batteries” (see Tesla) and a “Packet Switched Smart Grid”.

I’m enclosing my early concept: –

Patent for a Smart Gridfpat

nationalgrid2

Nick

Posted by admin at November 13, 2014

Category: Business, Cottingham, news, Politics, Solar Energy

Tags: , ,

Solar Energy – which is best – distributed or centralised?

A few years ago, the government offered over-generous incentives in the form of grants andfeed-in tariffs to home-owners who were prepared to invest in generating their own solar energy and equipment to supply energy back into the National Grid, rather than consume it themselves ‘at source’.

Solar energy generation is regarded as a “low energy density” resource like wind farms, unlike today’s existing gas fired power stations which are regarded as ‘high energy density’. This means solar energy is suited to “distributed generation”, where the optimum location of panels is as close to the point of consumption as possible, e.g. directly on buildings rooftops.

As was pointed out by a viewer texting BBC Looknorth last night, there has been a rush to push through planning permission in green field sites ahead of the removal of government subsidies for large scale solar farms.

As reported, it seems to the inhabitants at least that the countryside and its agriculture views and wildlife can only be blighted by solar and wind farms when viewed as green field investments, and that their location on brown field sites meets with a lack of investment.

 

Creating a “Level playing field for energy” to prevent the abuse – by removing all subsidies?

It is unfortunate that we did not adopt distributed solar generation Nationally and opted instead to remove the subsidy on small-scale rooftop generation several years back when Chris Huhne was the Energy and Climate Change Secretary. It would have created local work opportunities for local traders and made us more fossil fuel independent.

China by contrast adopted a very different ‘smarter’ energy strategy and, as a consequence of its massive governent support for solar energy panel manufacturing, the cost of importing solar panels fell to below “$1/Watt”.

 

Why it makes sense to generate more of what you consume locally

Electricity is expensive to transport and this incurrs transmission losses the further away the point of generation is placed from the point of consumption. To generate and distribute electricity centrally e.g. over 100s of miles in the Grid, 60W out of every 100W generated may be lost!

Policies that support our main economic growth and climate change objectives should be a good fit for any competitor in the Global Economy!

As a Nation State, the UK should be aiming to increase its energy utility by means of reducing costs and increasing its economic effectiveness as a whole. The UK should therefore be prepared to invest in a wide range of options and diversity of energy generation and in the ingenuity of its people and ideas.

Nicholas Robinson