Breaking News. Bp Finds Giant Oil Field Off Mexico

[cells]

Enercon standard units can be found all over low wind Germany and typical average output is 20-25% of nameplate

http://www.enercon.de/www/en/broschueren.n...ht_eng_0309.pdf

Windspeeds are relatively higher when you get 80-130 metres above the ground. Ask Long way down if you don't believe me

What always surprises me is how huge these things are vs the power they produce.

80m high or equivalent to a 15 story block of flats and its maximum power is 800kw.

So on average of 30% it is producing 240kw or about 350 horse power.

That huge thing produces as much power as a decent car engine!

[Kurt Barlow]

Oh dear god this isn’t difficult.

Wind is not good because of the long variations in supply.

If you have say two months a year when production goes from 30% capacity to 10% capacity how do you store that much energy?

Which just does not happen

Alternatively you have fossil fuel plants but how expensive do you think it would be to have a gas plant sitting idle for 10 months of the year to kick in on the slow months. That makes purely “backup†gas or “backup coal†very costly and unlikely.

I am not interested enough but kurt you seem to be. So find a dam graph of UK wind energy output versus total kWh demand per week. If they match somewhat that slightly gets over some of the storage problem but I would doubt it would get over most of it.

The back up is predominatly the same reserve that needs to be there anyway to ensure a stable supply

Wind output roughly matches demand - ie demand is higherst in the windy periods of the winter months (wind chill factor)

So the question is how you provide the shortfall. The only realistic way to do that is import the spare capacity of another country has not embarrassed wind. For example we may be able to import 2GW from France, 2GW from Germany, 2GW from …. Until we have the backup. We would likely have a lot more than is required so the French don’t screw us over with price or just cutting us off to feed themselves.

So maybe, just maybe the UK could produce 30-40-50% of electricity from wind but overall wind is not an option. It is only possible if we connect up with other grids which don’t have wind.

Then there is the second problem of high capacity months. If on average you get 30% and one month you get 60% then you have to find an outlet for 25GW of power.

This isn’t a difficult task as we could just dump it in the ocean but what a waste.

How would we constructively use it? Again we could dump some of it into Europe if they allow us.

But all this proves is that wind can only be a small % of a grid. Perhaps 10% tops realistically. However if we share europes grid the we might be able to go to 30% in the uk.

BTW to note, everything is dam possible but the price is the question. We could go 100% wind but it would mean your electricity bill goes from £500 a year to £5000 a year.

[Kurt Barlow]

What always surprises me is how huge these things are vs the power they produce.

80m high or equivalent to a 15 story block of flats and its maximum power is 800kw.

So on average of 30% it is producing 240kw or about 350 horse power.

That huge thing produces as much power as a decent car engine!

Well look at a coal fired power station - and then look at the size of the coal pile you need to feed into it to get the energy out

[Kurt Barlow]

You are 'flogging a dead horse' here Cells.

Anyone with an ounce of sense realises that wind power is never going to supply any more than a small percentage of our power for the reasons you have clearly explained.

You can't use reason to defeat dogma.

You are going to have to settle for being proved right by events I think.

Don't credit yourself with being in the same camp as Cells. Whilst we disagree on a lot I respect him for putting up a detailed arguement and providing figures and analysis to back it up. Sometimes he is right other times he is off the mark. The other thing about Cells is - he will reevaluate data and adjust his position.

In contrast what do you offer - sound bits and rolley eyes

[Kurt Barlow]

We could have 100% wind, there is no question about that. It may mean we need to build 500GW of capacity to meet us in the low months when turbines are at 10% and it may mean we dump 200GW into the sea when we are at high months on 50%.

There is no doubt about that.

The question is if we can do it at an affordable rate.

Upto 5% wind on the uk grid isn’t a problem.

10% it is manageable.

More than that, and it begins to get exponentially more expensive.

National Grid have made it quite clear that up to 20% is managable from an engineering perspective without any major adjustments to the grid. If we want to go higher then yes we have to start looking at schemes such as the Exmoor pump storage proposal, dynamic demand, possibily compressed gas in salt caverns.

5,10,20% from wind- its still 5,10,20% less imported coal or gas

[Kurt Barlow]

After that rant.

The only viable safe economical option for now is hydro and nuclear.

In the not to distant future solar could play a big-ish part in sunny countries.

All other known alternatives will only provide some 5%, 10% tops of electricity.

And remember, electricity is only some 30% or so of the power we use so the challenge just begins there.

Where are we going to build all this new Hydro capacity in the UK? I thought we were pretty much damed out in terms of viable sites?

[Damik]

-sigh-

The chances of the whole of the UK having wind speeds at 100 metres above the ground less than 5 m/s are about 0.0000000001%

No one is suggesting wind penetration at those levels. If it did - yes you would need major sinks for that power - I would suggest electrolysis of water / nitrogen harvesting to produce ammonia

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomm...e-argument.html

BWEA's evidence, not surprisingly, is completely contradicted by E.on's evidence to the same Committee, also presented in June 2008. In E.on's supplementary evidence to the Committee (on the same website) they make it very clear, based on their practical experience, that only 8 per cent of capacity can be relied upon in winter months:

"Our assessment of winter wind generation data in 2007 indicates that the system operator could rely on 8 per cent of total UK wind capacity to meet winter peak demand at the same level of dependability as thermal plant.

"On this basis, if the UK required, say, 40,000MW of wind capacity to meet its renewable target by 2020, only 8 per cent of this renewable capacity (3,600MW) could be relied on to meet winter peak demand.

"This would avoid the need to build 3,600MW of new thermal plant but the remaining 36,400MW of renewable capacity would need to be 'backed-up' by thermal plant to meet winter peak electricity demand in 2020."

[Game_Over]

Don't credit yourself with being in the same camp as Cells. Whilst we disagree on a lot I respect him for putting up a detailed arguement and providing figures and analysis to back it up. Sometimes he is right other times he is off the mark. The other thing about Cells is - he will reevaluate data and adjust his position.

In contrast what do you offer - sound bits and rolley eyes

I largely hold the same position as Cells, I just lack his patience and good humour in the face of illogical dogma.

You guys can argue until you are blue in the face, but the UK is never going to be covered with wind farms, either on shore or off shore.

Wind turbines are inefficient, costly, environmentally damaging monstrosities.

It's pointless arguing - ITS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

[cells]

Which just does not happen

The back up is predominatly the same reserve that needs to be there anyway to ensure a stable supply

Wind output roughly matches demand - ie demand is higherst in the windy periods of the winter months (wind chill factor)

Can you provide data from the uk wind farms? kWh vs week or month?

I may look into it tomorrow if you don’t have a link or page handy.

I remember looking at some raw data for an American wind farm and the output varied a lot. From memory it was from a bout 10% of capacity to 50% of capacity which is huge.

[Damik]

National Grid have made it quite clear that up to 20% is managable from an engineering perspective without any major adjustments to the grid. If we want to go higher then yes we have to start looking at schemes such as the Exmoor pump storage proposal, dynamic demand, possibily compressed gas in salt caverns.

5,10,20% from wind- its still 5,10,20% less imported coal or gas

20% of the UK grid is about 8GW. So you will need at least 6400 5MW turbines. Good luck!

[Game_Over]

Where are we going to build all this new Hydro capacity in the UK? I thought we were pretty much damed out in terms of viable sites?

Well if we don't have any hydro sites where are all the pumped storage sites going to be located if we are going to rely on wind turbines.

[Damik]

Can you provide data from the uk wind farms? kWh vs week or month?

I may look into it tomorrow if you don’t have a link or page handy.

I remember looking at some raw data for an American wind farm and the output varied a lot. From memory it was from a bout 10% of capacity to 50% of capacity which is huge.

http://www.segen.co.uk/eng/wind/faq/faq1.htm

AMWS could be as low as 4 m/s (9.0 mph) for an inland site to around 8 m/s (13 mph) or higher on the most exposed sites.

[1929crash]

I largely hold the same position as Cells, I just lack his patience and good humour in the face of illogical dogma.

You guys can argue until you are blue in the face, but the UK is never going to be covered with wind farms, either on shore or off shore.

Wind turbines are inefficient, costly, environmentally damaging monstrosities.

It's pointless arguing - ITS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

So you are saying that if the supply of uranium, coal, oil and natural gas become stoo tight to avoid blackouts, then we will just freeze in the dark?

[cells]

Don't credit yourself with being in the same camp as Cells. Whilst we disagree on a lot I respect him for putting up a detailed arguement and providing figures and analysis to back it up. Sometimes he is right other times he is off the mark. The other thing about Cells is - he will reevaluate data and adjust his position.

In contrast what do you offer - sound bits and rolley eyes

Now now kurt.

GO is quite good at this stuff. im lucky enough to have done and enjoyed a subject somewhat related which gives me a bit more knowledge.

as you point out the most important thing is the ability to learn and revaluate. very few people do it in real life or on this site. i would put you and GO in a field marked reluctant to admit having to adjust views but quietly accepts them.

To be honest two years ago I would have been far more like yourself and GO. But working where I do and reading this site amongst others has given me a big appreciation for the economics of things. I would definitely have said ITER would be successful and fusion would save the day. However when you look at the economics of it you know it will not save the day at least at an acceptable cost.

[cells]

Where are we going to build all this new Hydro capacity in the UK? I thought we were pretty much damed out in terms of viable sites?

Worldwide is what matters and I think we could add a lot more. Potentially doubling capacity and as you know hydro already accounts for a good chunk of electricity production..

I don’t see a problem in important coal or gas or oil or fissionable material or anything for that matter (bar perhaps advanced weapons)

[Damik]

Enercon standard units can be found all over low wind Germany and typical average output is 20-25% of nameplate

http://www.enercon.de/www/en/broschueren.n...ht_eng_0309.pdf

Windspeeds are relatively higher when you get 80-130 metres above the ground. Ask Long way down if you don't believe me

same thing as in my post; try better!

2.3MW

10m/s - 50%

8m/s - 25%

5m/s - 10%

[Kurt Barlow]

Here you go Cells

Figures for most renewable installations throughout the UK month by Month throughout 2008

If you decide to pick out low figure anomolies these are usually accounted for by maintenance / the fact not all the installation had been commissioned.

http://www.clowd.org.uk/Downloads/UK%20Ren...9April2009).pdf

[cells]

Well if we don't have any hydro sites where are all the pumped storage sites going to be located if we are going to rely on wind turbines.

We would not have anywhere enough the pumped storage sites to store the excess or shortfall of say 10GW from wind over a period of 1 month.

Not even close!!

Plus using pumped storage and you waste 25% of the power.

Only semi viable option is buying electricity from Europe probably at an expensive price and dumping electricity onto Europe at a very cheap price. Double whammy.

[Kurt Barlow]

Worldwide is what matters and I think we could add a lot more. Potentially doubling capacity and as you know hydro already accounts for a good chunk of electricity production..

I don’t see a problem in important coal or gas or oil or fissionable material or anything for that matter (bar perhaps advanced weapons)

And what will we trade for this foreign produced power - do tell?

[Damik]

So you are saying that if the supply of uranium, coal, oil and natural gas become stoo tight to avoid blackouts, then we will just freeze in the dark?

there is enough nucler fuel for thousand years ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/...sis-428279.html

[Kurt Barlow]

Well if we don't have any hydro sites where are all the pumped storage sites going to be located if we are going to rely on wind turbines.

We retrofit all existing hydro capacity

[Kurt Barlow]

there is enough nucler fuel for thousand years ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/...sis-428279.html

And we don't own any of it!

[Kurt Barlow]

We would not have anywhere enough the pumped storage sites to store the excess or shortfall of say 10GW from wind over a period of 1 month.

Not even close!!

Plus using pumped storage and you waste 25% of the power.

Only semi viable option is buying electricity from Europe probably at an expensive price and dumping electricity onto Europe at a very cheap price. Double whammy.

Nope you just throttle up or down dispatchable generating plant - coal, gas, hydro......

Pump storage is for short term storage.

Infact nucelar needs pump storage to store surplus nigh time power unless you want to piss it away as waste heat.

[1929crash]

there is enough nucler fuel for thousand years ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/...sis-428279.html

But the generating gap is upon us and the prototype would take 15 years, even if the politcial will existed.

Lillestol - whom Rubbia appointed as deputy division leader of CERN's Physics Division back in 1989 - has continued to fight for the thorium cause. He estimates the cost of a prototype reactor at 550m euros and believes it will take around 15 years to develop: "Molten lead becomes highly corrosive - and the problem is, how do we contain that lead? But the greatest difficulty is getting the world's experts to work together in one place and on one prototype. This, I believe, can only be achieved if all the participating countries have equal rights to all the results." Of course, the supply network for uranium has already been established, and is an important issue for governments all over the world. Switching to thorium would move the goalposts and put new power in the hands of the countries that have the thorium. And on such massive issues, it seems that no one likes change.

[Kurt Barlow]

Another factor which requires thought is self sufficency, which we lost a lot of with the closing of most of our coal mines. as many on here know the link between us and France was originally built to supply each others peaks in demand from the other country who peak was at diferrent times, but the flow is now over 90% to the UK, This and major imports of coal which are now no were as cheap as when our mines were closed and not as reliable the same with oil,all makes us more reliant on other countries for our energy.

Something people seem to forget here.

The Uk economy has been a net exporter of energy for the last 800 years. We are now entering new territory as a net importer. Will be interesting to see what this does to our balance of trade and currency value.

Wind is no silver bullet but it can feasibly provide 15-20% of electricity - home grown. Cells could even make the towers at Corus