That’s luck if I’ve heard it, working in offshore wind is a massive dream of mine if/when we get some more capacity up over here in the States, good on you
The United Kingdom has 7 out of 10 of the largest offshore wind farms on Earth with the top 5 all being British, this frankly does not get talked about enough. the UK is on course for having more than the current 15 out of the 20 largest wind farms by 2030 coupled with new nuclear plants being built and more in planning the UK could be the First "MAJOR " industrialised power to let go of hydrocarbon power generation .
There is another twist to this story when we go back in history. Before coal we had windpower. In the 17th century the Netherlands were not only a major trading power, but also a major industrial power, using wind power from windmills to saw timber (which was also used to make ships), but also to process a range of other products.
Yep. Windmills and watermills (along with rapid mechanization of workshops) were the main engine of European explosive industrial growth in the 17th century, especially in the Netherlands, Southern England, Northern France, and Northern Germany. Thanks to water and wind power, that particular region overtook Northern Italy and Yangtze river valley as the wealthiest and most industrious region in the world.
Just last week it emerged the UK is the first major economy in the world to have halved its CO2 emissions. But not a peep from the mainstream media. UK emissions are now at levels not seen since 1890. 52% drop since 1977.
That's not entirely true. Our domestic emissions have dropped drastically and depending on the weather on some days the vast majority of the UKs power comes from renewables. That being said often the headline government figures don't include emissions from consumption. Stuff like imports (mainly meat and finished products like electronics), aviation and exports (mainly oil and gas) have a big contribution to our emissions
@craigstephens93 No, the numpties we got landed with are those who fail to see how Britain has done this (a) after already industrialising and building out infrastructure, thus having contributed to a huge amount of the damage done, and (b) while importing goods from overseas territories, essentially outsourcing the emissions, continuing to contribute to more damage being done.
@@Dorgpoop why would they? Those are other countries industries producing those goods, creating jobs and earning profits on them. If they need to decarbonise those industries it should be down to their governments to do so.
It's also worth noting that 2022 was the first year that the UK was a net exporter of electricity since the mid 1970s. Although other factors contributed (such as the temporary pauses for various French nuclear reactors), the main reason why the UK could supply excess electricity was due to the expansion of North Sea wind power. It's quite incredible to think that as recently as late 2021, electricity was a strategic weakness for the UK (e.g. France threatening to cut power supplies over a fishing dispute, although this would have likely fallen foul of international law), but it is now instead fast becoming a major export industry.
Wait, is this the same Britain who's had some of the highest electricity cost hikes in Europe, same Britain who's much touted offshore wind expansion fell absolutely flat, after all energy companies pulled out of the new bids and contracts? What are you guys on, I need some of that special copium supply. Given that the vast majority of UK energy production is fossil fuels, I highly doubts we're in any position to be a net exporter of anything.
That cutting of power is a slightly different story than you've hinted at as well its still a threat France can do. This is because it's targeted at an island called Guernsey, who gets 100% of there power from France but are under British rule. They have no direct connection to the UKs grid as its just so much closer to France.
It's about time we benefited from our bad weather! Seriously though I think we are very lucky in energy potential from coal in the 1800s to the present. I think we just need to be realistic and keep investigating in nuclear.
I'm a bit sceptical because of the intermittence That said I'm for wind power but in a context of the port folio of energy mix we have Which I hope will include nuclear and geothermal
@@vinniechan yes absolutely unless we see massive advances in energy storage we will always need a reliable and rapid source of power independent of the weather
@@GooseSpringsteenthis is why I'm so frustrated about the narrative surrounding net zero It's always about emissions reduction but no one is talking about a vision of what type of energy mix and how much energy this country needs As for energy storage I reckon sodium battery tech will take over grid scale applications For the grid you dont need to go fro. 0-60 in 3 seconds and we have abundant supply in sodium which doesn't wreck the environment Again the media keep talking about the next battery storage facility (at the moment all lithium ion battery) instead of looking at what's in the pipeline We simply don't have enough supply of lithium on earth to meet our needs
@@vinniechan it's frustrating because like everything a lot of people just want to push a simple message like "STOP OIL" when oil is a necessary part of modern civilisation in a countless amount of ways beyond petrol or diesel. I totally support renewables and caring for the environment. I think microplastics will be a massive issue in human health going forward too. But we cannot reject industrial civilisation. We need solutions and progress guided by what is realistic.
9:30 there is a bit of a miss understanding here. carbon that is captured by land plants can be sequestated just as well as the carbon captured by sea plants, if you choose to do so. The sinking down to the sea floor is actually a bit of a problem dependent on the local ecosystem. The case for water plants is, that they are actually way more efficient growers, than land plants. If care to calculate the amount of carbon you can capture with land plants you quickly learn, that the potential is really not that high.
As of the posting of this video’s public release 15 mins ago from this post, the UK is currently running on 63% wind. The next biggest is nuclear at 15.5%
Source? Ten second web search says the opposite. Mostly oil and gas, with 10% wind at best. If you only count mains electricity of households then wind is a bit higher.
@@HisCoconutGun I think he meant literally 15 minutes ago, as in, at that exact moment it was 63%. 27% is the average, but on very windy days, it's close to 100%. Hopefully, storage tech will advance rapidly over the next few years, so all that energy doesn't have to be wasted.
As a Norwegian, the Nr. 1 (!!!) thing on top of my head, after the gas-pipelines in the Baltic just go blew up, without anyone having any clear answer who it was. I can imagine that the Faroese Islands (or perhaps the Orkney's, that is already important for both the UK and NATO) to be a base to control the North-South route. As Skagerak/Kattegat in Denmark/Sweden/Norway, and the Channel in Britain is probably very highly developed with defense infrastructure already, but the Norwegian Ocean have been a favorite place for USA-Soviet/Russia submarines to do cat and mouse playing for decades. This can clearly not continue, if the whole of Northern Europe is going to depend on electricity from fragile, easily destroyed farms and cables. A submarine defense system will have to be enforced into the area. Something that will be more easy once Sweden are accepted as the final piece of the chessboard, making St. Petersburg and the maritime advantage it once had, into a non-issue, since the Baltic is shallow and more easily monitored.
Very relevant point! Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish journalists documented earlier this year that Russian "science" vessels investigated and mapped critical underwater infrastructure around wind farms in the North Sea and Kattegat. Unfortunately, it is very easy to disable these wind farms without any chance of being noticed before it is too late. Wind farms is the future, but simple defensive measures must be taken when constructing these very important components of our collective power infrastructure
It's been proven definitively that it was the US and Ukraine who blew up the pipeline. Anyone who bought the official narrative that Russia blew up their own pipeline was a complete idiot.
Thanks for pointing this out, I'm sure I'm not the only one who wouldn't have considered the possibility. Considering the various floating turbine ideas and their (relatively) fragile cables, subs + wind farm = nightmare in waiting. Whether intentional sabotage due to geopolitical intrigue, or just an unfortunate accident with international repercussions, it's a recipe for disaster. Imagine one of those cat-and-mouse games fouling the anchor lines, sinking the sub and bringing down the turbine. Let's be creative and say the turbine crashing also sinks the opposing sub. Now we've got two enemy subs needing desperate search-and-rescue in a debris field in the middle of the seafloor. With American and Russian sabre-rattling complicated by the turbine's owner nation - and corporation - howling about their losses. Scary.
it sounds very weird and strange to say that a neighboring country of yours is your enemy and you find it dangerous them having military presence next/close/in your sea (ignoring the fact that their borders are right there and anything that happens geographically in the area will affect them too), while you accept the presence in your sea of a country that is on the other side of the planet and in another continent thousands of miles away from your borders. your way of thinking doesn't really make logical sense. and if you add the history factor it doesn't make sense even more when there is no proof of usa helping or being an ally on any country on the planet but rather they are all examples of wars, exploitation, coups, genocides etc. its common sense that the furthest one is the one that cares the least about your country but still you choose that one for ally... if this mindset represents the majority of norway this is very sad for a country.
@@cinqbuns I can see on your profile that you are from Greece. By the logic you are applying you should have no problem with your neighbor Turkey, right? But how about the Greek islands close to the Turkish coast? How about the division of Cyprus? My point being that just because you are neighbors doesn't mean you have the same outlook, priorities nor geopolitical necessaties, and you of all should be aware of this
EnBW (German) and bp (British) were successful at an auction in Scotland: The partners are planning a 2.9 gigawatt offshore wind farm that also includes a power cable to Germany.
As an aside, the Dogger Bank was likely inhabited by humans for tens of thousands of years before it flooded. If they end up digging footings out there, I hope there's archaeologists involved.
I suspect they won't be but it would definitely be cool if it became feasible to do some of that. Probably more useful to dig up the easier to reach stuff on land though.
@@jonevansauthor At least in the UK, I believe that there is a law or guidline that says archaeologists get a first say in any building work of this magnitude. It's part of the surveying process. It gets run by a group of archaeologists before any work begins and they can say if the area is of any interest or not. If any finds turn up during the building process, work gets indefinately halted until the archaeologists have investigated the area. It's actually held up some pretty big building projects in the past. In some cases, the area even gets declared an area of national interest and no building or development can happen there.
It's bound to have archaeological significance somewhere across an area as large as this kind of development will need. The question in my mind would be how feasible any archaeological investigation would be when the dig site is 95m underwater. Underwater digs do happen, and I don't know offhand how deep they've been conducted, but usually they're focused on a single object like a shipwreck. Even with a discrete target like that, they're still very difficult work. I'm not sure how they could conduct a meaningful investigation across such a vast area when it's also at the bottom of the sea.
I'm a public tech media person // who is also an offshore seaweed farmer who is currently looking for more strategic partners to help build public awareness for offshore renewable energy that combine offshore wind and wave and seaweed, so it was remarkable that you covered this issue so well given your relatively limited research staff. Three cheers! If you are interested in the subject of offshore seaweed and how far down the kelp really grows, then I'm happy to chat with you about that.
In Florida seaweed is referred to as bales of marijuana that were thrown overboard from smuggling boats when coast guard ships get a little too curious.
Public awareness? When has the public`s awareness or opinion ever swayed governments. You need to concentrate on NGO`s, big business and lobby groups as they run the government.
they both need storage solutions - wind is better in the winter but solar's generation patterns are much more reliable meaning long term grid planning is easier.
in the context of middle and northern europe they complement each other quite well. there is more wind in the time of the year, when there is less sun. But in terms of fine tuning solar power is more cooperative than wind power.
@@MusikCassette It does often seem to be overlooked by those opposed to investment in 'renewables' that when there's no wind, there's often more sun. That said, whilst I see no reason to avoid installing solar where viable in the UK, it's clearly not going to be any particularly significant part of the whole country's electricity generation. Where it clearly does have a place is in providing localized generation, potentially lowering people's/company's bills and lessening demand on the grid.
Interesting. The Scottish independence thing is a bit of a red herring as it looks increasingly unlikely, ever more so as North Sea oil production declines. While it is true Brexit complicates matters there is every reason to believe its impact on strategic cooperation will recede.
the Scots have the right to leave the English behind.... the Scots know they are welcome in Europe... while the English need to relocate to the pacific, because nobody want them anymore close by!
Brexit hasn’t impacted trade at all really. Theres been no evidence for a fall in trade or export/imports. Freedom of movement yes. So there was never going to be an impact on strategic cooperation. And for Scotland, the SNP is dead completely. Every thinktank has crushed Scottish independence as a calamity.
It's encouraging to see a video about projects like this getting the channel's in-depth analysis. So many of the videos cover wars and other geopolitical tensions, and even the ones about grand projects often have some nefarious angle to them. This one gives a lot more hope for the future than the usual omens of doom.
There's a simple reason for why the omens of doom are usual, positive stories do not get clicks. Check out sources like Hannah Ritchie from our world in data (and just that site as a whole). It won't tell you there's no problem, but it will tell you that a lot of progress is being made and there are plenty of reasons to be hopeful for the future. We've already averted the worst case climate scenarios (thank goodness) and there's little reason that progress won't continue to accelerate.
If the UK ever wants to get serious about decarbonizing its economy it will need to restart and rebuild its nuclear reactor fleet. I suggest starting with CANDU reactors and Moltex SMR's both of which back up hydro power well in Canada and produce the vast majority of our clean energy along with limited solar and wind development...
Sigh, not if Danielle Smith has her way. Wind and solar power are profitable here in Alberta and companies were actively, eagerly, increasing production but she put a "temporary" halt to all new renewable power construction. A fast growing sector of the economy, and she stomped on it. Totally in agreement with CANDUs and Moltex SMRs. Something that not a lot of people know about the Moltex SMR design is that it has a built-in "24 hour" battery/buffer for load following. You have the molten salt in the reactor, that goes through a heat exchanger to melt salt in a giant tank, and then that salt goes through a heat exchanger to boil water to spin the turbine(s). The thermal capacity of the giant tank is 24 hours of output from the reactor. The sustained electrical output of the whole plant is limited by the thermal output of the reactor, but the _peak_ electrical output is limited by the maximum salt-to-water heat exchange rate. I don't know this for certain, but I assume the tank is also fitted with heaters that can draw power from the grid. In June turn the reactor down to 50% and store excess solar production.
Yeah that sounds interesting. Now go ahead and find the places in the UK where you can get one permitted and find the people with the right skills who can build it a competitive cost per KWH. It is not going to happen. I agree that nuclear is worth investing in but I am also practical. It is not going to happen
The UK is investing in nuclear infact look into the rolls Royce mini reactor that could be ready soon whereby when brought online can power a city at a time but being able to build them at scale
Doesn't that mean there would be even more microplastics in the ocean if we started to mass wave power? We still don't know how important oceanic biodiversity is to our climate. While we invest towards a more green future, these things must be solved simultaneously with research and international regulation. We should also start to remove existing waste from oceans, it's a disgrace to humanity how bad things already are.
@@Purjo92 you mean, the massive ocean cleanup project which is handling that and has been going for years? And yes, we do know the oceans are extremely important to climate. We've known that for centuries. Who is it that you think doesn't know that? Wave generators aren't happening because no-one has developed a technology worth implementing at scale and we have this stuff called wind and solar, which makes it a complete waste of time worrying about it, unless or until someone makes a massive leap in tech. Microplastics, don't come into it.
@@Purjo92 Microplastics are generally formed via the breakdown of soft synthetic products, e.g. food packaging, tires and clothes. In contrast, given that wave power generators are mechanical power generators, they would need to be extremely robust and not wear down over use, which would indicate the use of alloys and strong synthetic materials over softer alternatives. So it would not necessarily become a significant source of additional contamination.
As a former sailor, maintenance on these will be a nightmare and I can guarantee that once these hulks are no longer profitable they'll just be abandoned navigation hazards.
All that aside, what about a war? If this area becomes reliant on mostly solar or wind power and then those pieces of hardware are all destroyed or not maintained...no one has power? This is what's tough around the world at the moment, where we're trying to evolve our technologies and industries to benefit humanity more as a whole but profiteering (mostly from oil) and geopolitical schadenfreude inhibit us. The best choices for us can turn out to be the worst if others have plans to use it against us.
@@megapangolin1093 What scrap metal bridage? There have been rusty anti-aircraft towers situated in the english channel for 70 years now. I strongly suspect we will have thousands of rusty defunct wind turbines dotted all over the north sea in 70 years acting as navigational hazards.
Submarines are more stealthy today than ever before, and not only because they themselves are quiter, but because the background noise in the oceans are so much higher. North sea with windmills will effectively be an invisibility shroud for subs, making this are a weird area of both critical infrastructure and perfect playground for subsea sabotage missions.
but thats also why the north sea is well protected. NATO has been doing shit tons of naval excersizes in the north sea around british and norwegian coasts.
Yes and no. More noise but far more places to put listening devices too. No need for long distance sensors when a bunch of short distance ones will do the job.
There are plenty of alternative ways of detecting submarines, other than sound. The UK can, and does, detect submarines in the North Sea from the land, without using acoustics.
Energy generation will always be a target whether on land or sea during a conflict. If someone is really stupid enough to risk a $2B sub to take out a $1m windmill then catching them won’t be too much of a challenge.
In the September preceding the Ukraine Invasion, the North Sea experienced 2-3 weeks of very low wind, and for about 3 days, the wind didn't blow at all affecting everyone from the British Isles to Germany. The sudden and sustained demand for energy exceeded the ability of other EU nations supply and prices spiked. Then Russia happened and it got worse, putting many into genuine poverty when their bills quadrupled, followed by sanctions and then with high inflation. Wind energy is cool, but it can't provide baseline power. Who'd have thought basing your economic future on a power source that changes strength and direction daily was a bad idea? When there isn't enough wind the Govt pays a fee to the farms, but when the wind is too strong the Govt pays again to STOP the turbines to prevent damage. In the UK the energy bill also contains a 25% 'Green' charge to subsidise the wind farms. Somehow, though wind is free, the infrastructure build cost, and maintenance means the farms can't make a profit without Govt. assistance? *The incompetence and grift is leading people to make rash conclusions. * Just to add that Scottish Power which boasts "100%" renewable sourced green energy increased it's prices 110% as Ukraine dragged on [2 weeks til Russia falls they promised] customers have written complaints to the chairman and CEO demanding explanation. Either they are price gouging their customers during a time of crisis or they're using false advertising in their claims about 100% energy supplied from renewable/green sources. The wind didn't blow for 3 days and you raise the bill by what now? From a 'free' source not linked to war or OPEC in any way? They're still waiting for a reply lol but we're all being taken for fools.
And last I checked, last wind farm bid in UK had ZERO bids... and all the wind farms are demanding more subsidies as they are all going bankrupt.... ya don't say... You mean government SUCKS at building anything? Wind is useless without gargantuan pumped hydro storage facilities and UK has no such land available to build them on. Norway does. Switzerland/Austria do. Just need to invade, evict them all and build gargantuan dams... Hey, Germany, got a job for you....
We need more gear in the Caspian store!! I bought a simple black shirt with the CR logo as a tiny white print on the left part of the chest and it was one of my all time favorite tees. I’ve since outgrown it and my wife now sports it as a night shirt but I need another!!
They started the Industrial Revolution, created the largest empire so far in human history, and now are turning the North Sea into a power plant, the British never ceases to amaze me.
Industrial revolution first take hold in Netherlands. But they run out of steam due to low land mass and resources. Britain merely pick up the torch Netherland unable to carry
@@nomad640 you dont start a 'revolution' by dipping your toes in the water... a revolution is started by a lot of momentum, in this case Britain. Netherland is irrelevant
A note on the Scottish "maritime border dispute": the subnational maritime border between England and Scotland was drawn by the central government in accordance with international law. An independent Scotland would neither challenge, nor have any basis for challenging, this border. The "dispute" is purely in the minds of a few independence activists. It isn't real and will have no real impact on the future.
the Scots have the right to challenge decisions made by an occupying country about their legit possessions... the English will learn how it is if nobody cares what they think!
Incorrect. As pointed out on the EEZ map in this video. if Scotland should be separated, its maritime borders will also be a point of contention and will need to be ratified with England. Its not as simple as you make it. I believe the disunion with Scotland won't happen but I know very well once certain resources such as for eg Scottish fuel becomes extinct this tune will change, VERY RAPIDLY.
In the end, even while the UK would have a strong argument for the existing border, it would still be used in any independence negotiations, for other concessions. Just like recent constitutional battles, even if its clear the Scots would not win the case, they try to appeal to supporters and at least have the small chance to win.
Wrong. It was done by parliamentary order by the then Labour government, with no basis in any law except the law they created in the Scotland Act, *and, crucially without any debate in Parliament, essentially in secret.* The order reads thus: _Whereas a draft of this Order has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament in accordance with section 115(1) of, and paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 7 to, the Scotland Act 1998(1);_ _Now, therefore, Her Majesty, in exercise of the powers conferred upon Her by section 126(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 is pleased, by and with the advice of Her Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered, as follows:_ See: _Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999_
@@mrrolandlawrence Oh! I guess foreigners are interested in investing in Europe instead of utilizing Renewable Energy opportunity in Asia and Africa along with Latin American 😁
@@SusCalvinit is nice to see it has largely been co operative so far. There will be hiccups in negotiations, but 100 years ago nations would have gone to war over this real estate.
Note that other countries around the North Sea basin are also developing their wind energy capacity, so I doubt they will want to buy much from the UK. Electricity isn't like oil. You can't stick it in a tanker and send it anywhere in the world to the highest bidder. The British Isles are also subject to high pressure anticyclones which settle over the entire North Sea basin for days at a time, delivering little or no wind.
Germany has signed an agreement with the UK to work towards hydrogen production on the Dogger Bank which will then be transferred to the European mainland. It is perfectly feasible to store hydrogen, the Dogger Bank is the prime location for wind turbines and around 70% of it is in the the UK's EEZ.
@@glynnwright1699 That's a good idea, I've thought for a while that using surplus wind energy to produce hydrogen is far more sensible that storing it in batteries. There should be more impetus on developing hydrogen powered cars instead of just EVs
@@brendanpells912 They are hoping to repurpose some of the gas pipelines for the task. It turns out that moving electrical energy is prohibitively expensive as the distance from shore increases. Turning it to hydrogen and using pipelines to bring it ashore is more economical.
this is what im thinking for few years now u.k can literally be the energy supplier of europe as it's very windy and could be used to harvest energy thru wind turbines
@KingKobiGames Spain is going to be very important for the European hydrogen market. However, British wind energy is going to be very important for the industry of the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium.
I actually built a ship detection project and the first thing I noticed was the dogger back wind farm. I've been actively monitoring it's construction for the last 1.5 years. I keep a webmap updated online, but I don't think i'm able to post links here.
This has been underway for more than 15 years but the construction of our offshore wind farms has accelerated since Brexit as we no longer act in tandem with the EU's energy polices and need to ensure the security of our supplies. The world's largest offshore windfarm Hornsea Two was completed last year and two others along the east coast of Britain will become fully operational in 2024.
10 years well spent. You'd be on my list of Fantasy League of Dinner Party Guests. I hope to see more vids, but I hope you get some time to just relax! Thank you Tom!
It's a shame these sorts of things aren't talked about enough these days the general populous and media are very quick to focus on everything wrong with the country right now but there is rarely any attention given to the good things like this.
Lots of love to Britain from one of your American cousins. I know we give each other a lot of crap but it's nice to see the UK take a W after several years of Ls.
Genuine questions What are the ecological impacts of giant wind farms in the ocean and how much does it harm wildlife? How much pollution is being created by the turbine blades when they need to be replaced? And most importantly, how is this superior to nuclear energy that isnt reliant on whether conditions?
well for starters when these power generators fail (which; given enough time, will happen) the north sea (and its biome) wont glow in the dark for a few decades. The fact that; from space, it looks like it is being set on fire due to all those drilling platforms out gassing is not lost to me. However those drilling platforms can be repurposed to wind/wave energy collection at less expense than making brand new platforms as cheaply as possible.
It is superior because there is no decommissioning process and having to bury radioactive waste which has a half-life ranging from 24,000 to literally billions of years, contaminating forever the areas in which it is disposed of.
@@francisedward8713 all of the nuclear fuel used by the US in its history would only take up an equivalent space to a football field stacked 10 meters high. That amount of space is, by orders of magnitude, smaller than what most preceive. The waist is also solid and recycling/efficiency techniques in newer reactors are far surpior than in the past. Wind relies on weather, takes considerable space and kills wildlife (to what extent is open debate), and produces significant, albiet nonradioactive, waist from only turbine blades. At this point nuclear is unquestionably the far superior green alternative.
Commissioning of a Nuclear power plant is a decade long process and one which the UK does not have the ability to do with existing domestic industry. On top of that Windmills are the definition of modular this is good for all the same reasons that motivate the attempted development of modular fission plants.
Only that THE CAPITAL COSTS required to BUILD, SET UP AND MAINTAIN these deep sea wind mills will be ASTRONOMICALLY HIGHER for each megawatt produced than ANY ALTERNATIVE there is or will be. The Friesland Windpark that's in the Netherlands is set up in waters that are less than 50m deep and even with subsidies from the local government, its financial costs for every Megawatt produced is and will continue to be higher than other sources of energy available right now. Remember, these are costs for an offshore windfarm that's located in one of the most ideal position in terms of construction and maintenance arrangements. Imagine the costs for setting up deep sea wind farms and the MILLIONS required to maintain them along with the thousands of miles of cables burried almost a mile deep in the ocean. I am gobsmacked to seeing the comments of people jumping for joy celebrating what equates to giving their incomes away for extortionate energy prices.
Impressive video! ⚡ The tale of energy is truly global, with key advancements like electromagnetic induction (England, 1831) and the electric motor (also England, 1832) laying the groundwork for our reliance on electricity. While Denmark pioneered the first practical wind turbine for electricity in 1891, Scotland proudly hosted the world's first large-scale wind farm in 1957. And speaking of wind power's giants, Hornsea 2 in the UK currently holds the crown for the world's largest operational offshore wind farm. Though, keep an eye on the Dogger Bank Wind Farm, also in the UK, which is set to claim the title upon completion in 2026. While wind and solar continue their ascent, fossil fuels still dominate the global energy mix. However, the tide is turning with renewables rapidly gaining ground. This progress is evident in agreements like the recent UK-EU energy security pact, a positive step towards continued cooperation despite the complex geopolitical landscape. Speaking of European leaders, Denmark reigns supreme with an impressive 86% of its energy derived from renewables. While Scotland, despite ambitious targets, currently relies heavily on fossil fuels (70%). However, the UK, with around 40% of its electricity from renewables, boasts an ambitious goal of achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and 100% renewable energy generation by 2035 (potentially with hydrogen storage). Germany, another renewable energy titan, gets nearly half its electricity from renewables and continues to invest heavily in clean energy tech. Overall, the energy landscape is evolving rapidly, and Europe is at the forefront of this exciting shift. It's a story of collaboration, innovation, and a collective push towards a sustainable future.
Isn't it the case though that Scotland uses non renewables as much of its renewable energy is exported. It generates nearly enough renewable energy for it's own needs. Storage is another issue.
Trouble is, without Government subsidy there is no profit to be made in manufacture, installation or running these wind farms and the wind generators themselves are not eco-friendly. Of course they do not provide a continus power source either so need fossil fuel power backup.
Shame most of it is owned by other countries that charge us a premium for the using the turbines, also when it's too windy and the turbines are turned off...we still have to pay
With an average depth of 95m, and with some free drivers in the world that can go to 120m. It's pretty crazy thinking potentially, someone on one breath could swim to the bottom of the north sea and back again (im sure ocean currents prevent any attempt but thats wild none the less) :D
The US generates 5x as much wind power as the UK which is the same as the UK per capita. China generates 13x as much wind power as the UK. Even Germany, which is similar in size and population, generates 3x as much wind energy and 2x as much wind energy per capita as the UK. Am I missing something here?
The UK is the world leader in offshore (which produces more power than onshore per turbine). Most of these other countries capacities come from onshore, which the UK has little off (mostly because of NIMBYism). The UK has the best location in Europe for wind and one of the best in the world. Maps of average wind speeds show they are far higher around the UK than the US or China, which are your point of comparisons. I don't know where you're getting your statistics from, though, because Germany's per capita is about 40% higher, not 200%, though the UK is scaling up far quicker.
@@francisedward8713 All statistics are from Wikipedia. I said Germany was 100% higher per capita (2x) not 200% higher. Writing off the concerns of others as NIMBYism is really demeaning of you, some of their concerns are legitimate. Furthermore, the UK is hardly scaling faster than the US and is doing so more slowly than China. UK has increased generation 2.3x in the last 8 years compared to 2.15x in the US and 3.2x for China. Brazil is scaling much faster at 4x in the last 8 years.
@@HisCoconutGun Much of it is due to "capacity factor" which means the percentage of maximum output a power generator produces over time. So a coal or nuclear generator usually has a capacity factor of over 90%. But wind power averages around 30%. However a wind turbine located in a place with consistent strong winds will have a much higher output than an identical turbine in a place with only light occasional winds. Britain has more of the ideal places, but other countries have to put their turbines in less ideal spots.
@@HisCoconutGun Sorry, I phrased the 200% wrong, meaning it as in 200%=double, not 200% more, which is different. Those Wikipedia figures, which I just looked up, are 3 years old, my friend. It really isn't demeaning. Large landowners and a small minority, along with a governing party catering to those people, are the reason why the UK has a tiny amount of onshore compared to offshore. There is a high public majority in favour of eliminating the onshore ban (near 70% last I checked) which the UK currently has in effect. The only legitimate concern, IMO, is when those turbines affect the aesthetic and preservation of historical villages, towns, buildings, castles and so on, which my country fortunately has in abundance (thousands of castles alone). But there are a lot of other places they can be put on, including farms and the vast tracts of open heathland and wilderness the country has.
Well, frankly, they fill the same niche as the kingdom of the Kongo, and they are heading the same way as the kingdom of the Kongo. Just with oil instead of slaves All of us know how the kingdom went from a centerpiece of the world economy to a colony within two centuries. The only big difference I see is that the house of saud and the Emirates don't only have decimated their human capital, but their water resources as well. But well, they were the 8th largest wheat exporter for a year or so, so it was worth it too loose all potential to sustain a human population in the future..
I wish for this to happen as OPEC keeps oil prices high which exports inflation globally to other countries. However, there will always be a need for hydrocarbons such as for plastics/air travel.
They're targeting Africa, and planning to bring back hypersonic air travel. Climate Town released a vid on it a few days ago. It is well worth watching if you are unfamiliar with that channel.
Peace love and Namaste to you and your production team. looking forward to more awesome content in the new year. great job guys. Respect from South Africa
@11:10 why does the "Dutch Sector" go all the way to the British shores (and then some more on the other side) ? I doubt this, like a lot. Maybe they bought this sector on EstablishedTitles, after seeing some ad in this channel?
Every little bit helps even if wind energy can not provide for UK's need. They are planning on using the wind energy to produce hydrogen. They will feed the hydrogen into their natural gas grid. Looks like a feasible energy project.
Hydrogen is an absolute nightmare to work with. It laughs at what we consider leak-proof seals. It leaks _into_ metals - between the crystal grains - making strong steel pipes as brittle as egg shells. Research on the effect of increasing the amount of hydrogen in the atmosphere is finding nothing but bad news: increased air pollution at low levels, increased depletion of the ozone layer, and even a possible increase in global warming. Hydrogen is a terrible fuel for all but a few niche uses (eg. rockets, possibly iron smelting) and is not worth pursuing.
I don't know how to tell you this, but we aren't going to use a natural gas grid going forward, because it's dangerous, a fossil fuel, has no benefits, blows things up, causes all sorts of disease, and is incredibly expensive in infrastructure, and hydrogen can't be stored in practice, and is incredibly good at leaking, and wildly dangerous, and our chemists are telling us it's a bad idea to use it for much other than fertiliser, and possibly making steel. So much are they telling us this, that they formed an entire society of chemists to stop people wasting money on stupid hydrogen schemes. But sure, apart from that, we'll be using hydrogen in our natural gas pipelines to cook food any time soon. You know, the lines we're removing for all the above reasons.
there's something special about wind energy and solar energy because when the technology gets to a point where we can harvest it well without much of a downside, its basically unlimited energy, and its clean
Ah yes, because you don't have to manufacture the technology. Y'all are geniuses, like with electric cars, oh yeah, so clean, except production and maintenance which end up causing more pollution.
@@ararune3734hur dur. Yes, obviously the technology requires unclean energy sources to get it going, but the more clean energy sources that become available, the more we can exclusively rely on them to manufacture more turbines and panels. How can you not see that?
Problem is: we own none of it. So to say "Britain" is turning the North Sea into a power plant is aestetic at best, in practice, it's actually all our neighbours and their energy companies.
It makes little difference who owns it since the energy can’t move very far unlike oil and the cost savings on bills would be shared with the EU due to market rules. The grids between the UK and EU are already connected which is more efficient to distribute excess vs trying to build the storage capacity in one place.
@@ecaeas4439 its just clear up that UK isnt anything important to anyone, we dont need the UK... did you know, we can do things Brits cant... like spending 100 days in a row in France... i know, you hate freedom of movement so much, you made it impossible for your own people! did you still need a passport to enter the USA???
Biggest issue in the UK is we aren't storing enough energy. Government needs to incentivise people to have a day or more worth of battery energy storage on site as well as local wind turbines and solar panels on roofs. If everyone was producing some renewable energy and storing it too, fossil fuels wouldn't be needed nearly as much anymore. This week the UK produced almost 50% of it's energy needs from wind alone. But without a way to store that energy over time it's just being wasted. Local energy production and storage is the key to a sustainable and secure energy grid.
4:52 Hearing someone pronounce "Celtic Sea" as "Seltic Sea" made me realise that according the English pronunciation rules, "Celt" should be pronounced "Selt".
Back on the 27th January 2023 Jeremy Hunt was going on about how great wind power is and how it provided 80% of the UK's electricity. So I actually read the article and it said that it provided 80% for ONE DAY ONLY for HALF AN HOUR ONLY between 0600 and 0630 am when nobody was even awake. Wind power is not better for the environment and is completely unreliable. It also needs regular maintenance, especially at sea which is done with diesel-powered boats. Renewables are incapable of providing for our baseload energy needs. Only coal, gas, and nuclear can. Industries that Labour, Tories, and Lib-Dems have attacked for decades. We are now paying the price.
When I was in UK. I saw empty boarded up streets under a constant grey sky, litter everywhere. Homeless people sleeping in doorways. A women with cat whiskers makeup casually walking into Tesco with her pajamas. Opioid addicts out of their mind and women so drunk they urinated on the streets. It's a sad declined country.
"under a constant grey sky" "It's a sad declined country" Yes, under the empire, the Sun (which was a British colony) shone brightly on the tropical paradise that was Britain, day and night.
Regarding the calculations of Scottish independence people - they entirely forget to mention a state funding allocation system called the Barnett Formula (and its predecessor) that ensured higher per-head spending in Scotland than England and Wales. This per-head premium, in place since 1888, totaled far more than £300bn if inflation adjusted. The idea that 90%+ of total UK oil and gas revenues were from Scottish waters is also fallacious, since the Southern (English) North Sea was the vast majority of UK gas fields until the mid 1980s.
What do you think about an alternative history where Scotland was independent before North Sea oil? Could it have become a wealthy nation, similar to Norway?
@anguslaurenson7473 it rather depends on what economic level you're assuming it starts from upon the discovery of oil and gas. However, if we assume it had the same level of development as pre-oil Norway, it would never have been anywhere near as rich. Firstly, Scotland's population was about 25% larger than Norway's, so less per head already. Secondly, 'Scottish' reserves are mainly oil, whereas Norway (and England's) reserves are/were mainly gas. Norway's 'oil fund' is actually more of a gas fund, and didn't really become large until the mid 1990s, when very high wholesale gas prices coincided with some very large Norwegian gas fields like Troll coming on line. Finally, and this is the main factor, Scotland's oil and gas reserves are small compared to Norway's. Norway has more than twice the oil reserves of the whole UK and ten times the gas reserves. There are other factors too, like the fact that Scotland tends to prefer low taxes, despite very high public spending, whereas Norway has always had extremely high taxes and quite reserved public spending, especially pre-oil.
I’m all for it! Not that us at the bottom will see any financial benefit, but we’re used to that - not seen a penny from our oil reserves! At least we can generate energy with minimal environmental impact.
Its a huge mistake, wind is far more expensive than the headline figures suggest and integrating intermittent power on to a grid is even more expensive. It is nuclear power that is the way forward.
@JG-MV If we have the choice then why not choose the one that is scalable, reliable and fits the needs of a modern industrial society? Why build an inferior technology in the first place?
@JG-MV Yeah one is a diffuse energy collecting scam and the other is a real energy source. If we'd spend all that wind money on nuclear we'd have a decarbonised grid by now.
As someone working directly in the offshore wind industry and UK projects, it's great to watch this video, well done!
That’s luck if I’ve heard it, working in offshore wind is a massive dream of mine if/when we get some more capacity up over here in the States, good on you
How did you get into offshore wind?
Aren’t the underwater sound waves created really harmful for sea life?
wow
Dont let the chinese know they will reverse engineer all your tech
The United Kingdom has 7 out of 10 of the largest offshore wind farms on Earth with the top 5 all being British, this frankly does not get talked about enough. the UK is on course for having more than the current 15 out of the 20 largest wind farms by 2030 coupled with new nuclear plants being built and more in planning the UK could be the First "MAJOR " industrialised power to let go of hydrocarbon power generation .
We need to reinvent comedy. This I find powers everything!
France? Belgium?
hmm, we will see...
@@vincevanderperre8660?
@mandamashup4204 what's your source for this??
There is another twist to this story when we go back in history. Before coal we had windpower. In the 17th century the Netherlands were not only a major trading power, but also a major industrial power, using wind power from windmills to saw timber (which was also used to make ships), but also to process a range of other products.
Netherlands had windmills, so much history is forgotten
Nice misinformation lol
@@tony16991what's wrong with what he said? I looked it up and it's correct.
Yep. Windmills and watermills (along with rapid mechanization of workshops) were the main engine of European explosive industrial growth in the 17th century, especially in the Netherlands, Southern England, Northern France, and Northern Germany.
Thanks to water and wind power, that particular region overtook Northern Italy and Yangtze river valley as the wealthiest and most industrious region in the world.
@@tony16991 windmills existed wayyyyy wayyy back.
Just last week it emerged the UK is the first major economy in the world to have halved its CO2 emissions. But not a peep from the mainstream media. UK emissions are now at levels not seen since 1890. 52% drop since 1977.
And somehow we get landed with all the JSO and XR numpties.
That's not entirely true. Our domestic emissions have dropped drastically and depending on the weather on some days the vast majority of the UKs power comes from renewables. That being said often the headline government figures don't include emissions from consumption. Stuff like imports (mainly meat and finished products like electronics), aviation and exports (mainly oil and gas) have a big contribution to our emissions
@craigstephens93 No, the numpties we got landed with are those who fail to see how Britain has done this (a) after already industrialising and building out infrastructure, thus having contributed to a huge amount of the damage done, and (b) while importing goods from overseas territories, essentially outsourcing the emissions, continuing to contribute to more damage being done.
@@Dorgpoop why would they? Those are other countries industries producing those goods, creating jobs and earning profits on them. If they need to decarbonise those industries it should be down to their governments to do so.
you mean paid actors @@abody499
It's also worth noting that 2022 was the first year that the UK was a net exporter of electricity since the mid 1970s. Although other factors contributed (such as the temporary pauses for various French nuclear reactors), the main reason why the UK could supply excess electricity was due to the expansion of North Sea wind power.
It's quite incredible to think that as recently as late 2021, electricity was a strategic weakness for the UK (e.g. France threatening to cut power supplies over a fishing dispute, although this would have likely fallen foul of international law), but it is now instead fast becoming a major export industry.
We still lack storage capacity for wind turbines. It would cost the UK about half it's GDP trying to create storage at current prices
and yet energy prices are insane in the uk.. and they are periodically warning us about grid failures
Wait, is this the same Britain who's had some of the highest electricity cost hikes in Europe, same Britain who's much touted offshore wind expansion fell absolutely flat, after all energy companies pulled out of the new bids and contracts?
What are you guys on, I need some of that special copium supply. Given that the vast majority of UK energy production is fossil fuels, I highly doubts we're in any position to be a net exporter of anything.
That cutting of power is a slightly different story than you've hinted at as well its still a threat France can do.
This is because it's targeted at an island called Guernsey, who gets 100% of there power from France but are under British rule. They have no direct connection to the UKs grid as its just so much closer to France.
@@jakehandley3366 You can thank all the eco power for that ESPESCIALLY wind power
Note: Celtic is only pronounced like Sell-tik when it comes to sport. In other areas e.g Celtic Sea, it's pronounced like Kell-tik
that is nonsense. practically only one american mutt team that goes by sell-tik. you would refer to irish sportsmen as kelts
I never knew that. Thanks.
The Celtics are 23 - 6 so far this year. We'll see how well they do in the playoffs.
He meant Celtic FC I bet
@@drmodestoesq Scottish Premier League has playoffs now? Weird.
It's about time we benefited from our bad weather!
Seriously though I think we are very lucky in energy potential from coal in the 1800s to the present. I think we just need to be realistic and keep investigating in nuclear.
I'm a bit sceptical because of the intermittence
That said I'm for wind power but in a context of the port folio of energy mix we have
Which I hope will include nuclear and geothermal
@@vinniechan yes absolutely unless we see massive advances in energy storage we will always need a reliable and rapid source of power independent of the weather
When you say "we" do you mean we in Scotland?
@@GooseSpringsteenthis is why I'm so frustrated about the narrative surrounding net zero
It's always about emissions reduction but no one is talking about a vision of what type of energy mix and how much energy this country needs
As for energy storage
I reckon sodium battery tech will take over grid scale applications
For the grid you dont need to go fro. 0-60 in 3 seconds and we have abundant supply in sodium which doesn't wreck the environment
Again the media keep talking about the next battery storage facility (at the moment all lithium ion battery) instead of looking at what's in the pipeline
We simply don't have enough supply of lithium on earth to meet our needs
@@vinniechan it's frustrating because like everything a lot of people just want to push a simple message like "STOP OIL" when oil is a necessary part of modern civilisation in a countless amount of ways beyond petrol or diesel.
I totally support renewables and caring for the environment. I think microplastics will be a massive issue in human health going forward too. But we cannot reject industrial civilisation. We need solutions and progress guided by what is realistic.
Britain doing something good for a change? As a Brit, that's refreshing 😅
Edit: Some of these comments.. If only I'd known what would happen!
This is a stupid idea. It kills all the migratory birds. And no electricity when no wind.
You wish lol 🇬🇧🤡🇬🇧🤣
It's about green tech and all that stuff is just a scam
@@Ghastly_Grinner Considering 26% of our power is derived from wind, it clearly isn't is it.
Pathetic our Conservative government keeps this stuff on the hush-hush so as not to appear too woke.
I never thought that strong wind would make me feel patriotic as a Brit but here we are
its the temperature of the wind and the slight drizzle and lack of sunlight that i take pride in
I assume the political disaters of recent years have left the brits grasping for anything that can still evoke a sense of pride.
Why not? Britannia doesn't Rule the Waves without wind.
ha I thought the same for a sec, I didn't know wind was our thing and I'm fine with that
Plenty of hot air going on that is for sure. Or is it foreshore?
The sun will shine on us again brethren 🇬🇧
9:30 there is a bit of a miss understanding here. carbon that is captured by land plants can be sequestated just as well as the carbon captured by sea plants, if you choose to do so. The sinking down to the sea floor is actually a bit of a problem dependent on the local ecosystem. The case for water plants is, that they are actually way more efficient growers, than land plants. If care to calculate the amount of carbon you can capture with land plants you quickly learn, that the potential is really not that high.
As of the posting of this video’s public release 15 mins ago from this post, the UK is currently running on 63% wind. The next biggest is nuclear at 15.5%
Love a good wind 🌪
Wrong.
Britain generated 27% of their energy from wind on 2022.
Source? Ten second web search says the opposite. Mostly oil and gas, with 10% wind at best. If you only count mains electricity of households then wind is a bit higher.
@@HisCoconutGun
I think he meant literally 15 minutes ago, as in, at that exact moment it was 63%.
27% is the average, but on very windy days, it's close to 100%. Hopefully, storage tech will advance rapidly over the next few years, so all that energy doesn't have to be wasted.
As a Norwegian, the Nr. 1 (!!!) thing on top of my head, after the gas-pipelines in the Baltic just go blew up, without anyone having any clear answer who it was.
I can imagine that the Faroese Islands (or perhaps the Orkney's, that is already important for both the UK and NATO) to be a base to control the North-South route. As Skagerak/Kattegat in Denmark/Sweden/Norway, and the Channel in Britain is probably very highly developed with defense infrastructure already, but the Norwegian Ocean have been a favorite place for USA-Soviet/Russia submarines to do cat and mouse playing for decades. This can clearly not continue, if the whole of Northern Europe is going to depend on electricity from fragile, easily destroyed farms and cables.
A submarine defense system will have to be enforced into the area. Something that will be more easy once Sweden are accepted as the final piece of the chessboard, making St. Petersburg and the maritime advantage it once had, into a non-issue, since the Baltic is shallow and more easily monitored.
Very relevant point! Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish journalists documented earlier this year that Russian "science" vessels investigated and mapped critical underwater infrastructure around wind farms in the North Sea and Kattegat. Unfortunately, it is very easy to disable these wind farms without any chance of being noticed before it is too late.
Wind farms is the future, but simple defensive measures must be taken when constructing these very important components of our collective power infrastructure
It's been proven definitively that it was the US and Ukraine who blew up the pipeline. Anyone who bought the official narrative that Russia blew up their own pipeline was a complete idiot.
Thanks for pointing this out, I'm sure I'm not the only one who wouldn't have considered the possibility. Considering the various floating turbine ideas and their (relatively) fragile cables, subs + wind farm = nightmare in waiting. Whether intentional sabotage due to geopolitical intrigue, or just an unfortunate accident with international repercussions, it's a recipe for disaster.
Imagine one of those cat-and-mouse games fouling the anchor lines, sinking the sub and bringing down the turbine. Let's be creative and say the turbine crashing also sinks the opposing sub. Now we've got two enemy subs needing desperate search-and-rescue in a debris field in the middle of the seafloor. With American and Russian sabre-rattling complicated by the turbine's owner nation - and corporation - howling about their losses. Scary.
it sounds very weird and strange to say that a neighboring country of yours is your enemy and you find it dangerous them having military presence next/close/in your sea (ignoring the fact that their borders are right there and anything that happens geographically in the area will affect them too), while you accept the presence in your sea of a country that is on the other side of the planet and in another continent thousands of miles away from your borders.
your way of thinking doesn't really make logical sense.
and if you add the history factor it doesn't make sense even more when there is no proof of usa helping or being an ally on any country on the planet but rather they are all examples of wars, exploitation, coups, genocides etc. its common sense that the furthest one is the one that cares the least about your country but still you choose that one for ally...
if this mindset represents the majority of norway this is very sad for a country.
@@cinqbuns I can see on your profile that you are from Greece. By the logic you are applying you should have no problem with your neighbor Turkey, right? But how about the Greek islands close to the Turkish coast? How about the division of Cyprus?
My point being that just because you are neighbors doesn't mean you have the same outlook, priorities nor geopolitical necessaties, and you of all should be aware of this
Shirvan you nailed it again. Love the informative maps and descriptions of amazing multilayered futuristic cleantech plans for the North Sea.
EnBW (German) and bp (British) were successful at an auction in Scotland: The partners are planning a 2.9 gigawatt offshore wind farm that also includes a power cable to Germany.
Wow. Caspian Report keep surprising me by the depth of his research and the balanced arguments
Totally get the limits
There are some big mistakes though. I hope he makes a correction vid.
@@MusikCassette ah... the doubts, always the doubts...
Caspian is bull$$itter, he is doing this between milking goats and herding sheeps up in Caspian mountains.
@@MusikCassette What corrections would that vid include?
@@ConradNeill f.e. : 9:30 and 11:20
As an aside, the Dogger Bank was likely inhabited by humans for tens of thousands of years before it flooded. If they end up digging footings out there, I hope there's archaeologists involved.
I suspect they won't be but it would definitely be cool if it became feasible to do some of that. Probably more useful to dig up the easier to reach stuff on land though.
@@jonevansauthor At least in the UK, I believe that there is a law or guidline that says archaeologists get a first say in any building work of this magnitude. It's part of the surveying process. It gets run by a group of archaeologists before any work begins and they can say if the area is of any interest or not. If any finds turn up during the building process, work gets indefinately halted until the archaeologists have investigated the area. It's actually held up some pretty big building projects in the past. In some cases, the area even gets declared an area of national interest and no building or development can happen there.
It's bound to have archaeological significance somewhere across an area as large as this kind of development will need. The question in my mind would be how feasible any archaeological investigation would be when the dig site is 95m underwater. Underwater digs do happen, and I don't know offhand how deep they've been conducted, but usually they're focused on a single object like a shipwreck. Even with a discrete target like that, they're still very difficult work. I'm not sure how they could conduct a meaningful investigation across such a vast area when it's also at the bottom of the sea.
I like it when caspian report reports.
I'm a public tech media person // who is also an offshore seaweed farmer who is currently looking for more strategic partners to help build public awareness for offshore renewable energy that combine offshore wind and wave and seaweed, so it was remarkable that you covered this issue so well given your relatively limited research staff. Three cheers! If you are interested in the subject of offshore seaweed and how far down the kelp really grows, then I'm happy to chat with you about that.
What do you think about vertical ocean farming?
In Florida seaweed is referred to as bales of marijuana that were thrown overboard from smuggling boats when coast guard ships get a little too curious.
Public awareness? When has the public`s awareness or opinion ever swayed governments. You need to concentrate on NGO`s, big business and lobby groups as they run the government.
What about combining offshore seaweed with mussels farming.
Although solar power plants have limited dispatch period without batteries, wind offers better renewable potential in many terms
Yes solar blows 🌬
they both need storage solutions - wind is better in the winter but solar's generation patterns are much more reliable meaning long term grid planning is easier.
Hm if you can count of something in the UK its it being wet and windy.@@Jennyeq
in the context of middle and northern europe they complement each other quite well. there is more wind in the time of the year, when there is less sun.
But in terms of fine tuning solar power is more cooperative than wind power.
@@MusikCassette It does often seem to be overlooked by those opposed to investment in 'renewables' that when there's no wind, there's often more sun.
That said, whilst I see no reason to avoid installing solar where viable in the UK, it's clearly not going to be any particularly significant part of the whole country's electricity generation. Where it clearly does have a place is in providing localized generation, potentially lowering people's/company's bills and lessening demand on the grid.
Interesting. The Scottish independence thing is a bit of a red herring as it looks increasingly unlikely, ever more so as North Sea oil production declines. While it is true Brexit complicates matters there is every reason to believe its impact on strategic cooperation will recede.
the Scots have the right to leave the English behind....
the Scots know they are welcome in Europe...
while the English need to relocate to the pacific, because nobody want them anymore close by!
Yeah the SNP's image has waned recently and Labour could regain large portions of their vote share
Brexit hasn’t impacted trade at all really. Theres been no evidence for a fall in trade or export/imports. Freedom of movement yes. So there was never going to be an impact on strategic cooperation. And for Scotland, the SNP is dead completely. Every thinktank has crushed Scottish independence as a calamity.
@@RRaymer the £120 billion loss to your GDP isnt from Brexshit, its because Tories are corrupt????
is Brexshit or the Tories? you choose!
"bit of a red herring as it looks increasingly unlikely" It really isn't tho
It's encouraging to see a video about projects like this getting the channel's in-depth analysis. So many of the videos cover wars and other geopolitical tensions, and even the ones about grand projects often have some nefarious angle to them. This one gives a lot more hope for the future than the usual omens of doom.
There's a simple reason for why the omens of doom are usual, positive stories do not get clicks. Check out sources like Hannah Ritchie from our world in data (and just that site as a whole). It won't tell you there's no problem, but it will tell you that a lot of progress is being made and there are plenty of reasons to be hopeful for the future. We've already averted the worst case climate scenarios (thank goodness) and there's little reason that progress won't continue to accelerate.
If the UK ever wants to get serious about decarbonizing its economy it will need to restart and rebuild its nuclear reactor fleet. I suggest starting with CANDU reactors and Moltex SMR's both of which back up hydro power well in Canada and produce the vast majority of our clean energy along with limited solar and wind development...
Sigh, not if Danielle Smith has her way. Wind and solar power are profitable here in Alberta and companies were actively, eagerly, increasing production but she put a "temporary" halt to all new renewable power construction. A fast growing sector of the economy, and she stomped on it.
Totally in agreement with CANDUs and Moltex SMRs. Something that not a lot of people know about the Moltex SMR design is that it has a built-in "24 hour" battery/buffer for load following. You have the molten salt in the reactor, that goes through a heat exchanger to melt salt in a giant tank, and then that salt goes through a heat exchanger to boil water to spin the turbine(s). The thermal capacity of the giant tank is 24 hours of output from the reactor. The sustained electrical output of the whole plant is limited by the thermal output of the reactor, but the _peak_ electrical output is limited by the maximum salt-to-water heat exchange rate.
I don't know this for certain, but I assume the tank is also fitted with heaters that can draw power from the grid. In June turn the reactor down to 50% and store excess solar production.
Yeah that sounds interesting. Now go ahead and find the places in the UK where you can get one permitted and find the people with the right skills who can build it a competitive cost per KWH.
It is not going to happen.
I agree that nuclear is worth investing in but I am also practical. It is not going to happen
The UK is investing in nuclear infact look into the rolls Royce mini reactor that could be ready soon whereby when brought online can power a city at a time but being able to build them at scale
@@dannycostello They aren't so 'mini' either at 470 MW.
@@glynnwright1699 no but in comparison to other reactors they are pretty small
If they can mass produce wave power generators, we maybe can see another revolution within the energy environment.
Doesn't that mean there would be even more microplastics in the ocean if we started to mass wave power? We still don't know how important oceanic biodiversity is to our climate. While we invest towards a more green future, these things must be solved simultaneously with research and international regulation. We should also start to remove existing waste from oceans, it's a disgrace to humanity how bad things already are.
@@Purjo92 you mean, the massive ocean cleanup project which is handling that and has been going for years? And yes, we do know the oceans are extremely important to climate. We've known that for centuries. Who is it that you think doesn't know that?
Wave generators aren't happening because no-one has developed a technology worth implementing at scale and we have this stuff called wind and solar, which makes it a complete waste of time worrying about it, unless or until someone makes a massive leap in tech. Microplastics, don't come into it.
@@Purjo92 Microplastics are generally formed via the breakdown of soft synthetic products, e.g. food packaging, tires and clothes. In contrast, given that wave power generators are mechanical power generators, they would need to be extremely robust and not wear down over use, which would indicate the use of alloys and strong synthetic materials over softer alternatives. So it would not necessarily become a significant source of additional contamination.
As a former sailor, maintenance on these will be a nightmare and I can guarantee that once these hulks are no longer profitable they'll just be abandoned navigation hazards.
Profitable? Profitable for whom exactly? What are electricity prices in the UK these days with all this free wind power?
Sounds like jobs for sailors to me mate.
All that aside, what about a war? If this area becomes reliant on mostly solar or wind power and then those pieces of hardware are all destroyed or not maintained...no one has power? This is what's tough around the world at the moment, where we're trying to evolve our technologies and industries to benefit humanity more as a whole but profiteering (mostly from oil) and geopolitical schadenfreude inhibit us. The best choices for us can turn out to be the worst if others have plans to use it against us.
I am sure the scrap metal brigade will have a go, if no one guards them..
@@megapangolin1093
What scrap metal bridage?
There have been rusty anti-aircraft towers situated in the english channel for 70 years now.
I strongly suspect we will have thousands of rusty defunct wind turbines dotted all over the north sea in 70 years acting as navigational hazards.
Submarines are more stealthy today than ever before, and not only because they themselves are quiter, but because the background noise in the oceans are so much higher. North sea with windmills will effectively be an invisibility shroud for subs, making this are a weird area of both critical infrastructure and perfect playground for subsea sabotage missions.
but thats also why the north sea is well protected. NATO has been doing shit tons of naval excersizes in the north sea around british and norwegian coasts.
Yes and no. More noise but far more places to put listening devices too. No need for long distance sensors when a bunch of short distance ones will do the job.
There are plenty of alternative ways of detecting submarines, other than sound. The UK can, and does, detect submarines in the North Sea from the land, without using acoustics.
Energy generation will always be a target whether on land or sea during a conflict. If someone is really stupid enough to risk a $2B sub to take out a $1m windmill then catching them won’t be too much of a challenge.
In the September preceding the Ukraine Invasion, the North Sea experienced 2-3 weeks of very low wind, and for about 3 days, the wind didn't blow at all affecting everyone from the British Isles to Germany. The sudden and sustained demand for energy exceeded the ability of other EU nations supply and prices spiked. Then Russia happened and it got worse, putting many into genuine poverty when their bills quadrupled, followed by sanctions and then with high inflation.
Wind energy is cool, but it can't provide baseline power. Who'd have thought basing your economic future on a power source that changes strength and direction daily was a bad idea?
When there isn't enough wind the Govt pays a fee to the farms, but when the wind is too strong the Govt pays again to STOP the turbines to prevent damage.
In the UK the energy bill also contains a 25% 'Green' charge to subsidise the wind farms. Somehow, though wind is free, the infrastructure build cost, and maintenance means the farms can't make a profit without Govt. assistance? *The incompetence and grift is leading people to make rash conclusions.
* Just to add that Scottish Power which boasts "100%" renewable sourced green energy increased it's prices 110% as Ukraine dragged on [2 weeks til Russia falls they promised] customers have written complaints to the chairman and CEO demanding explanation. Either they are price gouging their customers during a time of crisis or they're using false advertising in their claims about 100% energy supplied from renewable/green sources. The wind didn't blow for 3 days and you raise the bill by what now? From a 'free' source not linked to war or OPEC in any way?
They're still waiting for a reply lol but we're all being taken for fools.
And last I checked, last wind farm bid in UK had ZERO bids... and all the wind farms are demanding more subsidies as they are all going bankrupt.... ya don't say... You mean government SUCKS at building anything? Wind is useless without gargantuan pumped hydro storage facilities and UK has no such land available to build them on. Norway does. Switzerland/Austria do. Just need to invade, evict them all and build gargantuan dams... Hey, Germany, got a job for you....
We need more gear in the Caspian store!! I bought a simple black shirt with the CR logo as a tiny white print on the left part of the chest and it was one of my all time favorite tees. I’ve since outgrown it and my wife now sports it as a night shirt but I need another!!
Baltic Sea is very simmilar to the North Sea in terms of how good of a location it is for wind power
Russian Sabotage is a big problem there. Royal Navy can defend the North Sea
Shirvan, bravo! Very informative and good quality research!
They started the Industrial Revolution, created the largest empire so far in human history, and now are turning the North Sea into a power plant, the British never ceases to amaze me.
Industrial revolution first take hold in Netherlands. But they run out of steam due to low land mass and resources. Britain merely pick up the torch Netherland unable to carry
They also never cease to amaze me, but for other reasons. I'm British :(
@@nomad640 so what you're saying is, the Brits did in fact start the industrial revolution?
@@gg-ps1vz Reading comprehension is not your top skill
@@nomad640 you dont start a 'revolution' by dipping your toes in the water... a revolution is started by a lot of momentum, in this case Britain. Netherland is irrelevant
Thank you for these videos I always feel the most informed when I watch these.
when Tesla said "tapping into the wheelwork of nature" i dont think this is what he meant
A note on the Scottish "maritime border dispute": the subnational maritime border between England and Scotland was drawn by the central government in accordance with international law. An independent Scotland would neither challenge, nor have any basis for challenging, this border. The "dispute" is purely in the minds of a few independence activists. It isn't real and will have no real impact on the future.
the Scots have the right to challenge decisions made by an occupying country about their legit possessions...
the English will learn how it is if nobody cares what they think!
Incorrect. As pointed out on the EEZ map in this video. if Scotland should be separated, its maritime borders will also be a point of contention and will need to be ratified with England. Its not as simple as you make it. I believe the disunion with Scotland won't happen but I know very well once certain resources such as for eg Scottish fuel becomes extinct this tune will change, VERY RAPIDLY.
In the end, even while the UK would have a strong argument for the existing border, it would still be used in any independence negotiations, for other concessions. Just like recent constitutional battles, even if its clear the Scots would not win the case, they try to appeal to supporters and at least have the small chance to win.
Wrong. It was done by parliamentary order by the then Labour government, with no basis in any law except the law they created in the Scotland Act, *and, crucially without any debate in Parliament, essentially in secret.* The order reads thus:
_Whereas a draft of this Order has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament in accordance with section 115(1) of, and paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 7 to, the Scotland Act 1998(1);_
_Now, therefore, Her Majesty, in exercise of the powers conferred upon Her by section 126(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 is pleased, by and with the advice of Her Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered, as follows:_
See: _Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999_
Scoatish secession is never happening anyway LOL.
This is really amazing. UK still has a lot of things to do and remain independent in the future. :)
the dogger bank wind farm is owned by foreign capital. all profits to go overseas.
@@mrrolandlawrence Oh! I guess foreigners are interested in investing in Europe instead of utilizing Renewable Energy opportunity in Asia and Africa along with Latin American 😁
Really appreciate the scriptwriting for this episode!
You really underplaying the role of Denmark as one of the most active players in this cooperation.
Everyone in the North Sea/Baltic region is looking to claim some stake either in their own economic zones or further out.
Fun fact.....the Angles (The English) were from Denmark.
@@SusCalvinit is nice to see it has largely been co operative so far. There will be hiccups in negotiations, but 100 years ago nations would have gone to war over this real estate.
@@hazb8026 The "Cod War" with Iceland was not a military conflict, only a very intense economic one.
@@SusCalvin that was only about fish and only a few decades ago
Note that other countries around the North Sea basin are also developing their wind energy capacity, so I doubt they will want to buy much from the UK. Electricity isn't like oil. You can't stick it in a tanker and send it anywhere in the world to the highest bidder. The British Isles are also subject to high pressure anticyclones which settle over the entire North Sea basin for days at a time, delivering little or no wind.
Germany has signed an agreement with the UK to work towards hydrogen production on the Dogger Bank which will then be transferred to the European mainland. It is perfectly feasible to store hydrogen, the Dogger Bank is the prime location for wind turbines and around 70% of it is in the the UK's EEZ.
@@glynnwright1699 That's a good idea, I've thought for a while that using surplus wind energy to produce hydrogen is far more sensible that storing it in batteries. There should be more impetus on developing hydrogen powered cars instead of just EVs
@@brendanpells912 They are hoping to repurpose some of the gas pipelines for the task. It turns out that moving electrical energy is prohibitively expensive as the distance from shore increases. Turning it to hydrogen and using pipelines to bring it ashore is more economical.
this is what im thinking for few years now
u.k can literally be the energy supplier of europe as it's very windy and could be used to harvest energy thru wind turbines
No chance. Spain will be energy supplier of Europe if not Ukraine.
@@IhaveBigFeet spain is on the solar panel side cause spain is hot af
@@IhaveBigFeet the video literally explained how u.k. is the best candidate for being the wind turbine hub of europe
@KingKobiGames Spain is going to be very important for the European hydrogen market. However, British wind energy is going to be very important for the industry of the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium.
UK for wind, Spain for solar, France for Nuclear!
Amazing video. Thank you:))
The shallow waters is really the gamechanger. 95 metres is slightly bigger than a football pitch, and is what makes wind power truly feasible.
I actually built a ship detection project and the first thing I noticed was the dogger back wind farm. I've been actively monitoring it's construction for the last 1.5 years. I keep a webmap updated online, but I don't think i'm able to post links here.
Whoa!How long has the UK had this cooking?You surprise me there England.Very well done!
Using UK and England interchangeably?
This has been underway for more than 15 years but the construction of our offshore wind farms has accelerated since Brexit as we no longer act in tandem with the EU's energy polices and need to ensure the security of our supplies.
The world's largest offshore windfarm Hornsea Two was completed last year and two others along the east coast of Britain will become fully operational in 2024.
The innovation is in Scotland, but yeah keep troIIing.
@@abody499look at where dogger bank is on the map mate.
@@abody499 Oh my God,really?well done Ireland!Well done Wales!(just take a joke trolling wasn't my intent dude)
Excellent, balanced content. Adding a segment on storage alternatives is worth your consideration. All the best
Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the winds
And with the first commercial wave power generator, it rules the waves too.
Underrated channel
Love your videos. Super informational. Thank you.
same. respect.
"The sea has endless patience. At some point it will find out everything you did WRONG." Profound!
My downstairs toilet is actually the saudi arabia of wind.
dogger bank....hold my beer 😅
These structures have a massive problem with corrosion and are a beast to maintain
More money for whoever installed and maintained them. This is all a scam. Nuclear energy is more reliable.
I can see it now, an article in fifteen years titled: "How the ecosystem of northern Europe was destroyed by Wind Power".
Thank you for your video, I really enjoyed watching it. It is very interesting and educating. ❤❤❤
From my limited experience,its pronounced keltic sea✌️
Thats the sea below Ireland and west of Cornwall you are thinking of.
@@mdl2427 He mentions the Celtic Sea in the vid.
10 years well spent. You'd be on my list of Fantasy League of Dinner Party Guests. I hope to see more vids, but I hope you get some time to just relax! Thank you Tom!
"celtic" is pronounced with a hard C. As in "Keltic".
It’s pronounced both ways.
Football club: Seltic.
Sea area: Keltic.
@@AttaMan Only the Glasgow football club is pronounced "seltic"
@@rodjones117 Nah. Boston Celtics are pronounced “Seltic” as well.
Who cares
Excellent and Outstanding Video!!!! Enlisted Sounds Great!!!!!
It's a shame these sorts of things aren't talked about enough these days the general populous and media are very quick to focus on everything wrong with the country right now but there is rarely any attention given to the good things like this.
because this is WEF propaganda
@@bluedragontoybash2463oh get a grip 😂
Bad news get click and also there are a little too much bad news at the moment
eat bugs already ? do you know your breathing contribute to global warming 😀@@Orbital_Inclination
@@bluedragontoybash2463 maybe you should try holding your breath for an extended period of time then
"And even the greatest free lunch will not satisfy an endless appetite" - there ya go.
It seems relatively straight forward but we in the UK absolutely love messing a big public project up
You do a great job bro!
Lots of love to Britain from one of your American cousins. I know we give each other a lot of crap but it's nice to see the UK take a W after several years of Ls.
What ls
Nuclear is the future, not renewables.
Genuine questions
What are the ecological impacts of giant wind farms in the ocean and how much does it harm wildlife?
How much pollution is being created by the turbine blades when they need to be replaced?
And most importantly, how is this superior to nuclear energy that isnt reliant on whether conditions?
well for starters when these power generators fail (which; given enough time, will happen) the north sea (and its biome) wont glow in the dark for a few decades. The fact that; from space, it looks like it is being set on fire due to all those drilling platforms out gassing is not lost to me. However those drilling platforms can be repurposed to wind/wave energy collection at less expense than making brand new platforms as cheaply as possible.
It is superior because there is no decommissioning process and having to bury radioactive waste which has a half-life ranging from 24,000 to literally billions of years, contaminating forever the areas in which it is disposed of.
@@francisedward8713 all of the nuclear fuel used by the US in its history would only take up an equivalent space to a football field stacked 10 meters high. That amount of space is, by orders of magnitude, smaller than what most preceive. The waist is also solid and recycling/efficiency techniques in newer reactors are far surpior than in the past.
Wind relies on weather, takes considerable space and kills wildlife (to what extent is open debate), and produces significant, albiet nonradioactive, waist from only turbine blades. At this point nuclear is unquestionably the far superior green alternative.
Commissioning of a Nuclear power plant is a decade long process and one which the UK does not have the ability to do with existing domestic industry. On top of that Windmills are the definition of modular this is good for all the same reasons that motivate the attempted development of modular fission plants.
Maybe they can use the power to create synthetic fuel and then pump it to land using the pipes from existing oil rigs?
Hands Down, the Best Geo-Political / Economic Channel on RUclips.
Only that THE CAPITAL COSTS required to BUILD, SET UP AND MAINTAIN these deep sea wind mills will be ASTRONOMICALLY HIGHER for each megawatt produced than ANY ALTERNATIVE there is or will be.
The Friesland Windpark that's in the Netherlands is set up in waters that are less than 50m deep and even with subsidies from the local government, its financial costs for every Megawatt produced is and will continue to be higher than other sources of energy available right now. Remember, these are costs for an offshore windfarm that's located in one of the most ideal position in terms of construction and maintenance arrangements.
Imagine the costs for setting up deep sea wind farms and the MILLIONS required to maintain them along with the thousands of miles of cables burried almost a mile deep in the ocean.
I am gobsmacked to seeing the comments of people jumping for joy celebrating what equates to giving their incomes away for extortionate energy prices.
Keep going Uk
another great episode
Renewable energy is not a ‘craving’, or a ‘thirst’. It’s a global agreement that is necessary, and for which there is no alternative.
Impressive video! ⚡ The tale of energy is truly global, with key advancements like electromagnetic induction (England, 1831) and the electric motor (also England, 1832) laying the groundwork for our reliance on electricity. While Denmark pioneered the first practical wind turbine for electricity in 1891, Scotland proudly hosted the world's first large-scale wind farm in 1957.
And speaking of wind power's giants, Hornsea 2 in the UK currently holds the crown for the world's largest operational offshore wind farm. Though, keep an eye on the Dogger Bank Wind Farm, also in the UK, which is set to claim the title upon completion in 2026.
While wind and solar continue their ascent, fossil fuels still dominate the global energy mix. However, the tide is turning with renewables rapidly gaining ground. This progress is evident in agreements like the recent UK-EU energy security pact, a positive step towards continued cooperation despite the complex geopolitical landscape.
Speaking of European leaders, Denmark reigns supreme with an impressive 86% of its energy derived from renewables. While Scotland, despite ambitious targets, currently relies heavily on fossil fuels (70%). However, the UK, with around 40% of its electricity from renewables, boasts an ambitious goal of achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and 100% renewable energy generation by 2035 (potentially with hydrogen storage). Germany, another renewable energy titan, gets nearly half its electricity from renewables and continues to invest heavily in clean energy tech.
Overall, the energy landscape is evolving rapidly, and Europe is at the forefront of this exciting shift. It's a story of collaboration, innovation, and a collective push towards a sustainable future.
Isn't it the case though that Scotland uses non renewables as much of its renewable energy is exported. It generates nearly enough renewable energy for it's own needs. Storage is another issue.
Trouble is, without Government subsidy there is no profit to be made in manufacture, installation or running these wind farms and the wind generators themselves are not eco-friendly. Of course they do not provide a continus power source either so need fossil fuel power backup.
Being in a former British colony (Singapore), this explains so much. A really eloquent video, thank you!
Play Enlisted now for free with my link, and get a bonus pack including soldiers, weapons, and premium account: enlisted.link/caspianreport
🤡
No.
Shame most of it is owned by other countries that charge us a premium for the using the turbines, also when it's too windy and the turbines are turned off...we still have to pay
With an average depth of 95m, and with some free drivers in the world that can go to 120m. It's pretty crazy thinking potentially, someone on one breath could swim to the bottom of the north sea and back again (im sure ocean currents prevent any attempt but thats wild none the less) :D
The US generates 5x as much wind power as the UK which is the same as the UK per capita. China generates 13x as much wind power as the UK. Even Germany, which is similar in size and population, generates 3x as much wind energy and 2x as much wind energy per capita as the UK. Am I missing something here?
The UK is the world leader in offshore (which produces more power than onshore per turbine). Most of these other countries capacities come from onshore, which the UK has little off (mostly because of NIMBYism). The UK has the best location in Europe for wind and one of the best in the world. Maps of average wind speeds show they are far higher around the UK than the US or China, which are your point of comparisons.
I don't know where you're getting your statistics from, though, because Germany's per capita is about 40% higher, not 200%, though the UK is scaling up far quicker.
@@francisedward8713 All statistics are from Wikipedia. I said Germany was 100% higher per capita (2x) not 200% higher. Writing off the concerns of others as NIMBYism is really demeaning of you, some of their concerns are legitimate. Furthermore, the UK is hardly scaling faster than the US and is doing so more slowly than China. UK has increased generation 2.3x in the last 8 years compared to 2.15x in the US and 3.2x for China. Brazil is scaling much faster at 4x in the last 8 years.
@@HisCoconutGun Much of it is due to "capacity factor" which means the percentage of maximum output a power generator produces over time. So a coal or nuclear generator usually has a capacity factor of over 90%. But wind power averages around 30%. However a wind turbine located in a place with consistent strong winds will have a much higher output than an identical turbine in a place with only light occasional winds. Britain has more of the ideal places, but other countries have to put their turbines in less ideal spots.
@@HisCoconutGun Sorry, I phrased the 200% wrong, meaning it as in 200%=double, not 200% more, which is different. Those Wikipedia figures, which I just looked up, are 3 years old, my friend.
It really isn't demeaning. Large landowners and a small minority, along with a governing party catering to those people, are the reason why the UK has a tiny amount of onshore compared to offshore. There is a high public majority in favour of eliminating the onshore ban (near 70% last I checked) which the UK currently has in effect. The only legitimate concern, IMO, is when those turbines affect the aesthetic and preservation of historical villages, towns, buildings, castles and so on, which my country fortunately has in abundance (thousands of castles alone). But there are a lot of other places they can be put on, including farms and the vast tracts of open heathland and wilderness the country has.
I thought UK had the second biggest offshore capacity in the world (after China)?
So why cant the rest of Europe do it? Embarrassing.
If the world moves away from hydrocarbons - where does that leave the arabs? I can't see them suddenly turning into innovative economies.
As long as we use plastic they will be fine I think.
Well, frankly, they fill the same niche as the kingdom of the Kongo, and they are heading the same way as the kingdom of the Kongo. Just with oil instead of slaves
All of us know how the kingdom went from a centerpiece of the world economy to a colony within two centuries.
The only big difference I see is that the house of saud and the Emirates don't only have decimated their human capital, but their water resources as well. But well, they were the 8th largest wheat exporter for a year or so, so it was worth it too loose all potential to sustain a human population in the future..
I wish for this to happen as OPEC keeps oil prices high which exports inflation globally to other countries. However, there will always be a need for hydrocarbons such as for plastics/air travel.
They're targeting Africa, and planning to bring back hypersonic air travel. Climate Town released a vid on it a few days ago. It is well worth watching if you are unfamiliar with that channel.
Air travel, ships will require hydrocarbons.
Yes Britain is doing the right thing :)
Peace love and Namaste to you and your production team. looking forward to more awesome content in the new year. great job guys. Respect from South Africa
Thank you for the excellent content.
Can you make a video on tidal stream energy as well?
@11:10 why does the "Dutch Sector" go all the way to the British shores (and then some more on the other side) ? I doubt this, like a lot. Maybe they bought this sector on EstablishedTitles, after seeing some ad in this channel?
Every little bit helps even if wind energy can not provide for UK's need. They are planning on using the wind energy to produce hydrogen. They will feed the hydrogen into their natural gas grid. Looks like a feasible energy project.
Hydrogen is an absolute nightmare to work with. It laughs at what we consider leak-proof seals. It leaks _into_ metals - between the crystal grains - making strong steel pipes as brittle as egg shells. Research on the effect of increasing the amount of hydrogen in the atmosphere is finding nothing but bad news: increased air pollution at low levels, increased depletion of the ozone layer, and even a possible increase in global warming. Hydrogen is a terrible fuel for all but a few niche uses (eg. rockets, possibly iron smelting) and is not worth pursuing.
I don't know how to tell you this, but we aren't going to use a natural gas grid going forward, because it's dangerous, a fossil fuel, has no benefits, blows things up, causes all sorts of disease, and is incredibly expensive in infrastructure, and hydrogen can't be stored in practice, and is incredibly good at leaking, and wildly dangerous, and our chemists are telling us it's a bad idea to use it for much other than fertiliser, and possibly making steel. So much are they telling us this, that they formed an entire society of chemists to stop people wasting money on stupid hydrogen schemes. But sure, apart from that, we'll be using hydrogen in our natural gas pipelines to cook food any time soon. You know, the lines we're removing for all the above reasons.
Windmills were used in Flanders and the Netherlands to pump out water and create new land
there's something special about wind energy and solar energy because when the technology gets to a point where we can harvest it well without much of a downside, its basically unlimited energy, and its clean
Ah yes, because you don't have to manufacture the technology. Y'all are geniuses, like with electric cars, oh yeah, so clean, except production and maintenance which end up causing more pollution.
@@ararune3734hur dur. Yes, obviously the technology requires unclean energy sources to get it going, but the more clean energy sources that become available, the more we can exclusively rely on them to manufacture more turbines and panels. How can you not see that?
@@ararune3734Turbines built on land compensate the CO2 that's needed to construct them within a year and thats in the worst conditions.
Gothenburg, Sweden, is the most important harbour in the Nordic countries, even Finland depends on it.
Problem is: we own none of it. So to say "Britain" is turning the North Sea into a power plant is aestetic at best, in practice, it's actually all our neighbours and their energy companies.
but the UK is close by....so thats enough to put the UK first....for Brits, while everyone else is ignoring them constantly!
It makes little difference who owns it since the energy can’t move very far unlike oil and the cost savings on bills would be shared with the EU due to market rules. The grids between the UK and EU are already connected which is more efficient to distribute excess vs trying to build the storage capacity in one place.
@@ArltratloDo any of your comments actually have a point to them beyond being petulant?
@@ecaeas4439 its just clear up that UK isnt anything important to anyone, we dont need the UK... did you know, we can do things Brits cant... like spending 100 days in a row in France...
i know, you hate freedom of movement so much, you made it impossible for your own people!
did you still need a passport to enter the USA???
Biggest issue in the UK is we aren't storing enough energy. Government needs to incentivise people to have a day or more worth of battery energy storage on site as well as local wind turbines and solar panels on roofs. If everyone was producing some renewable energy and storing it too, fossil fuels wouldn't be needed nearly as much anymore. This week the UK produced almost 50% of it's energy needs from wind alone. But without a way to store that energy over time it's just being wasted. Local energy production and storage is the key to a sustainable and secure energy grid.
4:52 Hearing someone pronounce "Celtic Sea" as "Seltic Sea" made me realise that according the English pronunciation rules, "Celt" should be pronounced "Selt".
It’s the horrid American pronunciation
it's a borrowed word, so it does not follow the original germanic rules of english. greek & latin words c is always k
Back on the 27th January 2023 Jeremy Hunt was going on about how great wind power is and how it provided 80% of the UK's electricity. So I actually read the article and it said that it provided 80% for ONE DAY ONLY for HALF AN HOUR ONLY between 0600 and 0630 am when nobody was even awake. Wind power is not better for the environment and is completely unreliable. It also needs regular maintenance, especially at sea which is done with diesel-powered boats. Renewables are incapable of providing for our baseload energy needs. Only coal, gas, and nuclear can. Industries that Labour, Tories, and Lib-Dems have attacked for decades. We are now paying the price.
When I was in UK. I saw empty boarded up streets under a constant grey sky, litter everywhere.
Homeless people sleeping in doorways. A women with cat whiskers makeup casually walking into Tesco with her pajamas. Opioid addicts out of their mind and women so drunk they urinated on the streets.
It's a sad declined country.
For which year are you talking about ? I went there in 2016.
Suuuuuure buddy.
"under a constant grey sky"
"It's a sad declined country"
Yes, under the empire, the Sun (which was a British colony) shone brightly on the tropical paradise that was Britain, day and night.
Shirvan Neftchi serves reality like a Shakespearean Tragedy.
Fantastic words.
Regarding the calculations of Scottish independence people - they entirely forget to mention a state funding allocation system called the Barnett Formula (and its predecessor) that ensured higher per-head spending in Scotland than England and Wales. This per-head premium, in place since 1888, totaled far more than £300bn if inflation adjusted.
The idea that 90%+ of total UK oil and gas revenues were from Scottish waters is also fallacious, since the Southern (English) North Sea was the vast majority of UK gas fields until the mid 1980s.
What do you think about an alternative history where Scotland was independent before North Sea oil? Could it have become a wealthy nation, similar to Norway?
@anguslaurenson7473 it rather depends on what economic level you're assuming it starts from upon the discovery of oil and gas.
However, if we assume it had the same level of development as pre-oil Norway, it would never have been anywhere near as rich.
Firstly, Scotland's population was about 25% larger than Norway's, so less per head already.
Secondly, 'Scottish' reserves are mainly oil, whereas Norway (and England's) reserves are/were mainly gas. Norway's 'oil fund' is actually more of a gas fund, and didn't really become large until the mid 1990s, when very high wholesale gas prices coincided with some very large Norwegian gas fields like Troll coming on line.
Finally, and this is the main factor, Scotland's oil and gas reserves are small compared to Norway's. Norway has more than twice the oil reserves of the whole UK and ten times the gas reserves.
There are other factors too, like the fact that Scotland tends to prefer low taxes, despite very high public spending, whereas Norway has always had extremely high taxes and quite reserved public spending, especially pre-oil.
I’m all for it! Not that us at the bottom will see any financial benefit, but we’re used to that - not seen a penny from our oil reserves! At least we can generate energy with minimal environmental impact.
Wind is fine as long as it is blowing.
Good news indeed if this can come to pass. Energy independence will be vital going forward. Well done the UK. More of the same please.
And none of those wind farms are owned by a brittish company 😂
Some of them are owned or operated by companies with their headquarters in London such as Shell plc. Your statement is not true on its face.
@@jwadaow OK where do the profits go?
UK 🇬🇧
Excellent analysis as always
Its a huge mistake, wind is far more expensive than the headline figures suggest and integrating intermittent power on to a grid is even more expensive.
It is nuclear power that is the way forward.
@JG-MV If we have the choice then why not choose the one that is scalable, reliable and fits the needs of a modern industrial society? Why build an inferior technology in the first place?
@JG-MV Yeah one is a diffuse energy collecting scam and the other is a real energy source. If we'd spend all that wind money on nuclear we'd have a decarbonised grid by now.
Sounds amazing, hopefully it doesn't mess up the local ecosystem
In any case, it'll be less ecologically damaging than fossil fuels.