Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
OnlyMe

Scots Windfarms Paid Cash To Stop Producing Energy

Recommended Posts

Can't wait until the govt start imposing carbon taxes to really rub people's noses in it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13253876

Scots windfarms paid cash to stop producing energy

wind turbines generic Windfarms at six sites across Scotland were paid to stop producing electricity

Six Scottish windfarms were paid up to £300,000 to stop producing energy, it has emerged.

The turbines, at a range of sites across Scotland, were stopped because the grid network could not absorb all the energy they generated.

Details of the payments emerged following research by the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF).

The REF said energy companies were paid £900,000 to halt the turbines for several hours between 5 and 6 April.

According to the REF research, the payments made cost up to 20 times the value of the electricity that would have been generated if the turbines had kept running.

The largest payment was given to Whitelee windfarm in East Renfrewshire, owned by Scottish Power, which was paid £308,000 in April.

The RWE nPower-owned Farr windfarm, south of Inverness, received £265,000 in the same month.

'Very wasteful'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<br />Can't wait until the govt start imposing carbon taxes to really rub people's noses in it.<br /><br /><br /><br /><a href='http://www.bbc.co.uk...otland-13253876</a><br /><br />Scots windfarms paid cash to stop producing energy<br />wind turbines generic Windfarms at six sites across Scotland were paid to stop producing electricity<br /><br /><br />Six Scottish windfarms were paid up to £300,000 to stop producing energy, it has emerged.<br /><br />The turbines, at a range of sites across Scotland, were stopped because the grid network could not absorb all the energy they generated.<br /><br />Details of the payments emerged following research by the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF).<br /><br />The REF said energy companies were paid £900,000 to halt the turbines for several hours between 5 and 6 April.<br /><br />According to the REF research, the payments made cost up to 20 times the value of the electricity that would have been generated if the turbines had kept running.<br /><br />The largest payment was given to Whitelee windfarm in East Renfrewshire, owned by Scottish Power, which was paid £308,000 in April.<br /><br />The RWE nPower-owned Farr windfarm, south of Inverness, received £265,000 in the same month.<br /><br />'Very wasteful'<br />

Not the ONLY waste/cost!

Another hidden biggie is the rent paid to the landowners whether they are working or not - all added to your electric bill.

Another reason why 'they' cancelled building the comparatively 'free' tidal Severn barrier!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until the govt start imposing carbon taxes to really rub people's noses in it.

.....

'Very wasteful'

Damned renewables. Lucky we've got such a huge supply of fossil fuels to use instead eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wind powered coal mining ?

Probably wind power/nuke/other renewables + undergound coal gasification and such like for the next decade or three - most of the coal mining will be open cast from now on. I'd be surprised to see another deep mine sunk in England or Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until the govt start imposing carbon taxes to really rub people's noses in it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otland-13253876

Scots windfarms paid cash to stop producing energy

wind turbines generic Windfarms at six sites across Scotland were paid to stop producing electricity

Six Scottish windfarms were paid up to £300,000 to stop producing energy, it has emerged.

The turbines, at a range of sites across Scotland, were stopped because the grid network could not absorb all the energy they generated.

Details of the payments emerged following research by the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF).

The REF said energy companies were paid £900,000 to halt the turbines for several hours between 5 and 6 April.

According to the REF research, the payments made cost up to 20 times the value of the electricity that would have been generated if the turbines had kept running.

The largest payment was given to Whitelee windfarm in East Renfrewshire, owned by Scottish Power, which was paid £308,000 in April.

The RWE nPower-owned Farr windfarm, south of Inverness, received £265,000 in the same month.

'Very wasteful'

I give up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably wind power/nuke/other renewables + undergound coal gasification and such like for the next decade or three - most of the coal mining will be open cast from now on. I'd be surprised to see another deep mine sunk in England or Scotland.

By its nature open cast coal mining is for the easy-to-get-at deposits, which we've largely exhausted. There's plenty of coal left in the UK but most of it is too awkward to get at economically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. A business opportunity ...

On-site energy capture and storage for sites where capacity is variable and may exceed the grid's capacity.

Pump water?

A huge gyroscope?

Electrolyse water?

Or just site energy-intensive industries there, like aluminium in Iceland!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until the govt start imposing carbon taxes to really rub people's noses in it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otland-13253876

Scots windfarms paid cash to stop producing energy

wind turbines generic Windfarms at six sites across Scotland were paid to stop producing electricity

Six Scottish windfarms were paid up to £300,000 to stop producing energy, it has emerged.

The turbines, at a range of sites across Scotland, were stopped because the grid network could not absorb all the energy they generated.

Details of the payments emerged following research by the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF).

The REF said energy companies were paid £900,000 to halt the turbines for several hours between 5 and 6 April.

According to the REF research, the payments made cost up to 20 times the value of the electricity that would have been generated if the turbines had kept running.

The largest payment was given to Whitelee windfarm in East Renfrewshire, owned by Scottish Power, which was paid £308,000 in April.

The RWE nPower-owned Farr windfarm, south of Inverness, received £265,000 in the same month.

'Very wasteful'

This was for a few hours one night, when the power lines to England were down so they couldn't send the electricity down there. Scotland is usually a net exporter of electricity. These wind farms produce too much electricity for just Scotland to use, but over a UK-wide basis there is more than enough demand for them, and it makes sense to have most of the UK's wind generation capacity in Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was for a few hours one night, when the power lines to England were down so they couldn't send the electricity down there. Scotland is usually a net exporter of electricity. These wind farms produce too much electricity for just Scotland to use, but over a UK-wide basis there is more than enough demand for them, and it makes sense to have most of the UK's wind generation capacity in Scotland.

Renewables including wind farms account for 27% of Scotland's energy.

Is there something wrong with your statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renewables including wind farms account for 27% of Scotland's energy.

Is there something wrong with your statement?

Wind farms can't reliably provide more than about 5%-10% of electricity supply mix. We probably had a situation that night where Nuclear, which can't be turned off quickly + hydro, which had to run because it was raining so heavily + wind running at maximum output was more than 100% of demand, especially after bed time, when demand goes down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The industrialisation of our countryside by wind "farms" is a scandal. In years to come we will look back and wonder how on earth the construction of these plants was allowed. The present situation with wind turbines is in my mind identical to the construction of highrise towerblocks in the sixties, with collusion between big business, politicians and landowners with shared vested interests driven by the opportunity of huge profits from government subsidies, at the expense of the general population.

Please support the fight against the Nant y Moch windfarm:

http://www.cambrian-mountains.co.uk/nantymoch-windfarm-photo-montage-index.htm

http://www.cambrian-mountains.co.uk/issues-wind-nantymoch-landscape.php

http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&cat=Campaigning&nid=JMT-N10561

http://alansloman.blogspot.com/2011/04/impartiality-and-our-bbc.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wind farms can't reliably provide more than about 5%-10% of electricity supply mix. We probably had a situation that night where Nuclear, which can't be turned off quickly + hydro, which had to run because it was raining so heavily + wind running at maximum output was more than 100% of demand, especially after bed time, when demand goes down.

They can provide 100% of the supply mix, easily. Its what to do with the surplus that is always the problem, when they generate more than you need. Its about getting that AVERAGE figure up to 20-30% upwards that is the challenge.

Bit of planning, eg more pumped hydro storage, storage heaters (good economy 7 rates), properly insulated houses, smartmeters to heat houses when there is a greater surplus, electric cars to charge overnight etc etc.

However, there also solar power (thermal and PV) and a tidal barrage. I think we need more PV installations for those still sunny days when wind turbines dont work.

I wonder, in the future, as we generate more from renewables, if gas price spikes will become more exacerbated, given flexible prices, it might be a case of turn the heating down/ pay for it/ build thermally efficient houses etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The industrialisation of our countryside by wind "farms" is a scandal. In years to come we will look back and wonder how on earth the construction of these plants was allowed. The present situation with wind turbines is in my mind identical to the construction of highrise towerblocks in the sixties, with collusion between big business, politicians and landowners with shared vested interests driven by the opportunity of huge profits from government subsidies, at the expense of the general population.

Please support the fight against the Nant y Moch windfarm:

http://www.cambrian-...ntage-index.htm

http://www.cambrian-...h-landscape.php

http://www.jmt.org/n...&nid=JMT-N10561

http://alansloman.bl...nd-our-bbc.html

Utter Political corruption!

Plus each darn wind machine has a 25yr life (max) when it needs to be completely replaced again at hoooge cost to energy buyers!

You don't get told that when they dish out the details lulling people into how great they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Utter Political corruption!

Plus each darn wind machine has a 25yr life (max) when it needs to be completely replaced again at hoooge cost to energy buyers!

You don't get told that when they dish out the details lulling people into how great they are.

Surely a 25 year lifespan for a wind turbine isn't that unusual compared to say, a steam turbine?

Edited by Jie Bie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't get told that when they dish out the details lulling people into how great they are.

No, you don't. Or about the massive amount of pollution created through mining for the materials required for the magnets. Or the number of birds - red kites, golden eagles and many other rare species, killed annually by the blades. Or the pollution created locally when the plants are installed, requiring huge bulldozer trails to access the turbines.

The media sells us a story that wind turbines are a great eco-friendly invention, but this is far from the reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely a 25 year lifespan for a wind turbine isn't that unusual compared to say, a steam turbine?

There's not that much difference. Although, the wind turbine has a problem that the whole machine needs to be removed and replaced, whereas, large plants can often be upgraded/overhauled on a piecewise basis. Additionally, if the site is to be refitted with turbines, its likely that considerable work will be required to renew the foundations.

In a large power plant, e.g. coal, much of the plant has a long life which could be 40-50 years (e.g. generators, steam turbines, buildings, cooling towers, pipework, etc.), and it's only parts (e.g. boilers, pollution control system) that need more frequent replacement or overhaul. When one considers that the per unit energy cost of wind construction is close to 5x the cost of construction a coal power station, the shorter life is a potential problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed - we should be building nuclear here in Wales

Anecdotal. I was chatting to a friend who works for a power station owner / operator at the weekend. He's almost certain that Anglesey will get a replacement Nuclear power station. He also said that a few power stations are idle at the moment as we've got quite a bit of spare production capacity; combination of new facilities coming online and demand below forecasts from 3 or 4 years ago. Good news if we're serious about upping industrial production in the UK, one bit of the puzzle is already in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wind farms can't reliably provide more than about 5%-10% of electricity supply mix. We probably had a situation that night where Nuclear, which can't be turned off quickly + hydro, which had to run because it was raining so heavily + wind running at maximum output was more than 100% of demand, especially after bed time, when demand goes down.

THAT'S never the case.

Minimum demand is about 20 GW

Nukes output upto 9 GW

Wind is max 4 GW or so

So even with max wind & nukes you don't get close to exceeding min demand.

The problem was likely a local one. A power cable couldn't handle it. Perhaps one was down & the remainder were getting.g close to capacity so to be safe & not burn the cables they asked the wind turbines to back off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can provide 100% of the supply mix, easily. Its what to do with the surplus that is always the problem, when they generate more than you need. Its about getting that AVERAGE figure up to 20-30% upwards that is the challenge.

Bit of planning, eg more pumped hydro storage, storage heaters (good economy 7 rates), properly insulated houses, smartmeters to heat houses when there is a greater surplus, electric cars to charge overnight etc etc.

However, there also solar power (thermal and PV) and a tidal barrage. I think we need more PV installations for those still sunny days when wind turbines dont work.

I wonder, in the future, as we generate more from renewables, if gas price spikes will become more exacerbated, given flexible prices, it might be a case of turn the heating down/ pay for it/ build thermally efficient houses etc.

Everything can be done it just depends on how much you are willing to pay for electricity.

Fossil fuels will give you a unit of e- for about 4p

Wind will give you a unit for about 8p but only be with about 3p (marginal cost of fossil plant electric)

So simply the end user pays Aprox 5p for every unit of electric you want derrived from wind through direct & indirect.

Well I suspect it is prob a tad higher as wind farms don't pay for their own lines AFAIK

So question is simply do you want to pay 5p more per unit of electric to have it derived from wind instead of gas.

That holds for upto about 10gw capacity wind. After that it costs more as you need specific backup rather than the intrinsic greatness if gas/coal plants able to vary output

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus I have mentioned this before. Wind farms enmity lots of co2 indirectly

A coal and gas station operates most efficiently at capacity and less well below that.

For example a 1000MW gas plant operates at 60% efficiency when at full output but this might drop to say 55% efficiency at 900MW.

So if a wind farm forces this gas plant to back off just 100MW there is hardly any co2 savings. In fact that wind farm in effect emits 82% of the ci2 the gas plant would have. So the real co2 saving is only 12% of what most people think (in this example)

The terrible thing about wind farms is that they offset the most efficiently generateable electric.

Of course this is because fossil fuel plants operate at varying efficiency depending on the output level. Wind farms force fossil fuel plants to be less efficient.

The UK would have been far better served with a average co2 per unit target or law than ROCs or FITs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus I have mentioned this before. Wind farms enmity lots of co2 indirectly

A coal and gas station operates most efficiently at capacity and less well below that.

For example a 1000MW gas plant operates at 60% efficiency when at full output but this might drop to say 55% efficiency at 900MW.

So if a wind farm forces this gas plant to back off just 100MW there is hardly any co2 savings. In fact that wind farm in effect emits 82% of the ci2 the gas plant would have. So the real co2 saving is only 12% of what most people think (in this example)

The terrible thing about wind farms is that they offset the most efficiently generateable electric.

Of course this is because fossil fuel plants operate at varying efficiency depending on the output level. Wind farms force fossil fuel plants to be less efficient.

The UK would have been far better served with a average co2 per unit target or law than ROCs or FITs.

I get your point, but aren't you taking the worst possible scenario? Surely as wind generated power rises, it would be possible to shut down some gas turbines completely rather than reducing the output of them all. And the stationary turbines would then, of course, be using no gas at all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.