EMF

[openspaceman]

2 hours ago, sime42 said:

I don't know either but I'd guess the closer to the equator the better. The sunlight being strongest there. If that's true then great, we can put all the solar panels in and around London!

 

 

Output drops as temperature rises so my panels are most productive from April till mid summer.

 

It looks like the best way to combine solar panels and agriculture  other than for crops that like shade is to mount them vertically.

Edited June 28 by openspaceman
predictive txt :-(

[Steven P]

For crop and animal production with a solar farm you'll loose something like 20%? I can't remember the exact figure but the field is still productive - in fact can be preferential to graze animals on the field to keep the grass and shrubs down. The land owner gets about £1000? an acre rent. So for farm land, it can be economically OK for farmers to rent the space - and can make a side income with livestock too.

 

For the north of Scotland where income streams might be limited I can see the attraction to the land owners. That money will filter back to the local economy - farmer can spend more, a local work force employed to maintain and operate the site and local hotels and accommodation for construction and any big maintenance teams.

 

However.... we should also be combining new builds - houses, warehouses, offices - with solar (and I think new build houses should have 150% of their electrical needs as solar panels)

[Johnsond]

5 hours ago, scbk said:

I don't know if the latitude thing is good or bad for solar? Long summer days, but about 6hrs of daylight in midwinter?

Thurso in winter is not I’d think the ideal place for a solar panel set up. 

[Johnsond]

First bit of correspondence in ten months from SSEN. Basically a crock of shit full of corporate waffle and inaccuracies. 

[GarethM]

Why would you put a hydrophilic coating on an exposed power line, other than increasing the costs and turning it into a nonslip coating.

 

Mond boggles at more corporate BS spin.

It'll be wind turbines on the top of the ground cable or turning them into billboards for flying aircraft, visit the distillery or SSE cares about your money.

[Johnsond]

9 minutes ago, GarethM said:

Why would you put a hydrophilic coating on an exposed power line, other than increasing the costs and turning it into a nonslip coating.

 

Mond boggles at more corporate BS spin.

It'll be wind turbines on the top of the ground cable or turning them into billboards for flying aircraft, visit the distillery or SSE cares about your money.

Gareth as I’ve said before I still have the original consultation paperwork where they assured “ no changes to noise levels ” , now they are swaying to acceptable etc etc. I might find the address of the CEO and get a couple of marshal amps in the Ranger and play some white noise outside his house nonstop, I somehow think it would be dealt with quicker than what we are experiencing up here. But as you have seen from the reaction of some on here, they have the gullible fooled into believing they are doing it for net zero and to save the planet. 

[GarethM]

We both know it's all BS and there's no real way to stop it from happening.

 

It was just the corporate BS about a coating of a bare conductor in an effort to reduce noise, it's a coating they use on dehumidifier coils not each wire of a power cable.

 

Additional noise would probably be down to a lack of separation distance as the wind noise won't change unless the size is increasing?.

 

Vague recollections of magnetic fields distances between cables etc.

Edited June 28 by GarethM

[Steven P]

On 28/06/2024 at 17:17, GarethM said:

Why would you put a hydrophilic coating on an exposed power line, other than increasing the costs and turning it into a nonslip coating.

 

Hydrophilic coating - so that the lines don't get wet and so reduces arcing which is the noise you hear in the wet. Expensive to do but should make them quieter near houses - the noise is only really noticeable for about 50m tops so this will be applied to short sections, the increase in costs won't be that much for the full project costs.

 

I lived near power lines growing up and never noticed much noise from wind - only electrical discharge

Edited June 30 by Steven P

[Steven P]

On 28/06/2024 at 17:31, Johnsond said:

But as you have seen from the reaction of some on here, they have the gullible fooled into believing they are doing it for net zero and to save the planet. 

 

Ahhh, not guilty in this case, it is more the energy security from energy supplies from the unstable nations in the next 30 years and after that actual electricity for the children and grand children that worries me... if we don't act now then we will be at the mercy of those that do as the oil runs down

[GarethM]

7 hours ago, Steven P said:

 

Ahhh, not guilty in this case, it is more the energy security from energy supplies from the unstable nations in the next 30 years and after that actual electricity for the children and grand children that worries me... if we don't act now then we will be at the mercy of those that do as the oil runs down

Problem is we need more reliable base load not renewables, plus not also via another country regardless of how friendly they are at the moment as when they get cold it'll be turned off.

 

Batteries are not the answer as you've effectively argued we need even more electric!.