One can only hope that our statutory agencies like the Enironment Agency and the BGS show more balls than their compatriots in the US in exposing the dangers of this technology.

Although age and experience makes me doubt it. 

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/fracking_ourselves_to_death_in_pennsylvania_partner/

Scarey stuff, after reading that I sincirely hope it don't come to the UK. Just build 10,000 wind turbines instead at least with them its only noise pollution. I guess if people keep opposing green alternatives like wind farms, then govement will go with fracking, unseen, unheard, until your insides melt.

Of course they won't. We just follow the US lead regardless.

Alex said:

Scarey stuff, after reading that I sincirely hope it don't come to the UK. Just build 10,000 wind turbines instead at least with them its only noise pollution. I guess if people keep opposing green alternatives like wind farms, then govement will go with fracking, unseen, unheard, until your insides melt.

Click to expand...

Without getting into a debate, Wind Farms (or Wind Power Stations which is what they really are) are not as Green as the propaganda would imply. They use wind power to turn their generators, true, but they still need manufacturing, delivery, installation (with huge amounts of concrete foundations), access roads, maintenance and associated high voltage transmission infrastructure (how do you think the generated electricity gets distributed?). There's plenty of CO2 emitted from all these activities. Just Google "wind farms co2" and you'll get plenty of hits such as http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/sep/26/myth-wind-turbines-carbon-emissions.

In addition, if it wasn't for the huge subsidies and payments available for siting them on a landowner's land, I doubt whether there would be as many planned as there are at the moment.

Even if they were totally clean and didn't still contribute to CO2 emissions, the wind does not blow all the time so nuclear or fossil fuel power stations would still be required to act as back up.

Fracking may be a bad idea, but if there's any money in it, it will go ahead.

paul said:

Even if they were totally clean and didn't still contribute to CO2 emissions, the wind does not blow all the time so nuclear or fossil fuel power stations would still be required to act as back up.

Click to expand...

Obviously no generating system is wholly clean as otherwise -there would be no distribution network, but in the long term, nuclear and fossil remain worse polluters.

As for the point about the wind not blowing all the time, 'tis true. That's why we need a mix of generation systems, including solar and wave/tidal and why we also need to be investigating large capacity energy storage systems.

The other thing we need to be doing is building super-grids which are international in scope, this has already started with the interchange switches between us, France, Ireland, etc. 'cos if the wind ain't blowing here, it's probably blowing somewhere else.

and of course Hydro Electricity.  I know of numerous resurgences that could blocked off.

One can only hope that our statutory agencies like the Enironment Agency and the BGS show more balls than their compatriots in the US in exposing the dangers of this technology.

Click to expand...

Alex - if you want to know what BGS is doing with regard to shale gas, look at http://www.bgs.ac.uk/shalegas/  before accusing them of having no balls. At least they are doing something to assess the risks based on proper evidence. I would also be very wary basing judgments on articles in sensationalist media - you should know that.

Without getting into a debate, Wind Farms (or Wind Power Stations which is what they really are) are not as Green as the propaganda would imply. They use wind power to turn their generators, true, but they still need manufacturing, delivery, installation (with huge amounts of concrete foundations), access roads, maintenance and associated high voltage transmission infrastructure (how do you think the generated electricity gets distributed?).

Click to expand...

And coal fired power stations don't??? :blink:  Most of the thermal energy in coal is wasted.
see http://www.vestas.com/en/about-vestas/sustainability/sustainable-products/life-cycle-assessment/comparing-energy-payback-1.aspx

All energy generating technologies carry risks, and personally I think coal-fired power stations are some of the most risky of all - not least in terms of lives lost mining the stuff let alone the implications for climate change. By comparison wind is harmless. And if you wish to see how much energy is currently being generated by wind see http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm  Wind power contributed 9.2% of the UK's energy in the last 24 hours

And if you don't want to see fracking in your area, or wind turbines, or dirty coal fired power stations, or nuclear waste I suggest you start reducing you energy consumption at home and work. LED lighting, insulation, smart meters, solar hot water, ground source heat pumps - the technology is there.
Andy

Hold on a minute Andy, I don't see anything in the post by Alex thet says BGS have "No Balls", he merely hopes that they do it better than it has been done "Over The Pond" !!
He also suggests an increase in wind turbines.
Perhaps the way forward  is to reclaim the heat lost in coal generation, Who knows??, I don't understand the cause for your "Rant" and unsubstantiated attack on poor old (or young) Alex.
I have been involved in trying to source "renewable energy" on our land in a national park for over 20 years, Wind turbines are out because we are on the skyline (curtilage problems), not enough sunlight for solar, got to go down the "micro - hydro" channel, not a lot of assistance there!! Ground source will involve drilling into Gritstone from about 4 feet (thats the average topsoil cover round here!)
Also, do you have any experience of energy saving in a 250 year old grade 2 listed stone building in a national park? I have!!!.
  WRT Fracking, I have met folks from Lancashire that were involved in the Earth Tremors, I have also experienced one myself (caused by coal mining) whilst confined to a hospital bed, NOT a nice feeling!.
I can't understand anyone who is a caver being Pro - Fracking.

Wind power contributed 9.2% of the UK's energy in the last 24 hours

Click to expand...

We've had a windy 24 hours then. Amazing how those in support of wind power never quote figures on those calm days..

dunc said:

Wind power contributed 9.2% of the UK's energy in the last 24 hours

Click to expand...

We've had a windy 24 hours then. Amazing how those in support of wind power never quote figures on those calm days..

Click to expand...

Does the term 'mix' mean nothing to you? Nobody, nobody at all, suggests that one single renewable source can fulfil all our needs, but if wind cuts down our use of fossil by a significant amount then surely it should be welcomed into the mix.

Oh, and thanks for the link, Andy. I'd lost that one, it's very interesting. Looking at it now wind supplied 8.4% in the last 24 hours and just as interestingly, 7.9% of our usage came via the French and Dutch interconnectors (I put this fact in for the delight of any 'kippers reading this.   )

Bograt - exsumpers name is also Alex, I think Andy was replying to his post... 

I love how he has quoted me on the article as if I wrote it!

Anyway, I wouldent mind wind turbines in my area, and I cant understand the opposition againthem, but no point in defending my self further as Bograt has done a good job already.

Alex said:

I love how he has quoted me on the article as if I wrote it!

Anyway, I wouldent mind wind turbines in my area, and I cant understand the opposition againthem, but no point in defending my self further as Bograt has done a good job already.

Click to expand...

I suggest that you read Les W's post above.

I did but could not be bothered editing it as it was posted after I wrote mine, also its not 100% clear which alex he means.

graham said:

dunc said:

Wind power contributed 9.2% of the UK's energy in the last 24 hours

Click to expand...

We've had a windy 24 hours then. Amazing how those in support of wind power never quote figures on those calm days..

Click to expand...

Does the term 'mix' mean nothing to you? Nobody, nobody at all, suggests that one single renewable source can fulfil all our needs, but if wind cuts down our use of fossil by a significant amount then surely it should be welcomed into the mix.

Click to expand...

Club mix, dance mix? 

One can't fulfil all the needs, so we have to cover the countryside with turbines and build hydro plants all over along with the associated infrastructure, hardly a great solution either. We want the power but are not prepared to pay the price!

We really should spend money installing LED lighting, being more frugal with how we use it - switching off or dimming street lights, turning off pointless building lighting and generally stop wasting electricity! That would be a far more worthwhile method of spending cash than ploughing it in solutions to increase capacity.

And to get back on topic; I don't think fracking is great either, I don't know enough about it to make an absolute decision, but from what I have seen / heard it doesn't sound good..

Top and bottom of it the real problem is there is too many people so no matter what we do its just delaying the enivitable unless we get the population under control.

So.... maybe fracking may help.

Get population under controll??  Frack off!
OOOh, there's another thread emerging.  :

I was replying to Exsumper (apologies to other Alexes)
Like many controversial subjects, there are lots of scare stories out there about risks from fracking, for example reports that fracking could trigger a Mendip volcano (http://www.thisissomerset.co.uk/sitting-Mendip-volcano-says-Somerset-expert/story-14010082-detail/story.html#axzz2SY3obpBC) but many of these stories are not substantiated by the evidence. Mendip is not about to erupt! Similarly, much has been made of the Lancashire earthquakes, but the UK gets an average of 15 magnitude-2.3 earthquakes every year, so the quakes produced by the fracking are not out of the ordinary (the magnitude-5.2 Market Rasen earthquake in 2002 which woke me up in the middle of the night was far larger)

I am not pro-fracking, but equally I don't take as read much of the stuff written about it in the media or on various websites, same as I don't believe everything I read in the Daily Mail, or for that matter any other newspaper. Personally I would rather we didn't have to use shale gas, not least because of the CO2 emissions, but if we do, then clearly it needs to be well regulated with appropriate controls, safeguards and monitoring on well casing, injections, groundwater and seismicity.

As Graham rightly points out, we need a mix of energy souces, coupled with a fully integrated international grid to cope with fluctuations in demand and supply.
But the more renewable power we can generate the better - fracking may harm the environment, but a rapidly warming global climate will do far worse.
For info, the last 24 (calm) hours wind produced 3.2% of the UK electricity (in Spain, they were producing about 25% of their demand, in Denmark, c. 7%, Norway about 3.6% with 48% hydro).

But as Dunc points out, energy efficiency is the best method. Most of us (those in listed buildings in National Parks are a possible exemption) can do this easily and it will save you money.
Andy

Andy Farrant said:

For info, the last 24 (calm) hours wind produced 3.2% of the UK electricity (in Spain, they were producing about 25% of their demand, in Denmark, c. 7%, Norway about 3.6% with 48% hydro).

Click to expand...

One thing that the anti-windmill brigade ignore is the fact that this technology is already saving significant amounts of fossil fuel use across the world. I don't quite understand why that isn't acknowledged.

Andy Farrant said:

as I don't believe everything I read in the Daily Mail

Click to expand...

Good Lord, really? 

Andy Farrant said:

For info, the last 24 (calm) hours wind produced 3.2% of the UK electricity

Click to expand...

I wonder if 'produced' equates to 'usable'? A few big windfarms in mid Wales dump much of their product in optimum generating conditions because the transmisssion lines out of the region cannot carry the load. There are, reportedly, no intentions to upgrade the lines' capacity either.