The balancing boys at National Grid........... [Archive]

Droopy

10-Jul-10, 15:08

ywindythesecond

10-Jul-10, 19:04

Question here for you ywindy..

Before the Causewaymire windfarm was built lots of people, mostly from CWIF raised the subject of houses near the windfarm becoming unlivable, and or impossible to sell due to the proximity. Is there any evidence from your members or resisdents over the years, now seens as there are lots more windfarms than the Causewaymire in Caithness, that anyone has had to move or found their house impossible to sell?

To me, a lot of people that are against the windfarms use reason X, Y or Z when really what they are concerend about is their house value dropping...but are there any cases of this in Caithness?

p.s. please dont post a link to some Canadian or German house value issue, none of us live there or are affected by their planning decisions....lol

Good question Droopy. I only found out that CWIF existed when David Bellamy came to Thurso in November 2004, and Causeymire was operational by then, so I don't know what was being said at the time. I joined CWIF Committee in January 2005.

I have no evidence of and don't know of anyone whose house value has dropped or become unsellable in Caithness. I have spoken to people who are concerned, but that is not evidence.

There aren't actually lots more windfarms in Caithness now.

There is only Forss, Buolfruich , Bilbster and Achairn.

Consented but not built are Baillie, Camster, Stroupster, and Wathegar, and three more turbines at Causeymire.

I won't repeat my normal litany of turbines in the pipeline but attitudes to windfarm development based on those visible today are most unlikely to be the same as they will be when consented windfarms are developed, and will be quite different again if some or all of the other proposed windfarms are developed.

I won't refer you to an obscure foreign link, but try Googleing "Jane Davis wind farm" and see where that takes you.

Ricanna

10-Jul-10, 19:22

I haven't come across a house sale in the County as yet that has been affected/spoilt/fallen through by proximity to a windfarm

Droopy

10-Jul-10, 19:51

I have no evidence of and don't know of anyone whose house value has dropped or become unsellable in Caithness. I have spoken to people who are concerned, but that is not evidence.

That is why I raised the question, people were whipped up in to a frenzy about it by a vocal pressure group before the Causewaymire turbines went up. Now that they, and others are up, there seems to be, as you say, very little or no evidence that house prices or living quality are affected.

There aren't actually lots more windfarms in Caithness now.

There is only Forss, Buolfruich , Bilbster and Achairn.

Maybe not 'lots' but still 4 different sites spread about Caithness where houses, to my knowledge sell for, or above the asking price, and are lived in without the problems that CWIF predicted. Surley if there was any problems whatsoever it would be seized on by CWIF?

I won't refer you to an obscure foreign link, but try Googleing "Jane Davis wind farm" and see where that takes you.

Mmmmm.....but then there are hundreds of windfarms all over Britain in all areas where I presume groups equivilant to CWIF excist, surley if there was a problem, countless examples would excist, when in reality there seems to be little or none. Plus my question was about Caithness, where we live, and CWIF operate. Other parts of Britain are governed by different Councils and Consultees so we, and CWIF can only really make reasoned judgements by what is happening in Caithness, as like I said we are not affected by other areas planning decisions, be it the UK or abroad.

Ricanna

10-Jul-10, 20:06

As a matter of form in reply to house offers depending where they are, I always say such and such windfarm has planning permission , is in for planning permission etc etc and not to date has anyone withdrawn from negotiation as a result. It may alter of course but I can only report my actual experience if it assists

ywindythesecond

11-Jul-10, 07:15

That is why I raised the question, people were whipped up in to a frenzy about it by a vocal pressure group before the Causewaymire turbines went up. Now that they, and others are up, there seems to be, as you say, very little or no evidence that house prices or living quality are affected.
Maybe not 'lots' but still 4 different sites spread about Caithness where houses, to my knowledge sell for, or above the asking price, and are lived in without the problems that CWIF predicted. Surley if there was any problems whatsoever it would be seized on by CWIF?
Mmmmm.....but then there are hundreds of windfarms all over Britain in all areas where I presume groups equivilant to CWIF excist, surley if there was a problem, countless examples would excist, when in reality there seems to be little or none. Plus my question was about Caithness, where we live, and CWIF operate. Other parts of Britain are governed by different Councils and Consultees so we, and CWIF can only really make reasoned judgements by what is happening in Caithness, as like I said we are not affected by other areas planning decisions, be it the UK or abroad.
See post 4 for full quotation, the one above omits what Droopy is referring to and doesn't make sense on its own.
Droopy, you asked me a question and I answered it. If people were "whipped up into a frenzy" about Causeymire in 2004 then I didn't even know about it. In fact, in those days I was probably mildly supportive of windfarms.

Obviously I am not now, but can you please tell me why you think CWIF campaigns on the basis of house prices?

Can I suggest that you visit CWIF's excellent website at www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk (http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk) and find out what CWIF is actually about rather than go on about what you think, or like to think, it is about?

ywindythesecond

11-Jul-10, 07:37

Back on topic, the balancing boys heave a sigh of relief- there will be no wind to juggle tomorrow so they can go about their normal business of balancing predictable cheap electricity.
http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/9604/tomorrow.jpg

Droopy

11-Jul-10, 13:17

See post 4 for full quotation, the one above omits what Droopy is referring to and doesn't make sense on its own.
Can I suggest that anyone who can operate a computer is probably capable of reading a thread from start to finish. Ricanna posted 2 balanced and reasonable replies without any trouble.

Can I suggest that you visit CWIF's excellent website at www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk (http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/) and find out what CWIF is actually about rather than go on about what you think, or like to think, it is about

I am dissapointed with you here ywindy...you may be an authority on windfarms, but that does not give you the right to be authoritarian. I merely asked, had the much hyped subject of house prices and living quality of people living close to windfarms in Caithness been affected.

The fact that you, thee most vocal critic of windfarms has no evidence to support the presumption is no reason to belittle my thoughts. I dont support or object to CWIF and have no idea if it has 3, 30 or 300 members, but would have thought that if there were any problems with living near windfarms in Caithness that the residents living close to them would have raised genuine concerns by now.

Neil Howie

11-Jul-10, 14:15

So we need to be smarter about our electricy grids:

Link (http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20009962-54.html?tag=mncol;title)

To put it plainly: most electrical grids are long overdue for an upgrade anyway.

But it's not just issues of reliability and burden forcing electrical grids into updates. Electricity generation and storage needs are changing as governments push to include more electricity produced from renewable energy sources. The majority of electrical grids were originally built to transmit electricity generated from fossil fuel plants. They're not really equipped to handle the intermittent nature of renewable energy electricity generation like that of wind or solar, which require nuanced integration and, in some cases, electricity storage, according to the ABI Research report.

Consumer electricity use has changed as well in the last 60 to 80 years. Electrical grids need to be updated to accommodate the predicted increase in the use of plug-in electric vehicles, according to ABI research.

Rheghead

11-Jul-10, 19:58

So we need to be smarter about our electricy grids:

Link (http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20009962-54.html?tag=mncol;title)

Consumer electricity use has changed as well in the last 60 to 80 years. Electrical grids need to be updated to accommodate the predicted increase in the use of plug-in electric vehicles, according to ABI research.

Yes indeed, and eventually we will all be driving electric vehicles which can be used to balance the grid allowing the complete decommissioning of the fossil fuel powerstations.

badger

11-Jul-10, 19:59

I am dissapointed with you here ywindy...you may be an authority on windfarms, but that does not give you the right to be authoritarian. I merely asked, had the much hyped subject of house prices and living quality of people living close to windfarms in Caithness been affected.

Where are you getting this idea that house prices are being talked of in this fashion? I haven't seen it and certainly it's not a major issue on the CWIF website.

Rheghead

11-Jul-10, 20:05

Where are you getting this idea that house prices are being talked of in this fashion? I haven't seen it and certainly it's not a major issue on the CWIF website.

So are you now saying that wind farms don't affect house prices in Caithness?

upolian

11-Jul-10, 21:32

You need to move over from vinyl to CDs.

hahahahaha!!!

badger

12-Jul-10, 11:02

So are you now saying that wind farms don't affect house prices in Caithness?

If you read my post you will see that's not what I said.

Rheghead

12-Jul-10, 11:57

If you read my post you will see that's not what I said.

But then you aren't prepared to say that even though you have no evidence of the opposite.

Droopy

12-Jul-10, 13:27

Can I just say that I never imagined my fairly simple question of residential living quality near Caithness windfarms could be so difficult for a representitive of a Windfarm Information Forum to answer without becoming so antagonised.......is CWIF a case of 'listen to us but dont question us'?

Seens as you asked ywindy and Badger, here are two quotes from the CWIF website (which I presume each of you are involved in).

It is now well documented that wind turbines generate noise, both audible and
subsonic. There is a growing body of evidence from residents living near operational
wind farms that this noise is debilitating, incessant, irritating and destroys residential amenity.

The effect on the landscape would be detrimental to local residents, tourists, and house prices.

This is from the CWIF website, yet in 6 years and 5 operational windfarms you have stated here that you have not a single scrap of hard evidence. If I asked a question you dont like the answer to, that is your problem not mine, but to the man on the street, your reasons for campaigning against windfarms on these points are rather misguided.

My final question to ywindy.....I have been looking back over the threads regarding windfarms since posting on this thread, and it seems that at the core of lots of the posts is the amount of money that a company or person may make from turbines. ywindy...do you, or does your business gain financialy from your anti windfarm stance?...........

badger

12-Jul-10, 17:50

Droopy - you have found one quote that refers to house prices. There may be others, I don't know. My point is that you give the impression this is CWIF's main objection to windfarms and it's not. Quality of life certainly for those who live near them and I have spoken to people living near Causeymire who are affected and appalled by the thought of more windfarms near them - some could be surrounded.

If you look at the Objections you will see a multitude of reasons for not wanting windfarms. This thread started on intermittency of output and seems to have wandered off into house prices which is not yet a major issue up here. It may well become one if the county gets covered with windfarms but by then it will be too late.

Rheghead

12-Jul-10, 18:57

..................must be looking forward to their summer holidays!

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7804/july1to92010.jpg

So you have a graph showing on the 3rd July at 20;00hrs a ramp down of performance from 1250MW (79%) to ~500MW (31%)@06:00 hrs on 4th July.

So ywindy, if this performance was extrapolated to the larger scale of 33GW, the proposed target in 2020, what would be the slew rate expected?

So lets calculate, @20:00 the wind fleet would be making 26GW and over 10 hours go down to 10.2GW, a slew rate of just 1.58GW per hour which is the rate the fossil fuel generators would need to kick in to keep things balanced.

If you look at your beloved website, BMReports, you will see today @5.30hrs demand was 25GW and rose to 40GW @09.30Hrs, a slew rate of 3.75GW per hour which is easily met by fossil fuel generators on a daily basis.

I think this clearly puts the balancing aspect into perspective, in other words, it clearly isn't a problem.

ywindythesecond

13-Jul-10, 15:44

Quote Droopy Post 18
“Can I just say that I never imagined my fairly simple question of residential living quality near Caithness windfarms could be so difficult for a representitive of a Windfarm Information Forum to answer without becoming so antagonised.......is CWIF a case of 'listen to us but dont question us'?

Seens as you asked ywindy and Badger, here are two quotes from the CWIF website (which I presume each of you are involved in).
Quote:
It is now well documented that wind turbines generate noise, both audible and
subsonic. There is a growing body of evidence from residents living near operational
wind farms that this noise is debilitating, incessant, irritating and destroys residential amenity.

Quote:
The effect on the landscape would be detrimental to local residents, tourists, and house prices.

This is from the CWIF website, yet in 6 years and 5 operational windfarms you have stated here that you have not a single scrap of hard evidence. If I asked a question you dont like the answer to, that is your problem not mine, but to the man on the street, your reasons for campaigning against windfarms on these points are rather misguided.

My final question to ywindy.....I have been looking back over the threads regarding windfarms since posting on this thread, and it seems that at the core of lots of the posts is the amount of money that a company or person may make from turbines. ywindy...do you, or does your business gain financialy from your anti windfarm stance?...........

Last edited by Droopy; 12-Jul-10 at 14:09. “

You have only asked me two questions Droopy.
The first one on house prices I answered.

The second one is on my business interests which I don’t intend to discuss any further with you or anyone else on an open forum, but a small part of my business derives from work associated with windfarm visualisation.

When I post on the .org, I post as myself, and the views I express are my own. I am happy to answer any questions relative to any points which I have personally made on this forum.

Bazeye

17-Jul-10, 12:52

And yesterday. A wind turbine that was blown down because of the ....er, well wind really.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/07/16/article-1295324-0A76C59A000005DC-224_468x286.jpg

Phill

17-Jul-10, 13:53

And yesterday. A wind turbine that was blown down because of the ....er, well wind really.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/07/16/article-1295324-0A76C59A000005DC-224_468x286.jpg

Nah, clearly this was the petrolheaded-hydrocarbon junkie anti-truther climate change denier willfully vandalising a windymill that has now plunged swathes of houses into darkness due to his evil wicked destructive ways.

And I thought you were a Sun reader.

badger

17-Jul-10, 16:52

_Ju_

17-Jul-10, 17:42

I won't repeat my normal litany .......

Oh but you do. Endlessly. Tirelessy.
It could be a very intersting subject to discuss but you tend to knock people on the head until you rendering them unconcious (or maybe it is only me).

ywindythesecond

18-Jul-10, 00:31

Oh but you do. Endlessly. Tirelessy.
It could be a very intersting subject to discuss but you tend to knock people on the head until you rendering them unconcious (or maybe it is only me).
Ju, join the discussion. Make your points. Ask questions.

Droopy

18-Jul-10, 18:51

Ju, join the discussion. Make your points. Ask questions.

Ok ywindy.....as your the Chairperson of CWIF and thee most outspoken critic of turbines, I'll ask again...The following statements were taking from the CWIF website as reasons to object to turbines in Caithness.

It is now well documented that wind turbines generate noise, both audible and
subsonic. There is a growing body of evidence from residents living near operational
wind farms that this noise is debilitating, incessant, irritating and destroys residential amenity.
Now that there are 5 operational windfarms, and 6+ years of operation please give instances of this in Caithness.

The effect on the landscape would be detrimental to local residents, tourists, and house prices.
Now that there are 5 operational windfarms, and 6+ years of operation please give instances of this in Caithness.

I note that you are not prepared to disclose the effect your anti windfarm beliefs are swayed by the financial gain (if any) your business makes. Of course you are entitled to keep that information off a public forum, but you dont afford the same privacy to others by constantly quoting how much money windfarm X, Y or Z is receiving. And before you start on about ROCs and the public purse, have a good think about how many salaries in Caithness are from the public purse. We are not a Socialist governed country , thus private enterprise has to be encouraged.

I also note the CWIF website does not have a link to a front page article from the Press and Journal which read that an independant report concluded that windfarms had no negative effects on tourism levels in Scotland. Or is this another case of 'there are none as deaf as those that choose not to hear'.........

Droopy - you have found one quote that refers to house prices. There may be others, I don't know. My point is that you give the impression this is CWIF's main objection to windfarms and it's not.

Ok Badger, Im listening, what is your main objection to windfarms? And what effect on a national strategy does standing waving placards at developers, hijacking every closely associated thread on a community internet forum, and trying to scaremongers residents of Caithness with inacurate statements do to address your primary concerns regarding the government policy on renewable energy?

ducati

18-Jul-10, 19:48

Droopy, perhaps it is time to tell us why you are such a big fan of these turbines and declare any interests you may have in their proliferation?

Rheghead

18-Jul-10, 20:14

Droopy, perhaps it is time to tell us why you are such a big fan of these turbines and declare any interests you may have in their proliferation?

As far as I've read droopy hasn't declared that he is a fan of wind energy, he/she is just asking simple questions to those people about issues which they have firm beliefs about so they must be able to answer droopy. It seems not at the moment though...

A belief which is formed without firm evidence is called faith, of course there is nothing wrong with faith, millions have it but it will be interesting to know if ywindy is acting on faith when he says wind farms cause problems to properties in Caithness before planning and then he has no retrospective evidence to support his presumptions.

Droopy

18-Jul-10, 20:14

Droopy, perhaps it is time to tell us why you are such a big fan of these turbines and declare any interests you may have in their proliferation?

Hi Ducati, No problem.

I was warned some years ago by local canvassers (dont know if they were CWIF members or not) that my house would become unlivable and plummet in value due to my proximity to a proposed windfarm in Caithness.

The windfarm has since been built and has had not a single negative effect on either me or on my neighbours that I am aware off. Im not saying I adore them, but I certainly dont object to them in the way that some do.

I merely wanted a wider opinion from ywindy in his capacity as CWIF Chairperson as to the overall problem (which there seems to be little or none) of living near to different windfarms in Caithness seens as there are a few turbines up and running now. I have no difficulty answering fairly simple questions...

So my one to you ducati...are you a member of CWIF?

ywindythesecond

18-Jul-10, 20:21

I note that you are not prepared to disclose the effect your anti windfarm beliefs are swayed by the financial gain (if any) your business makes. Of course you are entitled to keep that information off a public forum, but you dont afford the same privacy to others by constantly quoting how much money windfarm X, Y or Z is receiving. And before you start on about ROCs and the public purse, have a good think about how many salaries in Caithness are from the public purse.

In quoting "how much money windfarm X,Y or Z, is receiving" I am drawing attention to how much the public pays, not to how much an individual earns. And you should understand that ROCs are not funded by the public purse, but directly by the consumer, us, through our electricity bills.

I also note the CWIF website does not have a link to a front page article from the Press and Journal which read that an independant report concluded that windfarms had no negative effects on tourism levels in Scotland. Or is this another case of 'there are none as deaf as those that choose not to hear'.........

I don't speak for CWIF on this forum, but this is of particular interest to me. So if you would care to define the "independent report" and ask me a specific question, I will be happy to answer it.

[/quote]

Rheghead

18-Jul-10, 20:58

I don't speak for CWIF on this forum,

[lol]:lol:

That has to be the biggest whopper so far.

ywindythesecond

18-Jul-10, 23:51

[lol]:lol:

That has to be the biggest whopper so far.
Its true Reggy, I don't have the permission to do so. I speak for myself.

Rheghead

19-Jul-10, 01:57

Its true Reggy, I don't have the permission to do so. I speak for myself.

But you are CWIF just as much as CWIF is you. I see no distinction and I would hazard a guess that no one in their right mind would do otherwise. As chairman of CWIF, every time you draw attention to CWIF's activities which you have done on many times on this forum then you have acted on behalf of CWIF. You have spoken consistently with the same Aims and Objectives of CWIF.

A propagandist with no badge or hat is the same propagandist wearing the regalia of office.

Anyway, I have secretly been infiltrating CWIF with like minded people as myself and next time there is an AGM we are all going to turn up and vote everyone out of office and install ourselves and then operate CWIF as it should be. From what I understand it will only take 7 of us to form a majority...:p

ducati

19-Jul-10, 10:43

Hi Ducati, No problem.

So my one to you ducati...are you a member of CWIF?

Nope!

My objection is that they are spending my money on a pointless waste of resources. :Razz

Rheghead

19-Jul-10, 11:24

My objection is that they are spending my money on a pointless waste of resources. :Razz

Oh dear, Face/palm

ducati

19-Jul-10, 11:27

Oh dear, Face/palm

I've to be convinced otherwise :lol:

Rheghead

19-Jul-10, 11:28

I've to be convinced otherwise :lol:

You aren't open to be convinced, that's the problem. :lol:

ducati

19-Jul-10, 12:25

You aren't open to be convinced, that's the problem. :lol:

Well... If I could believe that Windfarms in general and Caithness sites in particular would aid the closing of fossil fuel powerstations (and replace their output) that would be a start.

How about you? What would convince you they were not a good idea? ;)

Phill

19-Jul-10, 12:39

Rheghead

19-Jul-10, 19:45

That is just it. If the govt's were serious about carbon emissions and it wasn't just a huge gravy train why haven't they started to close coal fired power stations?
Why are they still allowing new ones to be built?

We have the answer, the answer obviously lies in Caithness and Windymills so we can now start a program of closures. I think we should have all coal fired stations closed by....oooohh.....2012.

That'll reduce our co2 output won't it.

Untrue, wind power has a capacity credit of 10-15% so wind farms in Caithness will only be able to retire 50MW of fossil fuel generation(on paper), hardly anything really.

Coal, whether we like it or not will continue to be a part of the generation mix well into the future. It is a relatively cheap, reliable and versatile energy source in every way except carbon emissions. As with anything, things just come to the end of their life and that includes coal fired power stations. It can be cynically and counter-intuitively viewed that new coal should not be built but these new builds will be more efficient and some will provide CHP. So carbon emissions will be reduced.

ducati

19-Jul-10, 19:59

Untrue, wind power has a capacity credit of 10-15% so wind farms in Caithness will only be able to retire 50MW of fossil fuel generation(on paper), hardly anything really.

Coal, whether we like it or not will continue to be a part of the generation mix well into the future. It is a relatively cheap, reliable and versatile energy source in every way except carbon emissions. As with anything, things just come to the end of their life and that includes coal fired power stations. It can be cynically and counter-intuitively viewed that new coal should not be built but these new builds will be more efficient and some will provide CHP. So carbon emissions will be reduced.

Well, I'm convinced :eek:

ywindythesecond

19-Jul-10, 21:13

[quote=Rheghead;737971]Untrue, wind power has a capacity credit of 10-15% so wind farms in Caithness will only be able to retire 50MW of fossil fuel generation(on paper), hardly anything really.
quote]

What do you mean by "capacity credit", and what is the source of 10-15%, and what are your calculations to arrive at 50MW?

Rheghead

19-Jul-10, 21:51

What do you mean by "capacity credit",

Capacity credit is the ability of any energy source to contribute to the peak demand of the national grid, which is also equated to the ratio of the displaced or retired thermal plant to the capacity of wind.

and what is the source of 10-15%,

Well actually it was you. You made a post once about the CEO of EON stating that 90% of wind has to be backed up. NGT state more optimistic figures of 20%, I decided to be pessimistic for argument sake.

and what are your calculations to arrive at 50MW?

Well it is just a judgement thing on my part, I estimate that by 2020 Caithness will become saturated by viable wind sites to the tune of ~500MW across the county. So 10% is 50MW as a pessimistic figure, I never exaggerate and bull up wind, if anything I always err on the understated side.

ywindythesecond

25-Jul-10, 23:28

Capacity credit is the ability of any energy source to contribute to the peak demand of the national grid, which is also equated to the ratio of the displaced or retired thermal plant to the capacity of wind.

Well actually it was you. You made a post once about the CEO of EON stating that 90% of wind has to be backed up. NGT state more optimistic figures of 20%, I decided to be pessimistic for argument sake.

Well it is just a judgement thing on my part, I estimate that by 2020 Caithness will become saturated by viable wind sites to the tune of ~500MW across the county. So 10% is 50MW as a pessimistic figure, I never exaggerate and bull up wind, if anything I always err on the understated side.

Para 1. Good definition of capacity credit, but I don't understand the second part.

Para 2. I am not the source of the information. The CEO of EON was the source. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/195/8061708.htm (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/195/8061708.htm)

He pointed out that historical records for 2007 showed that only 8% of connected wind output could be relied upon, therefore 92% back-up was required.
Last year National Grid consulted on how to balance the grid in 2020, and posited that 15% of wind energy was “firm” (same as capacity credit). EON suggested that 10% was more realistic, and that NG should also consider 5%.

http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/32879A26-D6F2-4D82-9441-40FB2B0E2E0C/39517/Operatingin2020Consulation1.pdf (http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/32879A26-D6F2-4D82-9441-40FB2B0E2E0C/39517/Operatingin2020Consulation1.pdf)

http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/4F15AC9D-C47E-4447-9D07-5DDCAD2BC987/38401/EonUK.pdf (http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/4F15AC9D-C47E-4447-9D07-5DDCAD2BC987/38401/EonUK.pdf)

The highest demand this winter was for 59310MW when metered wind was producing 71MW out of 1588MW, a capacity credit of 4.47%.
But 1588MW metered wind has on several occasions this year produced less than 10MW or 0.63% of capacity, and the probability of such a low output coinciding with maximum demand seems to be much greater than popularly supposed.
Wind generation has a capacity credit of zero because it is entirely predictable that extremely low wind output will, sooner rather than later, coincide with extremely high demand at a time when an emergency generation failure event occurs and the back-up designed for this purpose is not available because the lack of wind is using it all up.

Para 3. There is already consented wind development in Caithness in excess of the 250MW maximum envisaged by the Highland Renewable Energy Strategy for 2050.

Neil Howie

27-Jul-10, 22:26

Article on newscientist blog here (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727704.900-all-power-to-the-wind--it-cuts-your-electricity-bills.html)

All power to the wind – it cuts your electricity bills

Why is wind power derided as subsidised, inefficient and uncompetitive when the opposite is true, ask Jérôme Guillet and John Evans
...

The addition of wind power, however, changes the dynamics of the market. Wind turbines don't burn fuel, so their marginal costs of production are very low - lower even than coal, nuclear and hydro. Being the cheapest, transmission companies buy from them first.

On windless days, wind power companies don't get paid, since they only receive money for the electricity they produce. But on windy days, their output ensures that peak demand is satisfied without the need to turn on the most expensive peaker plants.

In other words, when there is little or no wind, prices on the market are normal; when a lot of wind power is available, it has a moderating effect on prices. The result is that, over time, bills are lower than if wind power were not present, even taking into account the cost of the support regime.

rupert

27-Jul-10, 23:15

Having driven past Achairn and Flex Hill wind turbines this evening and not a single one turning I really do question how we are going to keep the lights on in the future if the Scottish Government carries on with its obsession with wind power.

Also, it now seems that we are not just going to be 'the powerhouse of Europe' but 'world leaders' in this perfectly unrealiable technology.

Roll on next May so we can get this shower kicked out before we find ourselves back in the dark ages!

Neil Howie

28-Jul-10, 23:41

Rupert, what political party do you have in mind?

Labour started the ball rolling with wind, the con/libs have picked it up and run with it -

25 july 2010

Wind turbines 'set for increase

The number of UK wind turbines is set to rise to avert a power crisis, Energy Secretary Chris Huhne has indicated. In a Sunday Telegraph interview, the Lib Dem minister backed new onshore and offshore wind power over nuclear.

There are currently around 250 wind farms operating in the UK, with a further 12 offshore, with 2,909 turbines in operation in total. A further 27 onshore and five offshore wind farms are currently under construction while plans for another 468 wind farms have been announced.

Green_not_greed

29-Jul-10, 08:21

Is this the next stage for Caithness? Armed guards having to be posted at windfarms, ready to shoot the public?...

BUCHAREST, Romania-A clash between guards at a Czech wind farm project and local residents opposing the building of the euro1.1 billion (US$1.42 billion) plant left five people injured by rubber bullets in southeastern Romania Monday, authorities said.

Police chief Adrian Ropotan said the mayor of Cogealac village, about 250 kilometers (155 miles) east of Bucharest, and dozens of local residents headed to the construction site to hand a fine to Czech power company CEZ for violating village planning permission.

Guards on the premises said they fired rubber bullets in defense, the police chief said. Four people suffered injuries leg injuries and one was hit in the stomach.

http://www.windaction.org/news/28524

Wind farms....everybody loves them!
(Another great lie by wind turbine developers everywhere - coming to a space near you)

Neil Howie

29-Jul-10, 22:21

Bit more to it today, things maybe a little bit murkier than first reported -

They say power corrupts.....

Read the full article here (http://carboncreditromania.wordpress.com/tag/cogealac/)

Monday, we reported about the shooting on the premises of a CEZ wind farm project near the village Cogealac. Today, we have information that the fights have a political background. Allegedly, the source of the incident could be the fact that Iberdrola wants to build in the same area as CEZ . In the meantime the Mayor of Cogealac has been arrested and is currently interrogated about the incident.

Green_not_greed

30-Jul-10, 10:01

Its certainly murky - but then again isn't everything with the wind industry?

It still doesn't lessen the fact that peaceful demonstrators are being shot!

ywindythesecond

02-Aug-10, 00:01

Article on newscientist blog here (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727704.900-all-power-to-the-wind--it-cuts-your-electricity-bills.html)

All power to the wind – it cuts your electricity bills

Article on newscientist blog here (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727704.900-all-power-to-the-wind--it-cuts-your-electricity-bills.html)

All power to the wind – it cuts your electricity bills

Quote:
Why is wind power derided as subsidised, inefficient and uncompetitive when the opposite is true, ask Jérôme Guillet and John Evans
...

The addition of wind power, however, changes the dynamics of the market. Wind turbines don't burn fuel, so their marginal costs of production are very low - lower even than coal, nuclear and hydro. Being the cheapest, transmission companies buy from them first.

On windless days, wind power companies don't get paid, since they only receive money for the electricity they produce. But on windy days, their output ensures that peak demand is satisfied without the need to turn on the most expensive peaker plants.

In other words, when there is little or no wind, prices on the market are normal; when a lot of wind power is available, it has a moderating effect on prices. The result is that, over time, bills are lower than if wind power were not present, even taking into account the cost of the support regime.
End of quote

I hope people following this thread take the time to read the full article because there is a lot in it to take issue with. However, Neil Howie picked out three passages which pretty well stand alone, so I will respond to these stand-alone points.
1. Being the cheapest, transmission companies buy from them first.
Wind power is far from being the cheapest because of the ROC's element of cost. Companies buy wind generated power because government says they must.

2. But on windy days, their output ensures that peak demand is satisfied without the need to turn on the most expensive peaker plants.
On windy days, output from fossil fuel plant is switched off to make way for the windpower which government says must be used but the fires keep burning in coal power stations. Wind cannot satisfy peak demand at any time. Wind may contribute to a high demand, but peak demand is always satisfied by a controllable source of power.

3. In other words, when there is little or no wind, prices on the market are normal; when a lot of wind power is available, it has a moderating effect on prices. The result is that, over time, bills are lower than if wind power were not present, even taking into account the cost of the support regime.

This baffles me.

With no wind, prices are normal. OK so far.
Wind power moderates prices when it is available even though it costs more and we still have to pay for stand-by. Beg Pardon?