Human Achievement Hour

They want us to practice power cuts, to get used to having no lights, no television and no internet. So why not, instead, celebrate Human Achievement Hour

Millions of people around the world will be showing their support for human achievement by simply going about their daily lives. While earth hour activists will be left in the dark, Human Achievement Hour participants will be going to the cinema, enjoying a hot meal, driving their car or watching television.

So turn your lights on - 8:30 tonight, 28th March 2010, and celebrate technological advances.

h/t Dizzy

....

Climate protests - just a thought or two.

There is an ongoing protest at Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station, Britain's biggest coal-fired power station, with protesters from Camp for Climate Action, Plane Stupid and Climate Rush combining resources and manpower. This protest is reported to be an attempt to close the facility down.

Mrs Rigby has mixed feelings about things like this. She thinks it's all well and good to protest, and complain about coal-fired power stations, it's good to worry about the dangers of nuclear power - but there also has to be a healthy dose of realism, and the slimmest chance of success.

Maybe the decision by E.On to scrap postpone plans for Kingsnorth have given them some encouragement, after all, it was reported that

... E.ON said recent falls in demand for electricity had forced it to rethink, but that the plant could still be built if economic conditions permitted.

However, green campaigners were claiming a major victory over what they viewed as in effect a cancellation of the Kingsnorth station ...

Green campaigners need to realise that money's tight, E.On is a German company and if cutting costs and outgoings in UK mean they stay profitable then that's what they'll do - even if it means that our lights start going out.

Mrs R believes that these protesters have to understand that Britain will not function without electricity, and electricity has to be made somewhere. She thinks it's just a bit immoral to use power that's been made elsewhere - where you can't see it happening, and where you can't protest. She also believes there's a difference between protesting because you can, and protesting because you should.

If these protesters have reached Ratcliffe-on-Soar on foot or using pedal or wind power, then all well and good - congratulations to them. But if they've been bussed in, have shared cars or used trains and coaches then they're hypocritical, because each and every one of these forms of transport relies on electricity to get it going - and she challenges these protesters to successfully start any car, bus or coach that has a duff battery, and do it every single time they want to make a journey. The novelty would soon wear off. And Mrs Rigby would like to remind these people that so-called "eco-friendly", battery-powered, cars aren't a true alternative because they get plugged in and use electricity to recharge their batteries and every single component of these cars is put together in factories - and the factories are, guess what, they're powered by electricity that comes from power stations such as the one at Ratcliffe-on-Soar.

Mrs R looked at how these protesters communicate with each other, to organise this and other protests. The information is online, at for example, Twitter, GreenMomentum or The GreatClimateSwoop/ClimateCamp sites. The latter even has live newsfeeds, videos, photographs of this protest - to make sure everybody can see what's happening.

Accessing the internet in UK depends on networks of cables and wires, and sometimes satellites. Computers and mobile phones won't work without help from either a battery or mains electricity - solar power is available to charge/recharge, but can be desperately slow on a cloudy British day.

The bits of wire and other components used to make these things will have been made with the help of electricity - any other form of power would be uneconomical, possibly unreliable and maybe even too slow. They will have been transported and put together by people or machines - with the help of electricity to run air-cleaning systems and conveyor belts.

These protesters might not mind too much if E.On decides to close Ratcliff-on Soar, they'll see it as a victory and they'll go home patting themselves on the back, delighted with their achievements. Maybe they are happy to do without without the benefits of electricity, but they forget about the rest of us.

Few of these protesters will have lived through rolling power cuts, they will not have had to figure out how to get a meal in the dark, with no heat. They will not have had to do their homework by candlelight, wrapped in a blanket to keep warm. These young, fit and healthy protesters forget about the elderly who have their meals-on-wheels delivered all at once, and who rely on their freezers to keep their food safe to eat.

Although these protesters might be delighted by the total darkness and silence that several hours without electricity can bring, would they cheerfully climb to the top of a darkened tower block because the lifts won't work? If not, then why should they force it those who will have no alternative?

It has been suggested that this winter may bring power shortages, although nobody seems to want to take the blame for the lack of forward planning, there are no doubt some who will attempt to shift the blame onto climate protesters for successfully closing power stations, and thus turning out Britain's lights. - And that is the little thought Mrs Rigby would like these protesters to mull over.

Getting cooler?

Tucked away on the BBC Science pages, and 'last updated' at 15:22 GMT Friday 9th October, is an article that's failed to thrill the media, who are instead much more interested in the "Green" protesters who've managed to avoid the Police who guard our Parliament against attack from terrorists, and have climbed onto the roof.

The article is written by Paul Hudson, the BBC Climate Correspondent, and this is part of what it says.

For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

So all those graphs they keep showing us that say the earth is warming have been porkies? Surely not, "they" are all honourable people, with our best interests at heart.

Now Mrs R can remember being very worried when, in the sixties "they" told us it was so cold because Earth was entering a cooling phase and we could expect a mini-Ice Age. The same sort of thing happened in the eighties, and "they" told us we might be going back to the days of a frozen River Thames - with ice thick enough to hold parties. Anybody else remember?

When "they" first started saying scary things about our climate, mentioning CFCs, the Ozone Layer and so on, Mrs R was slightly sceptical because "they" all talked as if they knew what things were like before. They didn't ever mention that the hole in the Ozone Layer, that could only be seen from space, couldn't have ever been "seen" or measured before we were able to go into space and take a look. The CFCs were blamed for the ozone hole, so they took them out of our fridges and out of our aerosols, and put in something that could go bang instead.

Other stuff has happened, including taking lead out of petrol, which meant other chemicals had to be put into it to keep the engines working, so they invented catalytic converters - which chuck out sulphur dioxide. Mrs R remembers acid rain, and all the damage apparently caused by sulphur gases produced from burning coal - but apparently it's now just fine to have the same gas coming out of our cars - although smoking filthy cigarettes in the wrong place is a criminal offence.

"They" tell us that CO2, the horrible stuff that we all breathe out, has made our planet warmer - because it's capable of trapping heat. But few of "them" ever seem to say that lots of CO2 is good for plants and makes them grow bigger and better, which in turn might mean we can grow more food crops and so feed the world's increasing population of people.

"They" never mention that loads of CO2 might have led to the giant plants that were eaten by the massive plant-eating dinosaurs, and these days they never, ever, mention the atmospheric pollution from volcanic eruptions. They only ever blame mankind, and modern mankind at that, and tell us we're naughty.

None of "them" ever seem to look at history and find information about the Romans being able to grow grapes as far north as Hadrian's Wall. And none of "them" ever seem to mention that once almost all of Britain was covered with a huge layer of ice. None of "them" ever seem to mention continental drift and other geological forces beyond our control, but try to scare us into believing that earthquakes and tsunamis can be caused by too much CO2.

"They" brought in a lovely new law recently that said we'd all got to have energy saving lightbulbs, that contain mercury vapour, but we mustn't have mercury in either barometers or thermometers because it's a deadly poison that pollutes the environment.

Is it any wonder there are sceptics and nonbelievers - but not amongst the young who have been brainwashed by the national curriculum, and are no longer encouraged to think for themselves.

All "they" seem to want to do these days is make us feel guilty and find a way of punishing us, by making us pay lots of money for trying to keep warm in the winter, to have lights that are bright enough to read by, and enough electricity to keep our computers working.

These "green" people, not the ones from Mars, have (apparently) successfully managed to stop the new power station at Kingsnorth - but where do they think we're going to get our electricity from?

Energy supply is critical, British power stations desperately need replacing and here we have a French company (which employs Ed Milliband's girlfriend) deciding Britain doesn't need any more generating capacity - they even say there's been a drop in consumption. (Maybe that was because it was summer!) But, maybe it's because Eon has got plenty of power to spare, but I wouldn't mind betting it'll cost a heck of a lot more for it to cross the Channel once we can no longer make electricity for ourselves.

The new name of "Climate Change" can mean either upwards or downwards - so "they" will be right whatever happens, and us mugs will be footing the bill.

We're going to need that power to keep warm, because Global Warming isn't happening and few houses these days can be heated by either wood or coal - they don't have chimneys, and gas fires don't work without that little electrical spark.

Either we pay more or we'll seriously have to cut back and lose some of the benefits of 21st century life, because the lights will start going out - and very soon too.

.....

Added later.

A post written by Goodnight Vienna on "Calling England" says:-

"In the Times today a curious piece centred around the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. They maintain that in order to meet the targets for CO2 emission reduction, living standards in Britain and the West in general must fall dramatically.

The wealthier parts of the world, including Britain, will have to seriously consider reducing their levels of consumption over the next 10-15 years while we put in place low-carbon technologies.

That may mean having only one car per household, a smaller fridge, buying fewer clothes and electronic goods and curtailing the number of weekend breaks that we have.

Read the rest of it here, and make of it what you will.

When the wind doesn't blow - we'll need candles.

.
It seems that the country's forward energy policy - that of building loads of highly visible wind turbines that only make electricity when the wind is blowing - isn't going to produce the goods in the not very distant future.

Mrs Rigby has been banging on about this to her family for absolutely ages, and at last she feels vindicated because today's newspapers are awash with dire warnings of power cuts within a very few years, and possibly even this coming winter if global warming doesn't kick in quickly enough to raise temperatures above freezing and so ease the surges in demand caused by the ad breaks of Coronation Street and Eastenders.

Mrs R remembers reading, some ten or more years ago, that we needed to replace our power stations. She remembers there being a plan in place to do so, but it was quietly dropped by our current government and no doubt the money that had been set aside has been used elsewhere. Mr Miliband has at least admitted they've got it a bit wrong, it's he who has forecast these power shortages.

There are all sorts of alarmist stories doing the rounds - it'll be as bad as during the three day week, we'll all need candles - which are a fire hazard (and they give you cancer), and none of us will be able to watch the Olympics because all the country's electricity will have to be diverted to power the floodlights, CCTVs and so on - even though it'll be summer!

The thing is that we're very much more dependent on electricity than we were in the seventies. Almost every home has a computer - and most are in use whenever people are at home. It's the way we communicate with each other, how we find out what's going on in the world and, for many, it's the sole means of entertainment and relaxation.

Computers are also the way we do business, so having power cuts would be catastrophic for the economy. So it's essential we have energy security, it's almost unbelievable that any nation's government could have ignored the warnings for so long - but they have, and we'll all have to deal with it, somehow.

The country possibly faces being held to ransom in return for electrical energy (and will be nothing to do with Gordon Brown's brother who's currently head of media relations at EDF, which owns London Electricity, Sweb and Seeboard). It's now common knowledge (thanks to the MSM) that we soon won't be able to make enough electricityof our own for our needs, so providers will be able to name their price - and no doubt the consumer will end up being fleeced, as always.

We've got rid of gasometers at a rather alarming rate too (no doubt because of H+S regs) so can now only store a week's gas supply, unlike our neighbours in Europe who can each keep oodles of the stuff in store. This means that if there's a breakdown of a transcontinental pipeline we're all going to be very cold.

Mrs Rigby remembers the three day week, brought in by the Heath government to combat the effects of the miners' strikes. She was a bit younger, obviously, and it was something of an adventure when she learned about cooking in hay boxes - which were absolutely useless! She also learned how important it was to make sure a house had a secondary source of heating - an open fire, a woodburner or even one of those mobile gas heaters that steamed up all the windows when the cylinder was running low.

"Modern" homes aren't quite so well planned, they're almost hermetically sealed and almost all are totally dependent on gas for heating - and gas boilers won't work without electricity. Few, if any, houses built over the last ten or so years have a separate fireplace that could be used to burn coal or logs on a frosty night during a power cut.

So what are people supposed to do - when domestic wind turbines are a waste of money, solar panels are expensive, and you run the risk of falling foul of planning rules if you want some for your roof?

We'll all have to huddle round a candle of course, and blame the nasty Tories who will probably still be in government when the brown stuff fails to hit the fan because there's no energy to turn it round. And, of course, the Labour "opposition" will have a field day, no doubt carelessly forgetting that it's all their fault - in the same way that one commenter in the Mail said, "It's all because of Thatcher!" Somehow they never see themselves as culpable, and never seem to find a dry path out of a mire.

Pushing all that aside there must be things we can do to prepare ourselves - but apart from buying up the complete stock of Prices Altar Candles (they burn for absolutely ages) there doesn't seem much. Perhaps it would be a good idea to get a woodburner (which needs a flue) because the top can be used for cooking almost anything that would normally go on a hob. That'd solve the problem of cooking - but not for people living in high rise flats, or even low-rise apartments.

We could all make our own electricity, and quite easily too. Mrs R remembers seeing a very clever invention - probably on Tomorrow's World. It was a tiny turbine that would fit into the flue of a gas boiler and could generate electricity from the movement of the exhaust gases. The inventor claimed it produced enough for his home, with enough left over to go into the National Grid. But, try as she might Mrs R's never seen the thing for sale, and can't find it mentioned anywhere online.

What can businesses, central and local government do?

For a start they could turn off their lights at night, it'd reduce their energy use and save a fortune in bills as well as cutting the amount of light pollution. Perhaps councils could be persuaded to turn off every other street light? They're all so bright these days that those left turned on would still provide enough light to read a newspaper at midnight, even on the darkest night.

Perhaps also there should be some serious effort into finding truly alternate forms of energy.

Wind turbines are all well and good - they're highly visible, so make it look as if somebody or other's expending huge efforts into "doing something", but in reality most of them use more power than they'll ever generate - energy used in construction and because when there's no wind they use electricity to "feather" the blades so the motors don't seize up.

Aside from wave power and things like the Seven Barrage scheme, which has environmentalists in a tizz, one city seems to have had a great idea, and that's Southampton - which since 1986 has been using geothermal energy. It's now used to heat shopping centres, houses, flats, hotels and a swimming pool as well as providing all the electrical energy needed by the port of Southampton. (More about it here)

There are also the mountains of rubbish we produce, which is failing to generate any income from recycling even after its' long journey to the far east - it could stay here and be burned to generate electricity, surely? And if not, why not?

Before you leap to green conclusions, Mrs R is only a bit of a tree-hugger. She's always done her bit to conserve energy, if only because it keeps the bills down, but she's never truly believed that government has wanted to do anything that was more than show - and the latest EU regulations regarding lightbulbs are a good example - why force us use something containing mercury, when it's been banned from barometers and thermometers because it's so terribly dangerous to both people and the environment? And what are we supposed to do with the things when they stop working? (Oops! That was a sidestep and a half.)

But, of course, there's no mention of any sensible policy in the government's ideas portfolio.

All they can think about is ordering a future generation to reduce their carbon footprint (because the earth is going to turn into a desert) and then they talk about building more power stations, either nuclear or gas, some time, some when, in the future - when it'll be a different group of people who have to make the decision about where they should be.

All this will, of course, get the environmentalists in a tizz, and the health lobbyists in a tizz ... but, because we'll all be sitting in the dark hugging our candles, we won't have the slightest idea what's going on because our computers won't work without electricity!
.....

Addenda:

Excellent piece on the same subject written by leg-iron is here
.