Re: wind farms
Date: 7 Feb 2005 at 11:22
> I fully agree with you that the windfarm angle is diverting
> attention from other forms of energy production/research etc which would
> prove a longer term better bet. As to the 5% sawdust i have no idea- but I
> do not like the idea of "green credits" earned by windfarms in this
> country being sold at incredible prices to coal power stations elsewhere
> who can then say they have fulfilled their "green " requirements by
> purchasing someone elses credits. It is lucdicrous.
RWE/Inogy/Npower/Whatever they're called this week, are even proud of the fact:
"Tilbury power station is one of three of RWE npower’s coal powered power stations that is currently burning biomass in the form of sawdust, thus replacing up to 5% by weight of coal. The three power stations are also test burning other suitable biomass materials to meet Government’s renewable energy obligation, which came into effect in April 2002."
http://www.npower.com/education/powerstations/tilbury.aspx
Messages In This Thread
-
Wind Farm Plans
Troller — 12 Jan 2005 at 20:52 -
wind farms
Catherine Newcombe — 5 Feb 2005 at 18:23 -
Re: wind farms
Tony — 6 Feb 2005 at 19:53 -
Re: wind farms
Cattherine Newcombe — 6 Feb 2005 at 22:18 -
Re: wind farms
Tony — 26 Feb 2005 at 16:23 -
Re: wind farms
Catherine Newcombe — 26 Feb 2005 at 18:54 -
Re: wind farms
Catherine Newcombe — 5 Feb 2005 at 18:30 -
wind farms
Julie — 1 Feb 2005 at 10:37 -
Re: wind farms
Keith — 5 Feb 2005 at 18:48 -
Re: wind farms
Catherine Newcombe — 6 Feb 2005 at 22:01 -
Re: wind farms
Chris — 7 Feb 2005 at 11:22 -
Re: wind farms
Larry — 13 Feb 2005 at 20:08 -
Re: wind farms
Larry — 13 Feb 2005 at 19:42