[MashinBenzin]

Originally Posted by DaveA

I think that you'd be surprised about how much things like ground movements are still a concern here in the UK in the design of sensitive structures... (I speak from experience)...

... and whilst disasters might be rare, they do tend to be rather impactful if they do occur... so does not take much in the risk assessments to start to raise flags...

Don't get me wrong, I am not anti nuclear, but I am concerned we don't get carried away in siting and development off the smaller systems they are talking about ... They need the same regulatory framework as the mega stations...

Also, there are massive lead in times with all of these things... Hinkley Point C will be getting close to 20 years from initial conception when (if) it comes on stream...

It's going to have to, to be honest... We cannot just keep adding more energy... at some point we have to cut back our usage...

The Sunday Times article I read a week or two back talked about siting on existing closed nuclear sites. Which seemed eminently sensible.

[robbiep]

I'll only point one thing out here.

If you read the article properly, then it quite clearly states that :

New cars and vans powered wholly by petrol and diesel will not be sold in the UK from 2030, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said.


-----------------------------

Considering that virtually everything in BMW's current range is 'mild hybrid', then I'm not sure exactly what the OP is so concerned about.

The devil is, as usual, in the detail, rather than the headline

[winther1]

Originally Posted by robbiep

I'll only point one thing out here.

If you read the article properly, then it quite clearly states that :

New cars and vans powered wholly by petrol and diesel will not be sold in the UK from 2030, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said.


-----------------------------

Considering that virtually everything in BMW's current range is 'mild hybrid', then I'm not sure exactly what the OP is so concerned about.

The devil is, as usual, in the detail, rather than the headline

Another detail is "some" hybrid cars will be allowed. Whatever that means, but perhaps there will be limits on engine sizes, ie similar to a Prius setup.

[MY340i]

Originally Posted by winther1

Disasters are fortunately extremely rare - earthquakes are not a concern in the uk (Fukushima), and I'm sure safety has improved since 1986 (Chernobyl).
But yes, the waste is a challenge.

As the population continues to grow, I don't think it's realistic to assume energy consumption is going to drop.

cant wait for nuclear powered cars

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by 225

I really do think this lurch towards towards plug in cars will be another diesel fiasco where we look back in 15 years and it's been quickly superseded by Hydrogen engines or something else.

In my apprentice and early engineering days, I was taught (and learned) to think outside the box. Problem solving teaches you to ask a lot of "what if" questions.

I can't get any of the current thinking to add up, without simply moving the problems around. Very little solving of problems, without the potential for a lot more issues, which almost certainly will bite hard in the future.

Telford, Brunel and their peers built stuff that we still use today. A lot of the technology being proposed at the moment, is stated (even by those in the relevant industries) to have something like a 20 year life cycle.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by MY340i

cant wait for nuclear powered cars

I remember the time when nuclear was first getting established. The era was full of optimism, energy was going to be so cheap, it wouldn't be worth billing us.

[DaveA]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I remember the time when nuclear was first getting established. The era was full of optimism, energy was going to be so cheap, it wouldn't be worth billing us.

Indeed... and the second generation of fast breeder reactors were built as (IIRC) state projects when the North Sea oil money was flooding in...

Going to be interesting where the funding for these Nuclear projects (which are not cheap, to say the least) will come from isn't it... If they adopt the Hinkley C model of private funding repaid through guaranteed tariffs when on stream then we could be in for some very expensive times ahead... It is certainly an issue of some debate, let's say...

[robbiep]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

In my apprentice and early engineering days, I was taught (and learned) to think outside the box. Problem solving teaches you to ask a lot of "what if" questions.

I can't get any of the current thinking to add up, without simply moving the problems around. Very little solving of problems, without the potential for a lot more issues, which almost certainly will bite hard in the future.

Telford, Brunel and their peers built stuff that we still use today. A lot of the technology being proposed at the moment, is stated (even by those in the relevant industries) to have something like a 20 year life cycle.

I agree.

To me, the only current (excuse the pun) way in which you can go to the clean electrification of energy across the country is with the domestic solar PV and battery setup - but that only works for single unit houses (detached, semi, terrace, bungalows), it doesn't work for flats, tower blocks, etc.
Even so, if you want to go to electric heating in some way (direct or by the proposed heat pump method) rather than gas / oil, then you're talking far more than the current (yes, that word again) typical 4kW solar panel array, and it'd need a far larger battery to go with that. Add in the fact that you need more energy in the winter when the solar generation is at it's lowest, and you've still got problems, even with a large array and Tesla Powerwall.

But once again, the well-off will find it far easier to transition to the new systems, just as with EVs over the last few years. A large (8-10kW) solar PV array and Powerwall will cost in the region of £15-20k, add in your £10k heat pump, and 99%+ of the country would be largely energy independent for both car and home use. But that would involve that huge outlay in the first place.

[HighlandPete]

The idea of each property having a stand alone setup for power/heating may sound attractive, but is it really the best use of resources, finances and economies of scale? I'm snot sure.

A bit of lateral thinking. Let's take a seaside town with thousands of properties, and we want to make them more energy efficient. What do we have available? Typically more sun than average, often more wind than further inland, and we have rising sea temperature.

To me, it would make sense to have a community system, perhaps based around a water to water heat pump system. Harness the solar and wind to power the HP. Use the pretty constant sea water temperature, as the heating source. Pipe the water around the town. Then come the issues, property conversions being a major problem.

I do wonder even with the conversion issues, what the costs would be, compared to an individual approach. Also extracting heat from sea water is a win, for reducing global temperature and for the benefit of marine life. Too simplistic, not far reaching enough?

We've got a river running through our village, better flow rates in the winter season, when we need more heat. Obvious answer is an "in the river flow" turbine or two, extract the energy as the river drops through the gorge.

In fact I did some simple experiments in the local river, when proving my concept turbines. I discussed the ideas at the time with my local Enterprise Agency. Long story short, too far ahead 15 years ago, plus all the environmental hurdles, even with a proven technology.

[robbiep]

I agree HighlandPete , community-based systems are very good. I believe the Coal Authority are looking at pilot projects for mine water use (some shafts over 1000m deep in the UK, plenty of heat at that depth), where the water would be pumped up, used, treated, and then discharged back to surface run-off.
The problem that the CA have is that the mine water is heavily contaminated with all sorts of minerals - usually it's allowed to settle for months, when it naturally comes out of the mine shafts / levels, if they're pumping it out for use then the de-pollution system would have to be on a massive scale - we're talking hundreds of acres of land per town.
Plus you've got to cause enormous amounts of disruption to install that system.

I personally think the mine water plan is a non-starter. Too much cost and complexity, too much de-pollution cost.

Sea water systems can certainly work - certainly far fewer problems and complexity than mine water.

We don't have the geothermal capability in the UK to do that one, unfortunately.

As to small-scale hydro, that was popular here in Wales a few years ago. Then the Welsh Gov't realised they weren't getting a big enough slice of the cake, imposed full business rates on the schemes (which included rates on the entire catchment area for each setup !), which has then led to a large number of the small-scale community hydro schemes being closed down as of April this year !

You couldn't make it up, could you ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-56242378

I know people involved in one small-scale community hydro project. the Welsh Gov't refused to continue the rates concession (granted in Scotland until 2032), so their hydro system was shut down on 5th April. It provided enough power for about 80 homes.

[TodmordenLad]

Apologies if someone has already made the point but I think that the 2030 deadline will come and go, and a series of extended grace periods and exemptions will be implemented before the sale of petrol and diesel is finally ended. At the moment it's far enough into the future for most governments not to care much about it - ours being no exception - and as things stand, they aren't likely to lose elections over the issue if they fail to deliver their side of the bargain.

[225]

Originally Posted by winther1

Another detail is "some" hybrid cars will be allowed. Whatever that means, but perhaps there will be limits on engine sizes, ie similar to a Prius setup.

The law does state that the hybrid cars will have to be able to go a certain number of miles on electric only. I don't think that the number has been set yet though.

[SuperHamz]

Realistically until there's an established second hand market for EVs where you can pick one up for next to nothing and still have some reliability, I'd hope that ICE cars will have some future beyond 2030.

Unless the Government are planning to price lower income households out of their cars onto public transport.

That'll create a few more problems, less tax, further class divide and increased strain on public transport which I can't see improving significantly enough to take on extra commuters.

[G50]

I do a fair amount of miles for work, travelling to sites up to 300miles from my house. Yesterday I needed to go to a site that was 8mins drive from home(which is rare), or about 1hr walk.
Lovely day here yesterday, decided to walk it. Mostly along main roads, and it doesn't half make you think - wouldn't this walk be much nicer without all the petrol and diesel vehicles.

If I'm crossing a side street and a diesel especially is exiting onto the main road, I hold my breath until I've walked past it, the fumes are disgusting.