Wonder how it compares cost wise to us with there drive to net zero
They use a lot of tidal power on Orkney, and also hydrogen splitting out of sea water, the main hospital is powered by it I think.
I was told a long time ago that there was a debate going on in gov't as to whether to concentrate on Tidal or Wind power. Although tidal was more reliable (it doesn't stop) and outperformed wind by a factor of 10:1 the decision was made to go with wind because some clown got his maths wrong and put a decimal point in the wrong place while doing the comparison - which made wind look more favourable. I've never been able to verify that though.
Always amazes me we are an island surrounded by water and it’s just coming to head we can produce electricity here .
Clever films these with some very bright Engineers.. cost millions to produce such machines but the long run is bright if they get it correct .
Way out of hand HS2 I think .its not even going as far north as wanted in the first place .which is what it was intended to do .join south to north . Government “Tax payers money”have certainly wasted some money over the years And still continuing..Plus 1 and think they’ve got to do something if they wish to try and reduce the carbon footprint
Indeed extremely clever engineers who have designed all of this
Also just seen that the HS2 has a possible outlay of around 100 x billion, maybe they should scrap it and divert the money towards this
Many thks as never knew that , just found this video , got to be better than other eye sores , ie, wind turbines or large areas of land that’s been cleared for solar panels
But sounds like they need to upgrade the grid in order to expand it
Still beggers belief of how the hell there going to get to net zero (sic)
Should we start a listEasy enough if you kill off a large enough proportion of the population.
Mine is quite lengthy already...Should we start a list
I guess it's a start.Hopefully this covers ur list
Don't see that they ever will and why would you want to reduce CO2 anyway? CO2 is far lower than it has been historically (during periods when the temperature has been far higher than it is now), has been much higher in periods prior to anthropogenic CO2 production, CO2 levels 'follow' temperature increases - not precede and cause temperature rises, is an essential food for plant life (and therefore our food sources) and recent rises in CO2 have led to a 'greening' of the planet.Still beggers belief of how the hell there going to get to net zero
Totally agree. Whilst there has been an increase in pollution by humanity, carbon dioxide isn't the problem. It's the other pollutants, waste, by products of manufacturing, plastics. CO2 is a natural product, and is a lot lower than it has been many times in the past.it just doesn't fit the scare narrative, so it doesn't get any airtime. I absolutely disagree with Net Zero.