| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/30/2009 6:31:21 PM | Im guessing all or most of you have seen the news recently about the largest wind turbine manufacturer closing its UK production plant, I was wondering what your thoughts on the subject are.
I dont just mean the subject of losing the plant and with that loss gaining the prospect of all of the UKs new turbines being built in another country but also the workers occupation of the plant in an effort to get their bosses to listen to their desires to have the plant nationalised so production can continue.
Any thoughts, comments on the subject? | |
|
| |
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/30/2009 8:34:51 PM | It should have been nationalised. If only to keep the manufacturing in the country. One of the main problems that the UK economy has, is that all of the manufacturing that used to be done over here has gone to China and elsewhere.
Means that anyone buying anything is sending money outside the country.
All of our energy infrastructure industries should be kept in the UK. They are critical to maintaining the basic running of where we live.
Yes, the Danes and the Dutch have a lot more engineering experience in these fields, but that's only because we stopped doing it.
So much for the politics.
As for the engineering, the turbines that they made were excellent for what they did. There are more efficient designs for vertical axis wind turbines. They don't produce as much electricity, true, but they have a lower price point, and can use lower windspeeds to generate power, so are more easily installed in places where the big turbines are not going to work.
Combined with the new smart meters, and it becomes possible for anyone to provide electricity to the national grid. Main problem is that centralised solutions have always been more acceptable. The economies of scale are all very well, but spreading the generating capacity to many more place reduces risks from a few single points of failure to a more widespread network.
Roll on peer-to-peer energy production. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 1:27:41 AM | These days, if you're building a new house, you have to comply with building reg.s that make any dwelling suitable for disabled access - even though that building may never even be visited by someone in a wheelchair, yet green power considerations don't even come into it. If every new housing estate had to supply a certain percentage of its own power through solar/wind sources - just think how much less CO2 would be pumped out each year. Wind and solar power is, at present, quite expensive - there should be more in the way of grants and subsidies to allow householders to produce their own electricity.
Saying that, both wind and solar power are far less assured than water power. Nothing stops the tides - yet very little of our power comes from water.
I'd love a wind turbine in my back garden, although I'd probably end up just sitting watching it all day.
H.x | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 2:17:53 AM |
I dont just mean the subject of losing the plant and with that loss gaining the prospect of all of the UKs new turbines being built in another country but also the workers occupation of the plant in an effort to get their bosses to listen to their desires to have the plant nationalised so production can continue.
What's the point of producing something as useless as wind turbines?
We have a government and Opposition which have both nailed their colours to the mast of this 'green' industry without studying the facts with regard to their ability to do the the job, ie produce electricity on demand.
Worse, the government has already subsidised every turbine currently in use in this country, with added costs to the consumer. I've never understood why 'natural' electricity is so expensive......surely, it should be the cheapest?
I'd love a wind turbine in my back garden, although I'd probably end up just sitting watching it all day.
That would be all that it's fit for...... | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 2:30:17 AM | I drove past a wind farm during the recent hot spell. Not one turbine was working!
What a waste of money! | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 6:42:20 AM | I am with zeegary, he is clearly a realist.
Transmission losses cripple electricity production. Pour in buckets full at the production end and very little comes comes out the other. You just heat the air with the transmission lines. The post war national grid was build on the concept of energy security. U-boats cannot torpedo coal mines and pit head power stations. The national grid is not clever or efficient. Likewise, off shore or other remotely situated wind turbines, I fear, are unlikely to be cost effective. Mainly, they are just a sop to woolly minded green activists. Wins votes from the indifferent electorate. Well it sounds like a nice idea, you don't pay for wind.
Small wind turbines may be effective; used close to the point of consumption for background tasks such as lifting water for long term storage or heating a very thick concrete floor.
As for government support for non-viable industry. Well, where would subsidising candle makers or airship manufactures have lead? | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 7:01:33 AM | I don't understand the full energy potential of a commercial wind farm other than they can recover their initial outlay within 12 months and produce about 20% of the nations energy demand during the winter months when energy is needed the most. However, it cannot replace coal/nuclear power stations.
What I do see is the government taxing me with 'Green' taxes and pledge spending money on clean renewable alternative (think of a few other words in a minute) ways of producing energy and jobs...then don't.
I cannot see any of what we do environmentally making the slightest difference on the global stage. China is currently building 600+ coal powered stations over the next 10 years, that carbon emission increase alone is greater than the TOTAL Uk carbon output. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 7:16:05 AM |
Transmission losses cripple electricity production. Pour in buckets full at the production end and very little comes comes out the other. You just heat the air with the transmission lines.
So you think we should pack it all in then, you think we should stop making electricity because the mothod of getting it from the generators to the users in inefficient?
How about cars, they are inefficient too mabye we should scrap all of them, and as to cooking our food, what an inefficient way of surviving, wasting all that energy when we could just just as easy eat it without cooking it first!
The post war national grid was build on the concept of energy security. U-boats cannot torpedo coal mines and pit head power stations.
I dont think the local planners nor the national government need worry about zee jerrys comming anymore, if we do need to worry about that kind of thing again I think the threat of a nuclear explosion might out weigh the thought of will the power lines and power stations still be there in 500 years when we can safely come out to play
The national grid is not clever or efficient. Likewise, off shore or other remotely situated wind turbines, I fear, are unlikely to be cost effective. Mainly, they are just a sop to woolly minded green activists. Wins votes from the indifferent electorate. Well it sounds like a nice idea, you don't pay for wind.
No thats wrong, they are extreamly efficient at producing energy, the cost of ownership/energy production goes down the longer you have it, and in the end the costs of energy production are almost zero, that together with there are no harmful greenhouse emmisions from them they are perfect energy producers, there are so many studdies done in outher countries, places like Spain who actually rely on wind energy to a large extent, those studdies show how needed wind energy is, even our own government has said they are putting millions of pounds into wind energy, but it seems it might be a little bit late for Vestas on the Isle of Wight, which means all of our tax payers money that is going to be spent on our new turbines will be spent in Germany, Spain, Denmark or India!
Small wind turbines may be effective; used close to the point of consumption for background tasks such as lifting water for long term storage or heating a very thick concrete floor.
As for government support for non-viable industry. Well, where would subsidising candle makers or airship manufactures have lead? | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 7:19:02 AM | wind turbines are a waste of cash imho
when it gets to winter and electric usage goes up guess what we have to buy electric off the french and do they have turbines glazing the wine valleys? do they feck!
i agree we have natural resources for example tidal and the severn bore which has so much potential energy, same as most rivers when the tide comes in. but ive said this for years and wrote to local mp, (probably under b + q and porn receipts, its jacqui smith btw) about 10 years ago saying why dont the government put in an act saying every new house and extentions over a certain size has to have a solar panel of a certain size! or even better the government lead from example and put panels up on every government building. yes i know its not the miracle answer but it will help more then wind turbines and encourage grants, was gonna say from the eu but no ....
edit dont forget the "globel warming" another way to tax for the sake of wet summers! | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 7:43:51 AM | | I always sympathise with workers who fight to save their jobs. Modern Thatcherite governments (including of course New Labour) still defend the logic of "the great car economy" in all its forms. We are told that the environmental crisis is the greatest threat we face just now and yet it is being left to the logic of capitalism to solve it. This will only kick in once the crisis is having a negative material impact on capitalist interests and by then it will probably be too late, I fear. As for the idea of workers occupying their plant and arguing for nationalisation - well, we did something similar for the banks when they had their little moment of anxiety last autumn! And that crisis is not as serious as the environmental one according to the government itself. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 8:32:07 AM | OMG!
Wind turbines a waste WTF! You are all so freakin ignorant here. Im sure you would rather have good ol fossile fuels but one day were gonna run out, i guess you all believe nuclear is the best option as apposed to working alongside nature to provide energy to our planet. Think about it, wind is free, solar power is free, tidal power too, creates no waste either and is no target for bombing should war break out, all we have to do is get on with finding a way to install wind, solar and water energy quickly in a cost affective way. But of course once we find that alternative to oil there will be less to go to war over and that wouldnt be profitable now would it.
Wind power can be used affectivly, the elements can provide us with safer alternatives. As for turbines being out of action (still) they do have to shut down for servicing occasionaly, though the power is still being stored, it dosnt mean they are not gererating power because they are switched off for a short time. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:27:39 AM | | badge36, the government do install solar panels on new buildings, A recent housing association estate was built near me and all the houses have solar panels. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:40:39 AM | What-a-knobhead, yes there are some and about time, but what i was trying to put across is the fact the government aint done a lot except tax the people more, imagine every new building in the last ten years having one, beats putting up wind farms.
but would the power companies want the people to have there own power supply? Me being a cynic thinks not ...
edit, so very true, maybe we should start burning our rubbish in the fireplace, that way sod the council and there bin inspectors! | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 9:45:52 AM | but would the power companies want the people to have there own power supply? Me being a cynic thinks not ...
Thats very true, God forbid that the man in the street should become self sufficient!
The government would probably introduce a solar tax. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:00:15 AM |
though the power is still being stored
High voltage electricity is not stored, it is generated as it is needed.
If you want to stop using fossil fuels completely, nuclear power is (currently) the only viable alternative. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 10:56:09 AM | BladeRunner, the conclusion you base on my previous message is inaccurate. The point is that most wind farms are situated remote from urban centres. This is because of noise, visual impact and land availability/cost. The issue of transmission loss is simply an existing problem until the development of improved and affordable electrical conductors i.e. superconductors.
The point about today's power distribution network is that it was largely conceived during the second world war when strategic concerns were at the forefront of the planners' minds. By strategic I mean the fear of disruption by enemy attack. Then thanks to the fear of war with Soviet Russia. This line of thought was paramount until well into the 1980s, only receding with Glasnost. You are quite right in saying that strategic needs are no longer so important, however, we are left with the legacy of a distribution system based on pit head power production and the fear of war.
Regarding your final point on cost of ownership, it is true that wind is free but I suspect that that is about as far as it goes. Very straight forward idea, capture the wind and electricity comes out at the bottom of the mast. Alas, things are always more complicated. Firstly, there is the capital cost in manufacturing and erecting wind turbines which is closely tied in with something called discounted cash flow. It is like interest payments on a loan. It becomes a cost versus benefit analysis. Now here is the point. You effectively, (no matter how it is dressed up) take a loan or pay up front for the wind turbine. You then need to place a value on the electricity produced to see how long it will take to pay for itself. The value of the electricity is dictated by the open market and the pay point you choose. (Pay point? How much does the electricity company or alternatively the consumer pay for it.) And the crux of the argument is that because wind farms are generally situated many miles away from where the electricity is consumed, only a small proportion of the electricity will reach the consumer and therefore the revenue flow from electricity sales will be low. This results in the initial capital cost taking a long time to recoup. Factor in maintenance costs and it is possible that the capital cost will never be recovered.
You are quite right to mention other countries, but their examples need to be weighed together with many other factors, many of which are difficult to compare with factors in the UK. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 1:34:32 PM |
I don't understand the full energy potential of a commercial wind farm other than they can recover their initial outlay within 12 months and produce about 20% of the nations energy demand during the winter months when energy is needed the most.
You seem to be confusing 'capacity' with 'output'.....just like the Government wants you to do!
The truth is rather more alarming:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/25/renewable-energy-%E2%80%93-our-downfall/
Re the cost:
"In the UK, this subsidy is achieved through Renewables Obligation Certificates, the cost of which are eventually passed onto the consumer. In 2006 the cost to consumers was £600 million, and this is predicted to rise to £3 billion in 2020. 1 That is about £200 per household per annum, on top of current energy bills, for the privilege of using of ‘free’ energy."
Re the output:
"While tidal power may be predictably intermittent, wind power is even more problematical. Recent EU directives have stipulated that some 40% of electricity should be powered from renewable resources by 2020. If this were to be predominantly produced from wind turbines, as is likely, then we would need some 30 gigawatts (gw) of wind generating capacity. To put that figure in perspective, the UK currently has about 0.5 gw of wind capacity. However, that is not the full story, for UK wind turbines are only currently delivering about 25% of installed capacity, due to wind fluctuations and maintenance issues. That means we actually need some 120 gw of installed wind generation capacity to cover just 40% of total UK electrical demand. If the turbines being constructed average 2 mw rated capacity, then we shall need some 60,000 wind turbines to be installed over the next twelve years. And where shall we erect all those? – Certainly Not In My Back Yard."
Re the supply:
"The truth of the matter is that there are numerous days without significant winds across the UK, and when those conditions occur it doesn’t matter how much installed generating capacity we have, for it all goes off-line. A report from Denmark 2 indicates that the Danish ‘wind carpet’, which is the largest array of wind turbines in Europe, generated less than 1% of installed power on 54 days during 2002. That is more than one day every week of the year without electrical power. However, if we broaden the definition of ‘without power’ slightly, the same Danish ‘wind carpet’ generated less than 10% of installed capacity for some 16 weeks during 2003. Yet Denmark has the same kind of northerly, maritime weather systems as does the UK. Thus the wind-generation industry is lying to us, once more, for a ‘wind carpet’ that generates less than 10% of installed capacity it next to useless, for the national electrical grid will never cope with such a massive reduction in power supply. In fact, wind generation is so useless, that Denmark, Europe’s largest wind generating nation by far, has never used any of its wind-generated electricity – because it is too variable."
HTH | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 2:52:39 PM | The renewable energy "struggle" is not focused on just using wind turbines, Vestas, the company in question in this instance have a hand in all aspects of renewable energy, they did start out [again] just making wind turbines, but then when DE took over as CEO on Vestas Windsystems A/S he realised that just wind power alone wasnt viable as a power source, so the company diversified into all renewables.
I dont believe anybody has ever said just wind turbines will do what we need to do, the down time on a wind farm is quite high, I know that, and so do the people who matter.
So now you remove the "argument" about wind turbines not cutting it, what do you think?
The transmission medium is a concirn of course, in America they are trying to come up with ways to counter that very problem, with some quite ingenious methods but even then they know the most efficient method over costs is power lines.
Im more interested in your thoughts on RENEWABLES on the whole both land based and off shore turbines, tidal generation and solar too.
Also do you have any thoughts on the current situation on the Isle of Wight with the workers there making a stand against a company who doesnt seem to see a market in this country despite all the government funding promised in the future. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 3:31:53 PM | MSG 12
You know nothing about wind technology.....sorry. | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:14:07 PM | I heard that the so-called UK company were part of a European group and that most of the sales and production output, went to Europe and the US.
Wind is just another energy source... not particularly efficient but... WOW!!!!.. do they look majestic, on the horizon, out to sea, and especially driving through hilly areas of the UK (Cumbria, North Wales, Yorkshire etc) (Not seen the scottish windfarms... yet!)... Everyone thinks at the speed of computers now..... Try walking in North Cumbria... as you slowly round the brow of a hill, you hear the wonderful whoosh..................................................whoosh..................................................whoosh as the turbine blades rotate.... magic!!...
Jeez it was but three generations ago that Windmills and watermills were still milling grain to feed the bread and baking needs of villages, lest we forget!
But beware, the initial cost is recovered... far too easily......
The life cycle assessment of a 3.0 MW wind turbine indicates that it would have to generate electricity for only 6.8 months , of their assumed 20 year useful life, before it produces as much energy as is used during the manufacturing phase. “This, they say, means the turbine model earns its own worth more than 35 times during its energy production lifetime"....
Ok so the figures are based upon data projected for a further 5 years.... by the company in question (who are leaving the UK after our Gov't refused to invest in their product)...
How are the energy companies going to pay their dividends if the cost of producing electricity is sooooo low!!!!!!!!
The question is not about the environment, it is all about paying dividends to corporate investors....!!!!!
I say... well, my thought are private but, to say I disagree with the whole system is an understatement.
Ruffy
xx
(no I'm not socialist nor communist... I pay my taxes and work blummin hard... I just baulk at the fact the the few are getting rich whilst I struggle and the few getting richer, dictate the price hikes to ensure that they get even richer!!!! | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:14:15 PM |
You know nothing about wind technology.....sorry.
And you believe you do?
If you did know half as much as you think you would know the industries take on the situation wouldnt you?
So what it the situation?
What is the stand point of Vestas WindSystems A/S on wind energy generation in the next five years for instance?
And dont bother with a silly answer, after all you opened the door ;-) | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:22:18 PM | Does 'wind' produce the same gas as methane?
As all the 'wind' ladies seem to experience under the duvet may be of use in an ecological way.
I personally choose less flatulent partners for my under the duvet antics 
 | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:24:02 PM |
If you did know half as much as you think you would know the industries take on the situation wouldnt you?
And how do you 'know' how much I know about wind turbines?
Answer - you don't!
You have no idea what I know about the topic.
What is the stand point of Vestas WindSystems A/S on wind energy generation in the next five years for instance?
With regard to 'what'? I have no inside knowledge on how Vestas operates.
And dont bother with a silly answer, after all you opened the door ;-)
The door to 'what'?
If you want to debate the topic, then debate it. If you want to come on here and talk nonsense, then the 'door' is over there.
Either debate the topic, or leave it alone..... | |
|
| Wind turbines?I
Posted: 7/31/2009 5:27:08 PM | I read about a new housing development that was built up here and they had solar panels on the roof and it was estimated that the bills for these households for electricity for the year would be £80. Thats it, £80. I pay that a month right now.
I don't know enough about the wind farms although there is a one near me. I just know my electricity bills never seem to go down | |
|
Home
login 
