[jambutty]

The Boffins tell us that storms like the most recent one are likely to be even more frequent in the foreseeable future than they are now and probably more ferocious.

The government is continually bleating about reducing the UK’s ‘Carbon Footprint’.

In order to do so we are encouraged by the Government to at least conserve electrical energy. It has been suggested that the way to do so is to refrain from keeping various appliances on ‘stand by’ and to use the new low energy light bulbs. My research suggests that these low energy bulbs cost about 10 times what a normal hot filament bulb costs, but they are supposed to last more than ten times longer. However the downside is that a low energy bulb does not give off quite as much light as a hot filament bulb. Turning the heating thermostat down by just one degree will not only reduce the fuel used but also the cost.

It has become evident that the UK cannot supply all its energy needs. Particularly with gas and that we are now at the mercy of foreign powers to keep our factories (what few are left), our offices and homes heated and lit.

Our electrical energy is supplied from gas and oil fired power stations, nuclear stations and a tiny proportion from Wind Farms. Proposals are in place to build even more Wind Farms off shore. As far as I know we do not have any hydroelectric power stations in the UK. We are sat on a minimum of 400 years supply of coal. Technology is available to burn coal without adding too much carbon to the atmosphere if any at all.

If, and the scientific opinion is when, global warming does raise the sea levels significantly, off shore wind farms will be in deep water. In that event I suspect that most will become inoperable. Storm force winds are not good for wind turbines and days of calm make them just useless chunks of metal. There is also the question of the energy cost in manufacturing one wind turbine and how many hears it would take for that wind turbine to be in energy profit, so to speak. I believe that the figure is 20 years and by then the turbine is nearing the end of its economical life. Wind turbines are a total waste of time, energy and money. I’m not saying that because I wouldn’t want one in the field across from my flat, but because it is a fact. If a wind turbine were much more energy efficient from manufacture to its demise the location of one near where I live wouldn’t bother me one iota. Most, if not all, nuclear power stations have been built close to the shore. Just a few feet rise in sea levels will drown those plants.

The energy industry is geared to supply our needs as they are now and if drastic reductions in demand are made, the income for the energy industry will be less and thus the profits and of course share holders will be crying poverty. So that industry would not be happy if we used less energy. Nor would the government because there would be less money to tax.

One of the effects of the recent storm was that, apart from some structural damage to bricks and mortar property and large lorries being blown over, some power lines were brought down. Some were power lines that supplied electricity to homes and places of work and some that supplied the power to our main line electric trains.

With no power available the trains got stranded and couldn’t move an inch. Nor could the carriages be heated so that the passengers didn’t suffer from the cold. It was reported that passengers were supplied with blankets to try and keep warm until the time that power was restored or they were rescued. The trains were eventually moved to the nearest station when a Diesel engine was brought in to tow them. But that was after a couple of hours of cold waiting.

If nuclear fusion ever becomes a practical reality our electricity problems will be solved but that is either just a pipe dream or a long, long way off. Then again the break through could come about tomorrow. Nah! Unlikely!

Our energy problems could be tackled in three ways.
Hydroelectric schemes.
Expensive to build but long lasting and only dependant on water coming down the river. The rivers in turn are dependant on water seeping down from the hills and underground springs and the hills get their water from the rain that falls. The UK isn’t exactly a dry country and even if global warming takes a hold it is unlikely to affect our rainfall, especially in the north of the country and Scotland. Some land would have to be flooded but you cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.

De-electrify the railways.
Thus saving massive amounts of electricity. Replace the electric locomotives with bio fuelled Diesel locomotives. They may not be able to travel at upwards of 100 mph but do we really want to dash around the country at high speed? Is it really necessary to get to your destination in 3 hours rather than 3½ hours? By reducing the demand on power stations some could be closed down, thus reducing our need to import so much gas and oil. There is another plus to de-electrifying the railways and that is that with no live third rail and overhead power lines trespassers and workers would not get electrocuted. Electrification of underground railways would have to remain. Our farmers, many of whom are struggling to make a living, could diversify into growing crops from which the bio fuel is produced instead of leaving fields fallow.

Transfer the bulk of freight to the railways.
With freight depots in cities and major towns. If Eurostar can take large lorries to France or Belgium then a similar type of train can take freight lorries from depot to depot around the country. Just imagine, a lorry leaves a factory in Portsmouth, boards a freight train, disembarks in Glasgow and drives to its final destination. In fact just the trailer could be boarded and the driver and tractor could return to their point of departure possibly to do a local delivery or collect another trailer. At the other end, depot tractors could off load the trailers and dump them on a trailer park to await the arrival of the recipient tractor. The saving in road miles and fuel not forgetting man/woman hours would be enormous. Another plus would be fewer lorries on the motorways, thus making them less congested. If sea freight can be so well organised as it is with containers then surely something similar could be done for inland freight.

My suggestions could be implemented if the will to do so was there. But there are too many Nimbys who would block hydroelectric schemes and too many whingers making opposing noises.

Instead of people spouting, “no it can’t be done” and voicing objects it would be nice if they changed their attitudes and thought, “I wonder HOW it can be done?”