| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:renewable energy in Brentford | |
| Posted by: | Dan Filson | |
| Date/Time: | 08/07/09 21:44:00 |
| "Wind turbines usually yield little environmental benefit at this height in an urban context. Spending the same money on solar PV would probably yield greater environmental benefit" Andrew Dakers is broadly right on this, but the problem with both solar panels and to a lesser extent wind turbines is that they are not yet mass produced at low cost. So to cover a supermarket, factory or warheouse roof with solar panels would cost a bit, as would setting up turbines. Our energy problems in this country should not be solved at this micro scale but by using tidal and Gulf Stream power. The power of water is far greater than that of wind - check out the power of a relatively slow moving tsunami versus a tornado. The tornado wrecks trailer parks but the tsunamo sweeps all before it. A major national capital investment in harnessing the Gulf stream should be made - it might take 20 years to set up - and tidal power installations in the Severn Estuary, the Solent and the Thames Estuary. Whay is needed at local level is reduction in consumption, as much as - if not more than - generation of more power. And it might make sense to erect millions of solar panels in the Sahara, where I'm told the sun shines fairly consistently, and systems devised for conveying the power surplus to African needs efficiently across north Africa to Spain and into European grids there. |