OT Wind Farms in the UK

[rwsaunders]

Pretty impressive goals...it will be interesting to see if the engineering and manufacturing activities remain within the UK as some have requested.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/08/wind-farms-power-uk/?test=latestnews

[jpw]

The UK has the potential to produce more than 150% of its entire energy needs from wind. The key to success is how to store the energy generated for times when the wind isn't blowing. It's a better strategic approach than wave energy generation (which the UK also has lots of potential for) because enemy submarines can torpedo 'wave farms', but knocking out hundreds of thousands of wind turbines is more difficult - this is how London thinks about these things. They still haven't forgotten Napolean's 'continental system', and they are paranoid about foreign 'intervention' to weaken their power. They are also quite obsessed by nuclear energy generation, which is mad on a small and congested island - remember Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.

Very OT.

[nahtnoj]

$160 billion is nothing to sneeze at, but it is cheap in the grand scheme of things.

There is a proposal for a huge wind farm off Long Beach on Long Island - far enough out to not be seen from shore.

[Acotts]

There are some huge issues with having that much wind. This will be a very expensive. Far more than the 125 billion suggests.

[MattTuck]

eh. build a few nuclear plants. the generation 3 and generation 4 nuclear plants are orders of magnitude safer and less waste producing than designs from 30 years ago.

unless your goal is to create a new industry of wind farm mechanics to go around servicing all the turbines.

[1happygirl]

I'd hate to be one of these

[Karin Kirk]

There are some huge issues with having that much wind. This will be a very expensive. Far more than the 125 billion suggests.

What are some of the issues?

[Acotts]

Mainly its unpredictable and really expensive. Its just a very low value product. You need a "shadow" MW of natural gas generation for every MW of wind.

A good example comes from last august in Texas, which has close to 10,000 MW of wind. Last August they went 12 days without a single MW of wind. This coincided with the hottest days of the year which also coincided with the utilities peak load. It’s kind of like having a turbo on a car that only works when you drive under 20 mph.

Then in the Spring they had to dump over 80% of their wind generation because it was coming at 3 in the morning and it would have overloaded their systems. I spoke to a colleague at the Texas ISO and he estimated that they are getting less than 10% of the rated output for their wind farms. So going back to the car analogy, it’s like buying a car that has a top speed of 200, that is only reliable up to 20mph, you can’t control the accelerator and wont drive during rush hour.

Even more scary was the fact that a storm cell rushed through one day and the farms went from 0 to like 8,000 MW in less than a minute. They were able to dump a lot of it into the ground to keep it from destroying their entire grid, but just barely. And then, they lost all that generation in a few minutes. So then they need to really put the pedal to the medal on their Natural Gas and Coal Plants to make up the difference. These power plants are not really made to work like this. In the industry it’s called ramp rate and cycling. Because of the unpredictability of wind, Texas utilities are exceeding the engineered tolerances for ramping up and down these plants and they are starting to have all sorts of issues. Frankly, they have to shut them down now 2 or 3 times more often to keep things repaired. The whole grid is feeling this toll, and we are talking about just a few percent of the total generation. (off the top of my head, its like 3 or 4%. I cant remember and I don’t want to waste too much time looking this up.)

Now, I am not saying this is a bad idea. I am just saying that there is far more to the story than these articles suggest.

For example, for every MW of wind, you need a "shadow" MW of natural gas. Who is building that and were is it coming from? What’s the impact of that growing dependence on natural gas? Is it Liquid Natural Gas (LNG), becuase that is just as dirty and far more dangerous than coal? Just look at Denmark, they claim to produce 25% of their energy from wind, yet not a single power plant has been shut down. In fact, they have added more LNG plants and buy 90% of their power from Norway and sell 90% of their wind power to other countries. Only like 3% of their wind power stays in their grid. And what about the cost? What will this do to their electric rates? Not just the cost of the wind, but of the damage to their baseload generators, damage to the girds, the increased dependence on buying power on the open market with little notice. And normally I don’t really care too much for the birds, but that is a ton of windmills, and they are probably creating a 20 square mile blender right smack on a jet stream. I bet we are talking about 10-15,000 towers. These things are going to be dripping oil and lubricants all over the place. Normally it is not an issue, but at this scale in such a harsh environment that is so hard to service, its gonna get messy.

And again, there is no discussion about what this is doing to people energy bills. I bet that 160 billion is just the upfront capital costs. I bet operation and maintenence will be borne by the masses. I dont know how their energy market works. They may just end up paying it in increased taxes like they do in Canada. This could be a huge impact on cost of living. And what happens to the total pollution levels when factories leave UK due to increased costs and move to China where they can get cheaper dirtier energy. The total GHG content increases. It will be less in Europe, but the global total increases.

The technology simply is not there right now for any country to function on just renewables. It’s a supplement at best. But this stuff has a religious fervor to it and rational thoughts get put on the wayside in favor of faith, politics, and wishful thinking.

WE NEED BETTER BATTERIES!!!

..damn, that took up way more time than I intended. Gotta get back to work for the last 90 before I leave for the weekend.

[Acotts]

There is a myth that renewable energy is free. It is not. It is extremely expensive.

[Louis]

because enemy submarines can torpedo 'wave farms'

This seems pretty far-fetched to me, unless you're worried that Karl Dönitz's grandchildren are out there plotting against you...

[Acotts]

how did you get the umlaut?

P.S. I am not sure if I spelled [oohm-loht] correctly.

[Louis]

It was already there when I "cut" the name. (Wasn't sure about the spelling, so I looked it up.)

[Karin Kirk]

WE NEED BETTER BATTERIES!!!


Thanks for taking the time to describe all of that. I agree about the batteries, and I favor the notion of energy storage via water reservoirs. When there's extra wind, use the power to pump water uphill into a holding tank or reservoir. When there is an absence of wind, drain the water out and spin turbines with the falling water. IIRC, this is reasonably efficient. However I have not heard this discussed anywhere.

As for the price, ALL forms of energy are expensive. However there are large variables in how much of the actual cost is wrapped into the price. I'd argue that with many of our seemingly cheap forms of energy we are not actually paying the real cost. Nuclear waste disposal is an easy example here.

[RPS]

The UK has the potential to produce more than 150% of its entire energy needs from wind. Entire nation or "home" needs?

This statement suggests to me that they may be talking about residential “home” electric power needs only, and not the electric needs of the country. I don’t know the breakdown by users, but expect commercial and heavy industries use a lot of power.

“A series of companies were issued permits by the British government Friday to develop offshore wind farms that will generate enough power to supply every home in the U.K.”

[Louis]

I favor the notion of energy storage via water reservoirs.

As long as you don't neglect to maintain the system!!!!

This is picture of the Taum Sauk reservoir after a massive failure that allowed zillions of gallons to release at once down the mountain. One of the root causes was guys not properly maintaining the water level sensors...

More info (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taum_Sauk_pumped_storage_plant)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_yG2HbYQQYOw/SYsbZw4C89I/AAAAAAAAEAo/-gNIqdENAU0/s400/!0_2000-2009_TaumSauk_reservoir_failure.jpg

[Kevan]

The question or point I've got is not so much about making energy as much as consuming it. What I have in mind is a pretty tall order, but the energy saved and the safety it would bring is quite remarkable really. Simply put, why not start transitioning our homes and light businesses to small voltage appliances and services. I think most electrical engineers agree that most household appliances can be built and driven using a fraction of the power that comes to the current wall outlet. Take for example that laptop you're using right now; that brick attached to its power cord is a transformer (its why it gets warm), reducing the power to a level that the laptop can function in without popping. It's not a easy fix, there are appliances such as electric stoves and clothes dryers that require considerable juice, but TV's, refrigerators, lamps, lights, stereos and even pc's can get by with far less. It's another means of conservation and if it can be used in a home in conjunction with solar power the level of success should be far greater. The safety aspect is fewer shocks and fewer fires.

Now everyone... go home, turn off your circuit breakers and start installing new lines. Oh, and you'll have to go out and replace your alarm clock, garage door opener, blender, toaster, microwave, stereo...

Think of it as an economic stimulus program.

[RPS]

I favor the notion of energy storage via water reservoirs.
It’s interesting to consider the magnitude of such a “storage” system. For instance, the maximum generation of Glen Canyon Dam at Lake Powell is 1,356 MW.

To store significant amounts of energy at the required power levels we need relative to our total national needs and the maximum capacity of the grid would take a massive reservoir system with massive hydro-electric generation stations; not to mention the ability to pump the water back upstream. Costs and impact on the environment would have to be considered in much detail. I’m not saying it couldn’t work, just that it would be quite an expensive and complex undertaking.

IMHO a large-enough grid would solve many of the problems associated with wind power since we could divert and spread excess around throughout the nation, but I agree with Acotts that for national security we’d have to have standby power available at all times.

[RPS]

Simply put, why not start transitioning our homes and light businesses to small voltage appliances and services. I think most electrical engineers agree that most household appliances can be built and driven using a fraction of the power that comes to the current wall outlet.
Low voltage is not the same as low power. In fact, many things work more efficiently at higher voltage because it normally means less current, and hence less resistance in the electrical lines/wires.

As an example, old cars use to work on 6 volts, modern ones work at 12 volts, and future ones (if not converted to electric first) will likely work at 36 volts in order to increase efficiency.

[BdaGhisallo]

Mainly its unpredictable and really expensive. Its just a very low value product. You need a "shadow" MW of natural gas generation for every MW of wind.


..damn, that took up way more time than I intended. Gotta get back to work for the last 90 before I leave for the weekend.

Well said! Should be required reading for everyone convinced that renewables are a silver bullet that will fix all of our "problems".

[93legendti]

Made in China?

[LegendRider]

Acotts did a nice job explaining some of the issues surrounding wind energy. The bottom line is that it's not appropriate - right now - for baseload electricity requirements. And, the pump storage technology can potentially help, but its not a silver bullet.

[RPS]

Pretty impressive goals...it will be interesting to see if the engineering and manufacturing activities remain within the UK as some have requested.
The Houston Chronicle reported this morning that “electricity use set a statewide wintertime record of 55,856 megawatts Friday morning as an Artic front chilled most of the state.” Seems Texas alone would need more than twice as many of the new wind turbines proposed for the UK. And to make matters worse, our summertime electricity demands due to air conditioning are much higher. This last (very hot) summer the Houston area alone used a peak of about 18,000 megawatts.

It would be interesting to know what percentage of British homes need air conditioning compared to US due to climate differences, and also what type of energy they rely on to heat their homes.

[fjaws]

It would be interesting to know what percentage of British homes need air conditioning compared to US due to climate differences, and also what type of energy they rely on to heat their homes.


Having lived there for several years, Air conditioning is rare in a british home and a large percentage of homes heat with oil.

[jpw]

how did you get the umlaut?

P.S. I am not sure if I spelled [oohm-loht] correctly.

Use the 'insert' key.

[jpw]

Having lived there for several years, Air conditioning is rare in a british home and a large percentage of homes heat with oil.

Air con is rare, but oil heating is only in rural areas beyond the natural gas network of pipes. Few homes are oil heated as it is more expensive than gas.

[RPS]

Thanks for the info. Either way (whether gas or oil for heating) it confirms what I suspected, that few in UK depend on electric power for air conditioning or heat. In my area those two sources account for the largest portion of energy utilization. Running appliances, TVs, water heater, etc… are relatively small by comparison.

On the bright side if we are using so much power for AC and heating then there is much we can do to reduce our needs through conservation. In my case I know I could cut my maximum power demand in half but its cost prohibitive at today’s rates.

[93legendti]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/opinion/the-not-so-green-mountains.html?_r=1&smid=fb-share&src=tp&pagewanted=print

The Not-So-Green Mountains

By STEVE E. WRIGHT


Craftsbury, Vt.BULLDOZERS arrived a couple of weeks ago at the base of the nearby Lowell Mountains and began clawing their way through the forest to the ridgeline, where Green Mountain Power plans to erect 21 wind turbines, each rising to 459 feet from the ground to the tip of the blades.

Here and in other places — the allure of wind power threatens to destroy environmentally sensitive landscapes.

Erecting those turbines requires building roads — in places where the travel lanes are now made by bear, moose, bobcat and deer.

It requires changing the profile of the ridgeline with approximately 700,000 pounds of explosives that will reduce parts of the mountaintops to rubble that will be used to build the access roads.

It also requires the clear-cutting on steep slopes of 134 acres of healthy forest, now ablaze in autumn colors. Studies have shown that clear-cutting can lead to an increase in erosion to high-quality headwater streams, robbing them of life and fouling the water for downstream residents, wild and human.

The electricity generated by this project will not reduce Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions. Only 4% percent of those emissions now result from electricity generation.

Wind doesn’t blow all the time, or at an optimum speed, so the actual output of the turbines — the “capacity factor” — is closer to about 1/3 of the rated capacity of 63 megawatts. At best, this project will produce enough electricity to power about 24,000 homes per year, according to the utility.

But it is those same Green Mountain ridgelines that attracted nearly 14 million visitors to Vermont in 2009, generating $1.4 billion in tourism spending. The mountains are integral to our identity as the Green Mountain State, and provide us with clean air and water and healthy wildlife populations.

Vermont’s proud history of leadership in developing innovative, effective environmental protection is being tossed aside. This project will set an ominous precedent by ripping apart a healthy, intact ecosystem in the guise of doing something about climate change. In return, Green Mountain Power will receive $44 million in federal production tax credits over 10 years.

Ironically, most of the state’s environmental groups have not taken a stand on this ecologically disastrous project. Apparently, they are unwilling to stand in the way of “green” energy development, no matter how much destruction it wreaks upon Vermont’s core asset: the landscape that has made us who we are.

The pursuit of large-scale, ridgeline wind power in Vermont represents a terrible error of vision and planning and a misunderstanding of what a responsible society must do to slow the warming of our planet. It also represents a profound failure to understand the value of our landscape to our souls and our economic future in Vermont

[Idris Icabod]

Funnily enough I was just back in the UK visiting family and the issue of wind turbines was a hot issue in the local community. A company had just applied for permission to erect 20 windmills a mile or so out of the village I grew up in. My brother is the chairman of the local council and my father is a member and they had an open meeting at a site where you could see the turbines from if they get the go ahead. I actually went along to gauge the mood and it was pretty much 100% opposed. The key issue is the look, others compalined that they are only 28% efficient (which seems a pretty dumb argument to me as you are getting electricity from something that is renewable so the efficiency % seems a little academic, obviously it is efficient enough for a company to spend the money to put them up). Most said build these things in the sea and not where I can see them. Reading teh papers this seems to be a pretty widely accepted viewpoint with many applications getting turned down. I actually think they look stunning, I've driven through Palm Springs and I'm sure I could buy a house over looking those things and sit happily watching them spin.

[gasman]

A huge problem that only 1happy girl recognized is that these wind turbines kill huge numbers of birds. My cousin is a wildlife biologist and vet who has been invovled in studies of some of the California wind farms. Daily they found freshly killed birds over the entire wind farm area. Exrpolated it would result in the killing of millions of local and migratory bird populations.
Cats are bad enough already.

[oliver1850]

We have a group of 40 or so, about 10 km from where I live. I ride through them often, and like Icabod, don't mind the visual intrusion, either up close or viewing them from home. There was a lot of organized opposition when they were proposed. Several more projects have been proposed in the county, and opposition seems to be growing.

[Germany_chris]

I never knew these things were so contentious....they're everywhere here..