South Coast Wind farm

[Seanick]

Only Nuclear Power will sustain this power hungry nation with its short sighted desires .

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article575370.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

I have notice broadly that the younger generation support wind farms, where as the older generation do not.

 

[johnalison]

I have sailed through a large wind farm in the Baltic where there was a marked channel, or rather, alleyway. It was quite straightforward and the only problem was loss of the prevailing 15 knot wind.However, this is different to trying to navigate in the area in a tideway in severe conditions or in a ship with steering problems. I suppose the owners might think that the loss of just one or two masts was a risk worth taking, and my boat would barely scratch one.

Visually, I can see no particular problem. As sailors we are accustomed to structures of one kind or another at sea, and the Nab tower is hardly a thing of beauty. The Gunfleet Array is only vaguely visible from Clacton only a few miles away, and is actually not unattractive, which is not the same as saying that I support it. If we are going to extend the country's debt by spending billions on these ornaments we may as well put some around the South Coast as well.

 

[webcraft]

How can anybody sustain an argument for even one wind turbine now?

There are lots of arguments for wind turbines, but to increase the percentage of wind generated electricity much further we are going to need a European supergrid and/or smart meters and/or some form of energy storage eg compressed air, pumped storage hydro, hydrogen etc.

There may prove to be a slight lack of joined up thinking . . . time will tell.

- W

 

[webcraft]

Only Nuclear Power will sustain this power hungry nation with its short sighted desires .

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article575370.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

I have notice broadly that the younger generation support wind farms, where as the older generation do not.

The older generation don't support change or new ideas full stop. They are also prone to sweeping generalisations.

- W

 

[Robin]

The older generation don't support change or new ideas full stop. They are also prone to sweeping generalisations.

- W

They also prefer to be able to see, not sit in the dark when the wind doesn't blow for days on end.

Nuclear will do nicely.

 

[alant]

I read that yachts will be permitted to sail through the area.
Presumably this mean that the spacing between the individual turbines will be adequate.
Perhaps in conditions of moderate seas and good visibility this would be safe "enough".
Not that I'm at all qualified to comment, I haven't seen any of these offshore windfarms. I'm not sure yet whether I'd like to venture into one. I don't really like the sound of it much.
It does look like they will be very much in the way of a passage between Studland and Channel Islands.
Having said that these windfarms will produce useful amounts of power, in general I support their construction. No one is saying that they are a panacea.
Old Harry seems to have been stuck with representing all the boating interests on the south coast. I think he'll be owed more than one beer by the rest of us.
Thanks for that!

"Having said that these windfarms will produce useful amounts of power,"

 

[Whiskey Bravo]

Quote 'Having said that these windfarms will produce useful amounts of power, in general '

No they won't. None of the windfarms operating at present are achieving what is claimed they will, which is a pretty low amount of energy anyway. Certainly not cost effective.
Already there are signs that they are having problems. There is a report in the YBW archive about numerous examples of offshore wind generators starting to sink, which need stabilising at huge cost. In addition, during the recent freezing conditions the onshore ones near us required energy from the National Grid to warm them to keep them operational leading to a negative output.
I'm sure these are only a couple of examples with lots more unforseen or ignored problems to come. Can anybody in their right mind really think the best solution to creating energy is to put a large number of concrete and metal obstacles in one of the busiest shipping areas in the World in the hope that they will have a profound effect? Can anybody really promise that they won't cause even one disaster. We've had all the fuss over Studland Bay and MCZ's in general, can you imagine the environmental impact of a single oil tanker running into one of these constructions. And before anybody starts to say it won't happen, just look at the number of wrecks along both sides of the English Channel,both ancient and modern. None of them expected to sink either.
It's about time the whole windfarm sham in all areas of the UK and elsewhere was stopped, there are much more reliable and less visually intrusive ways of producing energy at an economic cost. If as much money had been poured into developing tidal energy as has been wasted on windfarms it would be up and running by now, but really the only sensible solution at present is nuclear energy, but of course the eco-mentalists don't like it.

 

[ChrisE]

Well I'm not an Eco-environmentalist but quite like the idea of a varied energy production regime, including windfarms. Where I live I would see the turbines from my bedroom window (well nearly) and I like the thought.

I'm also in favour of nuclear but ahem am aware that these are not without risk. Fwiw, I'd prefer to hear the response of the merchant shipping fleet rather than a few yachties re the dangers to shipping. The north sea is covered with oil rigs and we don't seem to have had a major problem there.

I'm aware I'm in the minority here but hey, so what?

 

[capnsensible]

Wind farm mythology!

It would seem that properly run, windfarms are very effective. Cotrary to some opinion.

Try this link???

 

[Stork_III]

It would seem that properly run, windfarms are very effective. Cotrary to some opinion.

Try this link???

Imay have missed it in your link, but I see only successful installation of CAPACITY, nothing about successful OUTPUT.

 

[WestwardBound]

Windpower is only one of the sustainable energy resources but it is a useful one. As I said before it is not claimed to be a panacea. In Denmark which is more progressive in sustainable energy than the UK it produces aboutt 19% of their power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power

I agree that tide/wave power have enormous potential here, but it will take these and wind power to make a dent in the UK's power consumption. Not to mention that we should be increasing the budget for research into fusion by an order of magnitude.

Wind power and tidal power have taken so long to become re-establised because the costs of installation and maintenance of the facilities has been an enormous disincentive compared to the cost of fossil fuel power plants. And, as has been pointed out, because of the non-trivial problem of dealing with the variable power output and inconvenient times the power may be produced. You need secondary infrastructure for this job.

I still don't fancy navigating through a windfarm but I suspect it is going to be there whether I like it or not. I keep thinking about how bad this would be in bad weather in the dark. It looks like a real issue for anyone bound cross channel from Poole, Weymouth, Portland under sail. Also very concerned about sufficient room outside the race at Portland Bill. I'm not sure we need the Bill to be more difficult to navigate.

I could not find the charts Old Harry was talking which show the wind farms locations more accurately.

 

[Whiskey Bravo]

It would seem that properly run, windfarms are very effective. Cotrary to some opinion.

Try this link???

Here's an example of how ineffective wnd farms are:

On 20th December 2010 peak demand in the UK was appx 60,000 megawatts.
Maximum capacity for UK windfarms at present is 5,891 megawatts.
20/12/2010 was a practically windless day, windfarms contributed 140 megawatts.
Do you really want to put your tust and money into somethng so useless?

There are many more examples, even before you start to look at costs & generation of CO2.

 

[capnsensible]

Awright, try this one then.

So thats 5 billion in the german pocket.Mmmmm.

 

[capnsensible]

Or this

 

[Stork_III]

Awright, try this one then.

So thats 5 billion in the german pocket.Mmmmm.

What happens in Germany is irrelevant to the UK. Show some cost benefit for the UK, accounting for the Tax breaks, subsidies on installation and the exhorbitant guaranteed buy in price. Your third link is also not relevant.

 

[capnsensible]

All I show is that windpower can work. What anyone makes of it is up to them.

Good on some countries not using a finite resource and making oil last longer.

Anyone is free to disagree.

I got no car and sail most places

 

[Boo2]

Nuclear will do nicely.

But what are your plans for dealing with the waste ?

Boo2

 

[Boo2]

Imay have missed it in your link, but I see only successful installation of CAPACITY, nothing about successful OUTPUT.

Well it clearly says "On particular windy days, wind power generation has surpassed all other electricity sources in Spain, including nuclear.[5] On November 8, 2009 wind power production reached the highest percentage of electricity production, with wind farms covering 53% of the total demand.[2][6] On November 9, 2010, the maximum power output was reached being 14,960 MW.[7]" ?

Boo2

 

[Boo2]

Here's an example of how ineffective wnd farms are:

On 20th December 2010 peak demand in the UK was appx 60,000 megawatts.
Maximum capacity for UK windfarms at present is 5,891 megawatts.

== 10%. An extremely useful and largely carbon free contribution to UK energy consumption. The National Grid have plans to expand this capacity to 30,000 MW, so around half of UK energy production will be low carbon / carbon free.

20/12/2010 was a practically windless day, windfarms contributed 140 megawatts.

An entirely irrelevant statistic : what is the average output of UK wind farm energy production taken over a whole year ?

...useless?

You are raving. It does follow that we need some backup and other technology in support, but WFs do produce substantially CF energy and that is far from useless given the universal acceptance by informed opinion of MMGW. Extremely useful, in fact.

As an on-topic explanation of why your point is a non-sequiteur, directed at anyone who is as rabid or as dim as yourself, merely consider that for much of British history all our international trade was carried out in boats which had no means of propulsion except wind power. When the wind didn't blow then the ships didn't go.

Does this mean that sailing ships were useless ? No.

Does your point render you a bit of an *rse ? Well, excuse the ad-hominim but, yes.

There are many more examples, even before you start to look at costs & generation of CO2.

Which I note you are very careful to avoid giving in your rabid post...

Boo2

 

[Boo2]

What happens in Germany is irrelevant to the UK.

No it's not. Both the UK and Germany are advanced industrial economies and have similar economic needs. The UK has higher levels of WP capacity available to it so what happens in Germany is very relevant to what the UK can expect to achieve.

Boo2