NoTail Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 4 minutes ago, Cambon said: Actually, I have had over twenty years experience, since I first went to Cornwall. I actually like the way those ones on the moores look as you drive through. But they are not in a residential area. Itis very simple. MU propose wiping out one of our carbon sinks to install windmills that will not do what we are promised, for a price that will make Liverpool look like a bargain! I am not against wind power. Earystane can not happen. It is completely ridiculous! I claim no expertise in this but are you suggesting that MU is deliberately trying to waste money on a project that can't work? Why would they do that? We know that experts are involved in approving this project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 (edited) 50 minutes ago, NoTail said: I claim no expertise in this but are you suggesting that MU is deliberately trying to waste money on a project that can't work? Why would they do that? We know that experts are involved in approving this project. Expert were involved in IRIS. Experts were involved in Liverpool. MU claim circa £40M for these windmills. That will not even pay for the items and delivery, not even considering installation. Honestly! Take a drive from Gawnes folly up towards Round Table. Cables criss cross the roads. One is a high voltage power line. Look at Earystane itself. No power grid. An enormous transformer at the least will be required to transmit anything. IT IS A COMPLETE NONE STARTER. Edited June 8 by Cambon 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 19 hours ago, Cambon said: Expert were involved in IRIS. Experts were involved in Liverpool. MU claim circa £40M for these windmills. That will not even pay for the items and delivery, not even considering installation. Honestly! Take a drive from Gawnes folly up towards Round Table. Cables criss cross the roads. One is a high voltage power line. Look at Earystane itself. No power grid. An enormous transformer at the least will be required to transmit anything. IT IS A COMPLETE NONE STARTER. You posts are full of more untruths and inconsistencies. 1. The transformers are on the turbine. There is no need for more. 2. You suggest more remote locations would be better but they they would need more cables. 3. You quote examples of overspend that have no similarity to this project. Desperate. You are clearly opined on the matter due to these being close to you. But you would be happy for them to be closer to others. Your views and statements are totally subjective and have no objectivity. You like wind farms....so long as they are not near you. It's already started BTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Lamb Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Stu Peters said: This man is not a scientist, but of those who are, NASA estimates 97% hold views opposed to his. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) Not a climate change nut, but it takes a bit more than taking isolated tables without the rest of the anaylsis and context from substantive reports to convince me. * However, BP are advertising that they will use gas as a way to help the transition to more sustainable sources of energy. That is the way we should be going, not in the vanguard but able to cherry pick the bits that work. What has happened with Crogga? * I would like to be convinced, BTW. Edited June 9 by Gladys 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Harry Lamb said: This man is not a scientist, but of those who are, NASA estimates 97% hold views opposed to his. Paul Burgess B.Sc, MS.C, a retired Chartered Water Resources Engineer was in charge of water resource planning for large sections of the UK and sat on national UK committees. Before he retired he represented the whole of the country of Wales where he was responsible for planning water supply, flood protection, reservoirs, hydrological and weather monitoring. He built the first mathematical model of the climate back in 1971. Retiring early from the water industry, Paul set up his own business. In the early 2000’s, Paul became aware of the growing corruption of science by the climate alarmists and then started making videos to counter the alarmism. He now has over 80 videos on the subject. He gives talks all over the UK all at his own expense in order to further the cause he feels so passionate about. He’s giving a talk on 20th June at 7.30pm at the Manx Legion and welcomes questions from and debate with those who support Net Zero. Edited June 9 by Stu Peters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/09/new-zealand-brings-back-oil-drilling-amid-fears-of-blackout/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiVibes Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 2 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: Paul Burgess B.Sc, MS.C, a retired Chartered Water Resources Engineer was in charge of water resource planning for large sections of the UK and sat on national UK committees. Before he retired he represented the whole of the country of Wales where he was responsible for planning water supply, flood protection, reservoirs, hydrological and weather monitoring. He built the first mathematical model of the climate back in 1971. Retiring early from the water industry, Paul set up his own business. In the early 2000’s, Paul became aware of the growing corruption of science by the climate alarmists and then started making videos to counter the alarmism. He now has over 80 videos on the subject. He gives talks all over the UK all at his own expense in order to further the cause he feels so passionate about. So no mention of him being a scientist thank for confirming. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 minute ago, HiVibes said: So no mention of him being a scientist thank for confirming. Ah yes, ignore the inconvenient truth of his clear expertise and seek to deflect. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiVibes Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Just now, Stu Peters said: Ah yes, ignore the inconvenient truth of his clear expertise and seek to deflect. No expertise in electricity production, not a scientist, probably drives a taxi by the look of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 59 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: Ah yes, ignore the inconvenient truth of his clear expertise and seek to deflect. Stu. He is a deluded fool. Anyone who makes these claims is deluded. He is not an expert on climate. Water resource engineering is only very loosely related to climatology. A water resource engineer will take the output of climate change experts and plan accordingly. You cannot be a Jack of all trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 hour ago, HiVibes said: So no mention of him being a scientist thank for confirming. A BSc is a bachelor of Science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Deluded in some cases, but he does make some very valid points as to the costs involved. The cost issues shouldn't be overlooked by either side of the 'for or against' argument on climate change. Science has won the argument, so we all know the direction we are heading whatever your view. But we currently will have 2 sets of infrastructure to purchase and maintain, so we need to optimise these costs, maybe not on a new power station in the future but, say, with more reliance on an interconnector. Even scientists can't make the wind blow on a calm day. We are all aware of the financial consequences of the construction of the current power station, and it looks to me like the island will be facing immense costs if both infrastructures are built and maintained. In 30 years those costs won't be able to be avoided by consumers choosing gas or oil instead. And if prices have been locked in at 4 times the current rate with wind providers for the next 20 years I can see us paying 6 times what the UK are currently paying. So we need to get our thinking caps on as to what the future should really be for the island...and what all these options will look like in terms of cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 4 minutes ago, NoTail said: A BSc is a bachelor of Science. lol. That makes me a scientist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.