Options
If solar power is so damn wonderful..
radio4extracrap
Posts: 2,933 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Thosr nasty Tories have turned off kour streetlights at midnight.
If solar power is so efficient and wonderful why isnt solar power used to light the streetlights?
Just a thought.
If solar power is so efficient and wonderful why isnt solar power used to light the streetlights?
Just a thought.
0
Comments
If there isn't much of a need for lighting once pretty much everyone is in bed, then why pay extra for 24 hour operation?
Your premise is Solar power, its a false argument.
Renewable Power now accounts for 50% of Scotland s power. Go Wind.
That doesn't mean much at all.
It's all very well asserting that 50% of power comes from wind but that's pretty-much irrelevant unless it means you can close down conventional power stations, which you can't because you can't rely on wind power.
The major benefit of wind-power, at the moment, is to investors because they know that the electricity wind-turbines produce WILL get used (and paid for) while regular power stations are expected to stay on line to cover the shortfall on days when the wind doesn't blow.
Why would you waste power in any circumstances? It's irrelevant whether it's "green" or gas/coal/nuclear. The council has to buy it from the power company and I'd prefer they used my taxes on something more important.
You probably don't have daughters or sons on minimum wage jobs having to make their way home from work in the pitch black. Sometimes the common good is more important than personal choices.
Each light fitting has two small fluorescent tubes and one of the tubes switches off around midnight.
Daft thing is, it's an incredibly precarious attempt at saving money.
A couple of years ago, something went wrong with the leccy around here and all the street lights were off for about 4 days.
During that time, somebody tripped over an uneven paving slab in the dark and ended up suing the council for about £40k IIRC.
You turn the lights off and save pennies night after night but it's only going to take a couple of civil actions and any savings are going to be flushed straight down the legal crapper.
Is that going to be the stock answer to all cutbacks?
More hazardous IMO and especially the night before the binmen come when the bins are out on the pavements, there's also uneven footpaths, rubbish and dog poo to contend with - all of which get hardly any attention nowadays due to cuts.
It's pitch black and no people shouldn't have to carry a torch, that's going backwards and as Si_Crewe has said, it will cost more than has been saved come any compo claims.
That is the price you pay for green energy, I'm all for nuclear but there is not a politician in this green country of ours that will say that. So expensive green winds and solars and wishing bones it is.
If solar power is so wonderful and efficient then why are not streetlights powered by it? Or is it not what it's cracked up to be in the adverts?
And I'll repeat the key point of my reply. Why focus on solar? Why not ask "If nuclear power is so wonderful why aren't streetlights powered by it".
Everything costs money, even solar power.
Then start a new thread. I wish to discuss solar.
No, you wish to use a totally fake argument to attack solar.
A lack of lighting didn't make the paving slab uneven. My mother-in-law once tripped over one in broad daylight in the middle of a glorious summer day
I wish to discuss solar. If you don't, go away.
The point is that we need to have a cohesive energy policy which we don't have now as all three parties are more interested in delivering profits to private businessmen than delivering cheap and efficient energy to the public.
My basic understanding of hybrid cars are that it uses battery power when it can but uses petrol when it can't.
We can use the same for our power needs. Where we can use solar, wind or tidal power then do so. It will lessen the need for using up fossil fuels and nuclear energy.
I would imagine until we had an effective way to store solar energy we will not be able to use it at night.
It is not a question of one source over the other but all of them in harmony.
No, I want to stay and highlight your hypocrisy.
What's the point of debating solar when you have started with a premise which doesn't make sense.
The issue of solar power and streetlights being turned off are not really connected are they?
Unless you're asking why streetlamps aren't detached from the national grid and individually generate their own power (how pricey would that be?) then I'm struggling to understand the question. The grid is fed by a whole host of electricity generating methods including solar, so why single that particular method (and street lamps) out?
I'd be more inclined to ask why it isn't mandatory for all new developments to be covered in panels be they houses, office buildings, schools, hospitals or whatever.
Renewables don't all go offline at once so there is often wind at night, while a calm, wind-free day may be sunny. Probably not all wind farms will be becalmed at the same time, but we'll still have hydro, geothermal, tidal, pumped storage etc. These sources need to be seen as working together to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
We still need a 'conventional' system to provide power when all else fails but this for less total power generated, so we reduce fuel costs, reliance on dwindling resources from sources outside our control - and of course, CO2 emissions!
The OP linking solar with street lights makes only a little sense. Maybe he's asking this: "if solar is in effect free why should we save energy by turning off street lights?" This depends on ability to store the energy, but batteries aren't cheap or very efficient so it's not a good plan.
I really want the lights to go off to give people a chance to see the sky.
People out late can carry a torch. Not asking people to make such easy provision for their own minority needs but demanding that everyone else makes more expensive provision for the few seems rather lefty to me.