Technology, Science and the Environment.

[Stadt]

13 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/28/wind-power-cut-uk-energy-costs-ucl-study

 

Lefty net zero renewable bastards saving us money!

From the study 

 

This study presents new evidence of the financial impact of wind generation on the UK energy market, challenging the idea that sustainability, security, and affordability, are always in conflict. From 2010 to 2023, wind power delivered a net benefit of £104.3 billion to UK consumers—£14.2 billion from lower electricity prices and £133.3 billion from reduced natural gas prices, partially offset by £43.2 billion in wind energy subsidies.

 

Bit disingenuous 

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, Stadt said:

From the study 

 

This study presents new evidence of the financial impact of wind generation on the UK energy market, challenging the idea that sustainability, security, and affordability, are always in conflict. From 2010 to 2023, wind power delivered a net benefit of £104.3 billion to UK consumers—£14.2 billion from lower electricity prices and £133.3 billion from reduced natural gas prices, partially offset by £43.2 billion in wind energy subsidies.

 

Bit disingenuous 

Possibly more disingenuous is not including the future cost of infrastructure damage, food and water replacement schemes, and a great many other measures, should the route towards greener energy not be taken. 

 

It dwarfs any of those figures. And it's not just cost in money, either. 

[CornwallFox]

36 minutes ago, Stadt said:

From the study 

 

This study presents new evidence of the financial impact of wind generation on the UK energy market, challenging the idea that sustainability, security, and affordability, are always in conflict. From 2010 to 2023, wind power delivered a net benefit of £104.3 billion to UK consumers—£14.2 billion from lower electricity prices and £133.3 billion from reduced natural gas prices, partially offset by £43.2 billion in wind energy subsidies.

 

Bit disingenuous 

£43bn across 13 years of much less than the £17.5bn in subsidies we give fossil fuels every single year. 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

£43bn across 13 years of much less than the £17.5bn in subsidies we give fossil fuels every single year. 

There's that too, but I have to say again I've no idea why some people don't think actually looking to save lives in the future is a reasonable thing to do. 

 

(Or I do, but I really don't want to think that of those people.)

[Trav Le Bleu]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

There's that too, but I have to say again I've no idea why some people don't think actually looking to save lives in the future is a reasonable thing to do. 

 

(Or I do, but I really don't want to think that of those people.)

Think it, it's true.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Think it, it's true.

I hear that, sadly. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

55 minutes ago, Stadt said:

From the study 

 

This study presents new evidence of the financial impact of wind generation on the UK energy market, challenging the idea that sustainability, security, and affordability, are always in conflict. From 2010 to 2023, wind power delivered a net benefit of £104.3 billion to UK consumers—£14.2 billion from lower electricity prices and £133.3 billion from reduced natural gas prices, partially offset by £43.2 billion in wind energy subsidies.

 

Bit disingenuous 

I've never understood why wind turbines look like windmills.

 

Surely a better way would be to have the actual sails parallel with the ground and on the same actual axle as the turbine?

 

I'm no engineer, but surely there's gearing in the tower to turn the vertical rotation to horizontal? Wouldn't that dissipate some of the energy?

 

Or is the energy actually harvested at the head of the mill? (I've always assumed it was in the base.)

 

I guess our design engineers know what they're doing.

[Otis]

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

£43bn across 13 years of much less than the £17.5bn in subsidies we give fossil fuels every single year. 

You'd need to consider energy produce by fuel percentages to compare accurately. 

[CornwallFox]

10 minutes ago, Otis said:

You'd need to consider energy produce by fuel percentages to compare accurately. 

Renewables together amount for a higher % than fossil fuels now

[CornwallFox]

13 minutes ago, Otis said:

You'd need to consider energy produce by fuel percentages to compare accurately. 

Renewables account for a pretty big chunk now. With it being winter and gas central heatings still being everywhere, today gas is leading the way over everything else on 41% of our energy mix, with wind at 26%. Throughout the year though, renewables I think account for a fair bit more than fossil fuels now.

Edited 29 October 2025 by CornwallFox

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, Otis said:

You'd need to consider energy produce by fuel percentages to compare accurately. 

 

9 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Renewables together amount for a higher % than fossil fuels now

https://grid.iamkate.com/ 

 

A useful resource for live and historic values on this matter. 

 

(For anyone who wants to know, the actual numbers over this year are 38.3% for renewables, 30.4% for fossil fuels. Though if you count biomass as a fossil fuel it pushes things to near parity, until you have fission add around 13% to the "cleaner" side too.)

 

In any case, people can quibble over the small numbers if they wish, the argument remains - on this matter, the UK and everywhere else buys now or pays later. In full, and in blood as well as money. 

Edited 29 October 2025 by leicsmac

[Otis]

8 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Renewables account for a pretty big chunk now. With it being winter and gas central heatings still being everywhere, today gas is leading the way over everything else on 41% of our energy mix, with wind at 26%. Throughout the year though, renewables I think account for a fair bit more than fossil fuels now.

Agreed, which is great.

But over the last 10 years I expect these percentages to be very different. 

[CornwallFox]

2 minutes ago, Otis said:

Agreed, which is great.

But over the last 10 years I expect these percentages to be very different. 

It's also a bit of a poor comparator.

Particularly now GB energy exists as it'll mean the country owns whatever it oversees/buys. 

We don't own any of our fossil fuel energy sources. 

Plus subsidies to the clean energy sector include things like conversion schemes for households etc too bring them online, such as heat pump subsidies etc. 

[Otis]

3 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

It's also a bit of a poor comparator.

Particularly now GB energy exists as it'll mean the country owns whatever it oversees/buys. 

We don't own any of our fossil fuel energy sources. 

Plus subsidies to the clean energy sector include things like conversion schemes for households etc too bring them online, such as heat pump subsidies etc. 

Not really when the argument was...

 

2 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

£43bn across 13 years of much less than the £17.5bn in subsidies we give fossil fuels every single year. 

 

[leicsmac]

10 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

It's also a bit of a poor comparator.

Particularly now GB energy exists as it'll mean the country owns whatever it oversees/buys. 

We don't own any of our fossil fuel energy sources. 

Plus subsidies to the clean energy sector include things like conversion schemes for households etc too bring them online, such as heat pump subsidies etc. 

This whole argument needs to consider future as well as past developments in energy as well anyway. 

[Lionator]

Some good news finally and will put to bed people who say “what’s the point when pollute so much”. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds

 

This is how China ends up being the world’s leading country, short term pain for long term gain. And thankfully this is something we’ll all benefit from. 

[Zear0]

50 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Some good news finally and will put to bed people who say “what’s the point when pollute so much”. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds

 

This is how China ends up being the world’s leading country, short term pain for long term gain. And thankfully this is something we’ll all benefit from. 

It's not even short term pain in this regard.  It's provided a massive boost to their industrial economy and reduces their energy costs.

[leicsmac]

10 hours ago, Lionator said:

Some good news finally and will put to bed people who say “what’s the point when pollute so much”. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds

 

This is how China ends up being the world’s leading country, short term pain for long term gain. And thankfully this is something we’ll all benefit from. 

 

9 hours ago, Zear0 said:

It's not even short term pain in this regard.  It's provided a massive boost to their industrial economy and reduces their energy costs.

Yep. They've played the long game and they likely will be rewarded with a position at the head of the table because of it.

 

The only question is whether they can (or will) help enough of the rest of the world on this matter when the time comes (which it, in essence, already has).

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Yep. They've played the long game and they likely will be rewarded with a position at the head of the table because of it.

 

The only question is whether they can (or will) help enough of the rest of the world on this matter when the time comes (which it, in essence, already has).

China already do because it’s soft power for them. Pretty much all developing countries would rather work with China than the west on these issues because they think China are least likely to exploit them and have better long term prospects. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Lionator said:

China already do because it’s soft power for them. Pretty much all developing countries would rather work with China than the west on these issues because they think China are least likely to exploit them and have better long term prospects. 

Or they are at least equally likely to exploit them while offering them a better quid pro quo than the Western countries have. 

 

But the work on this particular matter is very much ongoing and there's a lot of it still to do. 

[leicsmac]

https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/recyclers-switch-from-smelting-to-solvents-recovering-precious-metals-from-e-waste-with-fewer-emissions/

 

Some decent news first seen on Reuters today. 

[leicsmac]

Yep, I had trouble making sense of it when I first saw it too.

 

Informative in the end, though.

[davieG]

Speechless!

 

Fly tipping Kidlington Oxfordshire - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y4dxlgkp4o

 

 

 

 

Fly-tippers have dumped an "illegal" mountain of waste in a field in Oxfordshire.

The "environmental catastrophe unfolding in plain sight" is up to 150m (490ft) long and 6m (20ft) high and has appeared on a site between the River Cherwell and the A34 near Kidlington.

Calum Miller, Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock, has raised the issue in Parliament, saying it was "threatening an environmental disaster" and calling it "pollution on a grotesque scale".

He also said Cherwell District Council had estimated the cost of removing the waste would be greater than its entire annual budget.

"This is not a licensed waste site and we can just see the quantity of waste that has been dumped here, that's illegal, so it's criminal," Mr Miller said.

"That's not something that local residents and taxpayers can afford."

He says "criminal gangs are dumping waste on this scale" across the country and it will take government intervention before pollutants "leech out" into local rivers.

 

Charity Friends of the Thames said the illegal rubbish dump was created about a month ago by an organised crime group.

Chief executive Laura Reineke said: "This is an environmental catastrophe unfolding in plain sight.

"Every day that passes increases the risk of toxic run-off entering the river system, poisoning wildlife and threatening the health of the entire catchment.

"The Environment Agency must act now, not in months or years, which is their usual reaction time."

A restriction order had been put in place by the Environment Agency.

It is hard to distinguish any particular bits of waste as it appears to have been shredded with earth mixed in.

Some of the rubbish from the top of the pile has toppled and is now only five metres from the river.

 

The River Cherwell is a tributary of the River Thames, which means it flows through Oxford before joining the Thames.

Local angler Billy Burnell regularly fishes in the area and said he noticed the pile in September.

He called it "horrific" and said the potential run-off into the river is an "environmental disaster waiting to happen" and would like to see "instantaneous reactions" from the authorities to incidents like this.

 

Miller asked the government for help to remove the illegal tip before it caused a fire or was washed into the river system.

Addressing MPs on Thursday, he said: "Criminals have dumped a mountain of illegal plastic waste... weighing hundreds of tonnes, in my constituency on a floodplain adjacent to the River Cherwell.

"River levels are rising and heat-maps show that the waste is also heating up, raising the risk of fire.

"The Environment Agency said it has limited resources for enforcement, that the estimated cost of removal is greater than the entire annual budget of the local district council."

Environment minister Mary Creagh said the government had inherited a failing waste industry that had caused an "epidemic of illegal fly-tipping".

She told MPs the agency had served a restriction order to prevent further access to the site.

In a statement, the agency said it was investigating and appealed for information.

It said: "We share the public's anger about incidents like this, which is why we take action against those responsible for waste crime."

A recent House of Lords report found efforts to tackle serious waste crime have been "critically under-prioritised" despite the problem becoming bigger and more sophisticated.

The Environment and Climate Change Committee recommended an independent "root and branch" inquiry into how "endemic" waste crime is tackled.

[Sampson]

Thought this was quite interesting. Seems like our brains peak around age 32. I think calling it the end of adolescence is a bit click baity, but its still interesting, it’s more that’s when the brain stops going through its  rewriting efficiency stage and begins to slowly decline.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgl6klez226o

 

Adolescence lasts into 30s - new study shows four pivotal ages for your brain

 

The brain goes through five distinct phases in life, with key turning points at ages nine, 32, 66 and 83, scientists have revealed.

Around 4,000 people up to the age of 90 had scans to reveal the connections between their brain cells.

Researchers at the University of Cambridge showed that the brain stays in the adolescent phase until our early thirties when we "peak".

 

They say the results could help us understand why the risk of mental health disorders and dementia varies through life.

The brain is constantly changing in response to new knowledge and experience – but the research shows this is not one smooth pattern from birth to death.

Instead, these are the five brain phases:

 

Childhood - from birth to age nine

Adolescence - from nine to 32

Adulthood - from 32 to 66

Early ageing - from 66 to 83

Late ageing - from 83 onwards

 

"The brain rewires across the lifespan. It's always strengthening and weakening connections and it's not one steady pattern - there are fluctuations and phases of brain rewiring," Dr Alexa Mousley told the BBC.

Some people will reach these landmarks earlier or later than others – but the researchers said it was striking how clearly these ages stood out in the data. 

 

These patterns have only now been revealed due to the quantity of brain scans available in the study, which was published in the journal Nature Communications.

 

The five brain phases

Childhood - The first period is when the brain is rapidly increasing in size but also thinning out the overabundance of connections between brain cells, called synapses, created at the start of life.

The brain gets less efficient during this stage. It works like a child meandering around a park, going wherever takes their fancy, rather than heading straight from A to B.

 

Adolescence - That changes abruptly from the age of nine when the connections in the brain go through a period of ruthless efficiency. "It's a huge shift," said Dr Mousley, describing the most profound change between brain phases.

This is also the time when there is the greatest risk of mental health disorders beginning.

 

Unsurprisingly adolescence starts around the onset of puberty, but this is the latest evidence suggesting it ends much later than we assumed. It was once thought to be confined to the teenage years, before neuroscience suggested it continued into your 20s and now early 30s.

This phase is the brain's only period when its network of neurons gets more efficient. Dr Mousely said this backs up many measures of brain function suggesting it peaks in your early thirties, but added it was "very interesting" that the brain stays in the same phase between nine and 32.

 

Adulthood - Next comes a period of stability for the brain as it enters its longest era, lasting three decades.

Change is slower during this time compared with the fireworks before, but here we see the improvements in brain efficiency flip into reverse.

Dr Mousely said this "aligns with a plateau of intelligence and personality" that many of us will have witnessed or experienced.

 

Early ageing - This kicks in at 66, but it is not an abrupt and sudden decline. Instead there are shifts in the patterns of connections in the brain.

Instead of coordinating as one whole brain, the organ becomes increasingly separated into regions that work tightly together - like band members starting their own solo projects.

Although the study looked at healthy brains, this is also the age at which dementia and high blood pressure, which affects brain health, are starting to show.

 

Late ageing - Then, at the age of 83, we enter the final stage. There is less data than for the other groups as finding healthy brains to scan was more challenging. The brain changes are similar to early ageing, but even more pronounced.

 

Dr Mousely said what really surprised her was how well the different "ages align with a lot of important milestones" such as puberty, health concerns later in life and even the pretty big social shifts in your early 30s such as parenthood.

'A very cool study'

The study did not look at men and women separately, but there will be questions such as the impact of menopause.

Duncan Astle, professor of neuroinformatics at the University of Cambridge, said: "Many neurodevelopmental, mental health and neurological conditions are linked to the way the brain is wired. Indeed, differences in brain wiring predict difficulties with attention, language, memory, and a whole host of different behaviours."

Prof Tara Spires-Jones, director of the centre for discovery brain sciences at the University of Edinburgh, said: "This is a very cool study highlighting how much our brains change over our lifetimes."

She said the results "fit well" with our understanding of brain ageing, but cautioned "not everyone will experience these network changes at exactly the same ages".

Edited 25 November 2025 by Sampson

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1e48e5p8dlo

 

The UK point of view of the ongoing sixth big mass extinction event.