.Orger
The thing is I don't have the same faith in 'they' as you appear to have.Originally Posted by Rheghead
A few years ago Government set a target to double the countries CHP capacity as part of its climate change programme. This would have resulted in very meaningful reductions in carbon emissions (far in excess of anything turbines can achieve). Round about the same time they introduced ROC's for wind energy. 'They' made the decision to abandon CHP to reap the benefits of ROC's instead. The 2010 target for CHP? Do 'they' care about whether wind is good.
You questioned what the Beauly to Denny line had to do with carbon reduction as a result of wind energy. There would be no requirement to upgrade this line if the growth of wind energy in the north was controlled.
1K.Orger
There might not be as there is plenty on it but we are a welcoming lot. Mind you, the people of the IPCC, the National grid and the growing numbers of people who are finally realising the truth do take up a lot of room now.
We keep send messages to those on dying planets but the message doesn't seem to sink in...
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
1K.Orger
All the more reason for it to be built in my book but I grant you that it should be built underground to preserve the natural beauty of the nicest parts of Scotland.
Controlled?
And what is wrong with the ROC system?
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Administrator
Orgmaster
Beauly Denny
It might be useful to any interested to look at
Beauly to Denny 400kV Overhead Transmission Line Public Inquiry due to conclude in July 2007
see http://www.highland.gov.uk/yourenvir...publicinquiry/
There is 29 page report setting out the case.
A Scottish Renewables Briefing from December 2005 takes a different stance
See http://www.scottishrenewables.com/da...d_briefing.pdf
Administrator
Orgmaster
Although still in its early days an interesting project to watch is the Pure project in Unst, Shetland http://www.pure.shetland.co.uk/
This project shows thatt wind power can be used locally and perhaps there would be less neeed for so much transmission to places far away. It also shows that the wind energy can be stored as Hydrogen and used when the wind is not blowing. It also creates a replacement for petrol/diesel.
I have not yet seen any assessment of how the costs stack up but have now spoken to several people who have visitied the project including Louise Smith ther project worker for the Ornlie renewables scheme. Everyone I have heard from is impressed with the ideas. It remains to be seen if it can be scaled up to be really commercial.
If we are talking power for transport from wind power then the possibilities would appear to in crease the potential demand for more wind farms espcially if petrol/diesel prices continue to rise over time and the comparative cost differential gets closer. Depending on economic, politics etc around the world another source of fuel for vehicles woudl seem to be a very attractive possibility.
From the back of the hydrogen car the waste product is water so that perhpas everyone would be happier with the enviromental outcomes that would produce and they might even be prepared to have higher cost if the end benefits were as pronounced as no carbon emissions. Alternatively the government might just set targets for a transition to this new source. If other countris are developing anything along these lines should we not also be moving to be up with the technology rather than have to buy it from other suppliers at a higher cost.
None of this is to advocate the use of wind power but merely to point out that there are many reasons why it is being pushed ahead at the rate it is.
.Orger
Dear me. How insulting. You consider Caithness (etc) worthy only of trashing do you? You don't consider Caithness deserves to have its natural beauty preserved. Caithness IS one of the nicest parts of Scotland.
You were only joking, right?
.Orger
I agree the PURE project is very interesting and we should certainly be investing in this technology.
What I don't understand is why, as you seem to be suggesting, we race on with wind power with only a hope and prayer that the future will bring us commercial hydrogen storage - either for electricity or transport. As far as I'm aware we're not even close to developing this on a large scale - many people consider it impossible. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
We've also got absolutely no idea what the future energy policy of this country is therefore we've even less idea of how well (or how much) wind energy will fit into it.
Should we not be a little cautious? Slow down, take stock. If in 10, 15, 20 years the technology is available surely then is the time to build the necessary windfarms. Not now, before they know if it's even possible. We're not going to forget how to build a turbine.
I can't imagine any other industry embarking on this course of action. A car manufacturer is hardly going to run a million cars off the production line all needing a particular, undeveloped engine - in the hope that someone will someday maybe develop one.
Would you not have to be barking mad.
1K.Orger
More Obfuscation
Rheghead, I am going to stop asking you questions because you never answer them.
However- I am grateful that coal and gas etc power stations are there because they supply my electricity most of the time.
What really brasses me off is that I have to pay for them all of the time, because they have to keep working all of the time to step in when the wind drops.
AND I get the priviledge of paying for wind generated power when it is randomly available, because the grid has to take it, at about three times the nett cost of conventional.
Beauly to Denny grid upgrade is only necessary to accomodate wall to wall windmills. It produces nothing. It has a huge cash cost, and a huge carbon cost. Needs to be taken into account as well as Caithness to Beauly upgrades.
Forget fancy calculators, try logic.
ywindythesecond
PS Estimated cost of the Beauly Denny upgrade is around £400 million. Anyone think it will come in on budget?
PPS Forgot about the Ullapool to Beauly upgrade.
PPPS Forgot about the subsea cable from Lewis to Ullapool.
PPPPs Forgot about the Scotland to England interconnector.
PPPPPs Forgot what life was like before our government relinquished the responsibility of Government and handed over Energy Policy to the Stock Exchange.
1K.Orger
Windfarms produce electricity, without them, fossil fuels would have to be used to make that electricity, now, how will I get you to understand that windfarms do mitigate fossil fuels from that?
Last edited by Rheghead; 18-Jan-07 at 20:42.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
1K.Orger
Never said it was, never said it wasn't.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
1K.Orger
Why does it brass you off that wind generation is random/intermittent? As an end user, you won't notice any difference, as with any 'random renewable generator) like solar, wave, wind, tidal etc.
As for Beauly-Denny, you mentioned logic, logic requires reason rather than supposition. Have you any evidence that the carbon cost of the upgrade will outweigh the environmental benefits of reaping the wind energy of the north?
Last edited by Rheghead; 18-Jan-07 at 20:48.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Administrator
Orgmaster
I am not suggesting we race on although the companies constructing them certainly are. Perhaps as a country we are not near to hydrogen storage for mass usage but perhaps small communities may be able to use it in the short term. However since the name of the game for the companies involved in Wind Farms is profits they already have that particular problem solved. the government has set the market in their favour and they are doing what the government wanted and they are making money - that's what business is mainly about. Make profits or go bust.
Industrialisation of the countryside began hundreds of years ago. The ranks of fir trees have often been viewed as very bad thing from an environmental point of view and look anything but natural. However it now seem that that form of industrialisation is more acceptable for some than the latest one.
The landscape empty of trees in most of Britain was the result of clearance for farming and the disppearance of small fields surrounded by hedgerows to be replaced by huge grain fields is another part of that process in many parts of the country. Government/European funding may have ben responsible combined with improved machinery and then they partly backtracked as it was too successful - eg set-a-side etc.
Perhaps in 20 years we might see another backtrack if the current policy is too successful and there is too much production from wind farms.
On the fact that they lie idle when the wind does not blow I wonder if they are ain most parts of the country if some would be turning when others were at rest. Today for example there was not too much wind in Caithness but in the far south they were getting 99 mile an hour gusts and high winds all day. Might this not be an oposrutnity for evening out the power from all of them if they feed into the one grid system. A speculation and perhaps someone has a better idea if this would be the case.
I agree a car manufacturer might not produce millions of cars based on an undeveloped engine but the wind farms do not need this storage as they already have a guaranteed customer for all they can produce. the wind farms are not being built with hydrogen storage in mind. I only pointed this out as there are other possibilities being looked at.
Having been brought up living directly opposite railway shunting yard up to the age of 10 in the centre of Edinburgh and compare this to the noisy environments that many people live in. In the Highlands noise is not likely to be the main problem with most wind farms. The views are the main problem for some people and there are wide differences in what one person perceives as a problem and what another sees as an advantage even if it is not to them personally.
One of the problems for eveyone has perhaps been the planning system where a particular application for site can be looked at in the various process for a very long time creating extremely time consuming and costly processes for both the applicant and those opposed. A new planning regime will be in place next year and it remains to be seen whether the new rules will streamline and speed things up as they are intended to do. The Caithness Planning commitee along with the Caithness Area Committee comes to an end at the elections in May and thereafter the decisions will all be taken in Inverness or Edinburgh.
This means that much more travelling will be required from anyone who objects to a planning application and wants to attend the planning meetings in person. It is expected that there will be more appeals due to the fact that planning officers and not planning committees will make many more decisions. An appeals committee will deal with appeals.
1K.Orger
Spot on Bill
Spot on Bill. The more diversity of location of windfarms there is, the less unreliable the wind contribution becomes. So the way to get the best from wind generation is to spread it out, scientifically and statistically calculated, across the whole of the UK.
Take Strathy North. It is not far from Causeymire, Forss, or Buolfruich.
Although there are considerable local variations, on balance, these existing windfarms will generally produce electricity all at the same time and on balance they will generally not produce electricity all at the same time.
Is there a good reason for Strathy North to be added to our local contribution without a balancing contribution from another part of the country?
There also needs to be a calculation in each case of the cost of transmission to the point of use. Electricity needs to be used close to where it is made to be economical.
By the way Bill, gusts and high winds are just about as big a problem for wind turbines as no wind is.
1K.Orger
Bill,
"At very high wind speeds, i.e. gale force winds, (25 metres/second, 50+ miles/hour) wind turbines shut down."*
So for the last day or two most wind turbines will have been idle. Lot of good there eh?....
*http://www.bwea.com/ref/faq.html#blow
.Orger
Bill
Many people have been using the possible storage of wind power in the future as an argument in favour of windfarms now. A senseless argument that drives me to distraction. In any event, it's likely that by the time they develop a method to store electricity (be it hydrogen or other methods) - we will have moved on to far more efficient generators and windfarms will be redundant.
At least we've got that particular argument out of the way.
Spatial distribution of wind power is another very grey area - as has been pointed out in previous posts. We'll leave that one for now, me thinks.
As for the tree debacle. Another failed government scheme. I don't believe two wrongs make a right and I'd hope we've moved on a bit, understood our mistakes and realised the importance of preserving that which is unique and worth preserving unless absolutely necessary. Farming went the way of the trees and the turbines (for some, not all) but more and more it's going back to the old ways. Knowledgable stewardship of the land has been recognised as having value. Those who know and respect their land treat it well and don't abuse it.
I would accept the industrialisation of the countryside if I believed it was necessary and there were no alternatives. As yet, I am not convinced.
You wouldn't happen to know where I can lay my mitts on reports detailing the actual/real reduction in fossil fuel generated/consumed electricity as a direct result of displacement by wind energy. I can only find quarterly snapshots that seem to suggest that coal fired generation has increased and nuclear, hydro and gas decreased but over different periods of time.
Now if the claims made by the wind industry could be substantiated and wind power was in fact replacing only fossil fuel generators with the resultant carbon reductions - I might have to shut up or at least quieten down a fraction.
In order to be completely silenced I need to see a UK energy policy for the next 20 years and more. If wind slips in there favourably as a major contributor my lips are sealed.
1K.Orger
In that case, my words of advice is for you is to warmly grasp the nettle...
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Administrator
Orgmaster
Following up the reference by MadPict above the same web site has many other information sheets and one issued in December 2006 http://www.bwea.com/media/news/061220.html sets out how the industry is growing and aiming to beat the governments target of 20% renewable energy target by 2020.
The British Wind Energy Association has over 300 companies as members and is still growing. Undoubtedly any big industry needs to be watched carefully but it cannot be denied that collectively they are doing what the government asked them to do. It could be said from one viewpoint that it is one of the most successful government initiatives - it set targets, set the rules (including of course the fact that we the consumer will pay) and the targets are being met.
Whether in the long run the overall aims will prove to be succcesful depends on what aspirations you have for present and future energy needs and use. Year on years our collective demand for energy keeps increasing and it also runs along with a busy economy. Lower energy use will probably run alongside a stagnating economy. The plus side of a slower economy might well be that we use less carbon producing fuels but the down side might be high unemployment, repossessed home sand so on.
There are few if any sources of energy that do not have down side whether ti be from the extraction side of the industry - eg coal mines, bings etc, nuclear waste etc, gas running out - at least in the North Sea making it necessary to import at whatever price other countries are willing to sell or that world markets demand and at the whims of political or terrorist probelms in the future.
In addition to the ecological and economic arguemnts for or against wind power there could also once it begins to make large contributiuon a strategic argument for having another energy source based within the control of companies and government (via taxation, subsidies ROCS etc). The strategic reasons for government doing anything are in the realms of crystal ball gazing in some respects. Governments might decide to keep reserves of almost anything cased on their perceptions of the risk to that particular thing running out or the need to have it readily available at all times for the smooth running of the country or for national security. The policies need to be kept under review at all times and the arguments can go one way or the other in almost every situation depending on how you evaluate risk.
At times government gets it wrong eg for years after world wars there was tendency to keep vast stocks of everything needed to fight awar or for possible civil contingencies. Many years later it was decided that keeping vast stocks of say horse equipment for the army was a complete waste of money when mottor transport had taken over.
In a similar light although it does not seem to be discussed much there could be a reason in the interests of economic security a need to ensure we have some basic energy resources within our own control even if it is more expensive at the moment. As we have seen with oil prices they go up and they go down but over time the tendency is likely up.
Although we are not there yet the fact that our nuclear plants are heading towards the end of their life and it might take 10 years to build new ones if we start tomorrow and that gas is running out even the somewhat intermittent supply from wind might for some years make the difference in having the lights(and computers) on or not. I do not see any taste for using less only for reducing bills if at all possible. So unless people change their habits (switch off, throw out the electrical items and so on) we look as if our demands for energy are going to keep on rising. something must give and as we can see it is energy prices and as they rise they make the viability of wind power better.
Of course it is worth trying to win the huge prize of tidal, wave and other forms of energy that are less intrusive than wind turbines but we are not there yet. We are tickling at the edges but agai it is probably 20 years awya before we will see a huge contributions from those sources as they will take time to reseach, build and operate in sufficient numbers. They will all have their problems and hopefully many answers will be found.
1K.Orger
Let us be mindful that as with all renewable energy schemes there is a downfall, none are a golden bullet. Tidal schemes (as well as visual disruption) will play havoc with local wildlife and hydroschemes will also but will also create other harmful effects etc. Wind is harmful to birds cf white tailed eagles in Skye and Norway as well as other raptors. All are intermittent. It is all about striking a balance where these schemes can fit into the local area. A blanket no to either is neither constructive to the economy or to the impending effects of climate change.
Last edited by Rheghead; 19-Jan-07 at 02:47.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Banned
Yet our CO2 emissions are still rising.
We made gains in the early 90s by buying cheap goods made in developing countries so the CO2 produced went on their books and the added transport made global figures worse but since 1997 our CO2 output has risen steadily every year.
A colour TV used to cost 6 months wages, a home only had one and if it broke you got it mended. Now homes have one in every room and if it breaks it's cheaper to throw it in the bin and buy another. Good cars are going to the crusher every day, little rust and good engines but the surplus of second hand cars on the market and the huge cost of even minor repairs or an MOT makes it cheaper to just buy another. A wife used to get a new kitchen once in a lifetime if she was lucky now they can be renewed every 5 years. Most people lived and died never setting foot on an airplane now people think nothing of jetting off to Florida to visit Disney World or Spain to get drunk on the cheap.
These are the problems which need addressing if we are to save the world. Taking a holiday in America can do as much harm to the environment as driving a car for a year, planes account for 11% of UK CO2 emissions but that doesn't go on the books. They are busy building new airports and extending runways as the business booms, building new roads to take ever more cars and covering Caithness with windmills as window dressing.
And let's not forget the huge impact on the environment war has, all those military vehicles, ships and planes, the bombs, the rebuilding of a countries demolished infrastructure. Do you really think a politician who can do so much damage to the environment and humanity at the drop of a hat time after time actually gives a hoot about global warming or are they just trying to make fortunes for their friends and get the green vote?
Administrator
Orgmaster
Shetland and Community Wind Farm
Here is something that was on the BBC TV News today and see it at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/...st/6277049.stm
Shetland council are supporting a community wind farm - the biggest in the world with 200 turbines (to produce 600MW) which if it goes ahead and gets sea cable might supply a quarter of all of the homes in the UK and put £20 million a yearinto the local community.
Maybe in the light of this announcement the local Caithness community groups looking at setting up community wionf farms will be thinking about upping their ideas for one or two turbines. A 200 turbine community wind farm in Caithness would certainly set this column alight for a few weeks at least.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks