Sunshine is key to jobs and hope

“Wind Power creates hope and new jobs” (Letters, December 5).

Who for? Not the Brits: the UK’s flagship development, the London Array off the Kent coast, is costing £1.5 Billion, 90 per cent of which has gone to countries outside the UK and the British pick up the crumbs, but at least the fuel is free and clean.

With regards to the nuclear debate, the reactors are built by Westinghouse an American company, with the fuel (uranium) coming from Canada, Australia and Kazakhstan.

We do process the spent uranium at Sellafield, along with other countries’ waste; more crumbs for the Brits.

Moving on to coal, gas and oil, most of which we import, this really is not an option because of the emissions. Solar is the way forward, if done properly.

Give the people of this country the option of generating their own electricity and develop a mind-set to use wisely so they are independent (as much as possible) from the National Grid.

The sun’s rays are free, we won’t go to war over it like oil, no Government can stop us using it and it won’t run out anytime soon and the technology is simple.

If only someone would make solar arrays aesthetically pleasing. I have designed such a system and invite anyone with vision to take a look at this British system.

David Wilson, Almsford Drive, Acomb, York.

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:06pm Sat 8 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

David, if you can make solar work in the dark you are onto a winner, the only problem is that most of these panels are now made in China. More crumbs for the UK. You were right to point out that wind energy provides little employment to the UK worker, despite £Billions of tax payers money wasted on it and the main economic benefit to us of Nuclear is the reprocessing of spent fuel.
However, there is still North Sea gas and oil and hundreds of years worth of coal under our feet. Add to that it is thought that we may have enough of our own shale gas to last up to 250 years.
Unfortunately you appear to have been taken in by the carbon phobics or perhaps the EU?
When you or anyone can prove that man made CO2 causes global warming there may be a case for reducing the use of fossil fuels. Until then we can only harm ourselves by blindly going down the expensive and unreliable (excluding Hydro) renewable route.
David, if you can make solar work in the dark you are onto a winner, the only problem is that most of these panels are now made in China. More crumbs for the UK. You were right to point out that wind energy provides little employment to the UK worker, despite £Billions of tax payers money wasted on it and the main economic benefit to us of Nuclear is the reprocessing of spent fuel. However, there is still North Sea gas and oil and hundreds of years worth of coal under our feet. Add to that it is thought that we may have enough of our own shale gas to last up to 250 years. Unfortunately you appear to have been taken in by the carbon phobics or perhaps the EU? When you or anyone can prove that man made CO2 causes global warming there may be a case for reducing the use of fossil fuels. Until then we can only harm ourselves by blindly going down the expensive and unreliable (excluding Hydro) renewable route. ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Sat 8 Dec 12

Silver says...

David if you have such a design please just take it to the Dragons Den.
David if you have such a design please just take it to the Dragons Den. Silver
  • Score: 0

10:11pm Sat 8 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

I think one of the big 6 would nobble him first Silver but there is a fortune out there for someone. Just look at the Danish and German wind machine manufacturers!
I think one of the big 6 would nobble him first Silver but there is a fortune out there for someone. Just look at the Danish and German wind machine manufacturers! ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

11:17am Sun 9 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Why do any of this when we are sitting on a 50year supply of shale gas.
Why do any of this when we are sitting on a 50year supply of shale gas. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

11:19am Sun 9 Dec 12

yorkshirelad says...

Worth reminding folks at this point that the carbon global warming debate is not a marginal one. The overwhelming majority of the academic scientific community accepts that global warming is real, is highly dangerous to the planet and is being added to by CO2 production.

Despite this a collection of extreme right wing groups and lobbying groups working for large fossil fuel producers continue to try and undermine the science.

Don't be taken in by this. The scientific debate is not 50-50...nothing like it. Anyone with any concern for their descendents well-being should take a rational view of this and not be conned by bizarre right-wing conspiracy theorists.

Apart from the CO2 reasons for getting into renewables, the fact is that if we don't invest here then yet again we will be held back by conservative elements and watch while other countries make the profit.

Of course we'll need fossil fuel for many years yet and certainly when the wind is still and the sky dark...but why exactly does this mean that we can't use wind and sun when they are around to reduce (not replace) fossil fuel use?

The shrill voice of the Daily Mail (and others of course) will regret this one big style having convinced many otherwise reasonable people that Climate Change is a conspiracy.

The scientific community of right-wing conspiracy theorists? Your choice who to believe....
Worth reminding folks at this point that the carbon global warming debate is not a marginal one. The overwhelming majority of the academic scientific community accepts that global warming is real, is highly dangerous to the planet and is being added to by CO2 production. Despite this a collection of extreme right wing groups and lobbying groups working for large fossil fuel producers continue to try and undermine the science. Don't be taken in by this. The scientific debate is not 50-50...nothing like it. Anyone with any concern for their descendents well-being should take a rational view of this and not be conned by bizarre right-wing conspiracy theorists. Apart from the CO2 reasons for getting into renewables, the fact is that if we don't invest here then yet again we will be held back by conservative elements and watch while other countries make the profit. Of course we'll need fossil fuel for many years yet and certainly when the wind is still and the sky dark...but why exactly does this mean that we can't use wind and sun when they are around to reduce (not replace) fossil fuel use? The shrill voice of the Daily Mail (and others of course) will regret this one big style having convinced many otherwise reasonable people that Climate Change is a conspiracy. The scientific community of right-wing conspiracy theorists? Your choice who to believe.... yorkshirelad
  • Score: 0

2:18pm Sun 9 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Well I believe its a total conn just to tax us more and boy are they doing that.
My Gran who has been careful all her born days is paying £200.00 extra a year to fund your dubious theories.
She is not impressed and neither am I.
Well I believe its a total conn just to tax us more and boy are they doing that. My Gran who has been careful all her born days is paying £200.00 extra a year to fund your dubious theories. She is not impressed and neither am I. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

2:26pm Sun 9 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Theres an add next to this column which offers a
4 Kw PV system for £5972.00 with a 25 year warranty ? I note warranty and not guarentee ?

Havent we been here before with damp courses inject your walls with a 25 year gntee. You try finding them after a couple of years when the damp came back ......Theres your warranty gone with a defunct company.
Where theres a scheme theres a schemer.......But hey this is the green Lie we are supposed to believe.

I dont.
Theres an add next to this column which offers a 4 Kw PV system for £5972.00 with a 25 year warranty ? I note warranty and not guarentee ? Havent we been here before with damp courses inject your walls with a 25 year gntee. You try finding them after a couple of years when the damp came back ......Theres your warranty gone with a defunct company. Where theres a scheme theres a schemer.......But hey this is the green Lie we are supposed to believe. I dont. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

2:37pm Sun 9 Dec 12

skepticreader says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
David, if you can make solar work in the dark you are onto a winner, the only problem is that most of these panels are now made in China. More crumbs for the UK. You were right to point out that wind energy provides little employment to the UK worker, despite £Billions of tax payers money wasted on it and the main economic benefit to us of Nuclear is the reprocessing of spent fuel.
However, there is still North Sea gas and oil and hundreds of years worth of coal under our feet. Add to that it is thought that we may have enough of our own shale gas to last up to 250 years.
Unfortunately you appear to have been taken in by the carbon phobics or perhaps the EU?
When you or anyone can prove that man made CO2 causes global warming there may be a case for reducing the use of fossil fuels. Until then we can only harm ourselves by blindly going down the expensive and unreliable (excluding Hydro) renewable route.
I don't know where, if anywhere, you learnt physics, but CO2 does cause global warming - basic physics. Is man-made CO2 involved - well 30Gigatons a year is released and about half remains in the atmosphere causing the CO2 level to rise to very nearly 400ppm. If you want more information try: http://www.skeptical
science.com/
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: David, if you can make solar work in the dark you are onto a winner, the only problem is that most of these panels are now made in China. More crumbs for the UK. You were right to point out that wind energy provides little employment to the UK worker, despite £Billions of tax payers money wasted on it and the main economic benefit to us of Nuclear is the reprocessing of spent fuel. However, there is still North Sea gas and oil and hundreds of years worth of coal under our feet. Add to that it is thought that we may have enough of our own shale gas to last up to 250 years. Unfortunately you appear to have been taken in by the carbon phobics or perhaps the EU? When you or anyone can prove that man made CO2 causes global warming there may be a case for reducing the use of fossil fuels. Until then we can only harm ourselves by blindly going down the expensive and unreliable (excluding Hydro) renewable route.[/p][/quote]I don't know where, if anywhere, you learnt physics, but CO2 does cause global warming - basic physics. Is man-made CO2 involved - well 30Gigatons a year is released and about half remains in the atmosphere causing the CO2 level to rise to very nearly 400ppm. If you want more information try: http://www.skeptical science.com/ skepticreader
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Sun 9 Dec 12

skepticreader says...

capt spaulding wrote:
Well I believe its a total conn just to tax us more and boy are they doing that.
My Gran who has been careful all her born days is paying £200.00 extra a year to fund your dubious theories.
She is not impressed and neither am I.
OK, so is global warming a con? Who is perpetrating this? Just stop for a moment and think. Almost every national science foundation agrees its happening, so all the scientists are in on this. But science works by disproving the other guys evidence, so if any one of them published a disproof it would fall to bits. Most countries are planning to do something - so the politicians are in on this too and they are known for keeping quiet about things aren't they? There is stacks of evidence that birds and insects are changing their patterns due to global warming so are they in on this too? Even the oil industry is now convinced this is more than a "dubious theory".
The real issue is not is it happening (It IS), it is what do we do about it.
[quote][p][bold]capt spaulding[/bold] wrote: Well I believe its a total conn just to tax us more and boy are they doing that. My Gran who has been careful all her born days is paying £200.00 extra a year to fund your dubious theories. She is not impressed and neither am I.[/p][/quote]OK, so is global warming a con? Who is perpetrating this? Just stop for a moment and think. Almost every national science foundation agrees its happening, so all the scientists are in on this. But science works by disproving the other guys evidence, so if any one of them published a disproof it would fall to bits. Most countries are planning to do something - so the politicians are in on this too and they are known for keeping quiet about things aren't they? There is stacks of evidence that birds and insects are changing their patterns due to global warming so are they in on this too? Even the oil industry is now convinced this is more than a "dubious theory". The real issue is not is it happening (It IS), it is what do we do about it. skepticreader
  • Score: 0

3:45pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

Hey ColdAsChristmas -

You dedicate an awful lot of time to vociferously making your single-issue points at length here.
You have done for many years.

For most folk, commenting on websites is just a pastime, light entertainment. For you it's different.
Many people feel very passionate about their pet subjects but dedication such as yours doesn't happen without a payroll.

You're not doing this for yourself that's obvious.
The big question is: whose payroll?
Hey ColdAsChristmas - You dedicate an awful lot of time to vociferously making your single-issue points at length here. You have done for many years. For most folk, commenting on websites is just a pastime, light entertainment. For you it's different. Many people feel very passionate about their pet subjects but dedication such as yours doesn't happen without a payroll. You're not doing this for yourself that's obvious. The big question is: whose payroll? Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

4:20pm Sun 9 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

Good point Captain. The wind turbine the CofYC bought was from a now out of business supplier, but of course nobody, not even our Green councillors will own up to this. Not so far anyway. It's now been recycled......
Skepticreader, yes indeed CO2 is a greenhouse gas but it is a very minor player and I'm certain you know this.
Like the whole green agenda again this has been grossly exaggerated.
It is an established fact that only around 4% of CO2 (3.618% GHG in total) is man made. = 4% of 3.618% = 0.14472% of GHG= next to nothing!
Given that water vapour is 95% of the greenhouse effect and a much more potent agent at that too than the man made CO2 contribution, which is indeed insignificant.
There are plenty of top scientists who do not subscribe to man made global warming, independent of state funding. I'll name some if you like, unlike the so called bunch of Eco Warriors the BBC tried to call climate experts. No wonder they wanted to keep the names secret. Check out '28gate'!
I should have replied to Matt S earlier but basically most CO2 production in total comes from the Northern hemisphere. Everyday the level changes and where we measure from is significant, for example on a Volcano in Hawaii! CO2 natural production is also seasonal, then add or take from that the oceans both taking in and giving out CO2, the Earth does indeed regulates itself.
The idea that politicians can decide the mean temperature of Earth is ridiculous. (Eg +2C)
The fact is the Earth is cooling and that is what the current statistics show, so it is the warmers in denial.
Calling names to sceptics will not convince anyone of your junk science. Suggesting sceptics are extreme right wing nutters or in the pay of big oil companies is a myth. I bet my politics are to the left of most, so don't kid us with that one. This is a case of right or wrong and the warmers numbers don't add up and that is why they won't debate in public but only in private between themselves.
Green taxes cost the poor especially a fortune they can't afford.
Let's have that public debate and watch the wheels fall off the green agenda.
Remember, The Oxford Union and St Andrews did hold a debate on the issue bringing in guest speakers on both sides and guess what: The warmers lost both of them. No wonder the time for debate is over! (Algore)
I could write a book on the junk science and propaganda in the name of global warming or climate change or climate disruption, whatever they want to call it this week yorkshirelad. The biggest laugh I ever had was this one: CO2 causes the Oceans to become acidic! Oh really? The acidity of our Oceans is between 7.9 and 8.1 Ph. Now, with a value of 7 being neutral and anything less than 7 being acidic the above makes our Oceans alkaline. Still, desperate times and all that.....Goebbels had nothing on you lot!
Good point Captain. The wind turbine the CofYC bought was from a now out of business supplier, but of course nobody, not even our Green councillors will own up to this. Not so far anyway. It's now been recycled...... Skepticreader, yes indeed CO2 is a greenhouse gas but it is a very minor player and I'm certain you know this. Like the whole green agenda again this has been grossly exaggerated. It is an established fact that only around 4% of CO2 (3.618% GHG in total) is man made. = 4% of 3.618% = 0.14472% of GHG= next to nothing! Given that water vapour is 95% of the greenhouse effect and a much more potent agent at that too than the man made CO2 contribution, which is indeed insignificant. There are plenty of top scientists who do not subscribe to man made global warming, independent of state funding. I'll name some if you like, unlike the so called bunch of Eco Warriors the BBC tried to call climate experts. No wonder they wanted to keep the names secret. Check out '28gate'! I should have replied to Matt S earlier but basically most CO2 production in total comes from the Northern hemisphere. Everyday the level changes and where we measure from is significant, for example on a Volcano in Hawaii! CO2 natural production is also seasonal, then add or take from that the oceans both taking in and giving out CO2, the Earth does indeed regulates itself. The idea that politicians can decide the mean temperature of Earth is ridiculous. (Eg +2C) The fact is the Earth is cooling and that is what the current statistics show, so it is the warmers in denial. Calling names to sceptics will not convince anyone of your junk science. Suggesting sceptics are extreme right wing nutters or in the pay of big oil companies is a myth. I bet my politics are to the left of most, so don't kid us with that one. This is a case of right or wrong and the warmers numbers don't add up and that is why they won't debate in public but only in private between themselves. Green taxes cost the poor especially a fortune they can't afford. Let's have that public debate and watch the wheels fall off the green agenda. Remember, The Oxford Union and St Andrews did hold a debate on the issue bringing in guest speakers on both sides and guess what: The warmers lost both of them. No wonder the time for debate is over! (Algore) I could write a book on the junk science and propaganda in the name of global warming or climate change or climate disruption, whatever they want to call it this week yorkshirelad. The biggest laugh I ever had was this one: CO2 causes the Oceans to become acidic! Oh really? The acidity of our Oceans is between 7.9 and 8.1 Ph. Now, with a value of 7 being neutral and anything less than 7 being acidic the above makes our Oceans alkaline. Still, desperate times and all that.....Goebbels had nothing on you lot! ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

4:30pm Sun 9 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

Buzz, no body's payroll, I'm saying it to save you and your likes from yourselves. Just that you haven't woken up to reality yet. Maybe the Beast from the East in a few days will do the trick?
Buzz, no body's payroll, I'm saying it to save you and your likes from yourselves. Just that you haven't woken up to reality yet. Maybe the Beast from the East in a few days will do the trick? ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Sun 9 Dec 12

goatman says...

Given the amount of river estuaries we have in this country I'm surprised that nobody has invested in tidal power, like they have in France. After all, tides are a constant natural force.
Given the amount of river estuaries we have in this country I'm surprised that nobody has invested in tidal power, like they have in France. After all, tides are a constant natural force. goatman
  • Score: 0

6:44pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Buzz, no body's payroll, I'm saying it to save you and your likes from yourselves. Just that you haven't woken up to reality yet. Maybe the Beast from the East in a few days will do the trick?
Well you're obviously not going to admit it are you. Astute readers can judge for themselves.



Again you presume my stance on this. A stance I haven't declared.
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Buzz, no body's payroll, I'm saying it to save you and your likes from yourselves. Just that you haven't woken up to reality yet. Maybe the Beast from the East in a few days will do the trick?[/p][/quote]Well you're obviously not going to admit it are you. Astute readers can judge for themselves. Again you presume my stance on this. A stance I haven't declared. Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

8:16pm Sun 9 Dec 12

ak7274 says...

A bit like you presuming my skill as a Lorry Driver Buzz.
A bit like you presuming my skill as a Lorry Driver Buzz. ak7274
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

ak7274 wrote:
A bit like you presuming my skill as a Lorry Driver Buzz.
Nothing like.

I said nothing about your skill. You might be the HGV Stig.

I inferred your prejudice towards cyclists from your past anti-cyclist postings.

Just as dangerous.
[quote][p][bold]ak7274[/bold] wrote: A bit like you presuming my skill as a Lorry Driver Buzz.[/p][/quote]Nothing like. I said nothing about your skill. You might be the HGV Stig. I inferred your prejudice towards cyclists from your past anti-cyclist postings. Just as dangerous. Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

1:21am Mon 10 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

OK Buzz, I'm an amateur Meteorologist.
I have declared an interest.
Now, what about you? Crystal ball gazer and failed futurologist?
OK Buzz, I'm an amateur Meteorologist. I have declared an interest. Now, what about you? Crystal ball gazer and failed futurologist? ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

1:46am Mon 10 Dec 12

strangebuttrue? says...

Global warming. I have been cold now since about Dec 2010 how is that global warming. Mind you I suppose I will be told now that the unusually low temperatures in winters for the past 2 years which caused my Father-in-laws garden walls to rise out of the ground due to the deep frost penetration are a result of the unusual climatic conditions caused by global warming - HO HO HO Happy Christmas.
Global warming. I have been cold now since about Dec 2010 how is that global warming. Mind you I suppose I will be told now that the unusually low temperatures in winters for the past 2 years which caused my Father-in-laws garden walls to rise out of the ground due to the deep frost penetration are a result of the unusual climatic conditions caused by global warming - HO HO HO Happy Christmas. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Firedrake says...

Good point about tides, goatman. The Severn; Humber/Ouse/Trent and Thames systems have some of the biggest tidal ranges in the world. You only have to stand on Selby Toll Bridge during an eight knot "Spring" to appreciate the forces involved!
Good point about tides, goatman. The Severn; Humber/Ouse/Trent and Thames systems have some of the biggest tidal ranges in the world. You only have to stand on Selby Toll Bridge during an eight knot "Spring" to appreciate the forces involved! Firedrake
  • Score: 0

2:16pm Mon 10 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

Agreed but what do we get? Windmills!
Also, there has been no global warming since 1997 and the data for the past two years show temperatures falling.
The link with man made CO2 is a myth.
Agreed but what do we get? Windmills! Also, there has been no global warming since 1997 and the data for the past two years show temperatures falling. The link with man made CO2 is a myth. ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

3:32am Tue 11 Dec 12

Magicman! says...

Hydroelectric is the way to go actually.

Think of how many dams, reservoirs, or wiers we have which could be tapped to produce electricity. Plus you could build 'flood pipes' with turbines fitted so when the rivers flood the excess water is diverted through these pipes and then generates more electricity when more people need it. The last time we had a proper drought where streams and smaller rivers stopped in the north was in 1995 - even the Lake DIstrict was affected as Thirlmere had shrunk to a third its normal size and a lot of smaller rivers had dried up..... nearly 20 years have passed since then and river continue to flow, they don't flow better one day and not the next like wind power, nor do they flow at a level that can't be used for a few months every year like with solar power where the sun doesn't get high enough in the winter....

Hydroelectric.
Hydroelectric is the way to go actually. Think of how many dams, reservoirs, or wiers we have which could be tapped to produce electricity. Plus you could build 'flood pipes' with turbines fitted so when the rivers flood the excess water is diverted through these pipes and then generates more electricity when more people need it. The last time we had a proper drought where streams and smaller rivers stopped in the north was in 1995 - even the Lake DIstrict was affected as Thirlmere had shrunk to a third its normal size and a lot of smaller rivers had dried up..... nearly 20 years have passed since then and river continue to flow, they don't flow better one day and not the next like wind power, nor do they flow at a level that can't be used for a few months every year like with solar power where the sun doesn't get high enough in the winter.... Hydroelectric. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Tue 11 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

Totally agree magicman. We buy Norway's North Sea gas because they invested in hydro electricity many years ago. If we had done that and just used the gas for heating there would have been gas for hundreds of years.
We have a second chance of that with our shale gas.
Why not generate electricity with hydro, coal and a bit of nuclear. This would mean energy security and lower bills.
Somehow I think the carbon phobics will see it all wasted at a cost to industry and residents.
Totally agree magicman. We buy Norway's North Sea gas because they invested in hydro electricity many years ago. If we had done that and just used the gas for heating there would have been gas for hundreds of years. We have a second chance of that with our shale gas. Why not generate electricity with hydro, coal and a bit of nuclear. This would mean energy security and lower bills. Somehow I think the carbon phobics will see it all wasted at a cost to industry and residents. ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Tue 11 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

"carbon phobics"

Really?
"carbon phobics" Really? Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree