11 February 2017

Intermittent Electricity From UK Solar PV Costs 3.78X More Than Nuclear !

There isn't a decent sized solar farm in the UK where the information is available on both cost and electricity generated.

Turn to France and we've got it all:
Source 1      Source 2

Calculating the Output of a 300 MW Plant in the UK: 

2012: 1,736 MW delivered 1,328 GWh
So 300 MW would deliver 229.5 GWh

2013: 2,822 MW delivered 2,015 GWh
So 300 MW would deliver 214.2 GWh

2014: 5,228 MW delivered 3,931 GWh
So 300 MW would deliver 225.6 GWh

  2015: 8,915 MW delivered 7,556 GWh
So 300 MW would deliver 254.3 GWh
Statistics Section - Table
Average of 229.5 + 214.2 + 225.6 + 254.3
 = 230.9 GWh/year

Reasonable Life Expectancy of a Solar Array to fall to 80% efficiency - 30 years     Source

The average over 30 years of delivery would be 90% of 
the 230.9 average value: 230.9 x 0.9 = 207.8 GWh/year

Delivery over 30 year Life Expectancy = 6.234 TWh

Exchange Rate 2014: GBP/USD - 1.6$ to the £     Source

So 2014 cost of 300 MW UK Plant = £281.25 million
Comparative Data: Hinkley Point C Nuclear Power Plant

Source 1 - Page 15          Source 2

Delivery over 60 year Life Expectancy = 1,513.7 TWh

1,513.7 ÷ 6.234 = 242.8
242 Cestas-sized Solar Parks would have to be built
to deliver the same amount of electricity !

242 x 281,250,000 = 68,062,500,000
242 Cestas-sized Solar Parks would cost £68 billion !

£68 billion ÷ £18 billion = 3.78

For the same capital expenditure nuclear power will deliver nearly 
4X more 24/7 electricity 
than the intermittent electricity delivered by Solar Parks
242 x 2.5 = 605
242 Solar Parks would cover 605 square kilometres.

Solar Parks just about covering the 
Pembrokeshire Coast National Park !
Imagine:         Adventures Not In A Solar Park

04 February 2017

Kilgallioch - Here We Go Again - Twice The Price Of Nuclear!

Once the programme is completed, in 2017 this will be the UK’s third largest onshore wind farm, with 96 wind turbines with a generating capacity of up to 239 MW, the capacity of the wind farm will be enough to power the equivalent of 130,000 households per year.

A bit of simple arithmetic:
"...annual UK average domestic household consumption is 3,994kWh..."
"...Most wind turbines should last for about 25 years with normal inspection and maintenance..."
130,000 homes x 3,994 kWh = 0.51922 TWh/year.
0.51922 TWh/year x 25 year = 12.98 TWh
of intermittent electricity!

But Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant rated at 3.2 GW, operating at 90% capacity factor, with a design life of 60 years, delivers 1,513.7 TWh
of 24/7 electricity!

116 Kilgalliock-sized wind farms would need to be built to deliver the same amount of [intermittent] electricity as the [24/7] electricity delivered by HPC.
116 wind farms x £300 million = £34.8 billion.
That's HPC + 93%

116 of these GREEN power plants:
coupled with ISSUES:
"...Apart from water, peat bogs are largely composed of huge volumes of saturated, undecayed plants. A single hectare typically contains more than 5000 tonnes of carbon, ten times more than a typical hectare of forest. But any disturbance leads to lower water levels and to the peat drying, oxidising and releasing its carbon, says biochemist Mike Hall of the Cumbria Wildlife Trust.

The bog can decompose for hundreds of metres round every turbine, potentially releasing millions of tonnes of carbon. The process is slow, but frequently unstoppable, Hall says. So many wind farms may eventually emit more carbon than an equivalent coal-fired power station..."

Then there's LAND USE:
116 Kilgalliochs at 32 square kilometres each
= 3,712 square kilometres.

10 December 2016

11,184 UK Wind Turbines Supplying Intermittent Electricity = 1 Hinkley Point C Supplying 24/7 Electricity.

"...How long does a wind turbine last? The design life of a good quality modern wind turbine is 20 years. Depending on how windy and turbulent the site is, the turbine could last for 25 years or even longer, though as with anything mechanical, the maintenance costs will increase as it gets older..."

9,508,850 Homes x 25 Years = 237,721,250 Total
Homes Powered Equivalent (p.a.) - Calculated using the most recent statistics from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) showing that annual UK average domestic household consumption is 3,994 kWh.
Homes Powered Equivalent (p.a.) - 
Hinkley Point C Nuclear Power Plant = 6,406,500
6,406,500 Homes x 60 Years = 379,000,500 Total
Hinkley Power Total ÷ Wind Power Total = 1.59
Total UK Wind Farm Capacity Needed to Deliver as much electricity to UK Households is: 
1.59 x 14,261.275 MW = 22,675.427 MW
The UK needs to build another 8,414.152 MW of Wind Turbine Capacity [that's another 4,150 wind turbines
to deliver the same [intermittent] power as Hinkley's [24/7] power.
11,184 Wind Turbines = 1 Hinkley Point C
But - Will that target be reached before Hinkley starts to deliver?

31 October 2016

Hinkley Point C Will Power More Than One Quarter Of All UK Homes For 60 Years!

What's the best way to compare power supply technologies?

So how does Hinkley Compare?

What a bit of Simple Arithmetic can show about The Ludicrous Cost of Offshore Wind compared to a 
Nuclear Power Plant:

22 August 2016

The Death Knell of the LNT Model?

The Death Knell of the LNT Model?

Biological and Environmental Research (BER)

Biological Systems Science Division (BSSD)

Radiobiology: Low Dose Radiation Research

Program Description

The Low Dose Program is unique within the US

 government in supporting experimental 

radiation biology research that studies the effects of 
very low dose exposures.

Program Accomplishments

Research from DOE's Low Dose Program re-examines

existing paradigms and provides the results that support

the development of new, biological paradigms.

One example that challenges an old assumption is the 
findings that exposure to a low vs. high dose of radiation 
results in both qualitatively as well as quantitatively 
different cellular and molecular responses, thus 
demonstrating non-linear response with respect to 

Another is the finding that in addition to high-dose 
biological damage that may lead to cancer, 
very low dose radiation exposure may participate in 
beneficial biological outcomes by stimulation of our 
natural tissue surveillance mechanisms
These processes are shaped by physical 
exposure parameters that include dose, dose-rate and 

The research has underscored the importance of the 
Low Dose Program's effort to study intact-tissue 
biological response to a stressor such as radiation 
exposure, rather than studying only the initial events 
within an individual cell.

11 March 2015

Causorrelation - Background Radiation and Flatlined Solid Cancers?

Surely it's a Genuine Causation Link !

"...Considering that evolution, it seems entirely natural to us that life on Earth accepts low dose radiation as a stimulus and has been endowed with biophylactic functions for this, and that low dose radiation may also produce positive effects such as suppressing cancer..."

And since the Earth's Background Radiation has been around for the best part of 4.5 billion years:

 It's Background Radiation First
Life's Resistance to Low Level Radiation by the Evolution of DNA Repair Mechanisms

ICRP Graph
The Flat-line is almost perfectly bracketed by
'Earth background'

As near as can be estimated from the flat-lined portion of graph, the Number of Solid Cancers among Survivors stayed the same, although the Dose received by the 13,494 Group was 150 Times Higher than the dose received by the 12,806 group.

Tourists bury themselves in the Sands of the Beaches of Guarapari, where The Natural Background Radiation is 875 Times Higher than the dose received 
by the 12,860 group ! 
Guarapari Brazil 

LNT Predictions is Not What Happens in the Real World !
There's just too  much Noise from so many other Mutaganic Sources:

08 February 2015

WindIdiots Stop Now - Stop Damaging Our Wild Spaces! Stop Delaying Solutions!

In 6 Slides - How Damaging, How Monstrous And How Useless Wind Turbines Are:

And That's Not All!

For the Whole Of 2014, all of the Performance Data for UK Wind Farms is detailed on this Page:

It's 1,008,000 kg Versus 190 kg!

Here's a 14 x 14 array of 3 kW kettles:

Now try to picture this payload at the foot of a 479 feet high Monstrosity:

Every Member of Greenpeace, every Member of Friends of The Earth and every Concerned Environmentalist should consider the Ridiculous Imbalance in the use of Precious Resources against the Pathetic Performance of Wind Turbines.

Think seriously about the Destruction of Eco-Systems and Wildlife. Think about the degradation of our Pristine Countryside and Coastline Environments.

Think how you've dragged back in the past and continue to delay the introduction of Gen IV Breeder Reactor Technology: