National Grid forecasts 2832MW out of 3731MW possible on 3rd October 2011

[Rheghead]

Yet another puerile thread about what the National Grid are saying about wind power. 76% of capacity performance, oh golly gosh how interesting!!

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/Rheghead/unknowns/wind3-10-11.jpg

[orkneycadian]

Does that mean the winds doing to pick up? How interesting!

[orkneycadian]

Just a thought Rheghead, can you do us some similar graphs of hydro power vs rainfall, solar power vs sunshine and how much electricity we are going to use power streetlights vs darkness. That would be quite helpful. Oh, and one of those graphs that show how many kettles get turned on in the adverts of Coronation Street.

[Mystical Potato Head]

Golly gosh indeed,how very intreresting.A new double act.Have you thought of name yet?

[secrets in symmetry]

Rheghead, let them revel in their joy of finding out what we knew before the turn of the last century. They might even understand it eventually - although, at the rate ywindy is going, it won't be before the next turn of the century - by which time the storage problem will be well solved.

[NickInTheNorth]

quite surprised naywindy hasn't posted that forecast yet.

His attitude to these things would seem to be rather like tugmistress just telling us when it's going to be - in the words of the bbc news idiots - another lovely day. Rather than providing useful information such as when we can expect wheely bin races :)

[weezer 316]

Yeah bu if they prodice too much then they will neeedd to pay to turn them off for a while. Cant you see the quandry here!!

I think the way forward id to get rid of electricity all together

[John Little]

Yeah- but if one big windmill produces enough power for loads of houses, then if each house had a windmill on it we would not need the big windmills and everyone could produce their own...

D'oh - my brain hurts....

[bekisman]

Today Mrs Beks has been doing a bit of walking (20 miles) around the Westerdale, Halkirk, Scotscalder area and the Causeymire Wind Farm was in view all the time, the thing that struck us was that all that day not one of the 21 turbines there were turning - the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?

[secrets in symmetry]

Yeah bu if they prodice too much then they will neeedd to pay to turn them off for a while. Cant you see the quandry here!!

I think the way forward id to get rid of electricity all togetherVery windy days change from problem to solution once you've solved the storage problem.

[orkneycadian]

the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?

Dunno, but it looks like it was also windy enough for Northlink to get paid for not sailing!

Tuesday 4th October - 06:30 and 11:00 sailings from Stromness, and 08:45 and 13:15 sailings from Scrabster, have been cancelled and replaced by combined sailings departing Stromness at 09:00 and Scrabster at 12:00 - Source = Northlink website.

[ywindythesecond]

Very windy days change from problem to solution once you've solved the storage problem.

SiS, What if there is no solution to the storage problem? Nobody has one right now. There are lots of ideas, but none of them big enough, and none of them working right now. But every day, more and more wind energy is connected to a system that can't distribute it to a consumer base that doesn't need it, and certainly can't afford it. How do you see this storage problem being resolved?
My favourite book http://www.withouthotair.com/

[secrets in symmetry]

SiS, What if there is no solution to the storage problem? Nobody has one right now. There are lots of ideas, but none of them big enough, and none of them working right now. But every day, more and more wind energy is connected to a system that can't distribute it to a consumer base that doesn't need it, and certainly can't afford it. How do you see this storage problem being resolved?
My favourite book http://www.withouthotair.com/I'm LMAO at you!

How can that be your favourite book if you can't answer my question about your silly assumption? You haven't read it, have you? Or if you have read it, you clearly haven't understood much of it.

I read it years ago.

[ywindythesecond]

I'm LMAO at you!

How can that be your favourite book if you can't answer my question about your silly assumption? You haven't read it, have you? Or if you have read it, you clearly haven't understood much of it.

I read it years ago.

OK SiS. I don't know what LMAO means but I guess you are annoyed. I have thought about my "silly assumption" which we have agreed was an expectation rather than a hypothesis which is a starting point to test a theory. I did set out to check the reality of certain wind industry and government claims but not to prove any preconceived outcome. If you read my Report carefully (and its a cracking good read), you will find that there is almost no personal intellectual input, just facts from impeccable sources. So I give up. Do your worst. Show me up. What was my "silly assumption?

[Rheghead]

I'm LMAO at you!

How can that be your favourite book if you can't answer my question about your silly assumption? You haven't read it, have you? Or if you have read it, you clearly haven't understood much of it.

I read it years ago.

Yes I thought that. We are still waiting...

[bekisman]

Dunno, but it looks like it was also windy enough for Northlink to get paid for not sailing!

Tuesday 4th October - 06:30 and 11:00 sailings from Stromness, and 08:45 and 13:15 sailings from Scrabster, have been cancelled and replaced by combined sailings departing Stromness at 09:00 and Scrabster at 12:00 - Source = Northlink website.
Well the ones at Forss were turning when we left and those two lots over Wick/ Achairn way were going too, really don't think the wind was too strong.. Source: eyes

[david]

SiS, What if there is no solution to the storage problem? Nobody has one right now. There are lots of ideas, but none of them big enough, and none of them working right now. But every day, more and more wind energy is connected to a system that can't distribute it to a consumer base that doesn't need it, and certainly can't afford it. How do you see this storage problem being resolved?
My favourite book http://www.withouthotair.com/

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.

[John Little]

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.

As a complete layman in these matters I have to say that seems to solve the problem. Store the power as water and use it later. Simple it may be David - but elegant!

No doubt someone will come along and say why it can't be so...

[Even Chance]

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.

David, yer idea is totally feasable and I can see no reason why it cant and shouldnt be used as storage! Makes complete sense to me anyway. Weel done.

[weezer 316]

Cue complaints from heaps of people living near large bodies of water that pumping apparatus has been installed, ruining their view of said hill, ruining the environment, and raising the cost fo electricity again for users to jump on here and complain about.

How about you all just shut up about it and get on with it? Perhaps thats to old fashioned

[bekisman]

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.
Like this one, but use wind power: http://www.fhc.co.uk/ffestiniog.htm

[orkneycadian]

Sorry, but if you were hoping to patent it, your a touch too late.....

http://www.scotsrenewables.com/blog/distributionandstorage/pumped-storage-hydro-in-scotland/

[Rheghead]

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.

Yes that is a good strategy in theory and practice.

I'm sure it is being done on a limited practice already but the National Grid assures us that they can accomodate ~33GW of variable energy capacity on to the grid without the need for more storage, in other words they can just feed the electricity in when needed to displace fossil fuels. Once peak renewable capacity reaches above minimum nocturnal demand plus export capability then that is the time to use storage systems.

[david]

Today Mrs Beks has been doing a bit of walking (20 miles) around the Westerdale, Halkirk, Scotscalder area and the Causeymire Wind Farm was in view all the time, the thing that struck us was that all that day not one of the 21 turbines there were turning - the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?

I live at Westerdale and see this happening all the time even in moderate winds. However you do really need to look at the benefits for the local community, although I'm suprised that Westerdale isn't a little bit more local than Halkirk.... Yes I know, form an organisation blah blah. Would love to know who passed the constituition of the HDCBF. Anyone know?

[bekisman]

I live at Westerdale and see this happening all the time even in moderate winds. However you do really need to look at the benefits for the local community, although I'm suprised that Westerdale isn't a little bit more local than Halkirk.... Yes I know, form an organisation blah blah. Would love to know who passed the constituition of the HDCBF. Anyone know?
Not quite sure what you are on about 'bit local'?

[ywindythesecond]

Use the excess power to pump water up a hill then use it as hydro power when theres no wind or too much. Probably too simple, just a thought.

What you have suggested is actually the one way in which I would support windpower but it is horrendously expensive to construct and there are very limited opportunities where the topography is suitable. We have two pump storage hydro schemes in Scotland, Foyers and Cruachan. These schemes use electricity from the grid to replenish the reservoirs when demand is low overnight so by and large, what is used in the daytime can be restored at night. If wind was used exclusively to top up pump storage, then the generation could only be used after a sufficiently windy period. And if there is a prolonged windy period then the reservoir is likely to sit full and unable to take advantage of the wind. Another problem is the speed at which the reservoirs empty. The biggest pump storage scheme in UK is Dinorwig in Wales putting out a massive 1728MW but only has storage for five hours. Cruachan can produce a very respectable 400MW but runs out of water after 22 hours. You might wait a very long time before you can use it again if you are waiting for the wind to refill the reservoir.

[david]

What you have suggested is actually the one way in which I would support windpower but it is horrendously expensive to construct and there are very limited opportunities where the topography is suitable. We have two pump storage hydro schemes in Scotland, Foyers and Cruachan. These schemes use electricity from the grid to replenish the reservoirs when demand is low overnight so by and large, what is used in the daytime can be restored at night. If wind was used exclusively to top up pump storage, then the generation could only be used after a sufficiently windy period. And if there is a prolonged windy period then the reservoir is likely to sit full and unable to take advantage of the wind. Another problem is the speed at which the reservoirs empty. The biggest pump storage scheme in UK is Dinorwig in Wales putting out a massive 1728MW but only has storage for five hours. Cruachan can produce a very respectable 400MW but runs out of water after 22 hours. You might wait a very long time before you can use it again if you are waiting for the wind to refill the reservoir.

Cant they turn it down to produce less but for a longer period then?

[ywindythesecond]

Yes, but the amount of contribution to the nation's demand becomes very small indeed. Don't get me wrong, I am not knocking hydro or pump storage hydro. They are absolutely essential to fine tune balancing the National Grid or stepping in within minutes when there is a big generator failure, filling the gap until some other replacement generation can get up to speed. Their output is used cautiously and effectively for specific purposes. That is why the % output of hydro and PS is low. It is electricity at the turn of a tap when it is needed most, and off again when it has done its job.

[secrets in symmetry]

OK SiS. I don't know what LMAO means but I guess you are annoyed. I have thought about my "silly assumption" which we have agreed was an expectation rather than a hypothesis which is a starting point to test a theory. I did set out to check the reality of certain wind industry and government claims but not to prove any preconceived outcome. If you read my Report carefully (and its a cracking good read), you will find that there is almost no personal intellectual input, just facts from impeccable sources. So I give up. Do your worst. Show me up. What was my "silly assumption?
Annoyed? Lol! Last night, I was Laughing My "Bottom" Off, but now I'm ROFLMAO! How could I be annoyed when you made me laugh so much?

The hypothesis in question can only be an expectation by someone who understands absolutely nothing about the science behind wind generation, and indeed by someone who knows nearly nothing about it. The majority of hypotheses or assertions tested in your report are so obviously wrong (and so idiotic) that I can't read it without laughing.

If you want to get started on the road to scientific salvation, you should read the chapters entitled Wind and Wind II in David Mackay's book.

The wind speed distribution plots at the top of page 34 show why wind farms produce less than half their average output most of the time.

So far, so good, but those plots are purely empirical. Now read the first few pages of Wind II. They provide the fundamental science reasons why wind farms produce much less than half their average output most of the time. In simple terms, it only takes a few brief periods of high wind to increase the average output by a huge amount. It's the v3 that does it.

Now that you know where you stand, perhaps I can ask you a question....

Why did you not consult with a scientist or an engineer before writing your report? There have been several on the forum since you started recording data. Rheghead could have helped you stay on the straight and narrow (although he may not have agreed to do so), and Neil Howie seems to know what he's talking about. There must be others, and there are dozens of Dounreay engineers and scientists who could have helped.

The 5 assertions you set out to test are mostly nonsense - with the obvious exception of the last one (which is clearly true in principle) - although it's not obvious that we can build enough traditional pumped storage facilities to serve Scotland's needs, never mind the UK's needs. Those 5 assertions are the sickeningly naive political claptrap repeated ad nauseam by the First Minister and the Login Bitch together with her tree hugging loony friends at Scottish Renewables. Do that bunch of political clowns have a single science degree between them? The John Muir Trust have a few scientists, but they seem to be as clueless as everyone else I've just mentioned....

[bekisman]

'Words of Comfort'
I always remember the words of Simon Hayes; Scottish and Southern Electricity's project manager (Wind Farms) who had been rather terse with me back in 2006, who said in 2007:


"Having a Wind farm development would give local people the benefit of
knowing that they were doing their bit to help combat climate change"


It's amazing there are people who actually have the gall to say this, it would appear we have Orgers on here who have the same propensity for pomposity..

[orkneycadian]

Damn - And here was me thinking that by living in the "fall out zone" of Dounreay, alongside all you Caithnessians, for decades, and risking our sheep and kye getting radioactivity poisoning should there ever be a Chernobyl or a Fukishima, that we were doing our bit for the development of nuclear energy.

I guess we have been conned too....

[ywindythesecond]

Annoyed? Lol! Last night, I was Laughing My "Bottom" Off, but now I'm ROFLMAO! How could I be annoyed when you made me laugh so much?

The hypothesis in question can only be an expectation by someone who understands absolutely nothing about the science behind wind generation, and indeed by someone who knows nearly nothing about it. The majority of hypotheses or assertions tested in your report are so obviously wrong (and so idiotic) that I can't read it without laughing.

If you want to get started on the road to scientific salvation, you should read the chapters entitled Wind and Wind II in David Mackay's book.

The wind speed distribution plots at the top of page 34 show why wind farms produce less than half their average output most of the time.

So far, so good, but those plots are purely empirical. Now read the first few pages of Wind II. They provide the fundamental science reasons why wind farms produce much less than half their average output most of the time. In simple terms, it only takes a few brief periods of high wind to increase the average output by a huge amount. It's the v3 that does it.

Now that you know where you stand, perhaps I can ask you a question....

Why did you not consult with a scientist or an engineer before writing your report? There have been several on the forum since you started recording data. Rheghead could have helped you stay on the straight and narrow (although he may not have agreed to do so), and Neil Howie seems to know what he's talking about. There must be others, and there are dozens of Dounreay engineers and scientists who could have helped.

The 5 assertions you set out to test are mostly nonsense - with the obvious exception of the last one (which is clearly true in principle) - although it's not obvious that we can build enough traditional pumped storage facilities to serve Scotland's needs, never mind the UK's needs. Those 5 assertions are the sickeningly naive political claptrap repeated ad nauseam by the First Minister and the Login Bitch together with her tree hugging loony friends at Scottish Renewables. Do that bunch of political clowns have a single science degree between them? The John Muir Trust have a few scientists, but they seem to be as clueless as everyone else I've just mentioned....

Lets be clear SiS, and for the benefit of others reading this thread, my report at http://www.jmt.org/assets/pdf/Report_Analysis%20UK%20Wind_SYoung.pdf set out to test assertions by others:

“The following five statements are common assertions made by both the wind industry and Government representatives and agencies. This Report examines those assertions.
“Wind turbines will generate on average 30% of their rated capacity over a year.”
“The wind is always blowing somewhere.”
“Periods of widespread low wind are infrequent.”
“The probability of very low wind output coinciding with peak electricity demand is slight.”
“Pumped storage hydro can fill the generation gap during prolonged low wind periods.” “
I did not set out to test my own expectation of a particular outcome. I was surprised at the result, but that was incidental. If it had been an objective I would have given it more thought, but it wasn’t. Nor is my report in any way science based so why would I consult with scientists? The objective of the report was:

“Objective

This analysis seeks to test the “assertions” by examining and presenting historical generation data. There is nothing technical or difficult in this work. It is simply the accessing and recording of generation data from the 227,808 five-minute files in chronological order from 1st November 2008 until 31st December 2010, and presentation of the information by time, and by level of wind generation output relative to time.

It is the objective of this Report to set out hard indisputable facts about how wind power delivers its “average” output, and to place these facts before engineers, politicians, economists, and others who are hopefully in a position to influence energy policy.”

The conclusions reached were:

“This analysis uses publicly available data for a 26 month period between November 2008 and December 2010 and the facts in respect of the above assertions are:
Average output from wind was 27.18% of metered capacity in 2009, 21.14% in 2010, and 24.08% between November 2008 and December 2010 inclusive.
There were 124 separate occasions from November 2008 till December 2010 when total generation from the windfarms metered by National Grid was less than 20MW. (Average capacity over the period was in excess of 1600MW).
The average frequency and duration of a low wind event of 20MW or less between November 2008 and December 2010 was once every 6.38 days for a period of 4.93 hours.
At each of the four highest peak demands of 2010 wind output was low being respectively 4.72%, 5.51%, 2.59% and 2.51% of capacity at peak demand.
The entire pumped storage hydro capacity in the UK can provide up to 2788MW for only 5 hours then it drops to 1060MW, and finally runs out of water after 22 hours.”
None of these results have been challenged by the wind industry. Not even Reggy has taken issue with them. The reason for this is that they are facts which can be checked and verified and if wrong exposed by anyone. Does anyone imagine that the wind industry (and Reggy) hasn’t checked?

SiS, I am puzzled. Your last paragraph and my own views are just about identical.
You say “Those 5 assertions are the sickeningly naive political claptrap repeated ad nauseam by the First Minister and the Login Bitch together with her tree hugging loony friends at Scottish Renewables.”

My report proves your point. What are we arguing about?

PS It’s a cracking good read, and there are other interesting findings as well! http://www.jmt.org/stuart-young-report.asp

[secrets in symmetry]

Lol! I'm a scientist, so I want to know as much about the topic as I can know. That's what we're here for.

You should have consulted a scientist or engineer because you wouldn't have wasted so much time, space or paper investigating (and making such a fuss about) the bleeding obvious.

If I had your raw data (and the time and inclination to analyse it) I could have done a much more succinct and incisive analysis. The main reason your report got any attention is because of ignorance amongst members of the John Muir Trust and the fact that Scottish Renewables and their like have been caught talking scripted nonsense through their teeth with their collective knickers down.

Look at the posts on pumped storage on this thread as an example of how little the general public knows and understands about what's going on in the renewables industry.

Look at the number of times people suggest variablility can be solved by every house having a wind turbine to generate its own electricity. This is nonsense - even in principle, never mind in practice. (Wind and Wind II in David Mackay's book explain why.)

Similarly for all the rubbish that's posted denying climate change. They don't understand the evidence for it so they deny it.

But that's not the point....

As Rheghead has pointed out, even today's primitive grid can deal with surprisingly massive rapid changes in both production of, and demand for, electricity.

So far so good, but if renewables are going to be a mainstay of our energy production for the coming decades, then we need a massive storage system along the lines of those David Mackay suggests. The storage problem can be solved, and it will be solved quickly if the effort is put into solving it. It's not a particularly difficult problem, and I can think of several ways of doing it that aren't mentioned in the book, one of which I'm surprised isn't more popular.

Part of the problem is that the politicians (and Alex Salmond in particular) are too godamned stupid to understand the problem, and silly little psychos like the Login Witch make the problem worse by pretending things are all ok. She is a hindrance to the industry she claims to support, and her position must be shown to be untenable before she takes Scotland PLC down with her.

[ywindythesecond]

Lol! I'm a scientist, so I want to know as much about the topic as I can know. That's what we're here for.

You should have consulted a scientist or engineer because you wouldn't have wasted so much time, space or paper investigating (and making such a fuss about) the bleeding obvious.

If I had your raw data (and the time and inclination to analyse it) I could have done a much more succinct and incisive analysis. The main reason your report got any attention is because of ignorance amongst members of the John Muir Trust and the fact that Scottish Renewables and their like have been caught talking scripted nonsense through their teeth with their collective knickers down.

Look at the posts on pumped storage on this thread as an example of how little the general public knows and understands about what's going on in the renewables industry.

Look at the number of times people suggest variablility can be solved by every house having a wind turbine to generate its own electricity. This is nonsense - even in principle, never mind in practice. (Wind and Wind II in David Mackay's book explain why.)

Similarly for all the rubbish that's posted denying climate change. They don't understand the evidence for it so they deny it.

But that's not the point....

As Rheghead has pointed out, even today's primitive grid can deal with surprisingly massive rapid changes in both production of, and demand for, electricity.

So far so good, but if renewables are going to be a mainstay of our energy production for the coming decades, then we need a massive storage system along the lines of those David Mackay suggests. The storage problem can be solved, and it will be solved quickly if the effort is put into solving it. It's not a particularly difficult problem, and I can think of several ways of doing it that aren't mentioned in the book, one of which I'm surprised isn't more popular.

Part of the problem is that the politicians (and Alex Salmond in particular) are too godamned stupid to understand the problem, and silly little psychos like the Login Witch make the problem worse by pretending things are all ok. She is a hindrance to the industry she claims to support, and her position must be shown to be untenable before she takes Scotland PLC down with her.

Right SiS, I am beginning to see where you are coming from.
You are a scientist and because something is obvious to you it should be obvious to everyone. I am not a scientist but it was obvious to me that the five assertions were not right, but the media and our politicians clearly believed them and there was no specific body of work to counter these claims. There is and was a mass of scientific and economic work available to decision makers, but these don’t generally make headlines and politicians’ eyes glaze over as soon as it becomes a bit technical. Also, the wind industry has such huge sums of money to play for that they have the machinery to influence politicians and the PR ability to push their message to the public. Before my report, no other work identified and tested the five common assertions. They not only went unchallenged, they have clearly influenced Scottish and UK Government policy, and are taken for granted by an awful lot of people. My report, which may seem lightweight to you, is factual, readable, and has informed many more ordinary people, media, and politicians, than the tons of learned works which have been presented to both Parliaments and which have failed to make one bit of difference to our National Energy Strategy, which we actually don’t have.

And your reasons for my report gaining so much attention are wrong as they don’t explain this or many similar coverages world-wide:
http://www.balitapinoy.net/journal/706469/Scottish_Wind_Farm_report_devastating_to_the_green _energy_industry .

[Corrie 3]

Right SiS, I am beginning to see where you are coming from.
You are a scientist and because something is obvious to you it should be obvious to everyone. I am not a scientist but it was obvious to me that the five assertions were not right, but the media and our politicians clearly believed them and there was no specific body of work to counter these claims. There is and was a mass of scientific and economic work available to decision makers, but these don’t generally make headlines and politicians’ eyes glaze over as soon as it becomes a bit technical. Also, the wind industry has such huge sums of money to play for that they have the machinery to influence politicians and the PR ability to push their message to the public. Before my report, no other work identified and tested the five common assertions. They not only went unchallenged, they have clearly influenced Scottish and UK Government policy, and are taken for granted by an awful lot of people. My report, which may seem lightweight to you, is factual, readable, and has informed many more ordinary people, media, and politicians, than the tons of learned works which have been presented to both Parliaments and which have failed to make one bit of difference to our National Energy Strategy, which we actually don’t have.

And your reasons for my report gaining so much attention are wrong as they don’t explain this or many similar coverages world-wide:
http://www.balitapinoy.net/journal/706469/Scottish_Wind_Farm_report_devastating_to_the_green _energy_industry .
Dont worry about it Windy, I have it on good authority that SiS isn't a scientist but a chemist!!! Theres quite a big difference from a chemist to a scientist.................... chemist's spend a lot of time on Forums and scientists dont !!!

C3............[disgust][disgust]:roll:

[John Little]

"Hail MARS, Son of JUNO, God of the War ..." :eek:

[upolian]

This means i get to see blades flying? :D

[secrets in symmetry]

Right SiS, I am beginning to see where you are coming from.
You are a scientist and because something is obvious to you it should be obvious to everyone. I am not a scientist but it was obvious to me that the five assertions were not right, but the media and our politicians clearly believed them and there was no specific body of work to counter these claims. There is and was a mass of scientific and economic work available to decision makers, but these don’t generally make headlines and politicians’ eyes glaze over as soon as it becomes a bit technical. Also, the wind industry has such huge sums of money to play for that they have the machinery to influence politicians and the PR ability to push their message to the public. Before my report, no other work identified and tested the five common assertions. They not only went unchallenged, they have clearly influenced Scottish and UK Government policy, and are taken for granted by an awful lot of people. My report, which may seem lightweight to you, is factual, readable, and has informed many more ordinary people, media, and politicians, than the tons of learned works which have been presented to both Parliaments and which have failed to make one bit of difference to our National Energy Strategy, which we actually don’t have.

And your reasons for my report gaining so much attention are wrong as they don’t explain this or many similar coverages world-wide:
http://www.balitapinoy.net/journal/706469/Scottish_Wind_Farm_report_devastating_to_the_green _energy_industry .You might be getting the message, but slowly.

I'm not talking esoteric academic publications here. Your report could have hit so much harder if it had been shorter and more to the point. I think I could have got a more incisive version onto the front page of the Scotsman.

The Scottish wind industry is in danger of walking into a brick wall if idiots like Jenny Hogan convince even bigger idiots like Alex Salmond that all is well with the current one directional static Grid. Wind and tidal (with a spattering of wave) can be big and successful, but not with those clowns as mouthpieces.

[secrets in symmetry]

And your reasons for my report gaining so much attention are wrong as they don’t explain this or many similar coverages world-wide:
http://www.balitapinoy.net/journal/706469/Scottish_Wind_Farm_report_devastating_to_the_green _energy_industry .
They don't explain a report on a website I've never heard of, and which doesn't respond to clicking the link on the first five attempts? Wow, that's Earth shattering. :cool:

[ywindythesecond]

You might be getting the message, but slowly.
I'm not talking esoteric academic publications here. Your report could have hit so much harder if it had been shorter and more to the point. I think I could have got a more incisive version onto the front page of the Scotsman.
.
Probably. But we will never know.

[secrets in symmetry]

Probably. But we will never know.It could perhaps still be done, but I don't have the time to analyse your data. You've probably wasted the moment because you didn't consult people who would have known how to analyse the data properly.

Did you spend your career as some sort of sales or admin person?

[bekisman]

A while back (#90) I mentioned: "Today Mrs Beks has been doing a bit of walking (20 miles) around the Westerdale, Halkirk, Scotscalder area and the Causeymire Wind Farm was in view all the time, the thing that struck us was that all that day not one of the 21 turbines there were turning - the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?"

Well again today we were out that way and again they were not turning. So, are they being paid to not produce as the grid can't take it? Surely these experts on here would know, or be able to find out?

[Rheghead]

A while back (#90) I mentioned: "Today Mrs Beks has been doing a bit of walking (20 miles) around the Westerdale, Halkirk, Scotscalder area and the Causeymire Wind Farm was in view all the time, the thing that struck us was that all that day not one of the 21 turbines there were turning - the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?"

Well again today we were out that way and again they were not turning. So, are they being paid to not produce as the grid can't take it? Surely these experts on here would know, or be able to find out?

Should I email the site manager and let you know?

[bekisman]

Should I email the site manager and let you know?I understand you're an advisor to local government on these matters, so, yes, pull those strings; much appreciated.

[bekisman]

It's OK Reggy, they sent a message earlier and said to look at this link? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/7840035/Firms-paid-to-shut-down-wind-farms-when-the-wind-is-blowing.html

PS. do all you scientists work shifts?

[ywindythesecond]

A while back (#90) I mentioned: "Today Mrs Beks has been doing a bit of walking (20 miles) around the Westerdale, Halkirk, Scotscalder area and the Causeymire Wind Farm was in view all the time, the thing that struck us was that all that day not one of the 21 turbines there were turning - the wind was nowhere near enough to force shutdown, is it another case where the National Grid can't take the extra power from them, and becomes another wind farm that's paid a fortune for not producing?"

Well again today we were out that way and again they were not turning. So, are they being paid to not produce as the grid can't take it? Surely these experts on here would know, or be able to find out?


Beki, On the first occasion, the record shows that Caithness windfarms were not shut down by the Grid and paid for it. We will have to wait and see if what you observed today was a NG imposed shut down.
Up to the end of September 2011, the Highland windfarms benefitting from shut downs were Kilbraur-£ 840,693, Millenium-£711,882, Farr 1 and 2-£1,931,439, and Beinn Tharsuinn-£480,608.

[bekisman]

Beki, On the first occasion, the record shows that Caithness windfarms were not shut down by the Grid and paid for it. We will have to wait and see if what you observed today was a NG imposed shut down.
Up to the end of September 2011, the Highland windfarms benefitting from shut downs were Kilbraur-£ 840,693, Millenium-£711,882, Farr 1 and 2-£1,931,439, and Beinn Tharsuinn-£480,608.
Thanks for that ywindy, it's like pullling teeth trying to get info from 'our' scientists..

[orkneycadian]

On the first occasion, the record shows that Caithness windfarms were not shut down by the Grid and paid for it.

Horror of horrors! So they we stopped for some reason other than which has been lighted upon by the NIMBY's? Who would have thought it....

[bekisman]

Horror of horrors! So they we stopped for some reason other than which has been lighted upon by the NIMBY's? Who would have thought it....
"they we stopped" eh? Come on then, do tell why they were stopped, it wern't maintenance..