Comments on: Nuclear vs. Wind Farms Debate – rather misses the point. http://transitionculture.org/2006/01/30/nuclear-vs-wind-farms-rather-misses-the-point/ An Evolving Exploration into the Head, Heart and Hands of Energy Descent Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:18:13 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Does Nuclear Power Compete With Conservation, Wind, Solar and Biomass? : CleanTechnica http://transitionculture.org/2006/01/30/nuclear-vs-wind-farms-rather-misses-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-57488 Does Nuclear Power Compete With Conservation, Wind, Solar and Biomass? : CleanTechnica Sun, 18 May 2008 19:43:24 +0000 http://transitionculture.org/?p=217#comment-57488 <p>[...] links: First High Resolution Wind Map Cost of Wind vs Cost of Nuclear to Replace Coal Nuclear vs. Wind Farms Debate - rather misses the point. Tags: atomic fission, coal, fossil fuel combustion, uranium Add a comment or question 0 [...]</p> [...] links: First High Resolution Wind Map Cost of Wind vs Cost of Nuclear to Replace Coal Nuclear vs. Wind Farms Debate – rather misses the point. Tags: atomic fission, coal, fossil fuel combustion, uranium Add a comment or question 0 [...]

]]> By: Jason Cole http://transitionculture.org/2006/01/30/nuclear-vs-wind-farms-rather-misses-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-224 Jason Cole Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:18:01 +0000 http://transitionculture.org/?p=217#comment-224 [quote]Whether we connect nuclear, wind, tidal or whatever into the grid, it is still wasteful. [/quote] Please please please please please bear in mind that the grid is not wasteful per se. Your own diagram illustrates the point (3.5% loss). The problem is the use of remotely-sited thermal generation. Remotely-sited being the point, because the waste heat cannot be harnessed into CHP. It is better to site wind/tidal turbines where they can yield the most energy. The difference that makes would more than compensate for 3.5% grid losses. DG has its place but it's not a panacea. [quote]Whether we connect nuclear, wind, tidal or whatever into the grid, it is still wasteful. [/quote]
Please please please please please bear in mind that the grid is not wasteful per se. Your own diagram illustrates the point (3.5% loss).

The problem is the use of remotely-sited thermal generation. Remotely-sited being the point, because the waste heat cannot be harnessed into CHP.

It is better to site wind/tidal turbines where they can yield the most energy. The difference that makes would more than compensate for 3.5% grid losses.

DG has its place but it’s not a panacea.

]]> By: Tom Atkins http://transitionculture.org/2006/01/30/nuclear-vs-wind-farms-rather-misses-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-144 Tom Atkins Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:08:08 +0000 http://transitionculture.org/?p=217#comment-144 Love the Bernard Ingham pic! Was listening to Radio 4's 'Start the Week' this morning and they had James Lovelock on (worth listening to - available on the BBC website). At one point the interviewer asked "so what do you think of the Deep Greens who want wind trubines everywhere to solve the problem"... I wanted to immediately post him a copy of David Holmgren's book - surely he meant "Green Tech stabilitists"?! It reminded me just how unevolved the debate is in the mainstream (as 'Any questions' did for you) - the idea of 'managed descent' is just not there yet. Keep up the good work Rob and hopefully soon more people will have a more sophisticated way of visioning the future. Love the Bernard Ingham pic! Was listening to Radio 4’s ‘Start the Week’ this morning and they had James Lovelock on (worth listening to – available on the BBC website). At one point the interviewer asked “so what do you think of the Deep Greens who want wind trubines everywhere to solve the problem”… I wanted to immediately post him a copy of David Holmgren’s book – surely he meant “Green Tech stabilitists”?! It reminded me just how unevolved the debate is in the mainstream (as ‘Any questions’ did for you) – the idea of ‘managed descent’ is just not there yet. Keep up the good work Rob and hopefully soon more people will have a more sophisticated way of visioning the future.

]]>