[Closed] Tidal Power - the future?

there is no doubt at all that large scale commercial tidal is going ahead

there is plenty of doubt in the industry.

but I'll keep selling them kit until the funding plug gets pulled...

there is plenty of doubt in the industry.

but I'll keep selling them kit until the funding plug gets pulled...

Not from the side I'm looking from, some spectacular research inputs to it and several businesses currently growing from it around here, that and wave.

The biggest hurdle is the jump to commercial scale.

plenty of startups with brilliant, innovative ideas, results and field trials have withered because they haven't been able to secure the investment to make that jump.

oh, that and survivability. did I mention that?

Survivabilty is the issue - but that one survived the winter in place and here are models of it that have been running for many years without trouble

this is the start of the jump to commencial scale the political will is there - and so is the money

Not from the side I'm looking from, some spectacular research inputs to it and several businesses currently growing from it around here, that and wave.

Same here.

From what I've seen the funding gap has been bridged from Government technology demonstration to PLC full-scale demonstration (with a good dollop of consolidation in the market to boot). The key next step is for Government to get its ducks in a row and sell/license sites and the land-based infrastructure which will then allow the manufacturers to sell product and service contracts to the field operators. After that (with a good deal of optimism) it's self sustaining.

Wave power - I have another friend engineering a sea-snake type device. Less convinced about that TBH.....

this is the start of the jump to commencial scale the political [s]will[/s] backhanders necessary for this to replace lost jobs in Aberdeen is there

The key next step is for Government to get its ducks in a row and sell/license sites

Done already - the contracts are signed for much of it

Wave power - I have another friend engineering a sea-snake type device. Less convinced about that TBH..

My biggest issue is with energy security. That critical, many of the other arguments have very little impact.

Tidal is viable its proven techology just need some investment.

Nuclear is the same, exept the fuel is running out. And the more countries who move to it the less thee will be, we do not have any fuel in the UK.

Wind is not viable as it cannot be relied on.

Coal is viable we have about 100 years worth.

Oil is vaialble but its better used to make petrol and pastic as they give a higher return. We have about 40 year worth.

I have always advocated tidal for Scotland. As a Civil Engineer i hated to see all those wind project come into the office as i knew it was really a red herring.

Solar has a small merit in reducing the base load, but its small amounts, enough to heat your water in the winter at best.

pelarmis? their offices used to be under my flat and I can see their factory from my window

That trumps any relevant qualification or experience right there. TJ wins.

That trumps any relevant qualification or experience right there. TJ wins.

\o/

Edited

here you go TJ.

you should apply...

[url] http://www.pelamiswave.com/operations-engineer [/url]

My biggest issue is with energy security

With complete disregard to the environment. Oh - 100 years for coal doesn't make that a viable answer for our future energy needs.

come on Zokes - this is the key drawback to nuclear but one you ignore.

Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

Oh - 100 years for coal doesn't make that a viable answer for our future energy needs

100 years is better than nothing, and that's 100 years to find (a) viable alternative(s).

Better reinstated the edited post. then

stevewhyte - Member

Nuclear is the same, exept the fuel is running out. And the more countries who move to it the less thee will be, we do not have any fuel in the UK.

You have never been able to answer this zokes on any thread. I have read them You simply ignore this major drawback as you know there is no answer to it.

100 years is better than nothing, and that's 100 years to find (a) viable alternative(s).

Cool. Nuclear it is then...

Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

Damn I feel like I missed something really really importnant now 😳

I understand there's some argument about whether or not nuclear fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

I understand there's some argument about whether or not fossil fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

There are far more alternatives than tidal power.

I understand there's some argument [s]about whether or not fossil fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.[/s]

You have never been able to answer this zokes on any thread. I have read them You simply ignore this major drawback as you know there is no answer to it.

NO PLEASE GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOO

It has been done you choose to ignore it. It is not as conclusive as you suggest. [b]No one can answer anything to your satisfaction when you put the TJ head of stubborness on NO ONE[/b]

* PS you usually say this for storage rather than supply. Because you dont like or agree with the answers this does not mean it has not been answered [ it means you dont like /agree with the answer] but I will leave that dance to the dedicated as you explain why your logic has bestested all before it

[img] [/img]

but I will leave that dance to the dedicated a syou explain why your logic has bestested all before it

He already has done. A wave power company used to live in the same building as him. This seems to trump anything us mere mortals with relevant qualifications or industry experience can muster.

I love TJ logic 🙂

Junkyard -Not at all. Its not a question of me not liking the answer.

It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left and that is as a small % of the worlds energy usage.

It's tedious chaps - especially TJ and Zokes (yes Zokes - I blame TJ for invoking your name on this one, but please don't play the game).

Here we go - personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

Sorry Druidh.

I'm anti-nuke but everything I've read suggests that there is no shortage of fissionable material, especially given emerging technologies.

TandemJeremy - Member
Here we go - personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

Here we go - personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

Have a look at the top of Pg2 - I think you'll find that's the first mention of my name anywhere on this thread. And lo and behold, it's an [i]ad hominem[/i] attack by your good self.

Druidh - the nuclear industries own people say around 40 years of known fuel at current usage - this is the issue.

Zokes - that was a simple prediction - I do not make any attack on you there and lo and behold I was right in my prediction.

TJ:

Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

Then read these posts in this thread:

molgrips - Member

I understand there's some argument about whether or not nuclear fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

Junkyard - Member

NO PLEASE GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOO

It has been done you choose to ignore it. It is not as conclusive as you suggest. No one can answer anything to your satisfaction when you put the TJ head of stubborness on NO ONE

So then - yo still have no answer to this Zokes. I'll leave it at that with the major flaw in your pro nuclear evangelisicm exposed.

By the nuclear industries own figures there is a few decades of fuel available at current usage rates. Thus nuclear can never be more than a bit part player in the worlds energy consumption

Zokes - that was a simple prediction - I do not make any attack on you there and lo and behold I was right in my prediction.

Well, instead of bringing what was quite an interesting thread down to the predictable dirge with your negative use - deliberately trolling with a loaded statement, why didn't you just exalt the virtues of tidal turbines? Like I did?

It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left

Playing the game now but; where do you get that information from? I don't think that you can just make a statement like that with no peer approved study or even peer reviewed study to back it up.

It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left

I wonder what the ROI on a nuclear power plant is and over what time period? And if the companies that build them are aware of the limited fuel supplies?

TandemJeremy - Member
So then - yo still have no answer to this Zokes. I'll leave it at that with the major flaw in your pro nuclear evangelisicm exposed.

Where have I been evangelical about anything on this thread, apart from the need to build renewables?

I've even praised your logic, and you're still not happy!

Thorium.

Relatively abundant. More efficient than Uranium. Less waste. Shorter half-life (as radioactive as ash after 500 years). Can't be made into bombs.

druidh - Member
Thorium.
Abundant. More efficient than Uranium. less waste. Shorter half-life. Can't be made into bombs.

Unproved tech, can't be done, includes the worrd [b][i][u]NUCLEAR[/u][/i][/b] 😉

C'mon now, I think we know how this works!

druidh - Member

Thorium.
Abundant. More efficient than Uranium. less waste. Shorter half-life. Can't be made into bombs.

Be great if it works and well worth the research into it. Unproven and experimental as yet.

TandemJeremy - Member

Tidal Power

Be great if it works and well worth the research into it. Unproven and experimental as yet.

PMSL!!! 😆

[img] [/img]

includes the worrd NUCLEAR

~Again you try to portray me as a luddite scared of nuclear when actually that is not my position.

I know you have to do this as I have exposed the massive flaws in your pro nuclear attitude but it really is tiresome.

Oh good, a (potentially interesting) thread about tidal power than gets turned into a nuclear debate by the usual retards - joy!

~Again you try to portray me as a luddite scared of nuclear when actually that is not my position.

Find your name in that post.

I don't think you'll find you were mentioned. But that you associated yourself with it speaks volumes...

I have exposed the massive flaws in your pro nuclear attitude but it really is tiresome.

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/tidal-power-the-future/page/3#post-3802695 ]Try reading[/url]

TJ JUST STOP

I can feel the banhammer descending on me so I have to walk away.

Sorry for the disruption on the thread.

Zokes - I have clearly exposed massive flaws in your pro nuclear stance and you simply refuse to answer them preferring to mock and belittle showing the paucity of your arguemnt

I don't think you'll find you were mentioned. But that you associated yourself with it speaks volumes...

zokes, you're bordering on trolling now. I that's the polite way of putting it.

Zokes - I have clearly exposed massive flaws in your pro nuclear stance and you simply refuse to answer them preferring to mock and belittle showing the paucity of your arguemnt

I reiterate: [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/tidal-power-the-future/page/3#post-3802695 ]Try reading[/url]

If you think that's evangelistic of nuclear, then you need your head seeing to.