Can you please do a 2 minute survey as part of my Geography GCSE coursework. It would really help. Its all multiple choice and very easy questions (only 10 of them)
Done. Better than plenty of surveys I've seen from 'professionals' (I'm a market researcher), [including one published today with a headline "American teens keen on Apple'. You don't say!]
Pity that you didn't include anywhere if you thought renewable energy was waste of money or ask peoples opinion on nuclear energy, is it good or bad, my thoughts are for whats its worth, wind energy total waste of money (coldest weather of winter is when high pressure site on top of us in winter, when this happens there's no wind) , tidal power not spending enough on research, unfortunately nuclear energy will eventual become the prime uk source of energy, as the power requirements can be turned up or down when required. Regards Kerry
Done. A few of the questions are subjective and dependant on the respondent's local environment, but best of luck with the course. Long time since I did my Geography A...we had to go out and survey people in the street in those days...or go to the cafe and make it up amongst ourselves!!
Done. - If only the real geography GCSE could be as easy as that. I'm year 11 and I'm stuck on my own coursework at the moment. Good luck with yours BensonFC
Pity that you didn't include anywhere if you thought renewable energy was waste of money or ask peoples opinion on nuclear energy, is it good or bad, my thoughts are for whats its worth, wind energy total waste of money (coldest weather of winter is when high pressure site on top of us in winter, when this happens there's no wind) , tidal power not spending enough on research, unfortunately nuclear energy will eventual become the prime uk source of energy, as the power requirements can be turned up or down when required. Regards Kerry
Sorry Kerry, I completely disagree with you about wind energy. Not because the technical weather point you make isn't true, but despite it. In reality the times when we are stuck with a winter "high" are becoming rare indeed, and when they come, they don't usually stay parked over us for long. Wind energy is not a panacea, it can make a contribution to our energy needs which require a balanced approach.
As for new nuclear, well it may need to happen but the decommissioning costs are such that governments need to think long and hard about the true cost/benefits otherwise a some point downstream, the costs will have to be borne either by consumers (via bills) or tax payers. In addition you have potential catastrophic environmental risks associated with nuclear despite current safety standards and containment structures. I used to work for a Japanese company and I looked at the potential risks of a catastrophic event such as we have seen. The Japanese were complacent in the extreme about the level of protection engineered into their nuclear plants. No theoretical calculation can necessarily model what happen in the worse case scenario. When I heard the size of the quake, I knew they were in trouble.
Personally I have always felt that if we are going to move gradually from fossil and nuclear to something "clean", then wave power was the way forward if investment costs are written down over many years. This really represents a continuous source of renewal energy. Geo-thermal always seemed likely to be massively expensive.
In the end I have no doubt they will go for some new nuclear (because the politicians will run out of other options and will let future generations deal with the afternath). Wind and wave will make up some and the balance will be clean coal and gas with gas production coming from fracking of "shale" gas.
Sorry Bing, we will just have to agree to disagree on wind energy, but somehow I think we actually agree on the remainder of the energy issues you raise, similar to you I work in a related energy usage field so we both know the advantages and disadvantages of all forms of energy.
You point about the high not staying put was a fair point, however over the last few winters there has been a subtle change in the climate, who know's if its a temporary blip and the gradual warmer winters return or a continued cooling off will continue, if a more continental air flow is more common then wind will drop in the winter, however if the winters revert to the slightly warmer affairs then you would be proved right as the winds would tend to flow of the Atlantic and thus become stronger (can't resist it perhaps to strong and the wind turbines have to shut down), there another thing that has the ability to affect our weather and that the slow shutting down of the gulf stream, this has just started to be picked up over the last few years (one theory goes along the lines that the melting ice caps has altered the salinity of the water coming of Alaska, which can't remember this bit very well makes the less salty water of the gulf stream sink), if this happens then the Atlantic storms won't be so fierce and the uk winters will become even more continental based. Ok the last paragraph is full of ifs and buts, and obviously may not happen but I think it should be considered.
My point about nuclear actually said unfortunately, as I am not a fan, but again in my opinion if if you take into account that it is possible that high pressure in summer or winter can sit over the country for periods up to a week then can you base your energy supply on this, also you must take into account that there are days when the turbines have to shut down because the wind is to high, again how do you back up the energy when this happens? The only constant energy source I see is tidal power and we haven't spent enough money on R&D. Therefore unless we go down the fossil fuel route, nuclear is unfortunately the only answer. Regards (sorry if I bored everyone) Kerry
Personally I think the govt should get all the nations unemployed to peddle for 40 hrs a week on exercise bikes rigged up to generators, creating a mass of cheap electricity.
Solar - are you talking photo-electric or heat gathering. If you are talking about photo-electric - no problem with it just, if I remember the science, there is yet to be cost/energy produced that makes it viable especially when the sun doesn't shine.
I have an associate who works in this field - I should ask him really.
Comments
Done. Better than plenty of surveys I've seen from 'professionals' (I'm a market researcher), [including one published today with a headline "American teens keen on Apple'. You don't say!]
Good luck with it
Regards
Kerry
Done!
Done, but couldnt give an answer to q1 or q2.
Keep us updated on how you get on with your GCSEs
Ditto.
As for new nuclear, well it may need to happen but the decommissioning costs are such that governments need to think long and hard about the true cost/benefits otherwise a some point downstream, the costs will have to be borne either by consumers (via bills) or tax payers. In addition you have potential catastrophic environmental risks associated with nuclear despite current safety standards and containment structures. I used to work for a Japanese company and I looked at the potential risks of a catastrophic event such as we have seen. The Japanese were complacent in the extreme about the level of protection engineered into their nuclear plants. No theoretical calculation can necessarily model what happen in the worse case scenario. When I heard the size of the quake, I knew they were in trouble.
Personally I have always felt that if we are going to move gradually from fossil and nuclear to something "clean", then wave power was the way forward if investment costs are written down over many years. This really represents a continuous source of renewal energy. Geo-thermal always seemed likely to be massively expensive.
In the end I have no doubt they will go for some new nuclear (because the politicians will run out of other options and will let future generations deal with the afternath). Wind and wave will make up some and the balance will be clean coal and gas with gas production coming from fracking of "shale" gas.
You point about the high not staying put was a fair point, however over the last few winters there has been a subtle change in the climate, who know's if its a temporary blip and the gradual warmer winters return or a continued cooling off will continue, if a more continental air flow is more common then wind will drop in the winter, however if the winters revert to the slightly warmer affairs then you would be proved right as the winds would tend to flow of the Atlantic and thus become stronger (can't resist it perhaps to strong and the wind turbines have to shut down), there another thing that has the ability to affect our weather and that the slow shutting down of the gulf stream, this has just started to be picked up over the last few years (one theory goes along the lines that the melting ice caps has altered the salinity of the water coming of Alaska, which can't remember this bit very well makes the less salty water of the gulf stream sink), if this happens then the Atlantic storms won't be so fierce and the uk winters will become even more continental based. Ok the last paragraph is full of ifs and buts, and obviously may not happen but I think it should be considered.
My point about nuclear actually said unfortunately, as I am not a fan, but again in my opinion if if you take into account that it is possible that high pressure in summer or winter can sit over the country for periods up to a week then can you base your energy supply on this, also you must take into account that there are days when the turbines have to shut down because the wind is to high, again how do you back up the energy when this happens? The only constant energy source I see is tidal power and we haven't spent enough money on R&D. Therefore unless we go down the fossil fuel route, nuclear is unfortunately the only answer.
Regards (sorry if I bored everyone)
Kerry
I'll be running for PM next term................