Thread: Nuclear power
View Single Post
Old 19-01-2005, 17:53   #33
Pierre
cf.mega poster
 
Pierre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: floating in the ether
Posts: 13,347
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Nuclear power

Quote:
Originally Posted by kronas
what about hydro electricty ?
As mentioned not enough fast rivers or Dams with with a large enough bank of water.

There are several "fast response" hydro power station like the one in Dinorwic in Snowdonia. These instantly respond to large sudden demand such as everybody putting the kettle on during the ad-break in a Coronation St special, but they can only maintain the power for a few hours at most.

Hydro stations such as the Hoover dam in the USA have massive lakes behind them (Lake Eerie) so they can maintain constant flows even in times of low rainfall.

The best eco-friendly power available to us is wind power. We should be building hundreds of massive offshore wind farms.

But you always get the NIMBY crowd objecting.
__________________
The wheel's still turning but the hamsters dead.
Pierre is offline   Reply With Quote