View Full Version : Forss wind turbine
Green_not_greed
19-Apr-10, 09:15
I see that the broken Forss wind turbine is finally in pieces. Its not turned for about 2 months and this morning a crane is on site and the blades and rotor have been removed. Quite interesting to watch, and (I think) a first for the county.
GNG
Creme_Egg
19-Apr-10, 09:44
Oh i missed that one! And i was on breakfast at Forss House Hotel this morning to haha
Interesting. They've also just discovered that the blade which broke off in that massive Whitelee windfarm was due to faulty glue - hmmm.
Then of course there's the problem with offshore turbines where they've found a fault with the grout in those big lumps of concrete they sit on - they'll have fun fixing them. Considering offshore are going to cost a total of £130bn. (yes billion - this country is so rich :roll: ) you would think they might get the construction right.
Since we know these things don't really work anyway, except to fill the pockets of landowners and developers with our money, how long will it be before someone wakes up and decides maybe they're not such a good idea after all?
ywindythesecond
19-Apr-10, 13:13
they dont work? why not?
At ten past four this morning, the 1588MW windpower metred by National grid was churning out a miserable 25MW.
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/4005/0410amtoday19thapril.jpg
ShelleyCowie
19-Apr-10, 13:18
i saw 2 massive trucks with wind turbine parts driving through the street about an hour ago! Wouldnt want to be behind that :eek:
Bobinovich
19-Apr-10, 14:01
I saw them too Shelley, not sure where they're headed but they were just two of the humungous blades :eek: - third blade & numerous tower parts will no doubt be following. If they were part of the Baillie windfarm then there will be 21 turbines in total so that's gonna be a lot of traffic holdups!
flowertot
19-Apr-10, 14:22
I saw them too Shelley, not sure where they're headed but they were just two of the humungous blades :eek: - third blade & numerous tower parts will no doubt be following. If they were part of the Baillie windfarm then there will be 21 turbines in total so that's gonna be a lot of traffic holdups!
They are on their way to the Forss site as I passed the convoy about 1 1/2 hours ago just going round Forss Mill Corner. :D
They are on their way to the Forss site as I passed the convoy about 1 1/2 hours ago just going round Forss Mill Corner. :D
Went to Wick this morning, and as we passed Forss, huge crane had lowered the blades to the deck, one blade had been unbolted. Then 5 miles outside Thurso on the A9 convoy of two huge trucks carrying new blades escorted by Coppers.
After passing Dunnets with their Diesel at 123.9p onto Tesco, shopping and a fill of their very nice 120.9p Diesel - returned home via Forss, crane still there but did not see big trucks with blades (might be further in out of sight) - out of interest how much are new blades? cos my electric's gone up, don't want to pay any more :~(
[QUOTE=ywindythesecond;693662]At ten past four this morning, the 1588MW windpower metred by National grid was churning out a miserable 25MW.
How much is it expected to output?
Sorry I dont know much about it was intrigued by someone saying they dont work...
ywindythesecond
19-Apr-10, 17:45
[quote=ywindythesecond;693662]At ten past four this morning, the 1588MW windpower metred by National grid was churning out a miserable 25MW.
How much is it expected to output?
Sorry I dont know much about it was intrigued by someone saying they dont work...
1588 Megawatts is the theoretical maximum possible output from the windfarms which National Grid has meters on. That is enough for 1,588,000 one bar electric fires.
The figure generally bandied about for load factor, that is what is actually produced, is 30%, or 475MW in the case of these 1588MW. British Wind Energy association use an average output of 30% when they make their bold and misleading claims of "enough electricity to meet the needs of x thousand homes".
National Grid consulted last year on the basis that 15% or 237.5MW would be the worst case scenario.
E.ON, who know a thing or two about wind generation, said that 10% or 160MW is more realistic, and suggested that National Grid might also look at 5% or 80MW as being the worst case.
25MW is 1.57% of 1588MW, but it gets worse. On 4th March this year and again on 8th March the output for a period from the 1588MW was 3MW (0.189%) or 3000 one bar fires to heat most of Scotland.
Its not true that they don't work, technically they do. But they don't work in a way that gives you electricity when you want it at a reasonable cost.
ywindythesecond
19-Apr-10, 18:14
I saw them too Shelley, not sure where they're headed but they were just two of the humungous blades :eek: - third blade & numerous tower parts will no doubt be following. If they were part of the Baillie windfarm then there will be 21 turbines in total so that's gonna be a lot of traffic holdups!
Too soon for Baillie. The developer has to meet numerous conditions first, and anyway, the Forss blades are toty, only 31 metres long. Baillie blades will be almost one third again as long.
You might as well get used to the hold-ups because right now three turbines at Causeymire, two turbines at Bettyhill, twelve at Stroupster and twenty-five at Camster all have planning permission. Silly me, also 21 at Baillie .
In the planning process there are seven more for Forss, seventeen at Dunbeath (already got a nod and a wink from the planning committee), five at Wathegar, eighteen at Halsary, thirty at Spittal Hill, thirteen at Durran, two at Olgrinmore, fifty to sixty at Westerdale, two at Lieurary and five at Shebster. I think that is it. Nope I have just checked Highland Council's list and I missed three at Rumster, two at Nottingham Mains, thirteeen at Burn of Whilk (Yarrows Archaeological Trail to you) and one hundred and forty eight turbines along the north coast of Sutherland which will probably come in at Wick as well.
captain chaos
19-Apr-10, 18:36
The one blade at Forss is being replaced due to having some small holes after aparently having been shot at !! (Shotgun pellets)
The one blade at Forss is being replaced due to having some small holes after aparently having been shot at !! (Shotgun pellets)
It wasn't me! ;)
Green_not_greed
19-Apr-10, 20:16
The one blade at Forss is being replaced due to having some small holes after aparently having been shot at !! (Shotgun pellets)
I find it difficult to believe any claims by wind turbine operators after the claim in late 2008 that a blade came off one after it had been hit by a UFO. More likely the blade has been inspected and replaced on safety grounds after failing some test.
Too soon for Baillie. The developer has to meet numerous conditions first, and anyway, the Forss blades are toty, only 31 metres long. Baillie blades will be almost one third again as long.
You might as well get used to the hold-ups because right now three turbines at Causeymire, two turbines at Bettyhill, twelve at Stroupster and twenty-five at Camster all have planning permission. Silly me, also 21 at Baillie .
In the planning process there are seven more for Forss, seventeen at Dunbeath (already got a nod and a wink from the planning committee), five at Wathegar, eighteen at Halsary, thirty at Spittal Hill, thirteen at Durran, two at Olgrinmore, fifty to sixty at Westerdale, two at Lieurary and five at Shebster. I think that is it. Nope I have just checked Highland Council's list and I missed three at Rumster, two at Nottingham Mains, thirteeen at Burn of Whilk (Yarrows Archaeological Trail to you) and one hundred and forty eight turbines along the north coast of Sutherland which will probably come in at Wick as well.
In other words it is going to be wall to wall windmills.
Too right! Is that what people in Caithness really want?
One day locals will wake up to what is happening and say 'How was this allowed to happen?' But it will be too late then.
If people continue to do nothing then this Scottish Government will continue to shove all the windfarms up here - then they don't have to put up with them down there. Very clever.
At least they don't leak radiation :lol: When will Caithness wake up with out seeing glow every were [lol]
ywindythesecond
20-Apr-10, 08:35
At least they don't leak radiation :lol: When will Caithness wake up with out seeing glow every were [lol]
Like where for example?
Like where for example?
Has there not been a few shut downs at Dounreay and some hot spots on beaches :confused
Has there not been a few shut downs at Dounreay and some hot spots on beaches :confused
Sandside? (Mr Minter's Beach) you get more radioactivity in a jar of coffee
Sandside? (Mr Minter's Beach) you get more radioactivity in a jar of coffee
Say that to your future children. So if it is Safe why dig a big hole and bury it :roll:
Green_not_greed
20-Apr-10, 12:53
At least they don't leak radiation :lol: When will Caithness wake up with out seeing glow every were [lol]
You are trolling.
I am fed up with renewable energy threads being hijacked by anti-nukes at every opportunity. If you want an anti-nuke thread, then start it yourself.
Say that to your future children. So if it is Safe why dig a big hole and bury it :roll:
Future children, nah, had the snip 30 years ago, Mrs Bek's a pensioner, so not much risk there - well, maybe as much risk as Sandside Beach, which is open to the public. Do YOU smoke? I ask, as this kills 300 a day - I don't recall anyone having anything from Sandside? But hey, lets get back to windfarms - you're anti-nuke (?). Me? I'm pro nuclear power; the only CO2 free way to go, these piddly little wind turbines, that rely on the wind - which, with these highs we keep getting - well lights out again.
Never mind, SNP (anti-nuclear power station) lot will be out next time and I'm afraid Labour will be in, and THEY want nuclear power stations up here, cos they give REAL power. Back to turbines..
Are the beaches safe to use?
DPAG considered the work carried out by the Health Protection Agency and concluded that only significant particles post a realistic potential hazard to members of the public. To date particles found on publicly accessible beaches have been in the minor and relevant category and there is an extremely small possibility of a member of the public coming into contact with a particle. If they did so, no adverse health effects would be expected.
The beaches continue to be open to the public and a programme of monitoring regulated by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) reduces the risk further through the detection and removal of particles. It also provides re-assurance that significant particles are not present at these beaches.
http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs (http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs)
You are trolling.
I am fed up with renewable energy threads being hijacked by anti-nukes at every opportunity. If you want an anti-nuke thread, then start it yourself.
No I am pointing out it is Wind farms etc with few teething problems or Nuke with a bigger problem. I have asked before with the anti wind farm group what happens to waste I been told they will come back with that one. I am sure they will when they find out how to get over the problem.
No I am pointing out it is Wind farms etc with few teething problems or Nuke with a bigger problem. I have asked before with the anti wind farm group what happens to waste I been told they will come back with that one. I am sure they will when they find out how to get over the problem.
Sorry Windy, could not resist (wonder how much French nuclear electricity we're getting right now up here via the Interconnector?)
Why the French like Nuclear Energy
French technocrats had never thought that the waste issue would be much of a problem. From the beginning the French had been recycling their nuclear waste, reclaiming the plutonium and unused uranium and fabricating new fuel elements. This not only gave energy, it reduced the volume and longevity of French radioactive waste. The volume of the ultimate high-level waste was indeed very small: the contribution of a family of four using electricity for 20 years is a glass cylinder the size of a cigarette lighter. It was assumed that this high-level waste would be buried in underground geological storage and in the 80s French engineers began digging exploratory holes in France's rural regions.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html)
Sorry Windy, could not resist (wonder how much French nuclear electricity we're getting right now up here via the Interconnector?)
Why the French like Nuclear Energy
French technocrats had never thought that the waste issue would be much of a problem. From the beginning the French had been recycling their nuclear waste, reclaiming the plutonium and unused uranium and fabricating new fuel elements. This not only gave energy, it reduced the volume and longevity of French radioactive waste. The volume of the ultimate high-level waste was indeed very small: the contribution of a family of four using electricity for 20 years is a glass cylinder the size of a cigarette lighter. It was assumed that this high-level waste would be buried in underground geological storage and in the 80s French engineers began digging exploratory holes in France's rural regions.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html)
So were will the French be dumping there waste then if they like it so much.Another challange for nucear power is dealing with the left over, highly radioactive and long lived nuclear waste. It is necessary to isolate the waste from humans and evironment for about 100,000 years before it decays to safe levels. The consensus amongst the Nuclear Power industry is that radioactive waste should be isolated by multiple barriers and placed deep underground. However other strategies involving waste transmutation are being investigated. And you say there is nothing to worry about :roll:
Green_not_greed
20-Apr-10, 16:51
No I am pointing out it is Wind farms etc with few teething problems or Nuke with a bigger problem. I have asked before with the anti wind farm group what happens to waste I been told they will come back with that one. I am sure they will when they find out how to get over the problem.
Ah yes, few teething problems, safe as houses.
http://kingstonobserver.com/tko/articles/bm~pix/wind-accidents.jpg
ywindythesecond
20-Apr-10, 18:34
No I am pointing out it is Wind farms etc with few teething problems or Nuke with a bigger problem. I have asked before with the anti wind farm group what happens to waste I been told they will come back with that one. I am sure they will when they find out how to get over the problem.
A few teething problems? On 19th April 2010 output from the 1588MW metred by National Grid was as low as 21MW at one point, and as high as 1059MW at midnight and rising.
Wind is uncontrollable and unpredictable. It is teething trouble without a cure.
And to carry on the infant analogy, wind is most problematic when there is lots of it around.
And you say there is nothing to worry about :roll:
I refer my honourable friend to the answer I gave some time ago:
Are the beaches safe to use?
DPAG considered the work carried out by the Health Protection Agency and concluded that only significant particles post a realistic potential hazard to members of the public. To date particles found on publicly accessible beaches have been in the minor and relevant category and there is an extremely small possibility of a member of the public coming into contact with a particle. If they did so, no adverse health effects would be expected.
The beaches continue to be open to the public and a programme of monitoring regulated by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) reduces the risk further through the detection and removal of particles. It also provides re-assurance that significant particles are not present at these beaches.
http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs (http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs)
All wind turbines at Forss are working today when we passed a couple of hours ago:D
A few teething problems? On 19th April 2010 output from the 1588MW metred by National Grid was as low as 21MW at one point, and as high as 1059MW at midnight and rising.
Wind is uncontrollable and unpredictable. It is teething trouble without a cure.
And to carry on the infant analogy, wind is most problematic when there is lots of it around.
As you know this is miss leading to some point I have told you what my friend said and you agreed. So the small amount you say does not show the true out put of wind farms. To the other pictures you show at least it has not muck up our area on beaches in the sea. The cost of building Power Stations are twice if not more then of wind farms Tidal power. Next time Dounreay gets shut down you want to post that on the web site May be more people in the Country will look on this website and get to know what we going to have if South Government gives the go ahead. At Least the SNP have said no.
Ah yes, few teething problems, safe as houses.
http://kingstonobserver.com/tko/articles/bm%7Epix/wind-accidents.jpg
At the end of the day does this give of radiation No
I refer my honourable friend to the answer I gave some time ago:
Are the beaches safe to use?
DPAG considered the work carried out by the Health Protection Agency and concluded that only significant particles post a realistic potential hazard to members of the public. To date particles found on publicly accessible beaches have been in the minor and relevant category and there is an extremely small possibility of a member of the public coming into contact with a particle. If they did so, no adverse health effects would be expected.
The beaches continue to be open to the public and a programme of monitoring regulated by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) reduces the risk further through the detection and removal of particles. It also provides re-assurance that significant particles are not present at these beaches.
http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs (http://www.dounreay.com/particle-cleanup/faqs)
And you believe them like they told us about the war :roll:
ywindythesecond
24-Apr-10, 07:53
And you believe them like they told us about the war :roll:
I think it was Oddquine's footnote, sadly no longer with us because she made a lot of sense, which said "The mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is open". Think about it Scout.
I think it was Oddquine's footnote, sadly no longer with us because she made a lot of sense, which said "The mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is open". Think about it Scout.
What I am pointing out is your argument with wind farms and saying we need more Power Stations. It is not simple as that, There are big problems with Power Stations. You can make fun of wind farms with pictures but radiation out in the sea and on land is no joke. That is the problem no one can see it so you cant really take pictures. Again I agree with SNP there should be no more power Stations we should look at other ways. Of course this is my view and it seems I should say nothing to upset the anti wind farm groups
I think it was Oddquine's footnote, sadly no longer with us because she made a lot of sense, which said "The mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is open". Think about it Scout.
I think you will find that this footnote belongs to changilass :)
I think you will find that this footnote belongs to changilass :)
What happen to your one did it not open :lol:
And you believe them like they told us about the war :roll:
Eh? what on earth is that about - will you care to explain?
ywindythesecond
24-Apr-10, 12:28
I think you will find that this footnote belongs to changilass :)
Thanks for that Golach, and apologies to Changilass and Oddquine for the mix-up. Some days I forget that I cannot rely on my memory.
Eh? what on earth is that about - will you care to explain?
Yes when people say it is safe when it is not. Just like Government with War the truth starts to come out. So when Higher up groups I call them start to say this would not harm you I don't believe them. [disgust]
Green_not_greed
02-Jul-10, 11:39
Here's a photo with the nacelle and blade assembly removed...
http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/8578/forssturbinereplacement.jpg
There will be a greater amount of failures in the future as these turbines where all secondhand with no proper service history. Lots have suffered gust damage and blade fatigue, thats why they ended up lying in a Danish dockyard looking for some carpetbagger to buy them. The Council never ask for a engineers report into the structual integrity of the whole turbine and its founds. Studies are now showing that towers vibrate due to poor found construction and bad blade balance. The subsequent harmonics are now leading to failures of the equipment and blades. It has nothing to do with glue, its structural fatigue due to overloading which causes increased deflection of the blades leading to delamination.
So would I be right in thinking that if the causes of vibration were not investigated and remedied immediately this would compromise the integrity of the whole structure?
Nae wonder they stuck them up in Caithness!! [disgust]
All 6 going strong now though.
So would I be right in thinking that if the causes of vibration were not investigated and remedied immediately this would compromise the integrity of the whole structure?
Nae wonder they stuck them up in Caithness!! [disgust]
To keep it short YES....Unlike some on the ORG ,a few of us were involved in the renewable sector and in putting up the turbines a Forss and elsewhere. Some folk should only talk about things they have actually worked on ,that way they get the facts from both sides and get a true picture ..You see, each blade weights in excess of 6 tonnes turning at (tip speed)150-180 mph .Nacelles weight are close to 70 tonnes and the tower 100 tonnes.Even the foundations are 250-300 tonnes ,so now we have 3 blades and one Nacelle sitting 60-70 meters in the air with 40-45m blades rotating at 150mph ...You do the maths , scary or what..
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.