Biomass referendum costs soar (From Daily Echo)

How can it cost so much?

They set aside £5k initially then it goes up to £75k?

Yet we trust this Council with our finances, this isn't even a small increase.

Someone can't add up and this is very worrying! No wonder Williams was unavailable for comment.

I won’t be the only one not getting any satisfaction in being proven right that this so called referendum was just a gimmick by NuLabour ward councillors to attract bit of pro constituents publicity, when news of this populist exercise in PR at public expense first appeared on this website.

Most of the NuLabourites at that time told their critics on this site that they were wrong.

Then to make the matters worse, the resolution to hold this referendum was voted for by councillors of all parties. Who obviously wanted us the people to believe that they and they alone have the monopoly of working brains.

So what went wrong? Who misled the Council and through it the people of Southampton that cost of referendum could only be like bit of peanuts, but will be of massive value? Strangely the cost has gone up like a rocket and same people are trying to tell us that the same result can be achieved without any referendum i.e. without reshaping British form of democracy into Swiss version…

What does yet one more U Turn by NuLabour Group eventually proves?.... That so far Dear Leader led NuLabour Group has admitted that they do not know what they are talking about, and till the vote is taken in Council Tories have more or less done the same, but are likely to find some excuses in the Council Chamber on Wednesday without admitting any stupidities.

Hardly surprising more and more people are started to form the view that instead of having 48 councillors, Southampton Council has got collection of 48 clowns.

I think this is the result of typical elected representatives having over the years developed the habit of forgetting that it is the citizens who elect them to represents the interests of the people, but not to be led by the nose by under worked and overpaid pen pushing fat cats.

Looking from another point it also proves that figures which our useless representatives keep on throwing around should not be relied upon. That is why many of us do not believe Council’s figures on Oaklands Swimming Pool, which may also have been picked out of thin air.

IronLady2010 wrote:
How can it cost so much?

They set aside £5k initially then it goes up to £75k?

Yet we trust this Council with our finances, this isn't even a small increase.

Someone can't add up and this is very worrying! No wonder Williams was unavailable for comment.

Yes even I agree with you.

Have a nice week end

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
How can it cost so much?

They set aside £5k initially then it goes up to £75k?

Yet we trust this Council with our finances, this isn't even a small increase.

Someone can't add up and this is very worrying! No wonder Williams was unavailable for comment.

Yes even I agree with you.

Have a nice week end

You too. Enjoy this nice weather whilst it lasts :-) x

A referendum that will matter not was always the case, so, whether it was 5 or 75k it was still a waste of public money at a time when jobs, services etc.. are being cut, perhaps those that control the public purse need to tighten their grip to avoid further wasteage.

What is the point of the Localism Act if it to costly to administer and the result isn't binding?

Pathetic. I'll do it for £5k and have change!!

skin2000 wrote:
What is the point of the Localism Act if it to costly to administer and the result isn't binding?

You are quite correct.
.
Sadly the 2011 Localism Act that the Westminster Government put in place is all smoke and mirrors.
.
The increase in costs is not a failure of Councillors, the ruling party, the opposition or indeed Council Officers, instead it is the going rate to meet the bureaucracy and red tape that the Rt Hon Pickles MP put on the statute books.
.
Localism comes at a price!

Now there is a surprise, politicians get their sums wrong.

Let's get this right this was nothing but a gimmick by all opposed to the Bio Mass generator.
£5,000-£45,000-£7
5,000 any of these amounts could have gone to repair the Oaklands pool.
If Payne states they have £10-£20,000 to spend in every area why hasn't this been spent on Oaklands why are they even considering spending our money on a preferendum that will have no influence on if we get it or we don't get the Bio Mass?

Calculations may improve when cigarettes are wrapped in plain packs.

good-gosh wrote:
Calculations may improve when cigarettes are wrapped in plain packs.

.. lol, nice one.

loosehead wrote:
Let's get this right this was nothing but a gimmick by all opposed to the Bio Mass generator.
£5,000-£45,000-£7

5,000 any of these amounts could have gone to repair the Oaklands pool.
If Payne states they have £10-£20,000 to spend in every area why hasn't this been spent on Oaklands why are they even considering spending our money on a preferendum that will have no influence on if we get it or we don't get the Bio Mass?

I notice your decent thinking cells from Tony Benn supporting days have come to life again. Congratulations.....

Yes you have very rightly pointed the real issues. Money could be there but our so called councillors have got different priorities. Obviously Oaklands is not on the list of 46 clown in the Council but is top priority for only two decent councillors who actually care for the people who voted for them.

Hope now you will also accept that your Tory darlings should be demanding sums you have mentioned for saving Oaklands instead of start selling most important family silver in the shape of Arts Collection.

Oh another congratulation on your performance in chess game, now try teaching your skills to your Cllr. Hannides, because his stupid idea may appeal to Echo and it's editor, but will only achieve egg in Tory faces in the Council chamber. Not only your lot will lose the vote, they could in fact for a change make NuLabour look good, and also expose Tories as ruthless parasites, because they are trying to advertise their anti Arts policy on the back of our Oaklands Pool.

If as non chess player even I could work that out surely you as good one should have too.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Let's get this right this was nothing but a gimmick by all opposed to the Bio Mass generator.
£5,000-£45,000-£7


5,000 any of these amounts could have gone to repair the Oaklands pool.
If Payne states they have £10-£20,000 to spend in every area why hasn't this been spent on Oaklands why are they even considering spending our money on a preferendum that will have no influence on if we get it or we don't get the Bio Mass?

I notice your decent thinking cells from Tony Benn supporting days have come to life again. Congratulations.....


Yes you have very rightly pointed the real issues. Money could be there but our so called councillors have got different priorities. Obviously Oaklands is not on the list of 46 clown in the Council but is top priority for only two decent councillors who actually care for the people who voted for them.

Hope now you will also accept that your Tory darlings should be demanding sums you have mentioned for saving Oaklands instead of start selling most important family silver in the shape of Arts Collection.

Oh another congratulation on your performance in chess game, now try teaching your skills to your Cllr. Hannides, because his stupid idea may appeal to Echo and it's editor, but will only achieve egg in Tory faces in the Council chamber. Not only your lot will lose the vote, they could in fact for a change make NuLabour look good, and also expose Tories as ruthless parasites, because they are trying to advertise their anti Arts policy on the back of our Oaklands Pool.

If as non chess player even I could work that out surely you as good one should have too.

Paramjit let's get it straight.The Tory party were out canvassing & gaining support to oppose the closure of Oaklands way before Thomas or Morrel & Southy jumped on the bandwagon.
Also if you read posts you'll have read the letter from Steve Galton questioning where Warwick Payne came up with the extra cash he was boasting of to Regents Park residents.
The Tories are miles ahead of Labour on this issue the voters know the tories have been putting ideas forward to save this pool Labour said the Tories would close it & it was save under Labour & they all believe Thomas & Morrel are trying to save their seats & no more than that & Labour are liars & promise anything to get elected at least the Tories told the truth.
I think that's what they call Checkmate! ( I know it is).
play a feint make two of you're councillors look as if they're opposing you still close it but keep you're two sitting councillors?
I hope & believe the electorate can see through this & if it closes they will lose all three of those seats

Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Loosehead,

You sometimes talk some sense, but the Tories as bastions of truth ? you are really having a giraffe !

Where are our closed libraries they promised would happen under a Labour Council ?

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Total rubbish mate the last No Biomass I went to, it was mainly Labour councillor's there.

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

for people against the Bio Mass I think you'll find it's a cross party group as well as local residents.
Instead of coming on here telling me I'm having a laugh at saying the Tories have been telling the truth why don't you reply to some of my posts on green energies?
I have said if a Party promised free Solar panels to every one who wanted it & councils couldn't stop tenants from having them I would seriously think of voting for them.
I have suggested using our rivers to produce power through tidal & wave turbines & they are now so good they won't effect the Salmon runs.
I have also suggested using a limitless source of power which as long as there's humans there will be a supply & that is sewage.
Sewage gives off Methane & we've developed bugs to eat it & give off Methane & Oxygen .
The Methane can be burnt to produce Electricity or as in Tips to produce Gas & there's a giant drum that produces these gasses & compost/fertilisers up North why aren't we investing in all these energies?
After seeing the Green Party in action in Brighton I would never vote for them.
you should be campaigning for all the above plus a discount on all British built Electric cars.
I truly believe in renewable energries do you?

Loosehead be wary of the contract on Solar roof panels. There are many reports of the weight of them causing issues with leaks etc and the terms are preventing claims. x

Loosehead be wary of the contract on Solar roof panels. There are many reports of the weight of them causing issues with leaks etc and the terms are preventing claims. x

IronLady2010 wrote:
Loosehead be wary of the contract on Solar roof panels. There are many reports of the weight of them causing issues with leaks etc and the terms are preventing claims. x

I think it should be mandatory for all new houses to be completely roofed with solar panels, anything other than bl00dy windmills everywhere.

IronLady2010 wrote:
Loosehead be wary of the contract on Solar roof panels. There are many reports of the weight of them causing issues with leaks etc and the terms are preventing claims. x

The contract states that "if there are any problems caused by the Solar panels the company will be responsible"
If you have an old roof you should get a surveyor/builder out to check it can take the weight & either reinforce the roof or don't have the panels.
my roof is about 40years of age I have no leaks & if it started to collapse under the weight I would expect the company to fix it.
Ironlady the supporting structure is fixed to you're main roof beams these should hold the weight of the frame & the Solar panels aren't that heavy.
I can only guess that the roofs were very old or substandard to have problems,
Come around Millbrook & Lordshill & you'll see a hell of a lot of them & no one seems to be having any problems

loosehead wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
Loosehead be wary of the contract on Solar roof panels. There are many reports of the weight of them causing issues with leaks etc and the terms are preventing claims. x

The contract states that "if there are any problems caused by the Solar panels the company will be responsible"
If you have an old roof you should get a surveyor/builder out to check it can take the weight & either reinforce the roof or don't have the panels.
my roof is about 40years of age I have no leaks & if it started to collapse under the weight I would expect the company to fix it.
Ironlady the supporting structure is fixed to you're main roof beams these should hold the weight of the frame & the Solar panels aren't that heavy.
I can only guess that the roofs were very old or substandard to have problems,
Come around Millbrook & Lordshill & you'll see a hell of a lot of them & no one seems to be having any problems

Its around the Millbrook housing estate where many of these leaks are being reported. The roofs are fine till there is a high wind, with the wind the roofs are lifting with the up draft between the solar panel and roof tiles pushing the rain water up between the tiles and capillary action take over.

skin2000 wrote:

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Total rubbish mate the last No Biomass I went to, it was mainly Labour councillor's there.

The two I went to, it was across the board, it was not mainly Torys or Labour or any other political party, It was mainly residence with all sorts of political views.

southy wrote:

skin2000 wrote:

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Total rubbish mate the last No Biomass I went to, it was mainly Labour councillor's there.

The two I went to, it was across the board, it was not mainly Torys or Labour or any other political party, It was mainly residence with all sorts of political views.

.. totally agree with you southy.

My impression is identical after attending several meetings and demo's

loosehead wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Let's get this right this was nothing but a gimmick by all opposed to the Bio Mass generator.
£5,000-£45,000-£7



5,000 any of these amounts could have gone to repair the Oaklands pool.
If Payne states they have £10-£20,000 to spend in every area why hasn't this been spent on Oaklands why are they even considering spending our money on a preferendum that will have no influence on if we get it or we don't get the Bio Mass?

I notice your decent thinking cells from Tony Benn supporting days have come to life again. Congratulations.....



Yes you have very rightly pointed the real issues. Money could be there but our so called councillors have got different priorities. Obviously Oaklands is not on the list of 46 clown in the Council but is top priority for only two decent councillors who actually care for the people who voted for them.

Hope now you will also accept that your Tory darlings should be demanding sums you have mentioned for saving Oaklands instead of start selling most important family silver in the shape of Arts Collection.

Oh another congratulation on your performance in chess game, now try teaching your skills to your Cllr. Hannides, because his stupid idea may appeal to Echo and it's editor, but will only achieve egg in Tory faces in the Council chamber. Not only your lot will lose the vote, they could in fact for a change make NuLabour look good, and also expose Tories as ruthless parasites, because they are trying to advertise their anti Arts policy on the back of our Oaklands Pool.

If as non chess player even I could work that out surely you as good one should have too.

Paramjit let's get it straight.The Tory party were out canvassing & gaining support to oppose the closure of Oaklands way before Thomas or Morrel & Southy jumped on the bandwagon.
Also if you read posts you'll have read the letter from Steve Galton questioning where Warwick Payne came up with the extra cash he was boasting of to Regents Park residents.
The Tories are miles ahead of Labour on this issue the voters know the tories have been putting ideas forward to save this pool Labour said the Tories would close it & it was save under Labour & they all believe Thomas & Morrel are trying to save their seats & no more than that & Labour are liars & promise anything to get elected at least the Tories told the truth.
I think that's what they call Checkmate! ( I know it is).
play a feint make two of you're councillors look as if they're opposing you still close it but keep you're two sitting councillors?
I hope & believe the electorate can see through this & if it closes they will lose all three of those seats

Unless you was out before the local elections canvasting about the Oaklands Pool, Which was closed first by the Tory Council and then remained closed with the Labour Council, the only band wagon jumpers are the Tory Party who at Election time was offering the people Cuts in public services and jobs all other political partys apart from the TUSC, It was only the TUSC that was saying no to any cuts in services and jobs, the Torys truth is to spin and make it look the opposite to what they really mean, Labour is only doing what the Torys have been doing for a very long time they have joined the same band wagon.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

skin2000 wrote:

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Total rubbish mate the last No Biomass I went to, it was mainly Labour councillor's there.

The two I went to, it was across the board, it was not mainly Torys or Labour or any other political party, It was mainly residence with all sorts of political views.

.. totally agree with you southy.

My impression is identical after attending several meetings and demo's

I can quite clearly state the No Southampton Biomass group is not politically orientated. Yes I am a major part of this group and as Steven Galton I became politically involved after the group had been set up.

At all points I have been open and honest (including my real name when I publicly post) about my political beliefs and also shared with the NSB group my growing involvement in local politics so at no point could anything I said/did later be looked on in a different light.

My only goal is to stop this dreadful power station being built on my doorstep as it will actually lead to increased green house gas emissions in the short term and is totally inappropriate development so close to a heavily populated residential area that is already suffering from poor air quality!

The full email is now published on www.nosouthamptonbio
mass.co.uk and this is what EVERY Councillor was sent. To summarise these are the two options NSB, as a group, decided on

•We would love a referendum and a Council commitment to use its funds to pro-actively support us in the fight against Helius if budgets allow both

•Should funding mean only 1 of these is currently possible we would strongly urge the funds are used on the planning/legal side as this is ultimately how any fight will be won. These funds should not now be used on a referendum that will have no legal weight in any future Helius application if this precludes money from being spent on external expert legal/planning advice.

NSB meet the first Tuesday of every month at the Waterloo arms and anyone is welcome to come and talk with us or ask any questions you may have.


ps Loosehead it was Cllr Asa Thorpes comments I referred to in my letter not Cllr Payne's http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/yoursay/lette
rs/9912351.Raising_f
alse_hopes_for_Oakla
nds_pool/

Steven Galton wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

skin2000 wrote:

SotonGreen wrote:
Interesting to note the "No to Biomass" group are quoted as saying something that is in turn a direct quote of Royston Smith pretty much word for word.

It is I fear as have suspected for a while that this so called pressure group is little more than a front for the local conservative association.

Total rubbish mate the last No Biomass I went to, it was mainly Labour councillor's there.

The two I went to, it was across the board, it was not mainly Torys or Labour or any other political party, It was mainly residence with all sorts of political views.

.. totally agree with you southy.

My impression is identical after attending several meetings and demo's

I can quite clearly state the No Southampton Biomass group is not politically orientated. Yes I am a major part of this group and as Steven Galton I became politically involved after the group had been set up.

At all points I have been open and honest (including my real name when I publicly post) about my political beliefs and also shared with the NSB group my growing involvement in local politics so at no point could anything I said/did later be looked on in a different light.

My only goal is to stop this dreadful power station being built on my doorstep as it will actually lead to increased green house gas emissions in the short term and is totally inappropriate development so close to a heavily populated residential area that is already suffering from poor air quality!

The full email is now published on www.nosouthamptonbio

mass.co.uk and this is what EVERY Councillor was sent. To summarise these are the two options NSB, as a group, decided on

•We would love a referendum and a Council commitment to use its funds to pro-actively support us in the fight against Helius if budgets allow both

•Should funding mean only 1 of these is currently possible we would strongly urge the funds are used on the planning/legal side as this is ultimately how any fight will be won. These funds should not now be used on a referendum that will have no legal weight in any future Helius application if this precludes money from being spent on external expert legal/planning advice.

NSB meet the first Tuesday of every month at the Waterloo arms and anyone is welcome to come and talk with us or ask any questions you may have.


ps Loosehead it was Cllr Asa Thorpes comments I referred to in my letter not Cllr Payne's http://www.dailyecho

.co.uk/yoursay/lette

rs/9912351.Raising_f

alse_hopes_for_Oakla

nds_pool/

Sorry

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/
article/0,,16235063,
00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT
Tk

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/

article/0,,16235063,

00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT

Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit
ics.info/europolitic
s/commission-wants-t
o-limit-use-of-conve
ntional-biofuels-art
342921-46.html

Great maybe a windfarm instead with all the wind whipped up by the road traffic that should generate a bit of electricity shouldn't it?
But wait a minute people stop them because they're noisy? Look ugly ( sound familiar) & they say don't create enough energy oh! they're bad for the wildlife?
Can't see the rats getting caught in the blades though

loosehead wrote:
Great maybe a windfarm instead with all the wind whipped up by the road traffic that should generate a bit of electricity shouldn't it?
But wait a minute people stop them because they're noisy? Look ugly ( sound familiar) & they say don't create enough energy oh! they're bad for the wildlife?
Can't see the rats getting caught in the blades though

loosehead why don't you go solar?..


haven't you seen Robert Llewellyn's video.. one solar home generating enough power for three?


According to TV Presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT

Tk

Dan Soton wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Great maybe a windfarm instead with all the wind whipped up by the road traffic that should generate a bit of electricity shouldn't it?
But wait a minute people stop them because they're noisy? Look ugly ( sound familiar) & they say don't create enough energy oh! they're bad for the wildlife?
Can't see the rats getting caught in the blades though

loosehead why don't you go solar?..


haven't you seen Robert Llewellyn's video.. one solar home generating enough power for three?


According to TV Presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT


Tk

Dan read my posts please! I've got Solar Panels & Dan I'm for Green energies but I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/


article/0,,16235063,


00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT


Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit

ics.info/europolitic

s/commission-wants-t

o-limit-use-of-conve

ntional-biofuels-art

342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.
com/climate-environm
ent/eu-legislation-l
imit-use-crop-ba-new
s-514714

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/



article/0,,16235063,



00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT



Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit


ics.info/europolitic


s/commission-wants-t


o-limit-use-of-conve


ntional-biofuels-art


342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.

com/climate-environm

ent/eu-legislation-l

imit-use-crop-ba-new

s-514714

Why don't you get the NO campaign to look at the Methane from sewage projects here & around the world & ask why our sewage plant isn't taking this option?
If you could persuade them to go into producing electricity from sewage/methane maybe there would be no need for this Bio Mass plant?

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/




article/0,,16235063,




00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c




om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT




Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit



ics.info/europolitic



s/commission-wants-t



o-limit-use-of-conve



ntional-biofuels-art



342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.


com/climate-environm


ent/eu-legislation-l


imit-use-crop-ba-new


s-514714

Why don't you get the NO campaign to look at the Methane from sewage projects here & around the world & ask why our sewage plant isn't taking this option?
If you could persuade them to go into producing electricity from sewage/methane maybe there would be no need for this Bio Mass plant?

loosehead says.. Why don't you get the NO Campaign to look at Methane


I'm not a member of the NO Campaign, you'd do better if you had a word with them yourself.

I've only ever meet one representative from the No Campaign and that was in June outside the Holy Trinity Church Parish Hall were he was conducting a Yes/No Poll, we had a natter our views were very similar but that's about it, neither am I a member of a political or pressure group, sure I'm worried about the environment, pollution and stuff but then who isn't.

My big concern is £ and keeping my £ in my pocket.

I have no doubts, solar panels will make me energy self-sufficient by 2020, my fear is and it should be yours.. is a 20% or more Tax imposed by the EU on my solar power to pay for Helius's subsidies and all the other daft get rich quick scams the EU falls for.

Dan Soton wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/





article/0,,16235063,





00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c





om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT





Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit




ics.info/europolitic




s/commission-wants-t




o-limit-use-of-conve




ntional-biofuels-art




342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.



com/climate-environm



ent/eu-legislation-l



imit-use-crop-ba-new



s-514714

Why don't you get the NO campaign to look at the Methane from sewage projects here & around the world & ask why our sewage plant isn't taking this option?
If you could persuade them to go into producing electricity from sewage/methane maybe there would be no need for this Bio Mass plant?

loosehead says.. Why don't you get the NO Campaign to look at Methane


I'm not a member of the NO Campaign, you'd do better if you had a word with them yourself.

I've only ever meet one representative from the No Campaign and that was in June outside the Holy Trinity Church Parish Hall were he was conducting a Yes/No Poll, we had a natter our views were very similar but that's about it, neither am I a member of a political or pressure group, sure I'm worried about the environment, pollution and stuff but then who isn't.

My big concern is £ and keeping my £ in my pocket.

I have no doubts, solar panels will make me energy self-sufficient by 2020, my fear is and it should be yours.. is a 20% or more Tax imposed by the EU on my solar power to pay for Helius's subsidies and all the other daft get rich quick scams the EU falls for.

Dan I'm very Anti EU & would love to see us get the hell out of it.
Could you tell me exactly what you think would go where the proposed Bio Mass doesn't go ahead?
It should be obvious this is to be sold to make the port owners money so what will they come up with next?

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/






article/0,,16235063,






00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c






om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT






Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit





ics.info/europolitic





s/commission-wants-t





o-limit-use-of-conve





ntional-biofuels-art





342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.




com/climate-environm




ent/eu-legislation-l




imit-use-crop-ba-new




s-514714

Why don't you get the NO campaign to look at the Methane from sewage projects here & around the world & ask why our sewage plant isn't taking this option?
If you could persuade them to go into producing electricity from sewage/methane maybe there would be no need for this Bio Mass plant?

loosehead says.. Why don't you get the NO Campaign to look at Methane


I'm not a member of the NO Campaign, you'd do better if you had a word with them yourself.

I've only ever meet one representative from the No Campaign and that was in June outside the Holy Trinity Church Parish Hall were he was conducting a Yes/No Poll, we had a natter our views were very similar but that's about it, neither am I a member of a political or pressure group, sure I'm worried about the environment, pollution and stuff but then who isn't.

My big concern is £ and keeping my £ in my pocket.

I have no doubts, solar panels will make me energy self-sufficient by 2020, my fear is and it should be yours.. is a 20% or more Tax imposed by the EU on my solar power to pay for Helius's subsidies and all the other daft get rich quick scams the EU falls for.

Dan I'm very Anti EU & would love to see us get the hell out of it.
Could you tell me exactly what you think would go where the proposed Bio Mass doesn't go ahead?
It should be obvious this is to be sold to make the port owners money so what will they come up with next?

As far as I’m concerned Helius is the only blot on the landscape.




loosehead, I only see good things for the port, as far as I’m concerned Helius is the only blot on the landscape.

yes the port grows and contracts depending on the economy but.. I see lots expansion to accommodate more eco friendly ships that are only a few years away from the shipyard slipways




Designers Set Sail, Turning to Wind to Help Power Cargo Ships.

By JOHN J. GEOGHEGAN.

Published: August 27, 2012.

-

A model of the B9 ship was tested last month at the University of Southampton in England. "The tests were promising," said Diane Gilpin, a founder-director of B9 Shipping. "They validated the economic case for deploying a B9 ship on certain trading routes."

The next step, she said, is to seek financing for a full-size ship to demonstrate the technology. It would cost $45 million and take three years to build.

Several factors are driving efforts like these. Effective this month, ships in North American waters are required to burn low-sulfur oil, which costs 60 percent more than bunker fuel.

The United Nations’ International Maritime Organization is also phasing in restrictions on greenhouse-gas emissions by commercial ships.

Meanwhile, the price of bunker fuel, which accounts for most of a vessel’s operating cost, has been rising steeply — 600 percent over the last 10 years.

-
Or as Richard Pemberton, a marine technology expert at Southampton, put it, "The shipping industry will adopt whichever technology allows them to make a profit."

One company that is well past the design stage is SkySails. Founded in 2001 in Hamburg, Germany, it has been selling automated towing kite systems for cargo ships for several years.

-
　http://www.nytime
s.com/2012/08/28/sci
ence/earth/cargo-shi
p-designers-turn-to-
wind-to-cut-cost-and
-emissions.html?_r=2


　

　

Dan Soton wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. wind/solar power is cheaper than pollution generating timber/grass incinerators.



Oxfam, Unicef and Save the Children are in talks with David Cameron to end to biomass/biofuel subsidies.


-


Calculating the true cost of electricity.

Date 13.09.2012.

Taking into account health and environmental damage, wind and solar power from new plants in Europe is actually cheaper than energy from coal and nuclear power plants, according to a new report.

Wind and solar power costs the least of current energy sources.

The report points out that electricity produced from new coal plants costs twice as much as wind, and about the same as solar power.

GBG says by 2020, the combination of rising energy costs and innovation in the energy sector will make wind and solar power the most economical way to generate power.

-

http://www.dw.de/dw/







article/0,,16235063,







00.html

-


According to TV presenter Robert Llewellyn.. by 2020 one solar home could be generating 16,000kWh of energy and only using 4,000-5,000kWh a year.


-

see YouTube Video..

http://www.youtube.c







om/watch?v=Ac0cPOZMT







Tk

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. Today, the EU is applying the brakes to biomass/biofuels subsidies to stop land grabbing in developing countries.



Oxfam & Friends of the Earth says the EU needs to go further.. biomass/biofuels producers are appalled.

-


Commission wants to limit use of conventional biofuels.

By Marie-Martine Buckens | Friday 14 September 2012.

-
These effects can be classed into two types: economic and social – by aggravating the soaring prices of food and by being part of the extension of land grabbing, in particular in developing countries; and climate-related in the case where biofuels are cultivated on lands which have been previously deforested or which shelter a wide biodiversity.

-
In its draft, the Commission aims to propose limiting, after 2020, subsidies to biofuels that allow substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the Commission proposes attributing a scale of ‘climate values’ to biofuels: it would be double for second-generation biofuels, compared to current biofuels, and four times more for third-generation biofuels.

NGOs delighted, producers appalled.

Robbie Blake, of the NGO Friends of the Earth, welcomes the conclusions the Commission has drawn, but says it needs to go further still. He says biofuels made from food crops must be withdrawn, rather than just capped at 5%. Oxfam agrees, and says that all the plan will achieve is to put a brake on the increase of food products.

-

http://www.europolit






ics.info/europolitic






s/commission-wants-t






o-limit-use-of-conve






ntional-biofuels-art






342921-46.html

Helius is heading for bankruptcy.. The EU to end all subsidies for crop biomass/biofuels, saving Taxpayers over €17 billion a year in the process.

-

Loosehead says.. I've got Solar Panels & I'm for Green energies I don't agree with the way you plaster the same thing across many sites.

sorry to here that.


-


Friends of the Earth says.. "Biofuels are wreaking havoc on tight food markets and our forests, increasing hunger and accelerating climate change, what we need at this time of food crisis is to stop burning them altogether."


-

EU proposal would limit use of crop-based biofuels.

published 11 September 20124.

The European Union plans to impose a limit on the use of crop-based biofuels over fears they are less climate-friendly than initially thought and compete with food production, according to draft EU legislation.

The new rules, which will need the approval of EU governments and lawmakers, represent a major shift in Europe's much-criticised biofuel policy and a tacit admission by policymakers that the EU's 2020 biofuel target was flawed from the outset.

The plans also include a promise to end all public subsidies for crop-based biofuels after the current legislation expires in 2020, effectively ensuring the decline of a European sector now estimated to be worth €17 billion a year.


-

http://www.euractiv.





com/climate-environm





ent/eu-legislation-l





imit-use-crop-ba-new





s-514714

Why don't you get the NO campaign to look at the Methane from sewage projects here & around the world & ask why our sewage plant isn't taking this option?
If you could persuade them to go into producing electricity from sewage/methane maybe there would be no need for this Bio Mass plant?

loosehead says.. Why don't you get the NO Campaign to look at Methane


I'm not a member of the NO Campaign, you'd do better if you had a word with them yourself.

I've only ever meet one representative from the No Campaign and that was in June outside the Holy Trinity Church Parish Hall were he was conducting a Yes/No Poll, we had a natter our views were very similar but that's about it, neither am I a member of a political or pressure group, sure I'm worried about the environment, pollution and stuff but then who isn't.

My big concern is £ and keeping my £ in my pocket.

I have no doubts, solar panels will make me energy self-sufficient by 2020, my fear is and it should be yours.. is a 20% or more Tax imposed by the EU on my solar power to pay for Helius's subsidies and all the other daft get rich quick scams the EU falls for.

Dan I'm very Anti EU & would love to see us get the hell out of it.
Could you tell me exactly what you think would go where the proposed Bio Mass doesn't go ahead?
It should be obvious this is to be sold to make the port owners money so what will they come up with next?

As far as I’m concerned Helius is the only blot on the landscape.




loosehead, I only see good things for the port, as far as I’m concerned Helius is the only blot on the landscape.

yes the port grows and contracts depending on the economy but.. I see lots expansion to accommodate more eco friendly ships that are only a few years away from the shipyard slipways




Designers Set Sail, Turning to Wind to Help Power Cargo Ships.

By JOHN J. GEOGHEGAN.

Published: August 27, 2012.

-

A model of the B9 ship was tested last month at the University of Southampton in England. "The tests were promising," said Diane Gilpin, a founder-director of B9 Shipping. "They validated the economic case for deploying a B9 ship on certain trading routes."

The next step, she said, is to seek financing for a full-size ship to demonstrate the technology. It would cost $45 million and take three years to build.

Several factors are driving efforts like these. Effective this month, ships in North American waters are required to burn low-sulfur oil, which costs 60 percent more than bunker fuel.

The United Nations’ International Maritime Organization is also phasing in restrictions on greenhouse-gas emissions by commercial ships.

Meanwhile, the price of bunker fuel, which accounts for most of a vessel’s operating cost, has been rising steeply — 600 percent over the last 10 years.

-
Or as Richard Pemberton, a marine technology expert at Southampton, put it, "The shipping industry will adopt whichever technology allows them to make a profit."

One company that is well past the design stage is SkySails. Founded in 2001 in Hamburg, Germany, it has been selling automated towing kite systems for cargo ships for several years.

-
　http://www.nytime

s.com/2012/08/28/sci

ence/earth/cargo-shi

p-designers-turn-to-

wind-to-cut-cost-and

-emissions.html?_r=2



　

　

Helius would not get planning permission in Scotland.. no Combined Heat and Power, not close to local Biomass supplies.




Helius's Southampton pollution generating timber/grass incinerator lacks Combined Heat and Power (CHP), Helius to source timber/grass materials from Canada, South Africa, South America and Australia.

-


Summary.. Scotlands vision for biomass is clear: it is for small and sustainable stations that are close to available local supplies and operate as efficiently as possible, 10MW and that are not good quality combined heat and power(CHP) stations will not be eligible for ROCs after 2013.

-


Scottish Government tightens rules on Biomass power.

Posted on DateSeptember 15, 2012 by AuthorAlly.

the Scottish Government conducted a consultation into the way biomass subsidies for low carbon energy operate - and after doing some research, and listening to a lots of consultation responses, including our own, Fergus Ewing announced yesteday in parliament his Government's conclusions.

Here's what he said about biomass:

"On biomass generation, we asked for views on whether to restrict or remove support for large-scale wood-fuelled electricity-only and combined heat and power stations. A significant majority responded in favour of such restrictions, although others argued that biomass generation has an important role to play in meeting Scotland’s electricity and heat targets.

"I accept that role, but I also believe that our concerns over competition for the finite supply of wood and our concerns about the strategic value of biomass heat over electricity merit the introduction of a new control.

"I am therefore proposing that wood-fuelled stations with a total installed capacity that is greater than 10MW and that are not good quality combined heat and power stations will not be eligible for ROCs after 2013. That will not apply to stations that commission after April 2013, but which received consent or planning permission before our consultation was published.

"Our vision for biomass is clear: it is for small and sustainable stations that are close to available local supplies and operate as efficiently as possible."

-

http://www.greenerle
ith.org/greener-leit
h-news/2012/9/15/sco
ttish-government-tig
htens-rules-on-bioma
ss-power.html

Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Al there was a statement made which went like this"people see an old windmill & say it's lovely yet then see a new one & say it's ugly? Why they're both doing exactly the same job harnessing the power of the wind"
I went to Belgium & I saw Wind mills/Turbines every where & after a while stopped noticing them & looked at the scenery I only noticed them as they were a novelty so I can't see what people like you can complain about?
Would you prefer a dirty pollution belching coal powered station?

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Al there was a statement made which went like this"people see an old windmill & say it's lovely yet then see a new one & say it's ugly? Why they're both doing exactly the same job harnessing the power of the wind"
I went to Belgium & I saw Wind mills/Turbines every where & after a while stopped noticing them & looked at the scenery I only noticed them as they were a novelty so I can't see what people like you can complain about?
Would you prefer a dirty pollution belching coal powered station?

There are better and more environmental solutions than hijacking the skyline with hundreds, yes hundreds, of ugly windturbines. And yes, I do appreciate the sight of the solitary old windmill, and the emphasis is on solitary. If every roof in the country was made to be wholly solar panelled we could nprobably scrap all the power stations.

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Al there was a statement made which went like this"people see an old windmill & say it's lovely yet then see a new one & say it's ugly? Why they're both doing exactly the same job harnessing the power of the wind"
I went to Belgium & I saw Wind mills/Turbines every where & after a while stopped noticing them & looked at the scenery I only noticed them as they were a novelty so I can't see what people like you can complain about?
Would you prefer a dirty pollution belching coal powered station?

There are better and more environmental solutions than hijacking the skyline with hundreds, yes hundreds, of ugly windturbines. And yes, I do appreciate the sight of the solitary old windmill, and the emphasis is on solitary. If every roof in the country was made to be wholly solar panelled we could nprobably scrap all the power stations.

Al with the technology that was laughed at until very recently the power created by Solar panels & yes Wind Turbines can now be stored & used either when the wind doesn't blow or at night.
this destroys the arguments about the energy not being there when we need it so I hope & expect to see many more of these farms(Solar & wind).
I don't know if this will be able to be used in the family home but if it can instead of paying for only fossil powered stations maybe paying for every house & block of flats to have Solar energy is the way to go?
A Southampton education facility experimented on Solar Windows & they were efficient & did not block daylight getting into the building so could be put into every flat & maybe the blocks excess energy can be stored?

To all posters beware there's a virus called UKASH it destroys Anti Virus software unless it's Maleware & it leaves you're computer blocked/locked & it say's it's the Metropolitan Police & you've either been on a pedophile,Terrorist or many other banned sites & to unlock it you must pay £100 at given shops it's called UKASH. it's not Police but a virus

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Al there was a statement made which went like this"people see an old windmill & say it's lovely yet then see a new one & say it's ugly? Why they're both doing exactly the same job harnessing the power of the wind"
I went to Belgium & I saw Wind mills/Turbines every where & after a while stopped noticing them & looked at the scenery I only noticed them as they were a novelty so I can't see what people like you can complain about?
Would you prefer a dirty pollution belching coal powered station?

There are better and more environmental solutions than hijacking the skyline with hundreds, yes hundreds, of ugly windturbines. And yes, I do appreciate the sight of the solitary old windmill, and the emphasis is on solitary. If every roof in the country was made to be wholly solar panelled we could nprobably scrap all the power stations.

Al with the technology that was laughed at until very recently the power created by Solar panels & yes Wind Turbines can now be stored & used either when the wind doesn't blow or at night.
this destroys the arguments about the energy not being there when we need it so I hope & expect to see many more of these farms(Solar & wind).
I don't know if this will be able to be used in the family home but if it can instead of paying for only fossil powered stations maybe paying for every house & block of flats to have Solar energy is the way to go?
A Southampton education facility experimented on Solar Windows & they were efficient & did not block daylight getting into the building so could be put into every flat & maybe the blocks excess energy can be stored?

If EVERY roof was solar panelled there would be no need for the ugly wind turbine monstrocities, solar windows sounds like another good idea. Storing the power from these sources should be more than adequate.

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Liquid air seems now to be the new fuel

Shame it's not hot air, we could get the politicians to run the power stations.

Sorry it's super cooled turned into a liquid then reheated & is a power source & can be used to store electricity from both wind farms & solar Panels

Yes I know, but I think it's a shame that hot air doesn't have the same result, we could then find a use for the politicians and do away with the eyesore windmills.

Al there was a statement made which went like this"people see an old windmill & say it's lovely yet then see a new one & say it's ugly? Why they're both doing exactly the same job harnessing the power of the wind"
I went to Belgium & I saw Wind mills/Turbines every where & after a while stopped noticing them & looked at the scenery I only noticed them as they were a novelty so I can't see what people like you can complain about?
Would you prefer a dirty pollution belching coal powered station?

There are better and more environmental solutions than hijacking the skyline with hundreds, yes hundreds, of ugly windturbines. And yes, I do appreciate the sight of the solitary old windmill, and the emphasis is on solitary. If every roof in the country was made to be wholly solar panelled we could nprobably scrap all the power stations.

Al with the technology that was laughed at until very recently the power created by Solar panels & yes Wind Turbines can now be stored & used either when the wind doesn't blow or at night.
this destroys the arguments about the energy not being there when we need it so I hope & expect to see many more of these farms(Solar & wind).
I don't know if this will be able to be used in the family home but if it can instead of paying for only fossil powered stations maybe paying for every house & block of flats to have Solar energy is the way to go?
A Southampton education facility experimented on Solar Windows & they were efficient & did not block daylight getting into the building so could be put into every flat & maybe the blocks excess energy can be stored?

If EVERY roof was solar panelled there would be no need for the ugly wind turbine monstrocities, solar windows sounds like another good idea. Storing the power from these sources should be more than adequate.

Air used to store Solar/Wind energy.. one more nail in Helius's coffin.


funny I've been banging on about using compressed air to store Solar/Wind Energy for years..


here's a snip from the Echo dated,15th May 2012..


use Solar power to compress air, at sundown the stored compressed air drives on grid electrical generators, alternatively off grid smaller compressors in every Solar powered home.
-

http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/news/district
/southampton/9706278
.New_biomass_plans_a
__greenwash　
　
-

the idea of using compressed air to store energy probably dates back to the very fist Air Compressor, City-wide compressed air energy systems have been built since 1870.

Cities such as Paris, France; Birmingham, England;Rixdorf, Germany; Offenbach, Germany; Dresden, Germany and Buenos Aires, Argentina installed such systems.

-

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Compressed_
air_energy_storage

-

As for Liquid Air/Nitrogen Storage, good luck to them.. one more nail in Helius's coffin

-

http://www.extremete
ch.com/extreme/13723
1-british-company-ef
ficient-energy-stora
ge

Air used to store Solar/Wind energy.. one more nail in Helius's coffin.


funny I've been banging on about using compressed air to store Solar/Wind Energy for years..


here's a snip from the Echo dated,15th May 2012..


use Solar power to compress air, at sundown the stored compressed air drives on grid electrical generators, alternatively off grid smaller compressors in every Solar powered home.
-

http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/news/district
/southampton/9706278
.New_biomass_plans_a
__greenwash　
　
-

the idea of using compressed air to store energy probably dates back to the very fist Air Compressor, City-wide compressed air energy systems have been built since 1870.

Cities such as Paris, France; Birmingham, England;Rixdorf, Germany; Offenbach, Germany; Dresden, Germany and Buenos Aires, Argentina installed such systems.

-

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Compressed_
air_energy_storage

-

As for Liquid Air/Nitrogen Storage, good luck to them.. one more nail in Helius's coffin

-

http://www.extremete
ch.com/extreme/13723
1-british-company-ef
ficient-energy-stora
ge

Dan Soton wrote:
Air used to store Solar/Wind energy.. one more nail in Helius's coffin.


funny I've been banging on about using compressed air to store Solar/Wind Energy for years..


here's a snip from the Echo dated,15th May 2012..


use Solar power to compress air, at sundown the stored compressed air drives on grid electrical generators, alternatively off grid smaller compressors in every Solar powered home.
-

http://www.dailyecho

.co.uk/news/district

/southampton/9706278

.New_biomass_plans_a

__greenwash　
　
-

the idea of using compressed air to store energy probably dates back to the very fist Air Compressor, City-wide compressed air energy systems have been built since 1870.

Cities such as Paris, France; Birmingham, England;Rixdorf, Germany; Offenbach, Germany; Dresden, Germany and Buenos Aires, Argentina installed such systems.

-

http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Compressed_

air_energy_storage

-

As for Liquid Air/Nitrogen Storage, good luck to them.. one more nail in Helius's coffin

-

http://www.extremete

ch.com/extreme/13723

1-british-company-ef

ficient-energy-stora

ge

Dan if you watched the Telly this week an inventor who has been treated like a nut has proven you can run engines on liquid air & the way he's done it & the storage method is now being used by a company to convert it's waste hot air into electricity.
A wind Farm along Millbrook road ( where Helius propose to build ) connected to a Liquid Air Generator would get my vote or a Solar Array with a few Wind Turbines.
the Energy produced by this development wouldn't go to waste as it could be stored to be used at night or when the wind drops.
The NO campaign should be in favour of such a development shouldn't it?

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Air used to store Solar/Wind energy.. one more nail in Helius's coffin.


funny I've been banging on about using compressed air to store Solar/Wind Energy for years..


here's a snip from the Echo dated,15th May 2012..


use Solar power to compress air, at sundown the stored compressed air drives on grid electrical generators, alternatively off grid smaller compressors in every Solar powered home.
-

http://www.dailyecho


.co.uk/news/district


/southampton/9706278


.New_biomass_plans_a


__greenwash　
　
-

the idea of using compressed air to store energy probably dates back to the very fist Air Compressor, City-wide compressed air energy systems have been built since 1870.

Cities such as Paris, France; Birmingham, England;Rixdorf, Germany; Offenbach, Germany; Dresden, Germany and Buenos Aires, Argentina installed such systems.

-

http://en.wikipedia.


org/wiki/Compressed_


air_energy_storage

-

As for Liquid Air/Nitrogen Storage, good luck to them.. one more nail in Helius's coffin

-

http://www.extremete


ch.com/extreme/13723


1-british-company-ef


ficient-energy-stora


ge

Dan if you watched the Telly this week an inventor who has been treated like a nut has proven you can run engines on liquid air & the way he's done it & the storage method is now being used by a company to convert it's waste hot air into electricity.
A wind Farm along Millbrook road ( where Helius propose to build ) connected to a Liquid Air Generator would get my vote or a Solar Array with a few Wind Turbines.
the Energy produced by this development wouldn't go to waste as it could be stored to be used at night or when the wind drops.
The NO campaign should be in favour of such a development shouldn't it?

No, the wind turbines are as much an eyesore as the smoke pit will be. Solar YES.

Inform Al wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Air used to store Solar/Wind energy.. one more nail in Helius's coffin.


funny I've been banging on about using compressed air to store Solar/Wind Energy for years..


here's a snip from the Echo dated,15th May 2012..


use Solar power to compress air, at sundown the stored compressed air drives on grid electrical generators, alternatively off grid smaller compressors in every Solar powered home.
-

http://www.dailyecho



.co.uk/news/district



/southampton/9706278



.New_biomass_plans_a



__greenwash　
　
-

the idea of using compressed air to store energy probably dates back to the very fist Air Compressor, City-wide compressed air energy systems have been built since 1870.

Cities such as Paris, France; Birmingham, England;Rixdorf, Germany; Offenbach, Germany; Dresden, Germany and Buenos Aires, Argentina installed such systems.

-

http://en.wikipedia.



org/wiki/Compressed_



air_energy_storage

-

As for Liquid Air/Nitrogen Storage, good luck to them.. one more nail in Helius's coffin

-

http://www.extremete



ch.com/extreme/13723



1-british-company-ef



ficient-energy-stora



ge

Dan if you watched the Telly this week an inventor who has been treated like a nut has proven you can run engines on liquid air & the way he's done it & the storage method is now being used by a company to convert it's waste hot air into electricity.
A wind Farm along Millbrook road ( where Helius propose to build ) connected to a Liquid Air Generator would get my vote or a Solar Array with a few Wind Turbines.
the Energy produced by this development wouldn't go to waste as it could be stored to be used at night or when the wind drops.
The NO campaign should be in favour of such a development shouldn't it?

No, the wind turbines are as much an eyesore as the smoke pit will be. Solar YES.

We will have to agree to disagree over Wind Turbines

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. Why Subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass Incinerator ?.



Here's my Top three reasons why Helius's management should be on Medication.



1) Algae production yields.. Omega-3 fatty acids for Food products and Pharmaceuticals, as well as Fertiliser and Biodiesel fuel that can be used for (Car/Ship/Aircraft ) Transport and Power generation.


2) Algae can grow in Saltwater ponds or the Sea, thus negating the use of valuable fresh Water and Agricultural land.


3) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is used as a feedstock to promote Algae growth.




Inform Al, loosehead.. Solar and Wind power as good as they are I think you should add Algae into the mix.

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. Why Subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass Incinerator ?.



Here's my Top three reasons why Helius's management should be on Medication.



1) Algae production yields.. Omega-3 fatty acids for Food products and Pharmaceuticals, as well as Fertiliser and Biodiesel fuel that can be used for (Car/Ship/Aircraft ) Transport and Power generation.


2) Algae can grow in Saltwater ponds or the Sea, thus negating the use of valuable fresh Water and Agricultural land.


3) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is used as a feedstock to promote Algae growth.




Inform Al, loosehead.. Solar and Wind power as good as they are I think you should add Algae into the mix.

I'll be totally honest with you I know nothing what so ever about Algae power

loosehead wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..



Back in June I thought I was having a long fruitful conversation with a member of Helius's management team until I brought up the subject of Algae Biofuel.

My question.. Algae Biofuel is getting to the point where it will be commercially viable and not to soon after Taxable, at that point why should Governments continue to subsidise Helius?..


Helius's answer.. Algae Biofuel is never going to happen too many technical problems to overcome.

I wanted to follow that up with.. I know a few Algae Biofuel companies with huge potential but he just walked off, a bit odd considering the room was almost empty apart from six or seven other members of the Helius team.

For now Algae Biofuel is a dark horse but its a horse Helius's management know more about than they care to discuss.

Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. Why Subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass Incinerator ?.



Here's my Top three reasons why Helius's management should be on Medication.



1) Algae production yields.. Omega-3 fatty acids for Food products and Pharmaceuticals, as well as Fertiliser and Biodiesel fuel that can be used for (Car/Ship/Aircraft ) Transport and Power generation.


2) Algae can grow in Saltwater ponds or the Sea, thus negating the use of valuable fresh Water and Agricultural land.


3) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is used as a feedstock to promote Algae growth.




Inform Al, loosehead.. Solar and Wind power as good as they are I think you should add Algae into the mix.

I'll be totally honest with you I know nothing what so ever about Algae power

Governments Will Tax Algae Biofuel.. why subsidise Helius's Wood/Grass incinerator ?..


loosehead I'm not surprised, David Cameron & Co have Algae Biofuel near the bottom end of their priorities list, back in 2010 Southampton was heading up a Dream team of 70 algae scientists hoping find a winning formula for cultivating 70 billion litres of algae biofuel a year.

given the Algae research in Southampton I find Helius's move here more than a coincidence.