From the 18th: -

http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=allBreakingNews&storyID=2007-10-18T120725Z_01_L18150580_RTRIDST_0_BT-WINDFARMS.XML

The Times article from the 19th goes into a bit more detail: -

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/telecoms/article2690013.ece

Avoiding the crusty green nightmare seems to line them up for the Nimby Nightmare. Not that these pigopolists deserve sweet dreams.

I wonder how much the mobile industry is responsible for?

Obviously this is a little more complicated as owners use their own electricity to charge up the phone, whereas a basic BT phone is powered by the juice BT supply over the old copper/ally pair.

Logic would say the mobile industry would be worse as they're relying on signals being pumped out in all directions via a radio mast, instead of a nice targeted one down the wire.

Solar panels on the roofs of telephone exchanges, just don't expect to make phone calls after dark!

Since telephone exchanges use DC (from open-vented lead-acid batteries ..... old tech maybe, but still plenty of life in it and still the most recyclable battery) it's actually more feasible for them to be supplied by solar or wind power than just about anyone else.

More interesting question: What proportion of the country's energy output was telephony consuming, back in the days of the old clicky-clicky exchanges? Particularly bearing in mind that there were fewer appliances in use in homes in those days.

They used to clock up 50KW at peak times for a 10,000 line medium traffic level exchange. 1000 Amps at 50V, early in the morning it would reduce to a few KW and generally in the 2500 - 4000 KW range for the rest of the day.

I can understand the greenies campaigning against flights. They can probably stand by their convictions to not travel internationally. But I wonder how many of them would start getting further upset when, literally, the majority of the country (and probably large chunks of the rest of the WORLD) ground to a halt if BT stopped using ANY electricity and just turned off their network. The BT network (for all the faults it has) is one of the best in the world. I for one AM something of an environmentalist but I think BT are going in the right direction by moving away from nasty coal fired energy. I do NOT believe that campaigning outside an exchange is going to do much good for anyone.

50kW peak, you say ..... 1kA @ 50V, fair enough, it adds up ..... but then you say 2500-4000kW, which is rather *more* than you said earlier.

Have I missed something, or do you need to check your figures? Do you mean 2.5-4kW idling?