Wind Farms, Yes or No?

In my earlier reply I said stop all the pussyfooting around and just get on with the nuclear construction that is really the only way forward and unavoidable. Build 140% capacity not 80% and consign the Blue Peter stuff to the recycle bin. Problem solved.
 
alant said:
Exactly, so you cannot ignore the so-called base load generator costs, which still need to provide power for the other 64% of the time. This must be factored into any windfarm feasibility.
Click to expand...

You have a slight misconception of load factor. It does not mean that for 36% of the time all wind farms in Britain are running at full output and for the remaining 64% of the time they contribute nothing. It is quite rare for it to be flat calm in both the Solway Firth and the Thames Estruary, so although there will be few times when the total UK wind installation is giving rated output, there will be equally few times when there is nothing at all available.

There will always be a need for some backup capacity, but it does not need to be kept running all the time. Short term wind forecasts - over a few hours - are quite good enough to predict what spinning reserve will be called upon (spinning reserve stations are turning and synchronised but putting no power into the grid) and longer range forecasts can be used to plan what spinning reserve to have ready.

These figures are 'mean' desired/projected outputs, which will vary from 100% to a complete Zero. When providing power, it needs to match demand, which with an irregular/inconsistent source such as 'wind', a windfarm will have some difficulty.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt that increased use of renewables will involve increased storage capacity, so expect to see more pumped storage schemes like Cruachan or Dinorwig in the future.
 
orbister said:
It is quite rare for it to be flat calm in both the Solway Firth and the Thames Estruary, so although there will be few times when the total UK wind installation is giving rated output, there will be equally few times when there is nothing at all available. ..... Short term wind forecasts - over a few hours - are quite good enough to predict what spinning reserve will be called upon (spinning reserve stations are turning and synchronised but putting no power into the grid) and longer range forecasts can be used to plan what spinning reserve to have ready......There is no doubt that increased use of renewables will involve increased storage capacity, so expect to see more pumped storage schemes like Cruachan or Dinorwig in the future.
Click to expand...
The averaging of wind farm output across the UK proved to be another myth. The weather systems over the UK are much greater [in extent] than the UK such that when one wind farm is down, they all are. This data is readily available from several sources.

The immutable obstacle to any plan for renewable is that the power is required between 1700-1800hrs each and every day. Consumption is approximately half to one third before and after. I have no idea how often renewable energy sources generate useful capacity during that short interval in the course of a year but I would suspect not often. The owners of the over 40% of UK generation coming from CCG gas generators, which are ideal to meet such short term requirements, need to run these plants during that period, which is when the Grid pays substantially more per kwh, to be economic. In the absence of anything else, these CCG plants are essential to meet peak demand?

For base load and your spinning proposition, we will reach the farcical situation when, having built the nuclear stations, they are spiniing to allow another carbon neutral source to generate. We are paying twice over, and then some, for the same kwhr.

The National Grid's last rolling 5 year plan specifically ruled out any new mass storage schemes.

If, as seems likely, the nuclear industry gets a floor price for the electricity generated throughout the operating life of the plant, then the windfarm owners will reasonably demand a similar extension to the ROC subsidy to cover the substantial costs of offshore farms for 25 years or more. Wind farms will proliferate. Its money for old rope ... yuk ... the whole thing stinks
 
ParaHandy said:
The averaging of wind farm output across the UK proved to be another myth. The weather systems over the UK are much greater [in extent] than the UK such that when one wind farm is down, they all are. This data is readily available from several sources.

The immutable obstacle to any plan for renewable is that the power is required between 1700-1800hrs each and every day. Consumption is approximately half to one third before and after. I have no idea how often renewable energy sources generate useful capacity during that short interval in the course of a year but I would suspect not often. The owners of the over 40% of UK generation coming from CCG gas generators, which are ideal to meet such short term requirements, need to run these plants during that period, which is when the Grid pays substantially more per kwh, to be economic. In the absence of anything else, these CCG plants are essential to meet peak demand?

For base load and your spinning proposition, we will reach the farcical situation when, having built the nuclear stations, they are spiniing to allow another carbon neutral source to generate. We are paying twice over, and then some, for the same kwhr.

The National Grid's last rolling 5 year plan specifically ruled out any new mass storage schemes.

If, as seems likely, the nuclear industry gets a floor price for the electricity generated throughout the operating life of the plant, then the windfarm owners will reasonably demand a similar extension to the ROC subsidy to cover the substantial costs of offshore farms for 25 years or more. Wind farms will proliferate. Its money for old rope ... yuk ... the whole thing stinks
Click to expand...

Here speaks a breath of fresh air.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Wind farms DO NOT NEED to match demand & evidently cannot by their nature."

QED

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"There is no doubt that increased use of renewables will involve increased storage capacity, so expect to see more pumped storage schemes like Cruachan or Dinorwig in the future."

Even IF storage schemes came to fruition, how are they 'directly' related to windfarms?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You have a slight misconception of load factor. It does not mean that for 36% of the time all wind farms in Britain are running at full output and for the remaining 64% of the time they contribute nothing."

Really?
Blimey, I'd never have worked that out by myself.
Thanks for patronising me!
I'm obliged.
 
Wind farms will proliferate. Its money for old rope ... yuk ... the whole thing stinks
Click to expand...
Why don't the media (OK, Beeb would never kick against the reins) have a real go at getting answers to these points. This simple fact is a plain as the nose on your face, but every time some tries to bring it up industry spokes(wo)men, or junior Ministers, shoot them down with smoke and mirrors.
 
the best place for wind farms woul be as high as poss .. ben nevis
snowdon top of peak district ... no chance of that then! . still be a waste of space even up there anyway. ! IMHO should be using water hydro,dams ,tidal, wave and waterwheels and nuclear
 
On the face of it, hydro would seem to be the most practical given the rainfall & flooding problems we are experiencing. Some measure of flow controll may have reduced the problems at Workington I guess. I suppose the big problem with them is the capital investment required to build damns & the "Eco-effect" of flooding valleys & habitat.
 
http://www.picturesofengland.com/Isle_of_Man/Isle_of_Man/Laxey/pictures/1102571

Waterwheels could supply a local small towns and villages oop north anyway

Lots of sites where some of the infrastucture is still there wierheads leats millponds

Lady isobella enormous power used to pump 8 tons of water at every turn of the wheel

http://www.energy.soton.ac.uk/hydro/waterwheels.html

small town councils could easily find places where enough 'lecy could be generated 24/7 for most most basic needs

and people out there would like the water systems eviro benifits .Could generat a lot of building work for the building industry jobs etc

http://www.eurekamagazine.co.uk/article/17130/Water-wheels-begin-their-come-back.aspx

http://www.powerpal.co.uk/pposhotpwr.html

the power from the big wheels in the old mill towns was enormous
 
Last edited:
ParaHandy said:
The averaging of wind farm output across the UK proved to be another myth. The weather systems over the UK are much greater [in extent] than the UK such that when one wind farm is down, they all are. This data is readily available from several sources.
Click to expand...

Please give me one, then. I'd like to check that.

The immutable obstacle to any plan for renewable is that the power is required between 1700-1800hrs each and every day. Consumption is approximately half to one third before and after.
Click to expand...

Peak power demand is during th hour when most businesses have just closed and most domestic activities haven't started? You surprise me. Have you a source for that?

I have no idea how often renewable energy sources generate useful capacity during that short interval in the course of a year but I would suspect not often.
Click to expand...

That's why, as I wrote, increased use of renewables will inevitably mean increased storage capacity.

For base load and your spinning proposition, we will reach the farcical situation when, having built the nuclear stations, they are spiniing to allow another carbon neutral source to generate. We are paying twice over, and then some, for the same kwhr.
Click to expand...

No one expects fossil fuel use in generation to fall to zero. The spinning reserve can be coal (in the role played by gas at the moment).
 
Lakesailor said:
Why don't the media (OK, Beeb would never kick against the reins) have a real go at getting answers to these points.
Click to expand...

Because they are not real points and don't need answers. They are wildly inaccurate claims made by people with axes to grind. You might as well ask why the BBC doesn't answer the questions posed by flat earthers.

Looks, for example, at the ludicrous idea that wind turbines will never make the nergy required to construct them. Simply false, but a few diehards keep on punting it.
 
Must say I like the idea of lots of micro generation. It would be a distributed system, with a myriad of smaller sources of supply, as opposed to a centralised system with a few mega sources. If we go centralised then accident, breakdown, strike, attack could deprive us of a significant percentage of our production just like that (© Tommy Cooper).
 
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24414/

We use 65,000 tonnes of uranium a year, but we only mine 40,000 tonnes. The rest comes from stocks and recycling. Unless you happen to know where to start digging the idea that nuclear power is endless is somewhat laughable.

A lot of people have claimed that more energy goes into building a windfarm then comes out of it. Has anyone got any numbers to back that up?
According to this report http://www.bwea.com/pdf/briefings/target-2005-small.pdf :
"A wind farm will repay it's energy costs in 3-6months"

In terms of total costs wind power is not yet price competitive with gas or coal, but if development continues at the current rate it should be soon before 2020 (source: http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications.php?id=234).
 
hot air and wind farms

I started in the power industry in the late sixties on a large coal fired power plant(1000MW)and estimated boiler life then was 30 years.Now its 2009 and its still operating only now privatly,there are about twelve large stations just like this over thirty years old and maintenance costs must be pretty high!!Now supplementing these are the CCGT gas fired stations.What happens in ten years(or earlier)when gas prices go up and coal fired stations start to be really expensive to run(imported coal remember and maint costs spiral)?Was it a minister who recently said there will be no power blackouts or rationing!!!Good luck UK.
 
Twister_Ken said:
Must say I like the idea of lots of micro generation. It would be a distributed system, with a myriad of smaller sources of supply, as opposed to a centralised system with a few mega sources. If we go centralised then accident, breakdown, strike, attack could deprive us of a significant percentage of our production just like that (© Tommy Cooper).
Click to expand...


The problem with micro-gen is the cost.... much as one of the main problems with wind gen is the cost.

Micro gen introduces a whole load of new issues and duplications... including grid connections... load balancing... power managment.... maintanence... but in the end the cost per kwh can be very steep.

Like most things.. there are huge efficiencies in centralised bulk production.

At what point does the cost of Electricity overcome its utility? That is really the question. Wind power right now is being almost 100% subsidised by central government. Just how much can we afford to pay for our energy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

D
No Raw Water Strainer - Trapper 500 Nanni 2.14
Replies
3
Views
213
Dulaman66
D
C
Being offered a free Mystere 26
Replies
17
Views
735
Concerto
Concerto

Share this page

Top