View Full Version : Against windfarms for good techinological reasons
ywindythesecond
02-Jan-07, 22:35
Looking for members.
Mr P Cannop
02-Jan-07, 23:05
you have my support i will join
Boozeburglar
03-Jan-07, 00:16
Perhaps you could come up with a snappier name for your pressure group?
;)
ywindythesecond
03-Jan-07, 01:49
[quote=Boozeburglar;178173]Perhaps you could come up with a snappier name for your pressure group?
;)Thanks Boozeburglar. Great image! Could you put me in touch with your PR man please?:D
ywindythesecond.
philupmaboug
03-Jan-07, 09:56
Why don't you like wind farms?
What are the "good technological reasons"?
I think anyone considering joining would want to know.
yes, what are you reasons. we would like to know
Perhaps you could come up with a snappier name for your pressure group?
;)
The "Alonso Quixano Appreciation Society"?
Boffins Against Windfarms Society.
I can see the headline now "Windfarm construction plan held up by the BAWS" ;o)
How about:
Windpower Is Not Desired And Not Deemed Pertinent in Some Situations
Only a thought..........
What are the "good technological reasons"?
I think anyone considering joining would want to know.
Well............ They will produce so much power that Caithness will also be blighted with HUGE pylons taking all the electricity south.
Oh dear.........
ywindythesecond
03-Jan-07, 23:28
Jabberwock posted this
http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news,
and it says it so much bettr than I can. Please take the time to read it.
ywindythesecond
Jabberwock posted this
http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news,
and it says it so much bettr than I can. Please take the time to read it.
ywindythesecond
Sorry - I don't see how that alters the principles of power transmission.
Whatever Caithness generates itself, will alleviate power transmission from the south. The county will only become a net exporter to the grid when the next generation of nuclear reactor arrives on the shores (which may need larger capacity pylons)
How about:
Windpower Is Not Desired And Not Deemed Pertinent in Some Situations
Only a thought..........
LOLOLOLOLOL
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 00:16
Sorry - I don't see how that alters the principles of power transmission.
Whatever Caithness generates itself, will alleviate power transmission from the south. The county will only become a net exporter to the grid when the next generation of nuclear reactor arrives on the shores (which may need larger capacity pylons)
Can I see your sums please Mareng. This thread depends on good technological reasons.
Well........... I don't have any, but I don't believe the suggestion/claim that the current level of wind turbines is sustaining Caithness's electricity demand.
If they are, then we want to be building them everywhere.
I've counted 22 on the Cawsweymire, but am unsure how many more there are in the county. Anyone help?
Conscience
04-Jan-07, 11:05
From today's BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6209350.stm
lassieinfife
04-Jan-07, 11:30
I just wonder how many of the people who say windfarms a good idea live near one or will in the future?
I just wonder how many of the people who say windfarms a good idea live near one or will in the future?
All of them if they live in Caithness. Chances are we'll end up with over 2,000 wind turbines.
Mind you at a ratable value of £5,000 per megawat the Council will do alright out of it but if the bulk of that stays in Inverness and they just throw us a bun now and again to keep us quiet we will have to wait and see.
For all the Turbine lovers ,this will wipe the smile off .The Carbon Certs that are given too the Turbine owners as part off the non-carbon genernation agreement are being traded/sold and used by companies in South America/Boreno to fell and burn the rainforest for the production of palm oil and soya ---1 NEW TURBINE and 10 hectares goes up in smoke ever week as long as that 1 turbine stands..So when you see next see the Amazon on TV and its burning, pat yourself on the back .You may well be putting money into the pockets off the Turbine owners and the Electricity companies ,but helping to save the PLANET you're not .......
I do support the idea of wind turbines to a point. Personally I would prefer to see smaller community turbines, or individual domestic turbines, providing power for a group or individual houses via a grid-connect inverter. This basically means that the first part of any load is fulfilled by the turbine with the national grid providing the backup. Unless you are very carefull and organised you're not going to get your entire electricity supply in this way, but it is a far more "honest" solution, no underhand subsidies or carbon credit trading, and has the benefit of being an emergency power supply in the event of a power cut.
I suppose some folk would complain at the idea of every rural property having a small turbine, but I've driven round the northern side of St John's Loch many times and the turbine there isn't at all intrusive.
Of course it wouldn't be a option in built up areas, but no reason why solar panels can't be used in a similar way, they are quite expensive (about £5 per watt of output) but surely it would be better for the government to make them available through councils at a subsidised rate rather than throwing subsidies at the big wind power companies.
I also firmly believe that if you install this sort of equipment you're far more aware of your home's power consumption, it becomes almost a challenge to use only the power you generate and to opt for things like energy saving light bulbs.
Simple fact: If all tungsten filament bulbs were replaced with compact fluorescent bulbs the peak electricity demand in the UK would drop by 3GW, about the same as the output of a large power station.
Garycs,
If I recall correctly for those who generate their own electricity there is the option to 'sell' surplus electricity back to the electric companies - it gives you credit for any power off the grid that you consume when the wind fails to blow. I supppose if you generate enough you could reach a point where your power would be totally free?
I don't have a problem with alternative forms of power generation and would agree that individuals should be given subsidies to have solar panels/wind turbines fitted to their properties (if planning laws allow). You get subsidies for insulating your home - why not for green energy measures.
Like the system a few years ago of the tax breaks for planting fir trees in Caithness I have my suspicions about who really benefits from these huge windfarm projects....
Madpict,
Yes, you can sell any excess to the grid I think you get about 4p/kwh but you do need a higher spec of controller/inverter which is much more expensive and could be prohibitive. You can make use of the excess by storing in deep cycle batteries for use when demand rises (this would also provide an even better emergency supply in case of power cut) or using a low power immersion heater to top up a hot water tank.
I tend to take a slightly cynical view of who benefits from the various schemes, I'll bet half contents of my bank account that in 10 years time there will be a retired government minister sitting on the board of all these big "Green" companies; and the other £2.50 that they have similar positions with oil companies.
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 21:41
[quote=garycs;178634]
I suppose some folk would complain at the idea of every rural property having a small turbine, but I've driven round the northern side of St John's Loch many times and the turbine there isn't at all intrusive.(end of quote)
By coincidence, I went to see the same small turbine today at the owners invitation and it was very interesting.
I estimate it to be 6-8 metres high and it was birling at a tremendous rate in todays strong wind.
Its output is rated at 6kw and it achieves about 4kw on average, an excellent result.
Surplus power is sold back to the power company at just below half of the cost of the power they supply, which again is a really good deal.
Theoretically, the owner is entitled to Renewable Obligation Certificates which can be traded at around £40 a time, but there is some procedural hiccup there.
The turbine itself is not a thing of beauty. It looks like a demented hornet, but it works, it saves money, it provides clean electricity, it pays for itself without public subsidy, and it is small and localised, not big and everywhere.
Not like the proposed Dunbeath Windfarm. Check caithnesswindfarms.co.uk for an online objection. Tomorrow is the last day for objections to be lodged, although the Energy Consents Unit man told me they always allow 10 days grace.
I left the owner of the small turbine heading for her computer to lodge her objection.
ywindy
I just wonder how many of the people who say windfarms a good idea live near one or will in the future?
Well, I live in Edinburgh, but if I lived in Caithness again and had sufficient land (and I don't mean an estate) - I would be looking very closely at a wind turbine. Obviously, if the sums were completely nuts - I wouldn't have one - but otherwise........... I'd have it.
On "ywindythesecond's" last post - thanks for the frank appraisal of the St John's loch installation.
I'm going to reinforce what I said on many occasions..................
"If it is perceived to be an intrusion by a future generation, it can be removed with nary a scar on the landscape."
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 22:04
Well, I live in Edinburgh, but if I lived in Caithness again and had sufficient land (and I don't mean an estate) - I would be looking very closely at a wind turbine. Obviously, if the sums were completely nuts - I wouldn't have one - but otherwise........... I'd have it.
"If it is perceived to be an intrusion by a future generation, it can be removed with nary a scar on the landscape."
Thanks Mareng
By a curious co-incidence, the chap who owns the land the Causewaymire Windfarm is on also lives in your part of the world. He is now making his living by working for windfarm developers and it was he who hand delivered the neighbour notifications for the proposed Burn of Whilk (Yarrows) Windfarm.
Can you please explain how living in Edinburgh entitles you to your strong opinion on windfarms in Caithness?
ywindythesecond
Can you please explain how living in Edinburgh entitles you to your strong opinion on windfarms in Caithness?
Please don't.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion as where they live and everyone is entitled to express it.
Conscience
04-Jan-07, 22:31
Can you please explain how living in Edinburgh entitles you to your strong opinion on windfarms in Caithness?
ywindythesecond
I think the issues facing people are the same anywhere a windfarm is proposed. Some will want them, some will not, some will say they ruin the environment . This is certainly the case of windfarms I have seen in Wales, where previously beautiful areas are now scarred with these monstrosities.
I think the issues facing people are the same anywhere a windfarm is proposed. Some will want them, some will not, some will say they ruin the environment . This is certainly the case of windfarms I have seen in Wales, where previously beautiful areas are now scarred with these monstrosities.
I have lived in Caithness for a large number of years, and perceive that it will never fare well in terms of tourism revenue (so let's not put all our/your eggs in that basket).
As I stated in a previous post - I would not balk at the vision of my own wind turbine every morning as I opened my curtains.
I also find the 'farms' to have a "balletic presence", be they on the Cawswaymire or on the A68 (I think) south of Edinburgh. I struggle to take my eyes off them, to be honest.
I also perceive that windfarms have no adverse legacy on the landscape, so for someone to assert that "beautiful areas are now scarred with these monstrosities" - this smacks of selfishness.
I would recommend that you "put up with the eyesore" for your lifetime - go on....make that (small) sacrifice and let the next generation evaluate the impact based on gained experience. There are few industries that will allow that indulgence.
Yes, I think that tidal energy will ultimately be the better choice but, until that time - let's not dismiss wind power.
I remember the almost - "glee" that the tidal power experiment failure was met with in Caithness-circles. To me it smacked of: "Serves you right for trying to make money out of nothing" (the energy that has always been there, but not exploited). I sense that I will have to defend this position, so will leave that for another posting.
So.......... that's my outlook in a nutshell, so to speak.
Please don't.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion as where they live and everyone is entitled to express it.
Fred - you are correct, of course.
But, I would be happy to install (subject to "justification to myself" being satisfied - and it may not have to be absolutely financially sensible for that) a turbine in my garden/small holding, be it in Lothian or Caithness.
As justification for commenting on "Caithness issues", I have lived there for over 15 years, have parents either from there, or have strong connections with the county, and perhaps can view issues without any rose-tinted glasses which some residents can be coloured by.
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 23:10
Fred - you are correct, of course.
But, I would be happy to install (subject to "justification to myself" being satisfied - and it may not have to be absolutely financially sensible for that) a turbine in my garden/small holding, be it in Lothian or Caithness.
As justification for commenting on "Caithness issues", I have lived there for over 15 years, have parents either from there, or have strong connections with the county, and perhaps can view issues without any rose-tinted glasses which some residents can be coloured by.
First of all, thanks Fred for reminding me of my manners.
Mareng, I support and encourage wind turbines in gardens. I think you dont quite understand the size and scale of the installations proposed for not just Caithness, but all over the country. And it is not for good environmental reasons, it is for greed. And it doesn't work environmentally either.
Go on, ask me, how many football fields are needed for one industrial wind turbine? Have a guess yourself first.
ywindythesecond
Conscience
04-Jan-07, 23:17
I have lived in Caithness for a large number of years, and perceive that it will never fare well in terms of tourism revenue (so let's not put all our/your eggs in that basket).
As I stated in a previous post - I would not balk at the vision of my own wind turbine every morning as I opened my curtains.
I also find the 'farms' to have a "balletic presence", be they on the Cawswaymire or on the A68 (I think) south of Edinburgh. I struggle to take my eyes off them, to be honest.
I also perceive that windfarms have no adverse legacy on the landscape, so for someone to assert that "beautiful areas are now scarred with these monstrosities" - this smacks of selfishness.
I would recommend that you "put up with the eyesore" for your lifetime - go on....make that (small) sacrifice and let the next generation evaluate the impact based on gained experience. There are few industries that will allow that indulgence.
Yes, I think that tidal energy will ultimately be the better choice but, until that time - let's not dismiss wind power.
I remember the almost - "glee" that the tidal power experiment failure was met with in Caithness-circles. To me it smacked of: "Serves you right for trying to make money out of nothing" (the energy that has always been there, but not exploited). I sense that I will have to defend this position, so will leave that for another posting.
So.......... that's my outlook in a nutshell, so to speak.
How is it selfish to want to preserve the beauty of our country? To me it is selfish to want to turn everywhere into an industrial landscape, blighted with 200 foot tall towers, whirring away (these things are not quiet by the way). With service roads over green field land that has never been built on before.
Balletic? They are ugly blots on the landscape. They serve no great purpose, they do not replace oil fired power stations, they do not replace nuclear power stations. Those are still required to keep the supply flowing when the wind stops. If we have to have these things then put them off-shore. Do not ruin our countryside with them.
You don't realise how precious what you have is, until it is gone. And once it is gone, it is gone.
A vision of the future? (replace the mountains in the background with Morven)
As per my previous post - I wouldn't object to a lot more windfarms in Caithness, but......... I don't like seeing development on the basis of a "nice little earner through tax breaks" without moral benefits.
Obviously I have some reading to do (regarding those issues) to wholeheartedly support windfarm development, but up to now - all my comments should be read on the basis of scientific/ aesthetic/ environmental issues.
How is it selfish to want to preserve the beauty of our country? To me it is selfish to want to turn everywhere into an industrial landscape, blighted with 200 foot tall towers, whirring away (these things are not quiet by the way). With service roads over green field land that has never been built on before.
Balletic? They are ugly blots on the landscape. They serve no great purpose, they do not replace oil fired power stations, they do not replace nuclear power stations. Those are still required to keep the supply flowing when the wind stops. If we have to have these things then put them off-shore. Do not ruin our countryside with them.
You don't realise how precious what you have is, until it is gone. And once it is gone, it is gone.
Selfish: I have to disagree on the legacy remaining from a turbine - Turf over the road and the foundation.......... done.
Balletic: This is purely subjective, but I stand by my statement that I would have one in my back garden. (I've always admired the one at Berriedale, as have a majority of children as they travel south/north)
And once it is gone, it is gone: I don't see this. They leave no lasting impact/legacy as far as I can see.
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 23:39
[quote=mareng;178753]As per my previous post - I wouldn't object to a lot more windfarms in Caithness, but......... I don't like seeing development on the basis of a "nice little earner through tax breaks" without moral benefits.
quote]
Mareng,
http://www.socme.org/goldrush.html
Regarding moral benefits and "nice little earners", this is what opened my eyes.
ywindythesecond
Sure their physical footprint might be small and easily removed/disguised/covered over but the fact that these things are made out of steel and stand on plinths made from concrete.
7. Building Works
In addition to the wind turbines themselves, environmental impact is created by the foundations, the access roads and transmission lines.
The hole excavated for a turbine's foundation has a volume of 200 - 800 m3 depending on site conditions. This would need a maximum of about 1700 tonnes of concrete and aggregate for a gravity base. Only a quarter or less of the concrete will be cement - the energy intensive component which emits CO² in manufacture.
An average gravity base for a 2.5 MW turbine requires about 40 truckloads of concrete - up to about 250 m3 compared with only 40 m3 for the smaller 250 kW turbines, common a few years ago (Civil Engineering, November 2005).
That's EACH turbine. They are not green to manufacture. So for a farm of 20 turbines thats 34,000 tones of concrete for the bases alone.
All for an efficiency of what? 30%?
If it was 90% it might be acceptable. But it isn't and therein lies it's weakness. It can't be relied on to produce constant power.
How is it selfish to want to preserve the beauty of our country? To me it is selfish to want to turn everywhere into an industrial landscape, blighted with 200 foot tall towers, whirring away (these things are not quiet by the way). With service roads over green field land that has never been built on before.
Balletic? They are ugly blots on the landscape. They serve no great purpose, they do not replace oil fired power stations, they do not replace nuclear power stations. Those are still required to keep the supply flowing when the wind stops. If we have to have these things then put them off-shore. Do not ruin our countryside with them.
You don't realise how precious what you have is, until it is gone. And once it is gone, it is gone.
Sure their physical footprint might be small and easily removed/disguised/covered over but the fact that these things are made out of steel and stand on plinths made from concrete.
That's EACH turbine. They are not green to manufacture. So for a farm of 20 turbines thats 34,000 tones of concrete for the bases alone.
All for an efficiency of what? 30%?
If it was 90% it might be acceptable. But it isn't and therein lies it's weakness. It can't be relied on to produce constant power.
Remove the turbines, turf over the plinths.
Is it really an ecological disaster if, 6" below the turf - there's a deep concrete foundation?
Is anything "green to manufacture"? I think you are singling out wind turbines in this respect to bolster your argument.
Do you take a foreign holiday?, travelling by air? Take your "moral high ground" to that moral conundrum and see how it flies.
Yes, there are downsides to every development, but come on......... are you really demonising concrete production?
We would all like to be as green as possible ,but and theres always a but.When green renewable energy generation DESTROYS the Environment it is supposed to be protecting ,when theres a problem .If the folk in the cities had to generate their electricity locally things would be different . Its the I have the right to destroy were you stay ,because i have the power and the money.Thats what rubs folk up the wrong way,we are having these forests of Steel Industrial Towers forced on us and a very fragile environment is being destroyed .
If the folk in Edinburgh are Windtower Friendly get the executive to put 20 on top of Arthurs Seat and splash the rest as close the the source of demand as possible .Half the electricity produced is lost in the transfer ,so why would anyone that has the environment at its core want to ship electricity Hundreds of miles .
If you were looking at the P&J on Tuesday page 5 inner right hand column ,it stated that micro-turbine manufacturers had given false figures and you would be better spending your money on insulation and energy bulbs long before Windturbines .Its this halfbaked get rich quick schemes that will strangle the micro-renewables at birth.
If we as a County are to have Turbines ,surely we should get all the benefit .We should have a TRUST that will buy and run the Turbines and the money should be used to increase the Health and Fitness of all the residance
of the county as a whole .
The Trust should help all homes and public building become renewable energy
generators ,be it new types of micro wind or solar along with energy saving bulbs and insulation....
There is a new type of windturbine that is looking at setting new targets for micro generation ,its sits along the ridge of your roof and is a helix design and can be 15 ft or over and is producing 2.2kwph .So the longer the ridge on your roof the more power you can get ,the roof itself help generate power from the updraught ...
Lets hope that the folk of Caithness want to protect what nature has taken Thousands of years to give us or are we to see it all to go under steel and concrete.........
but they will produce power and as times goes on they will become more and more efficient with practically no legacy.
All power producing equipment has its footprint to create it, the difference is that some of them just have a 1 off payment and from that point we just sit back while power is produced, allbeit at the moment, limited but has no lasting damage or will cause any problems in the future.
as for tourism, i have found plenty of evidence that windfarms can actually be a tourist attraction... and as time progresses the windmills could become less of an eyesore, (why are they always white?) as society realises the benefit of having energy produce as cleanly as possible.
and does all this take into the consideration that maybe one day people will use power more responsibly and we wont need to produce so much?
We would all like to be as green as possible ,but and theres always a but.When green renewable energy generation DESTROYS the Environment it is supposed to be protecting ,when theres a problem .If the folk in the cities had to generate their electricity locally things would be different . Its the I have the right to destroy were you stay ,because i have the power and the money.Thats what rubs folk up the wrong way,we are having these forests of Steel Industrial Towers forced on us and a very fragile environment is being destroyed .
If the folk in Edinburgh are Windtower Friendly get the executive to put 20 on top of Arthurs Seat and splash the rest as close the the source of demand as possible .Half the electricity produced is lost in the transfer ,so why would anyone that has the environment at its core want to ship electricity Hundreds of miles .
If you were looking at the P&J on Tuesday page 5 inner right hand column ,it stated that micro-turbine manufacturers had given false figures and you would be better spending your money on insulation and energy bulbs long before Windturbines .Its this halfbaked get rich quick schemes that will strangle the micro-renewables at birth.
If we as a County are to have Turbines ,surely we should get all the benefit .We should have a TRUST that will buy and run the Turbines and the money should be used to increase the Health and Fitness of all the residance
of the county as a whole .
The Trust should help all homes and public building become renewable energy
generators ,be it new types of micro wind or solar along with energy saving bulbs and insulation....
There is a new type of windturbine that is looking at setting new targets for micro generation ,its sits along the ridge of your roof and is a helix design and can be 15 ft or over and is producing 2.2kwph .So the longer the ridge on your roof the more power you can get ,the roof itself help generate power from the updraught ...
Lets hope that the folk of Caithness want to protect what nature has taken Thousands of years to give us or are we to see it all to go under steel and concrete.........
Eloquently put...............
Obviously, it does grate on the likes of Caithness-inhabitants - that those in cities will always be "nett-users" rather than tending towards "self-sufficiency".
There are no turbines within Edinburgh, but you don't have to go south too far to encounter them. There are also no nuclear power stations within city limits anywhere in the UK, but I've yet to see any discussion that suggests that as being realistic. Windfarms + Inner Cities = ??? (not compatable)
There are obviously technological faults with wind generation (and I include financial viability in this subject), but let's not kill the idea of wind energy at this stage?
Conscience
05-Jan-07, 00:25
and does all this take into the consideration that maybe one day people will use power more responsibly and we wont need to produce so much?
A very good point.
Until we all use power responsibly, by insulating our homes properly, using energy saving features wherever possible, then constantly trying to find new ways to produce electricity is foolish. Especially if those new ways destroy the environment they are supposed to be saving.
Do you take a foreign holiday?, travelling by air? Take your "moral high ground" to that moral conundrum and see how it flies.
For your information I am flying shortly and when I do I my flight will cover 8618 Km and produce 0.9 tonnes of CO2.
I intend to offset this by getting Natural woodland portfolio (cost - £ 6.66)
With this package, you'll be supporting an area of wonderful new native UK forest which is sufficient to soak up your flight emissions (on average, it takes one tree grown to maturity to soak one tonne of CO2).
And also a International communities portfolio (cost - £ 8.05)
With this package, you'll be helping some great projects in developing countries which will save the same amount of CO2 as your flight produces.
I have done this before and I feel it is only fair for me to make up for my pollution....
http://www.carbonneutral.com
Yes, there are downsides to every development, but come on......... are you really demonising concrete production?
Yes there are downsides to every development and those objecting to wind turbines should consider themselves lucky they don't live near a coal fired plant.
However it's hard to find an upside for windfarms in Caithness. When they were looking for sites for the first commercial nuclear reactors Caithness was the obvious choice but was ruled out because it was too far from where the energy was needed to make it viable. Given that wind power is a very inefficient way of generating electricity anyway I don't see how it can possibly be viable if nuclear wasn't.
If covering Caithness with windmills was going to save the planet I'm sure few people would be objecting, if it's to make some already rich people a lot richer and allow the government to fiddle the books then the countryside is being spoilt for nothing.
[quote=mareng;178753]As per my previous post - I wouldn't object to a lot more windfarms in Caithness, but......... I don't like seeing development on the basis of a "nice little earner through tax breaks" without moral benefits.
quote]
Mareng,
http://www.socme.org/goldrush.html
Regarding moral benefits and "nice little earners", this is what opened my eyes.
ywindythesecond
sadly all this does is highlight the fact that we live in a society dominated by monitary greed and no matter what steps are put in place to combat climate change there is always going to be a group of individuals that are going to get rich off of it.
i once read years ago that the only way to protect the environment was to turn it into a commodity, that its only when something has a price tag, people will begin to respect and maintain it.
that sadly seems to be the way we are going...
We would all like to be as green as possible ,but and theres always a but.When green renewable energy generation DESTROYS the Environment it is supposed to be protecting ,when theres a problem .If the folk in the cities had to generate their electricity locally things would be different . Its the I have the right to destroy were you stay ,because i have the power and the money.Thats what rubs folk up the wrong way,we are having these forests of Steel Industrial Towers forced on us and a very fragile environment is being destroyed .
If the folk in Edinburgh are Windtower Friendly get the executive to put 20 on top of Arthurs Seat and splash the rest as close the the source of demand as possible .Half the electricity produced is lost in the transfer ,so why would anyone that has the environment at its core want to ship electricity Hundreds of miles .
If you were looking at the P&J on Tuesday page 5 inner right hand column ,it stated that micro-turbine manufacturers had given false figures and you would be better spending your money on insulation and energy bulbs long before Windturbines .Its this halfbaked get rich quick schemes that will strangle the micro-renewables at birth.
If we as a County are to have Turbines ,surely we should get all the benefit .We should have a TRUST that will buy and run the Turbines and the money should be used to increase the Health and Fitness of all the residance
of the county as a whole .
The Trust should help all homes and public building become renewable energy
generators ,be it new types of micro wind or solar along with energy saving bulbs and insulation....
There is a new type of windturbine that is looking at setting new targets for micro generation ,its sits along the ridge of your roof and is a helix design and can be 15 ft or over and is producing 2.2kwph .So the longer the ridge on your roof the more power you can get ,the roof itself help generate power from the updraught ...
Lets hope that the folk of Caithness want to protect what nature has taken Thousands of years to give us or are we to see it all to go under steel and concrete.........Dozy, I could not agree more. Why is there no assistance given towards ensuring current homes are not made more energy efficient, especially with things like Loft Insulation? It's fine laying down standards for homes which are being built but they are only a small proportion of homes and will remain so for a long time. Why so few grants for people to upgrade. I believe the current standard is 8 or 10 inches or 20 to 25 cms thick. How many older homes have anywhere near that?
Why not zero rate VAT on energy efficient lighting, insulation, double glazing, energy efficient central heating boilers and many other things? Why not more real and impartial information of micro-turbines and other power sources which can produce energy on site? I'm sure people can think of many more such ideas.
The biggest problem with any such suggestions is that it reduces the Tax Rake-off from supplying power if you either have your own source or seriously reduce your power usage. You will get plenty of lectures to give you guilt trips but no practical help.
In 2000 the Executive had a panic that Scotland, unlike England, had no National Parks and suddenly there was legislation.
In 2001 the first "Unsubsidised" Wind Farm started in Ayrshire.
In 2002 the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park was created. I don't think I need tell any of you what area that is right next to do I?
In 2003 the Cairngorms National Park was created.
Guess what won't be given Planning Permissions in National Parks? You can have a second guess if you need one. :lol:
Take a look at a site which tells you how everybody in Scotland loves Wind Farms, a quick glance through will give you the idea.
http://www.scottishrenewables.com/newsitem.asp?id=71
Then take a look at a site which reports the following,
"UP TO 15,000 wind farm turbines may be built across Scotland — five times more than was previously thought, an official report has revealed.
The study by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), the national environment agency, has exposed the full scale of planned wind farm developments, provoking outrage among environmental campaigners.
Nearly 500 farms, with turbines up to 460ft high, are planned in the next few years. Previous estimates had put the number of turbines operational or awaiting planning permission at 3,000 and wind farm developments at 300."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2090-1423171,00.html
Again, a quick glance will give you the idea, only five times the number the public had been led to believe.
A couple of years ago I had a nice long chat with the PR person for one of the Companies wanting Wind Farms here. They were based in the Birmingham area in the English Midlands. A bit of buttering up (from me to him, I can be nice sometimes), and I casually slipped in the following,
"Nice area not far from where you are. will you be putting any there?" - "Oh no, we can't do that!"
"English Lake District?" - "Oh no, we can't do that!"
Like Loch Lomond and the Trossachs and the Cairngorms, folks from the Big Cities go to play there at weekends. Can't possibly spoil that can they?
Caithness? Who cares? You don't exactly leave the Central Belt for a nice Sunday afternoon drive round Caithness, do you?
If there are real technological reasons why turbines shouldn't be built in Caithness then there should be none already built, surely?:roll:
Metalattakk
05-Jan-07, 06:12
Nah, the Danish guys that built the Causewaymire wind-farm told me during construction that the whole idea of wind-farms and turbines is fatally flawed.
Apparently, the efficiency of the turbines themselves is a lot less than they'd like you to believe, and the installation costs combined with all the future maintenance costs (which are astronomical, by the way - the crane company McNally's lifted each section of the Causewaymire turbines at a cost of only £60,000 per lift - and there were 5 sections to each tower if I remember correctly..and if the blades or gears in the turbine themselves need replacing, and they will, then a crane is definitely required) leads one to believe that the Danish construction guys weren't wrong in their assumption - wind turbines will never make back the money paid out initially.
ywindythesecond
05-Jan-07, 11:36
A vision of the future? (replace the mountains in the background with Morven)
Is this what you had in mind MadPict? Those on the right are the existing Buolfruich windfarm, the rest are the proposed Dunbeath windfarm.
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1327/dunbeathfromsmerralrd90mw3.jpg
Heh - there is too much empty space in the fore ground. I reckon there is room for a couple of hundred more in that area. ;)
The Maidens Pap encircled by a ring of whirling steel blades - ahhh what a joy to behold......
...NOT!
Is this what you had in mind MadPict? Those on the right are the existing Buolfruich windfarm, the rest are the proposed Dunbeath windfarm.
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1327/dunbeathfromsmerralrd90mw3.jpg
If this is what it costs to save our planet, then I consider it a small price to pay, I can imaging in the 1950's there would have been similar voices such as yours, going on about Dounreay. And look at the benefits that brought to Caithness
If this is what it costs to save our planet, then I consider it a small price to pay, I can imaging in the 1950's there would have been similar voices such as yours, going on about Dounreay. And look at the benefits that brought to Caithness
Yes, we are now the proud owners of a highly toxic radioactive hole in the ground while the nuclear power stations we developed and the jobs that went with them were built elsewhere.
The point of this thread is that wind turbines in Caithness will do nothing to save the planet, they will stop very little greenhouse gass emission while contributing greatly to it in their manufacture. What they will do is to put up the price of electricity and taxes to subsidise them, allow the government to pretend they are complying with their international agreements to curb greenhouse emission and make some rich people richer.
The only way we will do anything towards saving this planet is to replace tumble driers with washing lines and for people down south to replace their holidays in Australia with holidays in Caithness.
They didn't have fridges in my grandparents day, they had pantries, small rooms at the same temperature as the outside, they had cellars which were always cool. They didn't spend a fortune heating their kitchens in winter to spend a fortune keeping their food cold.
Fred your right ,but the folk that take the Golach view are HOOKED and they will never see the sensible or environmental side .When it comes right down to it they just don't care ,the TRUTH is a hard thing to swallow and to admit your wrong is harder .
I have worked on both sides of the fence and have advised,supervised and erected Turbines and as a renewable energy generator Turbines are NOT the answer .Yes! they are a quick and visual FIX for the Politicians and the Electricity Companies but as for helping with reducing CO2 thats just a joke .
But the sad thing is the JOKE is on US because we believe the lies and we allow the Council Planners to put them up in our name .If you complain you must be against the Environment benefits they bring ,but its the supporters of the Turbines that are doing the damage as they dont really know the TRUE costs TO THE ENVIRONMENT when they shout for more .
You dont need to rob banks any more to make pots of money, just stick up a few Turbines and ROB the Environment ...SAME OLD STORY ..
Question ..How many 1mw windturbines do you need in Caithness to get 1mw of electricity in Edinburgh....
Well said, Golach!
We ALL use far too much of the world's resources, and in a sense are no different from the developers of the wind farms, who expect their poor marginal land to support a lifestyle that it is not within its capacity to provide by normal sustainable means - hence the windfarms.
Some of the ones I know personally have never been particularly noted for their concern for the environment before this opportunity for easy cash came along, so why the sudden rush to save the planet?
We can all do our bit - Turn off a light - your standy-by on the telly, telly shops - do they have to have every machine in the shop turned on? Do we really have to live our lives at 25 degrees C indoors?.
The currently under-construction Bahrain World Trade Centre incorporates three wind turbines in its design.
http://www.bahrainwtc.com/realestate.htm
http://www.designbuild-network.com/projects/bahrain/
I understand that these turbines will contribute around 11-15% of the complex's electricity requirements.
The building is in the centre of Manama, so turbines in City Centres is possible:)
ywindythesecond
05-Jan-07, 14:52
The currently under-construction Bahrain World Trade Centre incorporates three wind turbines in its design.
http://www.bahrainwtc.com/realestate.htm
http://www.designbuild-network.com/projects/bahrain/
I understand that these turbines will contribute around 11-15% of the complex's electricity requirements.
The building is in the centre of Manama, so turbines in City Centres is possible:)
An excellent example of the proper use of windpower. Generating power at the point of need, and in these circumstances, replacing imported power and also taking no land area to do it in.
ywindythesecond
This sort of idea gets a big http://forum.caithness.org/images/icons/icon14.gif from me....
I don't like windmills except for the ones in Holland. The do not look aesthetically pleasing to me and they remind me of trifids or something sinister.
Bobinovich
05-Jan-07, 23:48
There is a new type of windturbine that is looking at setting new targets for micro generation ,its sits along the ridge of your roof and is a helix design and can be 15 ft or over and is producing 2.2kwph .So the longer the ridge on your roof the more power you can get ,the roof itself help generate power from the updraught.
This seems like a sound idea - not too intrusive (I take it the 15ft is not the height of the unit - simply the minimum height of the building it's going on :)) yet generating a reasonable amount for a decent size house. Now why the heck can't the Government subsidise these to a level which makes financial sense for your average household??? [evil]
Miniature wind generation is a pie in the sky due to wind buffeting near buildings, in large windfarms on isolated areas they are efficient. I can think of a lot of places in the Highlands where they will be suitable.
Aha- so it's down to palm oil and soya growing in S.America that's to blame for climate change?
Rheghead are you saying Micro-wind on you house is a waste of time and money ????
Well if you are planning to run your lights or kettle off it ,I would have to say YES !.
If your are planning for it to run a heater in the hot water system ,that in turn would help cut your heating bills and save on the CO2 from the gas or oil system that you are using at present thats totally different .
This type of energy needs a heat sink to store the energy and the hot water system fits the bill. Because the Turbines are not an ON DEMAND system you have to store the energy that it has produced .Using it to help heat the water allows you to use this energy were you need it most ,and because we spend over 60% for our energy bill on heating and hot water its the sensible thing to do .
If you are a supporter of the WINDFACTORIES have a go at the question I asked before .
Q:How many 1mw turbines do you need in Caithness to get 1mw of electricity to Edinburgh (this might help take the transfer loss as 30%)
BOBINOVICH: The building can be any height but the higher the better ,the system sits along the ridge of your roof .Supportered at each end with one in the middle .it can be 10", 12"or 14" in dia and can be as long as the roof allows. It can be a double or triple Helix so the surface area is 5 or 6 times greater than the micro turbines that where on the TESCO building .They can also be mounted on the corners of taller buildings to catch the cross winds .
I hope at this product will be made in Caithness ,but we'll have to wait and see it the POWERS THAT BE want to have it manufacturered locally, maybe there are a few local businesses that could fabricate some of the components...Wait and see
I have been told that there is NO support available for the development or manufacturer of the product in Caithness
Bagpuss
Its supply and demand ,we have an need for Palm oil and Soya and these countries need the Dollars .They have the land even though its planted with trees (RAIN FOREST)..So the Big Money men MOVE IN , lets fell the trees and sell them off for TIMBER , next lets clear the land ...so we'll burn whats left and the ash will help fertilize the soil ...and lastLY we'll plant a crop we can sell ..so its Palm Oil, Soya = DOLLARS simple enough !!!!!!!
Bagpuss
Its supply and demand ,we have an need for Palm oil and Soya and these countries need the Dollars .They have the land even though its planted with trees (RAIN FOREST)..So the Big Money men MOVE IN , lets fell the trees and sell them off for TIMBER , next lets clear the land ...so we'll burn whats left and the ash will help fertilize the soil ...and lastLY we'll plant a crop we can sell ..so its Palm Oil, Soya = DOLLARS simple enough !!!!!!!
So someone can walk out of the pub and buy a quarter chicken that's cheap enough to throw in the gutter when the taxi arrives.
If this is what it costs to save our planet, then I consider it a small price to pay, I can imaging in the 1950's there would have been similar voices such as yours, going on about Dounreay. And look at the benefits that brought to Caithness
The point is that the windfarm scam is NOT going to save the planet so the price we are being asked to pay becomes hugely unacceptable. The only benefit to this county through hosting windfactories is the community bribery which is pitiful.
Mareng - the unique beauty of Caithness is the sense and feel of the place as much as the magnificent undeveloped views - areas undisturbed for thousands of years. You can remove the visible towers but you have forever lost the wildness, the history, the culture - our heritage, when there are thousands of tonnes of concrete beneath your feet. I don't imagine you can understand how special this county is to many of us born/bred/living here but for many what is being proposed is heartbreaking.
There are many who could and would accept the sacrifice required if we were indeed saving the planet but only then - for nothing less. That is the value we place on this wonderful county of ours.
If you are a supporter of the WINDFACTORIES have a go at the question I asked before .
Q:How many 1mw turbines do you need in Caithness to get 1mw of electricity to Edinburgh (this might help take the transfer loss as 30%)
That is simple maths (assuming no thermal losses), ~3, so what is the point to this?
The major reason behind renewable energy is too ween ourselves away from foreign fuel dependence rather than any environmental good. I'd imagine there would be more call for it if Russia turned off the gas lines...
"If", Rheghead? Don't you mean "When"? They have already done that to pressurise certain countries to come into line! They have also used that as a gentle hint to Europe of the effects of "upsetting" them.
Britain is about the only European Country they cannot threaten in that way.
Strangely enough last year, Gazprom, the Russian State (Putin/KGB) Owned Gas Supplier stated an interest in making a Take-over Bid for Centrica who just happen to own - British Gas!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4945366.stm
In other words, the biggest Gas Supplier in Britain would be run by and from the Kremlin. Putin was a Colonel in the KGB and all the top people in Gazprom are ex?-KGB and personal acquaintances of Putin.
That, in effect, would put for all practical purposes the whole of Europe's Gas Supplies under the control of the Kremlin.
This is not supposition, guesswork or discovered by somebody doing diligent research. The information comes, quite openly, straight from the Russians themselves.
You don't have to search for obscure sites to find the information. Just Google, Gazprom and Putin or British, or any combination of them and the information is there from sources which are well known to all of you.
"If", Rheghead? Don't you mean "When"? They have already done that to pressurise certain countries to come into line! They have also used that as a gentle hint to Europe of the effects of "upsetting" them.
Britain is about the only European Country they cannot threaten in that way.
Strangely enough last year, Gazprom, the Russian State (Putin/KGB) Owned Gas Supplier stated an interest in making a Take-over Bid for Centrica who just happen to own - British Gas!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4945366.stm
This is called the global free market economy, something which Russia faught against for many years, something they were eventually forced to join by the west.
The line they preasurised certain countries to come into was paying market prices for their gas. When the Ukrain was part of the Soviet Union they paid the subsidised price of $50 per 1,000 cubic meters when the market price was $230 per 1,000 cubic meters. Ukrain wanted and got independence from the Soviet Union so Russia, quite rightly I think, couldn't see why they should carry on subsidising them.
With the break up of the Soviet Union Russia lost most of their oil and gas in the Caspian Sea area to foreign companies and now you're demonising them for not supplying a European country with gas at almost one fifth of market price.
If you don't pay the gas company they cut off your supply, that's what they call Capitalism.
Rheghead, you are giving an answer of Three 1mw turbines to get 1mw of electricity to Edinburgh.( No transfer loss)
Therefore you are taking it that because Turbines are only 33% efficient it would take 3 turbines to meet the demand .
Fast and easy answer the question, but sadly wrong... Sorry(its a trick question) ..You have to add to the equation that any site one will also only be 33% efficient..so the answer is any number between 1 and 11 ...One .. because in could be a windy day and 11 due to No wind at 2 sites plus 2 turbines for breakdowns and maintainance it takes the figure . 3 x 3 plus 2 =11
Thats Official Figures taken in the calculations for Base Load ...
Mass Windfactories are efficient ..are NOT words that should be used in the same sentence ..
If all the money and effort that is being used to Carpet Bomb the Highlands and Islands with Windfactories and erected Massive Pylons to carry off the power was spend on replacing old inefficient Lights ,appliances and upgrading the insulation would we need to Destroy the SCOTTISH Environment or are we and the landscape to be used a cannonfodder by City dwellers so they can leave thier Mobile phone chargers ON
Its not foolish or unmanly to want to protect what we have in the Highlands in and Caithness ,but it is Foolish to allow people to Abuse and Steal that Landscape/Environment from our Children
If you have access to todays P&J look at the Energy supplement page 17 on "Biofuels not saviour after all " claim researchers.
www.energy.gb.com (http://www.energy.gb.com)
They are claiming that Wood Biomass requires 57% more fossil energy than the fuel produces.
At last .........
As far as the GAS goes thats Maggie Thatcher doing .Her business friends torpedoed the Coal and Nuclear Industry so they and the forementioned could make millions .Short term gain for Longterm loss .She opened the for sale door and its still running ...
The major reason behind renewable energy is too ween ourselves away from foreign fuel dependence rather than any environmental good. I'd imagine there would be more call for it if Russia turned off the gas lines...
Unfortunately, wind energy will not allow any weening of any base load energy generation. So not only does it not help with environmental problems it doesn't help us with replacing any existing types of generation (many of the current generators (coal & nuclear) due to be decommissioned within the next 20 years).
It follows then that supporting this scam brings us ever nearer to being forced into relying on Russian gas. If Russia did indeed turn off the gas lines we certainly won't be replacing gas with wind so I doubt there would be more call for turbines.
BTW Reghead- I noticed on a previous thread that you asked who E.on were - the answer is the wind industry.
j4bberw0ck
08-Jan-07, 17:25
As far as the GAS goes thats Maggie Thatcher doing .Her business friends torpedoed the Coal and Nuclear Industry so they and the forementioned could make millions .Short term gain for Longterm loss .She opened the for sale door and its still running ...
<slightly off topic, but I can't let that one pass without a comment :D >
Strangely, I'd thought the coal industry torpedoed itself - like the steel industry and the British motor industry. Inefficient, over-unionised, restrictive practices, corruption, terrible management.... all came home to roost with cheap coal from Poland, cheap steel from India and cheap (and better) cars / motorbikes from Japan....
As for nuclear power, the same hysteria that surrounds it now surrounded it then. No one wanted it - and bear in mind that the terms "global warming" and "climate change" didn't come along until 20 years after gas started coming ashore.
As for nuclear power, the same hysteria that surrounds it now surrounded it then. No one wanted it - and bear in mind that the terms "global warming" and "climate change" didn't come along until 20 years after gas started coming ashore.
The term "global warming" was first used in 1977 in an article in the Economist.
They were still converting to north sea gas in Edinburgh at the time.
[QUOTE=dozy;179651]
If all the money and effort that is being used to Carpet Bomb the Highlands and Islands with Windfactories and erected Massive Pylons to carry off the power was spend on replacing old inefficient Lights ,appliances and upgrading the insulation would we need to Destroy the SCOTTISH Environment or are we and the landscape to be used a cannonfodder by City dwellers so they can leave thier Mobile phone chargers ON
QUOTE]
Do you really think that wind turbines are going to be exporting power south of Inverness?
Wind turbines (if totally successful) would barely meet Caithness' needs, let alone Orkney. So - why would you need bigger transmission lines leading south?
It's all very well quoting "Caithness domestic needs", but I've seen the meter that records the power usage from Dounreay's substation to Vulcan........... Damn sure I wouldn't be wanting to pay for that, let alone the rest of the industry in Caithness.
From reading posts in this thread, I realise that I have more research to do on wind turbines. But, I stand by my statement (written or inferred) that they may ultimately be folly in their present incarnation, but........ they do not leave a lasting legacy.
Too many people delight in the failure of such enterprises (I remember the wave-power endeavour and the comments of the time). At least these new endeavours are relatively safe compared to the casualty-ridden industries such as Nuclear, Oil, Coal.
Remember - there are no magical solutions to energy problems, only sensible compromises.
(not sure what has happened to the "quote" pane on this post - sorry)
The point is that the windfarm scam is NOT going to save the planet so the price we are being asked to pay becomes hugely unacceptable. The only benefit to this county through hosting windfactories is the community bribery which is pitiful.
Mareng - the unique beauty of Caithness is the sense and feel of the place as much as the magnificent undeveloped views - areas undisturbed for thousands of years. You can remove the visible towers but you have forever lost the wildness, the history, the culture - our heritage, when there are thousands of tonnes of concrete beneath your feet. I don't imagine you can understand how special this county is to many of us born/bred/living here but for many what is being proposed is heartbreaking.
There are many who could and would accept the sacrifice required if we were indeed saving the planet but only then - for nothing less. That is the value we place on this wonderful county of ours.
So...... give it 20 years and then have another look at the equation? If Carol Vordemann can't get the sums to work........... take the turbines down.
Or are you not prepared to do that? Yes, it may be "thousands of tonnes of concrete", but look how it is spread out..........
Perhaps we need another acronym:
N ot
I n
M y
L ifetime.
Damn! I wish I could have made that look better than "NIML"
J4bberwOck..I take on broad what you are saying .But what i remember of the Coal Industry and the strikes is that they were instigated by the government of the time to help break the union stranglehold on the energy industry .The Conservatives were told that the country needed to increase its power supply and they decided that coalfired power station were to easy a target for coal strikes .
So GAS was available and came with no union ties ,so the Taxpayer chipped in and the Companies made a mountain of money .
Yes the Car ,Steel and Motor Industry are gone but its mainly bad management (as with Rover ,the company was fleeced by the managers )
Well now its the Windfactories time to fleece the public, if your looking for a secondhand turbine .Just nip over to Denmark ,they've got Hundreds and i mean Hundreds laying at a port looking for some mug to buy them .These Turbines were taken down and not replaced because they the Danish Power Companies and the Government know they are a waste of time and money .
I my passionate about renewable energy and would like to see the local Enterprise Company/Government help develope ideas and support research .I think that the answer to some of energy needs can be found ,But hundreds of Massive Windfactories spread all over the landscape is CRAZY ......
Aha- so it's down to palm oil and soya growing in S.America that's to blame for climate change?
Palm Oil? I thought we'd stopped using that stuff?
Is it not shown as being a major contributing factor in childhood diebetes?
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 00:21
For all the Turbine lovers ,this will wipe the smile off .The Carbon Certs that are given too the Turbine owners as part off the non-carbon genernation agreement are being traded/sold and used by companies in South America/Boreno to fell and burn the rainforest for the production of palm oil and soya ---1 NEW TURBINE and 10 hectares goes up in smoke ever week as long as that 1 turbine stands..So when you see next see the Amazon on TV and its burning, pat yourself on the back .You may well be putting money into the pockets off the Turbine owners and the Electricity companies ,but helping to save the PLANET you're not .......
Dozy Stand back please, when we have ROCS in perspective, you can get your turn.
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 00:40
Palm Oil? I thought we'd stopped using that stuff?
Is it not shown as being a major contributing factor in childhood diebetes?
Mareng
Love your Avatar but these neurotic kittens at the end need to be humanely put to peace (not usually so pollitically correct)
ywindythesecond
j4bberw0ck
09-Jan-07, 01:19
Palm Oil? I thought we'd stopped using that stuff?
Er, no. Palm oil (or the planting of the trees from which it's harvested) is the reason for thousands of acres a month of virgin rain forest being lost in Indonesia and Borneo. Check out the labelling of almost any processed food you choose and one of the ingredients is likely to be "palm oil". :roll:
j4bberw0ck
09-Jan-07, 01:22
The term "global warming" was first used in 1977 in an article in the Economist.
Then I bow to your superior knowledge on that point. What I was meaning (in the absence of that particular piece of information) was that the phrase "global warming" didn't gain everyday currency until the 1990's - and the latter half of the 1990's at that. Point stands.
j4bberw0ck
09-Jan-07, 01:26
passionate about renewable energy and would like to see the local Enterprise Company/Government help develope ideas and support research .I think that the answer to some of energy needs can be found ,But hundreds of Massive Windfactories spread all over the landscape is CRAZY ......
I agree with you, for reasons I've posted on here several times before. I'll bore you with them again if you insist......... :lol:
The unions deserved to be crushed in the 70's and 80's, by the way. They were abusing their power and selling the country down the river. Scargill was and is a complete loony. IMO, of course.
Unfortunately, wind energy will not allow any weening of any base load energy generation. So not only does it not help with environmental problems it doesn't help us with replacing any existing types of generation (many of the current generators (coal & nuclear) due to be decommissioned within the next 20 years).
It follows then that supporting this scam brings us ever nearer to being forced into relying on Russian gas. If Russia did indeed turn off the gas lines we certainly won't be replacing gas with wind so I doubt there would be more call for turbines.
BTW Reghead- I noticed on a previous thread that you asked who E.on were - the answer is the wind industry.
The wind energy sector is already producing ~4% of our energy needs and growing.
Rheghead, you are giving an answer of Three 1mw turbines to get 1mw of electricity to Edinburgh.( No transfer loss)
Therefore you are taking it that because Turbines are only 33% efficient it would take 3 turbines to meet the demand .
Fast and easy answer the question, but sadly wrong... Sorry(its a trick question) ..You have to add to the equation that any site one will also only be 33% efficient..so the answer is any number between 1 and 11 ...One .. because in could be a windy day and 11 due to No wind at 2 sites plus 2 turbines for breakdowns and maintainance it takes the figure . 3 x 3 plus 2 =11
Thats Official Figures taken in the calculations for Base Load ...
Mass Windfactories are efficient ..are NOT words that should be used in the same sentence ..
So? What is your point? All generators are inefficient.
Mareng
Love your Avatar but these neurotic kittens at the end need to be humanely put to peace (not usually so pollitically correct)
ywindythesecond
While they allow me to quickly identify my posts in a thread, I can see that they might eventually drive people nuts............
Now removed!
Cheers!
So? What is your point? All generators are inefficient.
I think Dozy has gone away to think exactly why he wants to pump all that electricity south to Edinburgh, rather than (here's a wild idea).............................. Use it in Caithness?!?!
While they allow me to quickly identify my posts in a thread, I can see that they might eventually drive people nuts............
Now removed!
Cheers!
Thanks Mareng - appreciate the removal of the frantic kittens and they were indeed driving me nuts!
The wind energy sector is already producing ~4% of our energy needs and growing.
Really and truly? What type of generation is wind energy replacing?
Not nuclear. Sympathies go to the anti nuclear folk who fully believe that wind energy removes the requirement for any further nuclear development - supporting wind energy to the exclusion of other development is in fact a great help to the nuclear industry.
Have you managed to get your hands on stats from power plants proving reduced generation in line with wind energy claims?
Finally, there is a strong suspicion that in some areas of the country wind energy is replacing hydro. That couldn't possibly be happening though, could it?
Finally, there is a strong suspicion that in some areas of the country wind energy is replacing hydro. That couldn't possibly be happening though, could it?
Why not? Surely a Wind Turbine or two is cheaper to build than a Hydro Dam
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 21:10
While they allow me to quickly identify my posts in a thread, I can see that they might eventually drive people nuts............
Now removed!
Cheers!
Thanks Mareng.
Now, what were you saying?
ywindythesecond
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 21:36
I think Dozy has gone away to think exactly why he wants to pump all that electricity south to Edinburgh, rather than (here's a wild idea).............................. Use it in Caithness?!?!
Mareng
Don't you do sums? Don't you read what the windfarm developers claim?
See Spittal Hill_Windfarm Website
http://www.spittalwindfarm.co.uk/proposal.html
"The current proposal has 31 turbines with an installed capacity of up to 85 megawatts (MW) of renewable electricity. With a capacity of this size in such a windy part of Scotland, the project will meet the average needs of some 46,000 households "
Mareng, how many households are there in Caithness.
A. More than 46,000
B. Less than 46,000
C. Don't know.
ywindythesecond
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 21:41
Finally, there is a strong suspicion that in some areas of the country wind energy is replacing hydro. That couldn't possibly be happening though, could it?
Don't get the point Kitty May, obviously you have information we don't have.
Really and truly? What type of generation is wind energy replacing?
Not nuclear. Sympathies go to the anti nuclear folk who fully believe that wind energy removes the requirement for any further nuclear development - supporting wind energy to the exclusion of other development is in fact a great help to the nuclear industry.
Have you managed to get your hands on stats from power plants proving reduced generation in line with wind energy claims?
Finally, there is a strong suspicion that in some areas of the country wind energy is replacing hydro. That couldn't possibly be happening though, could it?
Due to complications in the planning process, the wind energy sector is struggling to keep up with the rise in demand for energy, come to think of it, any generator cannot keep up with the growth in demand for energy.
Without the wind energy sector, what do you think will fill the gap?
Bill Fernie
10-Jan-07, 01:53
To fully understand what is happening you really need to get a grasp of the Renwable Obligation Certificate system or ROCS.
In relation to Hydro many people are perturbed that the system appears to be biased against Hydro power and perhaps this link will illustrate it http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/policy/renewables-obligation/what-is-renewables-obligation/page15633.html when you note that hydro is excluded except for schemes after 1 April 2002. Since most hydro schemes were built long before this and therfor do not qualify despite being the largest source of alternative energy they are effectively cut off from this sourceof revenue. I have read that hydro schemes do not produce the amount of power they used to as they are not being run for sufficinet hours per week compared to previous years. Perhaps someone can find more references to this.
On the amount of power from Caithness. I fail to see that the amount of power from an area has anything to do with the population numbers or numbers of households. Did Fife or Yorkshire limit coal production to the number fo people within its county boundaires that would use it? Would Caithness ever have had coal fires if this logic applied nationally?
On the amount of power from Caithness. I fail to see that the amount of power from an area has anything to do with the population numbers or numbers of households. Did Fife or Yorkshire limit coal production to the number fo people within its county boundaires that would use it? Would Caithness ever have had coal fires if this logic applied nationally?
In Yorkshire they built industry round the coal fields because that's where the coal was cheapest.
In the Sheffield area they close the car window if someone passes wind, is that what we can expect for Caithness?
In the Sheffield area they close the car window if someone passes wind, is that what we can expect for Caithness?
In the Sheffield area, they also object to the siting of a windfarm only yards in front of the largest coal power station in Europe for aesthetic reasons...:roll:
If that is the mentality of objecters, nuff said.
Without the wind energy sector, what do you think will fill the gap?
Anyone out there able to clarify the following re. this ‘gap’ in electricity production Rheghead refers to.
1 - Is it correct that currently there is no gap (that’s what Ofgem and DTI data states?) and at the moment as wind energy comes on line existing generators spend the day ramping up and down, depending on wind conditions, to accommodate wind energy, meet demand and balance the grid?
2 If there was an actual ‘gap’ between supply and demand (it’s forecast that about 20% of our generating capacity is to be decommissioned over the next 20 or so years) could wind energy be relied upon to fill the gap?
3 Would there not always be the requirement for a back up capacity (almost*) equal to that generated by the wind ie equal to the gap - on standby to ramp up when the wind doesn’t blow?? (*I know a little about G Sindens’ theory about spreading developments across the country but that’s a whole new debate – keep it simple for now)
4 If we’re always going to need the backup why bother with the turbines in the first place? Genuine question.
Answers on a postcard to .. only joking. Seriously, can anyone provide the truth?
Leave aside any climate/carbon issues and concentrate on security of supply only.
In the Sheffield area, they also object to the siting of a windfarm only yards in front of the largest coal power station in Europe for aesthetic reasons...:roll:
If that is the mentality of objecters, nuff said.
Perhaps it's not for aesthetic reasons - perhaps it's because the coal station did what it was asked to do and the wind doesn't.
ywindythesecond
10-Jan-07, 22:51
To fully understand what is happening you really need to get a grasp of the Renwable Obligation Certificate system or ROCS.
In relation to Hydro many people are perturbed that the system appears to be biased against Hydro power and perhaps this link will illustrate it http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/policy/renewables-obligation/what-is-renewables-obligation/page15633.html when you note that hydro is excluded except for schemes after 1 April 2002. Since most hydro schemes were built long before this and therfor do not qualify despite being the largest source of alternative energy they are effectively cut off from this sourceof revenue. I have read that hydro schemes do not produce the amount of power they used to as they are not being run for sufficinet hours per week compared to previous years. Perhaps someone can find more references to this.
On the amount of power from Caithness. I fail to see that the amount of power from an area has anything to do with the population numbers or numbers of households. Did Fife or Yorkshire limit coal production to the number fo people within its county boundaires that would use it? Would Caithness ever have had coal fires if this logic applied nationally?
Thanks Bill, good point about coal. But coal provided a living for lots of people who lived and worked where it was produced, wind doesn't.
Regarding ROCS, could you summarise it for us please.
ywindythesecond
Perhaps it's not for aesthetic reasons - perhaps it's because the coal station did what it was asked to do and the wind doesn't.
Have you any evidence to suggest that windfarms aren't supplying energy to the grid? The National grid seem to think so, lol!
Anyone out there able to clarify the following re. this ‘gap’ in electricity production Rheghead refers to.
1 - Is it correct that currently there is no gap Currently there is no gap as the wind sector fills it so your sentence neither addresses my question or relates to sense.(that’s what Ofgem and DTI data states?) and at the moment as wind energy comes on line existing generators spend the day ramping up and down, depending on wind conditions, to accommodate wind energy, meet demand and balance the grid?
2 If there was an actual ‘gap’ between supply and demand (it’s forecast that about 20% of our generating capacity is to be decommissioned over the next 20 or so years) could wind energy be relied upon to fill the gap?The question if wind fills a gap in the supply and demand of energy can equally apply to any energy generator.
3 Would there not always be the requirement for a back up capacity (almost*) equal to that generated by the wind ie equal to the gap - on standby to ramp up when the wind doesn’t blow?? (*I know a little about G Sindens’ theory about spreading developments across the country but that’s a whole new debate – keep it simple for now)
4 If we’re always going to need the backup why bother with the turbines in the first place? Genuine question.When the SS Great Britain sailed across the Atlantic and used her sails on windy days, what savings on coal did it make to the coal usage compared to the same journey if she only used her engines?
Answers on a postcard to .. only joking. Seriously, can anyone provide the truth?
Leave aside any climate/carbon issues and concentrate on security of supply only.
Perhaps it's not for aesthetic reasons - perhaps it's because the coal station did what it was asked to do and the wind doesn't.
No they couldn't on those grounds, it was for aesthetics.
Seriously though, when the National Grid start complaining that they cannot accomodate windfarms on the Grid for whatever reason or for whatever reason they say that windfarms are a complete waste of time and energy (pardon pun), then I will take more notice of these threads...
Bill Fernie
10-Jan-07, 23:54
For ywindythesecond an explantion of Rocs can be found on many web sites.
One can be found at http://www.bwea.com/business/roc.html
It reads as follows -
The new Renewables Obligation and associated Renewables (Scotland) Obligation came into force in April 2002 as part of the Utilities Act (2000). It requires power suppliers to derive from renewables a specified proportion of the electricity they supply to their customers. This starts at 3% in 2003, rising gradually to 10% by 2010. The cost to consumers will be limited by a price cap and the obligation is guaranteed in law until 2027.
Eligible renewable generators receive Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) for each MWh of electricity generated. These certificates can then be sold to suppliers, in order to fulfil their obligation. Suppliers can either present enough certificates to cover the required percentage of their output, or they can pay a ‘buyout’ price of price of £30/MWh for any shortfall. All proceeds from buyout payments are recycled to suppliers in proportion to the number of ROCs they present.
ROCs have traded as high as £47/MWh but there is no guarantee that they will remain at this price. ROCs have increase the profitability of renewable energy generation as the certificates can currently sell for more than the power! This is especially true for wind, which was already producing electricity at competitive prices. ROC trading is administered by Non-Fossil Purchase Agency Ltd. The Renewables Obligation has just been extended to rise to 15% by 2015 - see our press release on this. The obligation is due for a compresensive review in 2005/2006 as to how it may be used to support renewables in the long term. To find out more about BWEA's work on this review follow click here.
Me Again -
The climate change levy is another government mechanism for encouraging renewable energy.
The point is that there can be very big profits from the sale of these ROCS. there are two income streams for the wind farms - the sale of electricity and the sale of the ROCS that mainstream energy producers must acquire or they face increasingly heavy fines. This pretty well guarantees at present that wind farms will be highly profitable. You can argue correctly that the government has rigged the market in favour of alternative energy producers and currently wind farms are best placed to take advantage of the sytem. since there is time limit the sooner they get going the more profits they can make.
So they have until 2027 to make money and in due course this might be extended but that is for the future and will depend on whole range of variables over the next 20 years.
Another driver is the Climate Change Levy
See http://www.bwea.com/business/lec.html
Climate Change Levy
Running alongside the Renewables Obligation is a drive for increased energy efficiency and the Climate Change Levy (CCL). Introduced on the 1st April 2001, this is a tax on energy use by both business and public sectors. The principal aim of the levy is to encourage non-domestic electricity users to become more energy efficient and so reduce carbon emissions. The levy package as a whole is expected to save at least 5 million tonnes of carbon a year by 2010.
Relevant electricity bills increased by an average of 8-10%. The Climate Change Levy Calculator at www.climatechangelevy.com will give a more accurate indication of what a business might expect to pay. The levy was forecast to raise around £1 billion in 2001/02, and to ensure that the competitiveness of UK business remains unaffected, all revenue raised will be recycled back into business. This will be achieved primarily through a 0.3% cut in employers’ National Insurance Contributions and £150m of additional government support for energy efficiency measures and energy-saving technologies.
This is by no means bad news for business; rather business will benefit not only from the cut in employers’ NICs, and the 80 per cent levy discounts for energy intensive sectors that agree energy efficiency targets with the Government, but also from the exemptions for electricity generated from new forms of renewable energy and in good quality combined heat and power (CHP) plants.
Me again
From the above you will see that there is yet another incentive that might help drive the wind farm race as businesses are encourage by financial incentives to derive their energy from green sources.
I hope that this helps explain the rush to wind we are seeing in the Highlands and in particular Caithness and Sutherland.
Undoubtedly all countries in Europe are looking for ways to be less dependent on outside sources for their energy requirements. The UK has been very lucky in having North Sea oil and gas. France has not had that luxury and has headed down the Nuclear route. The Uk may well look to go back to that one and the timescale may be getting shorter for decision as our nucleear industry employees and experts will shortly begin to disappear from retirement and closures. A decision on tha one will be required if we are to progress towards some form of nuclear answer to our energy problems otherwise we will need to buy the expertise or possibly the energy from France who hgave invested heavily in new nuclear technology.
Alternative energy is not yet big enough to plug the gap as our demand continues to grow and we know our nuclear plants are reaching the end of their working lives albeit some may be extended for a few years with some investment. There is little doubt that government seems to be moving to change its view towards nuclear power if a solution to the waste can be found. Since many minds and very large sums of money are nor focussed on that problem an answer may well be found that is workable and acceptable to most people.
Whilst we may have a part of the population in the north who are comfortable working in the nuclear environment it remains to be seen if everyone would accept a new investment in nuclear power in Caithness even if it were to be offered. As stated on other threads the reasons why Dounreay was placed in Caithness may not exist now and power is usually best manufactured close to where it will be used.
Wind created energy will keep increasing for some time to come as there are now so many plans in process and the turbines appear to be getting larger. Highland council's strategy would at least limit the areas where they might be placed but there is no guarantee that this will always be heeded by National Government/Scottish Executive. There are targets for alternative energy and if these are to be met the pace will keep going over the next few years.
Communities are split on this issue as with most and some care more than others whether there are wind farms near them or not. Clearly Caithness is going to have many more wind turbines and companies will not go away even if they lose at one planning meeting. there is too much money involved for them to give up. To present an application in the first place requires significant investment - it is not like submitting plans for house. If they lose at planning they will normally appeal and they will keep taking it further until they exhaust all the possibilities to change the decision in their favour. That is business.
We also have local communities now planning their own wind farms so it is not always going to be companies from far away doing it. The potential rewrds of having a permanent income are jut too tempting even for community groups and there are incentives for groups to get together and try to do it. Two groups are already looking at the possibilities andmore may yet join in.
In addition community benefits from wind farms already up and running are already yielding significant suusme for the localities involved. This will possibly encourage others to join in as they begin to see the money being made availabl in smaller village groups. Will community council lend their wieght to suppor them and if they do not and oppose will they begine to have to deal with the wrath of local voters in community council elections if they are seen to be turning down the possibility of bringing in perhps the largest sums of money ever for theiir local areas. I throw these suggestions in for discussion.
Thanks for your comments Rheghead. Don't take this the wrong way but they really haven't helped a bit.
I'll try again though. Would anyone with a little knowledge of this subject be able to assist.
Anyone out there able to clarify the following re. this ‘gap’ in electricity production Rheghead refers to.
1 - Is it correct that currently there is no gap - even when the wind isn't blowing and the turbines are not generating - (that’s what Ofgem and DTI data states?) and at the moment as wind energy comes on line existing generators spend the day ramping up and down, depending on wind conditions, to accommodate wind energy, meet demand and balance the grid?
2 If there was an actual ‘gap’ between supply and demand (it’s forecast that about 20% of our generating capacity is to be decommissioned over the next 20 or so years) could wind energy be relied upon to fill the gap?
3 Would there not always be the requirement for a back up capacity (almost*) equal to that generated by the wind ie equal to the gap - on standby to ramp up when the wind doesn’t blow?? (*I know a little about G Sindens’ theory about spreading developments across the country but that’s a whole new debate – keep it simple for now)
4 If we’re always going to need the backup why bother with the turbines in the first place? Genuine question.
Answers on a postcard to .. only joking. Seriously, can anyone provide the truth?
Leave aside any climate/carbon issues and concentrate on security of supply only.
http://forum.caithness.org/images/misc/progress.gif
In addition community benefits from wind farms already up and running are already yielding significant suusme for the localities involved. This will possibly encourage others to join in as they begin to see the money being made availabl in smaller village groups. Will community council lend their wieght to suppor them and if they do not and oppose will they begine to have to deal with the wrath of local voters in community council elections if they are seen to be turning down the possibility of bringing in perhps the largest sums of money ever for theiir local areas. I throw these suggestions in for discussion.
None of this deals with the issue of what happens to all that electricity.
If Caithness ends up with power from 2,000 turbines that's going to be a peak output of knocking on 5GW of electricity, more than the largest coal fired powerstation in Britain and that feeds a good part of the industral north.
I cannot concieve they could ship that amount of electricity south, it would take two double-circuit 400Kv lines and all we've got is one 275Kv line. A 400Kv line costs up to a million pounds per killometer and with a peak more than three times average most of the time it will be vastly under used.
Thanks for your comments Rheghead. Don't take this the wrong way but they really haven't helped a bit.
I'll try again though. Would anyone with a little knowledge of this subject be able to assist.
Anyone out there able to clarify the following re. this ‘gap’ in electricity production Rheghead refers to.
1 - Is it correct that currently there is no gap - even when the wind isn't blowing and the turbines are not generating - (that’s what Ofgem and DTI data states?) and at the moment as wind energy comes on line existing generators spend the day ramping up and down, depending on wind conditions, to accommodate wind energy, meet demand and balance the grid?
2 If there was an actual ‘gap’ between supply and demand (it’s forecast that about 20% of our generating capacity is to be decommissioned over the next 20 or so years) could wind energy be relied upon to fill the gap?
3 Would there not always be the requirement for a back up capacity (almost*) equal to that generated by the wind ie equal to the gap - on standby to ramp up when the wind doesn’t blow?? (*I know a little about G Sindens’ theory about spreading developments across the country but that’s a whole new debate – keep it simple for now)
4 If we’re always going to need the backup why bother with the turbines in the first place? Genuine question.
Answers on a postcard to .. only joking. Seriously, can anyone provide the truth?
Leave aside any climate/carbon issues and concentrate on security of supply only.
http://forum.caithness.org/images/misc/progress.gif
So you would agree that the energy which is currently being generated by the wind energy sector would be generated by gas or coal stations in wind's absence?
Anyone out there able to clarify the following re. this ‘gap’ in electricity production Rheghead refers to.
I haven't said there is a gap in generating capacity.
2 If there was an actual ‘gap’ between supply and demand (it’s forecast that about 20% of our generating capacity is to be decommissioned over the next 20 or so years) could wind energy be relied upon to fill the gap?
Who is actually claiming this? And can you give any links to it? Wind is not there to enable decommisioning of other plants, it is there to mitigate fossil fuel usage.
4 If we’re always going to need the backup why bother with the turbines in the first place? Genuine question.
I think you already know the answer to this question. It is to mitigate fossil fuel useage.
ywindythesecond
14-Jan-07, 22:59
None of this deals with the issue of what happens to all that electricity.
If Caithness ends up with power from 2,000 turbines that's going to be a peak output of knocking on 5GW of electricity, more than the largest coal fired powerstation in Britain and that feeds a good part of the industral north.
I cannot concieve they could ship that amount of electricity south, it would take two double-circuit 400Kv lines and all we've got is one 275Kv line. A 400Kv line costs up to a million pounds per killometer and with a peak more than three times average most of the time it will be vastly under used.
Fred
The Beauly to Denny grid upgrade is estimated in round figures at £400million for 137 miles. That is closer to £1.8 million per kilometre.
We have to pay for it by the way.
ywindythesecond
Who is actually claiming this? And can you give any links to it? Wind is not there to enable decommisioning of other plants, it is there to mitigate fossil fuel usage.
I think you already know the answer to this question. It is to mitigate fossil fuel useage.
Rheghead - if you were the slightest bit interested in the beef around the bones of this subject you would have sourced this information for yourself. As you're clearly not interested I won't bore you any further.
Looking for members.
Just a wee thought Ywindythe second, just how many members have joined up?
Rheghead - if you were the slightest bit interested in the beef around the bones of this subject you would have sourced this information for yourself. As you're clearly not interested I won't bore you any further.
I am quite interested in it actually, so when you provide some beef on the bones instead of your beef over the windturbines then I am quite happy to discuss this subject. Still waiting...
I would be interested to hear from anybody who currently uses wind turbines and or solar panels for their own domestic use and what yields you are obtaining. Is it worthwhile?
I am quite interested in it actually, so when you provide some beef on the bones instead of your beef over the windturbines then I am quite happy to discuss this subject. Still waiting...
Very good - I almost laughed but held back at the grinning stage.
So when you've done the necessary research let's discuss your findings.
Now I'm waiting.
ywindythesecond
16-Jan-07, 00:01
Just a wee thought Ywindythe second, just how many members have joined up?
Golach, You have the unique opportunity to be MEMBER NUMBER 1. Congratulations.
Don't blow it!
ywindythesecond
Golach, You have the unique opportunity to be MEMBER NUMBER 1. Congratulations.
Don't blow it!
ywindythesecond
Wow Thanks for the kind offer, I will have to decline, on reasons of sanity lol
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.