On 17/11/2021 10:35, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> Your concern for the 'UK' may hinge on if Scotland becomes independent or
> not.*:-) cf my previous posting about the error of assuming wind power is
> land based. It is*already* significantly sea based, and it does tend to be
> a tad windy in some of those places.

Are any bookmakers offering odds on how long before a large ship
(probably carrying nasties) ploughs into one of the offshore windpower
stations. They regularly manage to hit things that have been there for
millennia so can only be a matter of time.

On 17/11/2021 10:51, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> And aren't those subs still at Faslane awaiting 'decomissioning'... ?

There are none at Faslane, twenty at Devonport and Rosyth I believe.

Just wait until there hundreds (or more) wind turbine towers awaiting
"decommissioning", I doubt that any will be removed completely whatever
promises were made.

On 17/11/2021 11:25, Indy Jess John wrote:
> There is always Global Warming to submerge thousands of square miles of
> fertile, crop-bearing land under higher water levels.

I thought it was supposed to have submerged many of the Pacific islands
by now like the one where they are building four airports!

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17/11/2021 10:35, Jim Lesurf wrote:
>> Your concern for the 'UK' may hinge on if Scotland becomes independent or
>> not.*:-) cf my previous posting about the error of assuming wind power is
>> land based. It is*already* significantly sea based, and it does tend to be
>> a tad windy in some of those places.
>
> Are any bookmakers offering odds on how long before a large ship
> (probably carrying nasties) ploughs into one of the offshore windpower
> stations. They regularly manage to hit things that have been there for
> millennia so can only be a matter of time.
>

Have any oil or gas rigs been hit?

On 17/11/2021 16:51, charles wrote:
> I assume the "Hydro-killed" include the construction phase and also dams
> breaking

The number drowned in the reservoirs and aqueducts feeding hydro power
stations probably well exceeds number killed by nuclear power stations.

In article <sn39g2$usi$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:
> There's an interesting article on the status of practical fusion
> electricity generation here

> https://www.powermag.com/fusion-energy-is-coming-and-maybe-sooner-than-you-think/

> Fission reactors may be a useful bridging technology. Having read the
> world-nuclear report reference above, and other sources, eg

> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last/

> I'm unconvinced we will be short of fuel for fission reactors before
> fusion ones take over.

I'm unconvinced that we'll need the fission before fusion 'takes over'...

Also clear that neither of them is our only option.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <qik9pgluhm9914gf826naub27undnnn47j@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> Ultimately the only real answer to the question of how we use energy
> supplies is to aim to have fewer people using them. Solve that problem
> and everything else will fall into place.

> Unfortunately it still boils down to the practicality of how to change
> the behaviour of vast numbers of people. I don't know the best way to do
> this, but the main choices would seem to be despotism, advertising, or
> something in the water. I'm not sure which would be worst.

Actually, in practice the best way seems to be that when the general
standard of living rises above a given level, people tend to have fewer
children. IIUC this has been shown in various countries around the world as
they got up to 'first world' levels.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <598cbe2f2ebob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> The climate has always changed and always will without any help from man.

Indeed. And that is detailed and examined in the book you refuse to read.
Along with various human-generated changes on various timescales and
periods, etc. The book helps to compare and relate the various processes
and effects and put them into context. But you don't know because you
refuse to even read it.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <mvlapgh8u4h6ho61o9dn91s687j9uenabt@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> Yep. If we don't deal with it, Mother Nature will. One way or another it
> will definitely happen. But the planet will survive, just without so
> many of us on it.

As yet that isn't clear. If we get to the point where the CO2 created rise
tips frozen/bound methane release into a positive feedback rise-release we
could change the temperature and climate so much that essentially none of
the current species can cope.

One of the points people miss if they don't look back over climate info for
the full history of Earth is that it spent billions of years with totally
different climates to today.

Lacking 'greenhouse' gases in the air we could get a snowball Earth about
30 deg C below now. (1)Or get a runaway heating effect and be more like
venus with no liquid water and a thick nasty atmosphere.

Bear in mind we're here because the stromatalites spent eons changing the
early atmosphere so it could get to having modern green vegitation and
animals in a watery oxygenated atmosphere that found a quasi-stable state.
The oxygen didn't just let us breath. It provided ozone in the upper
atmosphere to shield us from the XUV that would have crisped our genes,
etc.

Jim

1. The erronious comment made by someone some time ago about our
undertanding mentioning 'Stephan's Law' comes up here. The Earth is *not* a
'Black Body' and we can be thankful for that. If it were, the surface temp
would be about 30 deg *lower* than now! We have the natural background
level of 'Greenhouse' effect, etc, to thank for that as a quasi-stable
result of the pre-existing atmosphere.

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn3ehv$6rs$1@dont-email.me>, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
> > When I researched this the death rates due to Wind, Nuclear and Solar
> > (I think Solar was the third) were all down in the negligable, lost in
> > the noise, sort of area whereas most others were much worse
> > (especially hydro electric).

> Yes, I'm not disputing that nuclear has killed fewer than many suppose.

The snag is we don't really know how many, now, or over the future given
the 'legacy' it leaves for a long period. Basically, it may kill some
people without us realising, and others in the future. Almost impossible to
assess reliably.

But the key point is that it has a poor track record, various snags, and we
simply won't need it.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn58h9$3cg$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Someone had better get a squirt on with the wind turbines then. In very
> rough terms UK electricity production accounts for only a third of our
> energy use. Transport, industrial processes and heating are the other
> two thirds and are largely fossil fuel powered. If they are going to
> become electricity powered we need a massive deployment of new
> generating capacity. That doesn't seem to be happening.

It is happening, but I agree that mindsets and practice need to change.
However this does seem to be happening. e.g. the recent comments from Saint
Nic.

In effect, we can expect a quasi-exponential rise in wind turbines, etc,
now because it seems to now be competitive and designs are improving. So I
think we are now going though a changeover and it is gaining impetus.

What we need is similar development in terms of other methods, storage,
hydrogen, etc. I think the wind part of this can largely take care of
itself as it has become a decent commercial investment.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:

[...]

> IEEE Spectrum in recent years has had a number of articles on the progress
> in these topics. Am I the only IEEE member here? I don't know which of the
> items is openly on the web. But a fair bit of 'Spectrum' is I think.
> However I just read the printed copies they send me.
>

Prompted by this: while I'm not an IEEE member I have just signed up
to read 'Spectrum'. Thanks for the tip, it looks very interesting.

--
^Ï^ <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

My pet rock Gordon just is.

In article <sn5c8g$r0v$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17/11/2021 10:35, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> > Your concern for the 'UK' may hinge on if Scotland becomes independent
> > or not.*:-) cf my previous posting about the error of assuming wind
> > power is land based. It is*already* significantly sea based, and it
> > does tend to be a tad windy in some of those places.

> Are any bookmakers offering odds on how long before a large ship
> (probably carrying nasties) ploughs into one of the offshore windpower
> stations. They regularly manage to hit things that have been there for
> millennia so can only be a matter of time.

Yes, I'm sure it'll happen if only because there will be thousands of both
wind turbines and ships. But losing one doesn't mean all the others then
stop.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn5cl7$tja$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> > On 17/11/2021 10:35, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> >> Your concern for the 'UK' may hinge on if Scotland becomes
> >> independent or not.*:-) cf my previous posting about the error of
> >> assuming wind power is land based. It is*already* significantly sea
> >> based, and it does tend to be a tad windy in some of those places.
> >
> > Are any bookmakers offering odds on how long before a large ship
> > (probably carrying nasties) ploughs into one of the offshore windpower
> > stations. They regularly manage to hit things that have been there
> > for millennia so can only be a matter of time.
> >

> Have any oil or gas rigs been hit?

There certainly have been a number of dramatic 'events'. Inc big fires,
loss of life, etc. Also serious 'blow outs' that do a lot of damage to
fishing, etc.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn5ch3$r0v$2@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17/11/2021 10:51, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> > And aren't those subs still at Faslane awaiting 'decomissioning'... ?

> There are none at Faslane, twenty at Devonport and Rosyth I believe.

Sorry, yes, I was thinking of Rosyth.

> Just wait until there hundreds (or more) wind turbine towers awaiting
> "decommissioning", I doubt that any will be removed completely whatever
> promises were made.

What I suspect will be more likely is generation companies wanting to
replace old ones with bigger better ones.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn5ct5$v7l$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17/11/2021 16:51, charles wrote:
> > I assume the "Hydro-killed" include the construction phase and also
> > dams breaking

> The number drowned in the reservoirs and aqueducts feeding hydro power
> stations probably well exceeds number killed by nuclear power stations.

You mean we should ban baths from homes and remove all swimming pools!?
Oh, and cover over all the rivers and lakes!

Persumably stairs should also be banned.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <1piuhj7.1kvm13roff07aN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>, Sn!pe
<snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:

> [...]

> > IEEE Spectrum in recent years has had a number of articles on the
> > progress in these topics. Am I the only IEEE member here? I don't know
> > which of the items is openly on the web. But a fair bit of 'Spectrum'
> > is I think. However I just read the printed copies they send me.
> >

> Prompted by this: while I'm not an IEEE member I have just signed up
> to read 'Spectrum'. Thanks for the tip, it looks very interesting.

FWIW I'd also recommend any Electronic/Electrical Eng to join the IEEE.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <598d5d66abnoise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <1piuhj7.1kvm13roff07aN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>, Sn!pe
> <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:

> > [...]

> > > IEEE Spectrum in recent years has had a number of articles on the
> > > progress in these topics. Am I the only IEEE member here? I don't know
> > > which of the items is openly on the web. But a fair bit of 'Spectrum'
> > > is I think. However I just read the printed copies they send me.
> > >

> > Prompted by this: while I'm not an IEEE member I have just signed up
> > to read 'Spectrum'. Thanks for the tip, it looks very interesting.

> FWIW I'd also recommend any Electronic/Electrical Eng to join the IEEE.

> Jim

Since the IEE became the IET it's proabaly all that's left for electrical
engineers.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 18/11/2021 11:15, Tweed wrote:
> Have any oil or gas rigs been hit?

Yes.

And they tend to stand alone and not with dozens (hundreds?) of other
ones around them.

On 18/11/2021 12:16, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> Yes, I'm sure it'll happen if only because there will be thousands of both
> wind turbines and ships. But losing one doesn't mean all the others then
> stop.

I am not worried about the turbine, more worried about nasties on the
ship or even just a damaged ship out of control.

On 18/11/2021 12:17, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> What I suspect will be more likely is generation companies wanting to
> replace old ones with bigger better ones.

Bigger ones will need completely new foundations.

On 18/11/2021 12:21, Jim Lesurf wrote:
>> The number drowned in the reservoirs and aqueducts feeding hydro power
>> stations probably well exceeds number killed by nuclear power stations.
> You mean we should ban baths from homes and remove all swimming pools!?
> Oh, and cover over all the rivers and lakes!

It isn't like you to make a mistake of logic Jim.

Bill

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 09:17:38 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
<noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:

>Actually, in practice the best way seems to be that when the general
>standard of living rises above a given level, people tend to have fewer
>children. IIUC this has been shown in various countries around the world as
>they got up to 'first world' levels.

Professor Dawkins describes it slightly differently. He suggests the
most significant factor is that it is those cultures in which women
have control over their own reproductive systems that have the lowest
birth rates. I think he makes a fair point.

Rod.

In article <598d6117fccharles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
<charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
> > FWIW I'd also recommend any Electronic/Electrical Eng to join the
> > IEEE.

> > Jim

> Since the IEE became the IET it's proabaly all that's left for
> electrical engineers.

Some decades ago I did inquire about joining the UK IEE. Their forms to
give your 'qualifying' details were heavy on factors like "How many people
work for you?", etc. i.e. focussed old fashioned 'status'. Not on what
engineering you'd done or were doing.

I joined the IEEE. Better value for money, and their focus was on "Are you
an engineer?" Also a huge range of sections on various topics.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <sn5vfj$6sp$3@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 18/11/2021 12:17, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> > What I suspect will be more likely is generation companies wanting to
> > replace old ones with bigger better ones.

> Bigger ones will need completely new foundations.

They may. But the long-term trend is looking towards bigger ones that are
moored / active rather than directly hardstanding. Higher efficiency and
bigger 'take' will be the driver for upgrades.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html