Nuclear needs over ten years to be built

[Philip R]

#92 Renewable John.

There is no Nuclear plant at Hinckley. If you check it out, it is in Leicestershire, near the M69.

Hinkley Point is in West Somerset near Stogursey.

Hinkleys o/p has been downrated to extend the operating life of the plant. In its heyday from the mid 90s, performance enhancements to the fuel, feed flow, Turbines increased output to beyond its original design of 1320 MWe gross.
SZB is probably benefitting from optimal fuel burn up and enhanced LP Turbine performance due to lower winter cooling water temperatures, allowing better condenser vacuum to be achieved.

PhilipR

[renewablejohn]

Philip

Ok you spotted the typo but you knew where I meant.  I would not wish a Nuclear plant on Hinckley. At least with coastal sites you cut the population area down by 50%.

[SimonHobson]

"But they do get the eyesores on the seascape for the next 25 years in return for ****-all" - pollocks!, pure and simple Delingpolian lying, inaccurate anti-wind propaganda (as is usual from many of the pro nukers) - that is a pure "troll" statement on a renewables forum

No not lies, truth.
"eyesores on the seascape" - it's a matter of opinion, but I (along with many others) consider them an eyesore. Unless of course you wish to claim that they are invisible ?
"next 25 years" - I believe that is about their intended lifetime. Unless you have different figures.
"in return for ****-all" - as I explained, Barrow doesn't get much from them. The docks have had some business, and I believe there'll be a handful (single digit) of long term jobs, but AIUI, most of the construction is being done by itinerant workers. And just for good measure, the construction workers are actually living offshore on the latest farm - so not even that much business for the local accommodation businesses.

So, where are the lies ?

[martin]

Conveniently totally overlooking the contribution to our energy needs for many years, and glossing over the fact that turbines can be repaired, recycled and replaced ad infinitum... as I said "pure and simple Delingpolian lying, inaccurate anti-wind propaganda (as is usual from many of the pro nukers) - that is a pure "troll" statement on a renewables forum" - but then I'd expect nothing else from a blatant shill for the nuke industry

[SteveH]

No not lies, truth.
"eyesores on the seascape" - it's a matter of opinion,....

 To me. it's a visible reminder of our addiction to energy...

 In the same way that the old windmills are a reflection of our need to feed ourselves...

 I don't think you should be able to "Buy-off" a clear view of the sea, any more than we should be able to allow pollution of somebody else's back yard for your own personal gain.

 You can mitigate these selfish needs by taking responsibility for your actions... Most people on this forum do this & talk here about it. (My sort of people, aware.)

 Simon what are you doing?

[mikey9]

"eyesores on the seascape"

So how come Sellafield isn't considered an eyesore on the landscape - so many places in the Western Lake district you can see a huge industrial complex from  - and that goes for all Nuclear installations - certainly they wouldn't get planning permission for large industrial complex in the countryside  for any other purpose. They all loom out of typically very rural landcapes (out of sight, out of mind?) - but no-one can say they are attractive.

Why is it that eyesores only applies to Turbines - but not to Oil Rigs (look in the Cromarty Firth where the oil industry seem to forget they have parked one set of legs - for years) - Not the many Power Stations (Drax and others) you can see for 10s of miles across the Vale of York - seen by far more millions of people than turbines either off or onshore are likely to ever be seen by (due to their location).

What about Clydebank, Tyneside, SHeffield Steel Mills, London itself (all "eyesore"s to some perhaps - ), how about the mills in industrial West Yorkshire - they have been there for so long now - no-one considers them eyesores - and they have become part of our history - and with residential conversion part of our future too.

Lets be honest - the middle classes who walk, sail etc in the playgrounds where these are going up are pretty vociferous and have their own newspapers to do their shouting for them. There are many more millions who live next to "eyesores" in the Urban Environment who just get on with it.

Nothing to see here other than some shouty people trying to tell us that turbines are evil cos they don't like them.....

[M]

Had a 'offshore wind farm' chat with my father quite a while back. He's very anti change, but to my great surprise, really doesn't know what all the bother is about windmills, as he calls them.

Chatting about the sea, or at least the Bristol Channel, given that both of us have grown up right next to it. We both agreed that the sea, especially when calm, is pretty boring to look at. You stand there pointing at everything else, look at the waves, look at that ship, look at the gulls, the boats, the planes etc. The sea itself is really a blank canvas on which a very enjoyable picture is painted. Given the choice of a coastal hotel near a wind farm or not, I'd definitely go for the wind farm.

I get to see a nearby land wind turbine (approx 120m) every day during my morning stroll (about 1 mile away). It's visible from just about everywhere in Cardiff, except from my house, even my loft velux. Very frustrating. I enjoy timing the blades to see how many rpm its doing each day. Very theraputic.

Mart.

Edit: Also remember seeing / reading that off-shore farms offer no go areas for fishing, and obstacles for fish to live around. This is already leading to improved fishing in neighbouring areas. M.

[SimonHobson]

Well, it is true that you can also see nuclear power stations from some distance - but then there aren't many of those for much more generating capacity. Also, for most of the area from which you can see Sellafield, it's below the horizon which is somewhat less intrusive that something sticking up above the horizon. I don't get up that way very often, but I suspect there are few places from which Sellafield is visible, but wind turbines aren't - IIRC there are onshore and offshore turbines in the area.

If we build the number of turbines needed to fulfil some people's plan for supplying our needs, then it won't be long before it's not possible to look anywhere without these things spinning on the skyline.

And for the record, I don't like a lot of other "stuff" either - so I'm not singling out wind over coal or gas or industry or ... But the Sheffield steel works etc are already there, so that's already a lost cause. And i consider the only good view of London is as it recedes over the horizon.

Conveniently totally overlooking the contribution to our energy needs for many years, and glossing over the fact that turbines can be repaired, recycled and replaced ad infinitum... as I said "pure and simple Delingpolian lying, inaccurate anti-wind propaganda (as is usual from many of the pro nukers) - that is a pure "troll" statement on a renewables forum" - but then I'd expect nothing else from a blatant shill for the nuke industry

So you throw personal insults, but you cannot refute any of the statements as being untrue then ? You basically describe anyone who doesn't agree with you as a liar and/or shill for some industry - without realising that you sound exactly like that for the wind industry.

Barrow will get very little from these offshore windfarms - either during construction or operation. In terms of energy production, the "share" that goes to Barrow (vs any other load) is quite small.
And as for "glossing over the fact that turbines can be repaired, recycled and replaced ad infinitum" - how is that relevant ? I didn't say they couldn't - merely that their planned life out at sea is 25 years during which, for some, they will be a permanent blot on the seascape.

[desperate]

And i consider the only good view of London is as it recedes over the horizon.

Oi, wotch it me old china

Desp

[SteveH]

 Simon,

 One persons (Emotionally loaded) propergander  is another's view. Deft use of language.

 You arrive here, on a Renewable energy site (The clue is in the title.) & contribute little.

 I hope you "Take away" more than you leave...

 Best wishes for you're future,

 Steve...

[renewablejohn]

Barrow will get very little from these offshore windfarms - either during construction or operation. In terms of energy production, the "share" that goes to Barrow (vs any other load) is quite small.

Sorry but I have very little sympathy for Barrow which could quite easily have built the turbines for the Irish sea but instead stuck to its nuclear expertise and allowed Harland and Wolf to dominate the Irish Sea market for wind turbines in a similar way Hull are gearing up to dominate the North Sea market.

[mikey9]

but I suspect there are few places from which Sellafield is visible

Methinks you need a trip up the extensive areas of the Western Lake District - from whence the glories of the huge blob on the Landscape that make up Sellafield and its associated stuff can be seen.

Compared with a line of Turbines in the seascape - I know which I and many more would prefer.

[SimonHobson]

Sorry but I have very little sympathy for Barrow which could quite easily have built the turbines for the Irish sea but instead stuck to its nuclear expertise and allowed Harland and Wolf to dominate the Irish Sea market for wind turbines in a similar way Hull are gearing up to dominate the North Sea market.

Not too sure where the "stuck to it's nuclear expertise" comes from. The shipyard, whilst it did concentrate on nuclear subs, has also kept doing non-nuclear as well. AIUI, they've bidded for a lot of other work, but like all shipyards struggle to compete with foreign yards with cheap labour and often state subsidies.
It is a cause of some irritation to many engineers that with all the skills and facilities we have here - even basic stuff like rolling "tin cans" has been done abroad. In effect, these are "kit" turbines, brought in from abroad, and assembled by mostly foreign labour. I suppose you are going to criticise individual for not getting jobs that were never advertised because the construction firms already had their own ?

but I suspect there are few places from which Sellafield is visible

Methinks you need a trip up the extensive areas of the Western Lake District - from whence the glories of the huge blob on the Landscape that make up Sellafield and its associated stuff can be seen.

Ah, the old "quote a snippet out of context to change it's meaning" trick.

Compared with a line of Turbines in the seascape - I know which I and many more would prefer.

Well that's a matter of opinion. Also note that much of what you see at Sellafield isn't related (even through fuel processing) to power generation.

[mikey9]

Well, it is true that you can also see nuclear power stations from some distance - but then there aren't many of those for much more generating capacity. Also, for most of the area from which you can see Sellafield, it's below the horizon which is somewhat less intrusive that something sticking up above the horizon. I don't get up that way very often, but I suspect there are few places from which Sellafield is visible, but wind turbines aren't - IIRC there are onshore and offshore turbines in the area.

In context for your benefit.

You still need to get up there before stating such tosh.

If it is on the horizon 10-15km away and very small it is less intrusive than a huge industrial complex within a couple of km - or if you are looking down on it hoping to see an attractive coastline.

.....oh I can't be bothered anymore.......have your opinion I will have mine

[wookey]

Wind farm installations don't go to foreign yards. Transport is 1/3rd the cost of a windfarm installation so they try not to move them any further than necessary. With all the shuttling needed for an install it has to be done from a relatively local port. If Barrow really aren't supporting irish sea installs then it's not got anything to do with being undercut by 'foreginers' (unless you mean the Irish).

And 'no benefit for 25 years' is ignoring the generation, which is their whole purpose. That's silly, as is saying 'oh no, the generation goes down the road to different towns'. The grid is a national resource; everyone gets their share. You are just displaying prejudice now.