Lead Balloon?

[lurker]

Er no it isn't. Not all energy sources are carbon based, hence there isn't always the same carbon footprint. There will always be a carbon footprint, it will never be zero, but it isn't constant.
CB

Name this electricity generating technique that has a low carbon footprint.

Other than the one I mention (which incidentally I made up & does not actually exist.

 

[Digit]

Solar panels! Trouble is the car is now scalectrix!

Roy.

 

[lurker]

Solar panels! Trouble is the car is now scalectrix!

Roy.

Ok they are actually getting better!
And might be a goer in a sunny country

In the UK
The manufacturing (Carbon footprint) payback is about 6 years worth of Oil power stations output for the same lecy. Remember the panels are not made by the fairies in santas workshop using acorns.

Financial payback is just under 20 years (assuming they last that long) :roll:

Any more suggestions ??

 

[Digit]

Horse and cart?

Roy.

 

[lurker]

Horse and cart?

Roy.

Getting very close, but no cigar!

Horses fart & belch methane - which is many times worse than CO2
Far better than an Ox (ruminant) & cart tho' :lol:

 

[Digit]

Horses fart & belch methane

Yep! Straight at the whip hand!

Roy.

 

[Jonzjob]

Er no it isn't. Not all energy sources are carbon based, hence there isn't always the same carbon footprint. There will always be a carbon footprint, it will never be zero, but it isn't constant.
CB

Name this electricity generating technique that has a low carbon footprint.

Other than the one I mention (which incidentally I made up & does not actually exist.

EDF. 87% nuek and not very much of a carbon foot/hand/ear/eye/bum print. Well it is here in France!!

Shame about the wind turbines though. Designed by the same bloke as the ashtray on a motorbike and the chocolate teapot me thinks?

 

[Digit]

Designed by the same bloke as the ashtray on a motorbike and the chocolate teapot me thinks?

That was the Parliamentary Committee for the Development of White Elephants.

Roy.

 

[CraigyBoy]

Er no it isn't. Not all energy sources are carbon based, hence there isn't always the same carbon footprint. There will always be a carbon footprint, it will never be zero, but it isn't constant.
CB

Name this electricity generating technique that has a low carbon footprint.

Other than the one I mention (which incidentally I made up & does not actually exist.

Who mentioned low? I didn't. I said not constant. But since you ask ...

Common sense suggests that any method of generating electricity that doesn't involve constantly burning a carbon based fuel will eventually be more efficient (from a carbon footprint perspective) than one that does. Both have a carbon footprint associated with the manufacture of equipment. This might be wind turbines, solar panels, a nuclear power station or it might be oil rigs and large drill bits! However, when a carbon based fuel is being constantly burnt, there is a constant carbon output, not just an initial impact. Over time this will be higher than any generating method that does not have an ongoing carbon output.

Alternative fuel sources aren't the answer today. They are simply too rubbish. The key thing is to invest in them now to improve the efficiency, reliability and to develop the new technology that will mean they are the answer tomorrow.

If Henry Ford had built his first car and said "pineapple it, that'll never go round the Nurburgring in less than 10 minutes, there's no point to a car, it'll never work, let's stick with riding donkeys" then we wouldn't all be grumbling about speed cameras today! It's a journey, not a single step. People's lifestyles today mean that we all want answers immediately and lose sight of the long game.

Let's not make perfect be the enemy of good.

CB

 

[Digit]

Let's not make perfect be the enemy of good.

How true.

Roy.