Steven P

If we had a predictable stable baseload then yes, the power grid could probably cope... if the generation is where it is located currently... but to transition away from an oil based system and ahead of the 30 years for new nuclear builds then the generation is going to be distributed where the power is.. and to cope the creaky distribution network needs - and indeed is being - upgraded to cope.. or we put in battery storage at the point of generation to easy the supply side of things. Been a while since I did any course on transmission and distribution, they were concerned with AC, that's what was being installed at the time. HVDC is the flavour of the month for long distances though, must be a technical improvement over AC, I was assuming losses would be less - a bit more in the infrastructure costs but winning with losses

Tidal is tricky - OK we have a large coast but it is also a bit aggressive to infrastructure (particularly moving parts). Get the reliability in there and we are good to go, north of Scotland has a lot of potential. There is an option for tidal on some rivers in the West like the Severn and Mersey - away from the actual coast and a bit more protected. Whatever the UK does though, the network is creaking a bit and needs upgrading, new generation and distribution network. Might upset a few NIMBYs along the way (flip side, the redundant power stations and pylons that are taken down for example will make an equal and opposite amount of happy people to those getting narky). Same as in the US, their network isn't far off rolling blackouts either - only takes a small nudge to create problems, old systems and networks that need 21st century designs and distribution to where the power is needed now (and not 70 years ago). Trumps January actions have in the background been very interested in power (and I don't mean political power) - Argentina with Musks chainsaw, Ukraine with their oil and Lithium and Greenland potential for oil and rare minerals.

Likewise, depends what I get on the drive, I'll cut the thinner bits down (generally 1") to 3 or 4" lengths, great firewood, burns quick and hot s you'd expect for the cold days, have to fill the fire more often as you'd expect but it does go well.... reminds me, when I get the barrow fixed, got most of a tree to do that to. (I don't have a branch logger, tend to use the biggest Fiskars loppers, far quicker than the axe I was using before)

25kW.... That is the power when the boiler is on max, of course there will be discrimination in the system (20 million houses arn't all turning on the bath at the same time). Heat pump heating again lowers the demand from a boiler too - the 25KW copes with heating and hot water. So it isn't quite as bad as that. 10KW is typical for a shower. However there are peak demands on the system, but to make the most and cost effective use of the 'free' energy sources - free wind, free sun (after construction costs) we do need to shift that way. The network controllers can then generate with the cheapest / best fuel source according to the time of day and what is out there. As it stands if we want hot water (as a country) the gas boiler goes on, no choice in the fuel, cannot switch "it is windy, use the electric boiler instead". Heat pumps... and hot water... since it is sunny in the day, peak solar production... we can cut back on overnight storage heating a bit and heat on demand... but needs an overhaul of domestic pricing systems to do that. It is no small task the world faces, the populations mindset also needs to think electric.

With any luck the world can distract Trump long enough so he doesn't do stupid things like withdraw from NATO (divided we fall and all that)

Argentina you say? With massive oil reserves locked out by a trade embargo to the US, suddenly becoming friends with Trump and Musk just at the time when Trump is needed an influx of cheap oil to reduce costs ( cents per gallon on the forecourt is a good visual of lowering prices). That is a massive coincidence.

Yes, but modern UK planning and NIMBYs, nuclear power takes about a million years of local planning enquiries and objections. Think we all accept that reducing our reliance on overseas oil and gas is a good goal, and that North Sea oil and gas has a shortening limited lifespan. I know I was flippant about the meteor hitting us, but that would also just about coincide with a new nuclear plant if we pushed really really hard. Think we need to be working on that sooner rather than our kids having an "Oh Shit" moment when the gas and lights run out. You won't like this bit but to utilise the green energy best, we need a transition to an electrical based society rather than a gas / oil based society - and that is going to mean electric boilers, heat pumps, cars and an equalisation of the tax on domestic energy (electricity in the UK (since this is POTUS thread, just thought I'd qualify that) is taxed at a higher rate than gas). Localised energy storage where appropriate (BESS systems or domestic 10-15kwh batteries). As for local solar and wind, true, over the complete country a national strategy, distribution network, storage and control equalises differences to ensure an efficient system. That does mean we need to upgrade the infrastructure to move electrical power from generation to supply, it is a price I think we need to pay to help society transition and future proof for our children and theirs. Again better do it now rather than wait for the rest of the worlds 'Oh Shit' moment and their repowering driving the raw material prices higher still. And where does this leave Trump (the current POTUS).... the US has about 5 years of proven oil and gas reserves - excluding shale gas which has an unproven quantity (could be a lot and a lot) - it is there and no one knows exactly how much, so Trump is OK, his oil paymasters will keep the dollars rolling in with shale gas... but like some in the UK and Europe, burying his head in the (shale) sand is not going to do his country any favours in the long term. And then to link up a few threads, The Ukraine has large gas deposits, Greenland is suspected to have some but both have minerals that can be used to power the green energy future (batteries and so on). Might explain some of Trumps interest* in both countries - carving up the Ukraine gas reserves, and the potential from Greenland. Looking to the Iraq war, the US gained access to a lot of oil and gas from Kuwait off the back of that, going to defend a country and being paid in cheap oil is a proven strategy for the US. Edity * : When I say Trump, I really mean his advisors, I suspect he doesn't have the knowledge, interest or intellect to work out what his country needs, but some of the people he employs do.

Not forgetting that Trump had a cosy behind closed doors one on one chat with Putin, often considered that Putin knows more about Trump than Trump knows about Putin, but also Trump can be read like a book a lot of the time. Says what he is thinking with no filters, priceless if you want to do a deal with him. I know this won't be a mega popular idea, but said it before, the UK needs energy security - green energy is fastest to bring online, nuclear as a base load takes 25+ year (needs starting now), and taking away our reliance of foreign supplied oil and gas - considering that the foreign oil is controlled by the more interesting countries and leaders (Putin and Trump included there), and the known supplies are running down (could be a close thing, oil runs out or a meteor strike in 2032)

As David sys, split first is usually the best bet with most woods. Drying in nets is asking for trouble - need an airflow, the used boxes cold be OK - perhaps fill each one only half depth. For sticks I have a slatted box outside that does the trick,

Sorry Gareth, despite having polar opposite political views I can normally rely on you to form a sentence and an eloquent argument (even when you are so very, very wrong). You're going down a slippery slope of just firing out insults to the detriment of the threads. Others have done that, and still do that, and don't get my respect for it either.

FYI it was so biggly hurty that I had to threaten the doctor with eviction so he'd write the proper words to the solder man. I think the pain was making me threaten the doctor more than usual. He learnt though and in later life he has declared me fit, in fact probably the fittest man he has ever seen, much fitter than many 78 year olds, cognivitely up there, barely senile at all.

I had a sore foot.

Without making a political point, there are few right wing comedians out there at all, it doesn't lend itself to humour. Bashing individuals works regardless of political stance and deserved too in many cases. Never rated Ben Elton, not funny, Eddie Izzard is hit and miss.

You get out what you put in, Put in a piss take and that is what you will get as a response, though the above proper advice is sound for those that follow you.

Daily Starmer!! Brilliant.

Yes, but in the future you know we'll all just log onto the internet and watch mind numbing pap with that power in our laptops "we could go to the moon with less power than what is in our phone" "why don't you" "Because I am watching cats hit other cats in funny ways" Might be able to suggest Husky vs Stihl... but I doubt it

Not yet, but if I was guessing I'd be saying their last incarnation got flushed down the WC

It would also be a recycled car tyre which I suspect much more durable. (I started resoling some trainers with a bike tyre, then life got in the way so paused that project - it was a 'can it be done' job)

Putin has had a few body doubles in his time, not all assassins do their homework well.

"To go to war", only the Russians went to war, The Ukraine didn't go anywhere outside their borders, they were invaded and defended themselves - as any country would and do. "MISSING" money - is that the 100 billion dollars that haven't reached The Ukraine... because they are being spent in the US... giving wages to US citizens to manufacture goods (arms and so on) to send there? That is well documented as accounted for Approval rating, in 2019 (Before Covid which warped things) Trump had a disapproval rating of about 55% Refuses to have elections.. I suspect that there is another reason why The Ukraine has not had elections last year when they were due Millions being killed - best reports suggest about 60,000 Ukrainians have been killed so with Trumps Russia hotline they have lost at least 1,900,000 (millions is more than 1 million of course).. or that 'Millions' is not correct.

4m 'hit and miss' fence at the weekend, reusing the boards with new posts (3"), cross members and top rail and a couple of new boards, postcrete £120 for supplies. Labour costs were endless tea, biscuits, dinner B&B (but it was for mum).

Not on a moral high ground, looking pragmatically, 3 years ago if the deal was "Ukraine give Russia the Donbas region and they will stop fighting for now" as you suggest... would that deal actually have been agreed and signed off? No moral high ground to say at the time that would not happen, not a deal that would ever be given credibility. If that deal was not possible - at the time - and I think we all know that The Ukraine would never have agreed to that - then with all of Trumps superior world political knowledge - what was the deal he is thinking that could have been done.

Going back to where we were this morning, Trump is saying to The Ukraine that they should have done a deal 3 years ago. The deal you are thinking of was not acceptable to the Ukraine 3 years ago, and in fact while Russia was making advances into the country they were not looking for a deal either - brute force tactics from them. So Trump saying "You should have done a deal 3 years ago" are just empty words. I'll fire it back to you, do you think that 3 years ago The Ukraine would have settled to hand over the Donbas region? Do you think that was the deal to be done?

Ahh so the aggressor, Russia wins, the victim, Ukraine looses? Do you think that is acceptable to all sides and it is a deal that would have been achievable 3 years ago when Russia was controlling much more land... that would appease them so they don't take any more, ever. I don't. Pretty much, "Roll over Ukraine, surrender" and all is good in the world?

You're distracting yourself from my musings though, what kind of deal would Trump be suggesting that could have been done 3 years ago that would be acceptable to both sides? Let's assume we take out the EU, NATO and Afghanistan (?) from the equation, Ukraine phones up Russia "Lets do a deal, you feck off out of Ukraine and Russia ..... ? " - that last part I am struggling with, a deal acceptable to both sides.