wind farms offshore a soft target for the Govt?

[Sybarite]

Re: Cobblers is right

I was on the Iles de Glénan recently where both windmills and solar pannels are used. Often one type is favoured when the other isn't. EDF (Elecricité de France) had a large pannel up showing the balance sheet of generation against use. I don't remember the exact figues except that they only had to turn on the diesel generators when there was heavy cloud cover with no wind for 5 days.

I would be very interested to know what the pay-back is on the (unsubsidized) investment in a windmill. On the other hand, what are we going to do when we use up all the oil - aided and abetted by the American gas guzzlers? (On this subject it is not diplomatic to refer to mobos!)

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

Re: Cobblers is right

Depends entirely on the amount of power required, I believe. You can power a yacht quite happily with a mix of solar and wind, for example, or even an island where a small comjunity can exist on power from a diesel, but powering up a city is a different matter entirely. Costs of large-scale solar power at the moment are put at about 20 times that of wind which in turn is roughly three times that of coal, depending how you count it. West Denmark is hailed as the model for the rest of Europe. Its masses of windmills supply more than 40 percent of demand, but only for 18 percent of the time despite Jutland's inherent windiness. This bodes ill for the UK's new green energy policies. My advice is buy some candles.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NigeCh]

Re: Cobblers is right (Energy equation)

There's more energy landing on the earth from the sun in a single day than all the peoples of the earth use in a year. That's not a greenie green statemnet. It's a fact.

Windmills are eco-friendly but they are polluting - they create noise. 2% of our power is created from hydro and even that's causing problems in Scotland (See The John Muir Website at http://www.jmt.org/policy/shieldaig_sta.html )

It's all very well everyone slagging off windmills and claiming that they are all subsidised .... But they are not. It's us subsidising petrol and diesel. Oneday someday we will have to pay the true cost of energy.

We are already into the negative scenario where more oil is being consumed than there are reserves being discovered. If you take a quick gander on google and look at say any of the most optimistic of the USA sites it would appear that 2010 is the crunch year (and it's been forecast for the past 20 years) ... after 2010 energy prices will skyrocket and then what?

Yes. We can already make petrol etc from grass - but that's not the answer.

The next energy crisis won't happen in 2010. It will be a gradual increase in energy prices way above inflation. And then as those prices increase even the greeniest of greens will start moaning that all governments didn't do enough in time to stop it happening. The one European Government which is tackling this future problem now is the Irish Government and they have given permission for a series of massive windfarms not just on the east coast of Ireland but on the west coast as well. When the wind stops they will just dig a few more hectares of 5,000 year old peat and wind up some of their in-limbo power stations. When the wind blows they will be exporting surpus to the under-funded politically-bound UK at a premium.

The future is nuclear - afterall, that's what the sun is. IMO, it's time to restart the serious research again into both solar and nuclear.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

Re: Cobblers is right (Energy equation)

Nigel -- you're wrong about subsidies, though the govt doesn't use that word. In every country in Europe all windmills are heavily dependent on additional payments in various forms, the UK too. You're right about sunlight, but we haven't (yet) found a way of making economic use of it. Ireland? You put your finger on the reason why windmills are not eco-friendly. As you say, they plan to wind up some in-limbo power station which is another way of saying they must provide conventional generating back-up for every windmill. And what will the greenies say about digging up the peat? The real reason windmills are not eco-friendly is not noise, though it plays a part, but the fact that power stations on standby for when the wind drops in fact create more CO2 pollution than they do when running at full whack. The other problem, never discussed, is that when wind generation reaches a big percentage, it causes enormous and costly problems in the national grid whichin effect has to be rebuilt. The wind proponents never talk about this, and intense criticism from the likes of the UK's major engineering institutions is simply ignored. It's a scandal and in a few years our kids will be killing us for these stupid, short-sighted, green window-dressing decisions.
In the end I agree with you -- the future is nuclear but you'll never convince anyone of that. Except a Frenchman or a Finn. Though even the Swiss voted for a nuclear station the other day.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Re: Cobblers is right (Energy equation)

I attended a meeting with the RYA and local yacht clubs concerning the wind farm planned for the scarweather sands off swansea bay. what follows is from memory since i have passed my papers on.

this windfarm covers several square miles mainly of sandbank but also a relatively lightly used channel between the banks and the shore. each windmill is 800m away from the next one, and with blades at 30m minimum above mean sea level. the exclusion zones planned are the whole site as far as trawling is concerned, but only 50m from each windmill for anchoring / sailing/ rod and line fishing. the difference is because only trawlers have the bollard pull to lift the burried cables. if your anchor gets stuck, hard luck.

i think its fair to say that most cruising yachtsmen present were not concerned about the scheme after they heard the details. the fishermen were - but given the way they've raped the sea, most people would happily tilt the odds a bit in favour of the fish.

most discussion was on the subject of marking and lighting. all will have a red light on top for planes, but there was some discussion of a proposal only to buoy the 4 corners of the site. given that the distance between mills is as big as it is, this seems dodgy to me. imagine arriving there, at night, i fog, electrics failed so back to basics. how do you know where you are if they're not individually lit?

there was no discussion of the economics since this was not the purpose of the meeting. in any case as an (ex) nuclear physicist, i have no doubt that the future is green (and glowing)

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Bergman]

Re: My 2 cents worth

Agree in part that windmills are not a major nuisance, I certainly don't see that they are a pollutant. Parked in Blyth many times with about 9 mills on the harbour wall and not noticed any noise problem, rather handy - wake up on morning glance out of window if spinning like top go back to sleep - no problem.

Don't see the Irish situation in any way relevant - UK has population of 60M Irish republic has population of (I think) 5M - no serious comparison.

Peak demand in UK is something like 50 GWatts (50,000,000,000). Windmills producing 200 - 300 kWatts on a good day are not going to make much of an impression but I suppose every little helps. I don't see the argument that fossil fuel stations on standby produce more CO2 than when working flat out. Nonsense, CO2 is produced as a product of combustion and quantity produced is proportional to mass of fuel burned. Power stations on standby burn very little fuel (thats why they are on standby)so produce very little CO2. Although, come to think of it most stand-by cover is from Olympus gas turbines with about 30 second run up time, and they produce zero CO2 if not running. Probaby misunderstood efficiency figures, certainly more efficient on full load, but thats not the same thing.

Only answer is nuclear, for the immediate future fission, but hopefully at some point fusion process will be developed to a point where it is a practical source. I would strongly favour increased investment in that as an alternative to subsidising "green" sources which can never come close to meeting even a fraction of the real demand.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[oldgit]

dear anal. Any chance of you filling in the rest of your profile.Perchance.You must have a pretty tall stick on that mega yacht for it to hit those deadly whirly blades.
However if while wandering along the Sheppey shores, a little pile of matchwood hoves into view..........

<hr width=100% size=1>My little Princess/forums/images/icons/laugh.gifthe 33 of course.Shame its not just a bit bigger.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Re: Cobblers is right (Energy equation)

>Windmills are eco-friendly but they are polluting - they create noise.<

Not neccessarily. I've frequently passed the wind farm above <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.natwindpower.co.uk/towlaw/towlaw.htm>Tow Law </A>in Co Durham, and even when 20 metres away the noise is barely detectable - certainly much lower than the ambient noise which most town and city dwellers live with full time.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: You\'ve put your finger on it

Build the bloody things in areas that already have ugly back drops and background noise.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

Re: My 2 cents worth

According to power system engineers I spoke to in Germany, as well as many experts in UK, a conventional coal power station (not gas turbine) idling on hot standby produces more emissions than one running efficiently at full whack. Same as your car emitting more smoke when it's idling at traffic lights. As I understand it, idling is inherently inefficient.

<hr width=100% size=1>