Wind Turbine

[computedshorty]

There are now so many of these dotted around the countryside, the thing is you are not told of the hundreds that catch fire destroying the whole generating unit. The failier is now traced to the wrong Gear Oil. There is now the cost of fitting an extinguisher to each one. Every one that catches fire the Fire Brigade attends, It makes me wonder will these ever make a profit?

When the penny drops they have a good amount of scrap metal to sell. To give a small repayment to the Investers.

There is a proposed new factory in the old Sheerness Docks, giving a job to hundreds of employees but will it be short lived putting them back onto the list of unemployed.

[mockney piers]

I suppose profit would be nice, but it's more about the sustainability and cleanliness of the energy source.

Mind you, that one does seem to be pumping out the CO2 ;-)

[James Barber]

Hundreds?

[DJKillaQueen]

Not sure hundreds are catching fire and using the wrong gear oil is human error surely....nothing to do with the turbine. I'm all for turbines, along with tidal, wave and solar power. And then there's geothermal technology.......makes you wonder why we are clinging to fossil fuel when there already is the technology to potentially do without it.

[Loz]

Am I the only person that thinks they have a certain beauty to them? I kind of like wind turbines on the landscape and flying over the bank of them placed in the middle of the channel was very impressive.

[Huguenot]

I think they're truly beautiful, and their ecological contribution enhances them...

Windy Miller...

http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/Images/Wind_Turbines_Impact.jpg

Are you shitting me?

http://powerplantss.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Coal-Fired-Power-Plant-Process.jpg

[mockney piers]

absolutely they're beautiful

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3424/3178094074_c5fd369d3d.jpg

Energy by tochis, on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4047/4659082365_86cf252ff9.jpg

somewhere over spain by jens.lilienthal, on Flickr

Surely the 'blight' to our landscape became a defunct argument the day we erected our first pylon!!

[computedshorty]

Of course I cant post all the Fires in the Wind Turbines but here are a few for the doubters.

Fw: Fwd: Fw: If you see one of these starting to smoke...RUN!

Gear oil failures in wind turbines

Here are some photos of what happens when transmission failures occur in wind turbines.

To date no gear oil has been invented to withstand the pressures produced within these transmissions.

Most recently the government gave Dow-Corning a big grant to work on it.

Previously, many others had tried and failed.

[computedshorty]

A few more as I had used my capacity.

Thesa are what you are not told about.

[computedshorty]

I can put many more but I hope that I have now shown what is the failier rate.

[mockney piers]

Still, at least there isn't a 5000 year 35 mile exclusion zone when they go wrong.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

On that first picture it is a clear case of arson - look at the name on the van.

I love them, esp the ones in the Mersey.

[mockney piers]

Brilliant pgc. Can I add you to my crushe(s)d and devalued thread nominations?

[computedshorty]

If you go to Vestas web you will see they have a section that is trying to deal with the know defects.

http://worldofwind.vestas.com/presentations/offshorev164

[Huguenot]

Call that a fire Shorty? That's not a fire, this is a fire...

http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2010/06/21/200610top.jpg

[Marmora Man]

They may be beautiful, but en masse I'd suggest they're not, they certainly blight some of the beautiful and wilder parts of the countryside that I love. More importantly is the fact that they appear to be inefficient in terms of energy saving /conservation and general commercial economics.

It is my understanding that:

a. A permanent back up of power generation is required to cover those periods when the wind doesn't blow -an event which, in winter, generally occurs during a period of high pressure, intense cold and high energy demand.

b. The through life energy costs and CO2 creation are as high, per kilowatt generated, as modern low emission coal,

gas or oil powered generation.

For me - nuclear power followed by tidal and / or wave power are far better options, with less impact on the visual environment or wider countryside.

[katie1997]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Am I the only person that thinks they have a

> certain beauty to them? I kind of like wind

> turbines on the landscape and flying over the bank

> of them placed in the middle of the channel was

> very impressive.

Heheh loz, I had to smile when I read about your appreciation of the beauty of wind turbines esp from the vantage poiint of flying above them :)

That said, I don't mind how they look at all, nor do I mind the sound. But as MM has beat me to it, they aren't on 24/7, for a considerable amount of time and need back up from other (hydrocarbon fuelled) sources too.

There's also the staggering amount of subsidies (sp?) being dished ouit like smarties for something that produces not a huge amount of power to meet our demands. Nuclear amd tidal are far more able to produce that. But what do I know, I'm not an engineer.

Energy efficiency people. Put on a fucking jumper when you're feeling cold for a start. Stop buying so much stuff. Re-use and recycle what you've got.

Edited to add: meant to say, I think most of the (informed) opposition to them, whether offshore or more controversially onshore, is not about how they look/affect the landscape and wildlife population but that they simply aren't efficiienct enough.

[katie1997]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not sure hundreds are catching fire and using the

> wrong gear oil is human error surely....nothing to

> do with the turbine. I'm all for turbines, along

> with tidal, wave and solar power. And then there's

> geothermal technology...... .makes you wonder why

> we are clinging to fossil fuel when there already

> is the technology to potentially do without it.

That's the million dollar question, DJKQ. We have all this knowledge at our fingertips about other energy sources yet we still have reliance on those pesky fossil fuels. If only someone could single-handedly take over and turn around our failing energy strategy in this country and we'd be laughing. But where to find such a person?!!

Mind you, the powers of the EDF never cease to amaze me. There *may* be such an expert out there.

PS I thought you'd be against solar what with all these (already rich) people making money from the incentives they receive to plaster it all over their huuuuuuge houses. They don't even pay for the stuff they use AND get money back for generating it too...

[mockney piers]

It just sounds a bit dubious to me, especially b.

I can't say as I've done thorough research but this wasn't hard to come by though can't especially vouch for the 'facts' they certainly sound more plausible than the above.

And remember it's not just about CO2 but sustainability. Oil, gas and coal even if made cleaner are not a solution. Nuclear is notoriously expensive in the long run and we've all seen how bad when things go wrong, though I did see on Horizon the other day that the French are making good progress on making the waste products much safer, thought that's only part of the story of course.

Anyway, mythbusters:

Myth: Wind farms won't help climate change

Fact: Wind power is a clean, renewable source of energy which produces no greenhouse gas emissions or waste products. The UK currently emits 560 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), the key greenhouse gas culprit, every year and the Government target is to cut this by 60% by 20501. Power stations are the largest contributor to carbon emissions, producing 170 million tonnes of CO2 each year2. We need to switch to forms of energy that do not produce CO2. Just one modern wind turbine will save over 2,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually

Myth: Building a wind farm takes more energy than it ever makes

Fact: The average wind farm will pay back the energy used in its manufacture within 3-5 months of operation4. This compares favourably with coal or nuclear power stations, which take about six months. A modern wind turbine is designed to operate for more than 20 years and at the end of its working life, the area can be restored at low financial and environmental costs. Wind energy is a form of development which is essentially reversible ? in contrast to fossil fuel or nuclear power stations.

Myth: Wind farms are inefficient and only work 30% of the time

Fact: A modern wind turbine produces electricity 70-85% of the time, but it generates different outputs depending on the wind speed. Over the course of a year, it will typically generate about 30% of the theoretical maximum output. This is known as its load factor. The load factor of conventional power stations is on average 50%5 . A modern wind turbine will generate enough to meet the electricity demands of more than a thousand homes over the course of a year.

Myth: Wind energy needs back-up to work

Fact: All forms of power generation require back up and no energy technology can be relied upon 100%. The UK's transmission system already operates with enough back-up to manage the instantaneous loss of a large power station. Variations in the output from wind farms are barely noticeable over and above the normal fluctuation in supply and demand, seen when the nation's workforce goes home, or if lightning brings down a high-voltage transmission line. Therefore, at present there is no need for additional back-up because of wind energy.

Even for wind power to provide 10% of our nation's electricity needs, only a small amount of additional conventional back-up would be required, in the region of 300-500 megawatts (MW). This would add only 0.2 pence per kilowatt hour to the generation cost of wind energy and would not in any way threaten the security of our grid6. In fact, this is unlikely to become a significant issue until wind generates over 20% of total electricity supply.

[mockney piers]

quick note to add that tidal and wave are far from there, but surely for an island like ours must be promising and attractive once workable.

The big one as Katie says is to use less of the bloody stuff in the first place of course.

We're building a house which will be super efficient and rely at least 50% of the year (the cheaper half sadly) on solar. Yep, even in Ireland believe it or not!!!!

[katie1997]

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It just sounds a bit dubious to me, especially b.

> I can't say as I've done thorough research but

> this wasn't hard to come by though can't

> especially vouch for the 'facts' they certainly

> sound more plausible than the above.

That's the trouble Mockney. No need to do any thorough research but plenty of Mythbusters out there on the intranbet for whatever you want to believe.

Fair enough if allf that sounds more plausible to you though it really doesn't to me.

[mockney piers]

"No need to do any thorough research but plenty of Mythbusters out there on the intranbet for whatever you want to believe"No time whilst at work and getting more into a debate than I ought to be.

Coming from a history background, sifting through sources and motives comes pretty naturally.

You may be able to find anything to support any point of view on the internet, but when one quotes a couple of other blogs propagating the same myths or a list of retired military wingnuts and academics from irrelevant fields, whilst another cites a dozen or so scientific journals, papers and government reports, it ranks somewhat higher in the plausibility stakes.

here's that list for the above points out of interest

References

1 Energy White Paper (2003), Our Energy Future - Creating a Low Carbon Economy, available online at http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/ourenergyfuture.pdf.

2 DTI (2004), DUKES, Annex E - Energy and the environment, available at www.dti.gov.uk/energy/inform/dukes/dukes2004/annexe.pdf.

3 See BWEA calculations.

4 Milborrow, Dispelling the Myths of Energy Payback Time, as published in Windstats, vol 11, no 2 (Spring 1998).

5 DTI (2004), Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics 2004, Table 5.10 Plant loads, demand and efficiency, available online at http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/inform/energy_stats/electricity/dukes5_10.xls.

6 See The Carbon Trust and DTI (2004), Renewables Network Impact Study, available online at http://www.carbontrust.org.uk/carbontrust/about/publications/Renewables Network Impact Study Final.pdf and National Grid (2004), Seven Year Statement, available online at http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/library/documents/sys_04/default.asp?sNode=SYS&action=&Exp=Y

7 Milborrow (2003), The Economics of Wind Energy, WREN International Seminar.

8 ExternE (2003) External Costs, Research Results on Socio-Environmental Damages due to Electricity and Transport, available online at http://www.externe.info/externpr.pdf.

9 See PIU (2002), Renewables Innovation Review, available online at http://www.dti.gov.uk/renewables/policy/oxeraresults.pdf;

Hansard, 21 June 2004, Column 1225W, available online at http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/cm040621/text/40621w14.htm;

Oxera (2003), The Non-market value of Generation Technologies; Oxera (2004), Results Of Renewables Market Modelling; DTI (2003), Economics Paper No 4; and Milborrow D, Becoming Respectable in Serious Circles, Windpower Monthly, Jan 2004.

10 RBA (1998), Stroud District Residents Survey, RBA for Triodos Bank, The Gloucestershire Water & Energy Forum, BWEA and Western Windpower.

11 For latest national study, please see TNS (2003), Attitudes and Knowledge of Renewable Energy amongst the General Public, On behalf of: Department of Trade and Industry, Scottish Executive, National Assembly for Wales and Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment Northern Ireland.

12 Mori (2003), Public Attitudes to Windfarms a Survey of Local Residents in Scotland, Scottish Executive Social Research.

13 RSPB (2004), Information leaflet on Wind Farms and Birds.

14 Extinction risk from climate change, Nature 427, 145 - 148 (08 January 2004).

15 EWEA: 68,000 turbines installed worldwide by the end of 2003.

16 Defra (2003), A Review of Published Research on Low Frequency Noise and its Effects, Report for Defra by Dr Geoff Leventhall Assisted by Dr Peter Pelmear and Dr Stephen Benton. Available online at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/noise/lowfrequency/pdf/lowfreqnoise.pdf.

17 The Working Group on Wind Turbine Noise, The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms, September 1996. ETSU-R-97.

18 For a copy of PPS22, see http://www.odpm.gov.uk.

[katie1997]

mockney piers Wrote:

> Coming from a history background, sifting through

> sources and motives comes pretty naturally.

> You may be able to find anything to support any

> point of view on the internet, but when one quotes

> a couple of other blogs propagating the same myths

> or a list of retired military wingnuts and

> academics from irrelevant fields, whilst another

> cites a dozen or so scientific journals, papers

> and government reports, it ranks somewhat higher

> in the plausibility stakes.

Mockney, I hope you're not suggesting that's what I habve been quoting here by the way!

>

> here's that list for the above points out of

> interest

> References

Thanks, will take a look at it later. Looks like there's some worthwhile reading there and from credible sources (on the edf!! Who'd have thought it...) Hopefully evidence on the massive costs of electricity generation compared to other renewable sources. For what its worth, I am not vehemently anti-wind power, I do believe in a good mix of energy technologies including renewable technologies. This is not simply for reasons of sustainability or the environment but to address the problem of secure energy supplies. I think diversity of sources is important although not for increased costs to consumers via their energy bills. I too have ended up in a bit more debate than intended and nearly missed a meeting, priorities or what :)

[mockney piers]

Of course I wasn't Katie, more that though anything can be borne out by a page on the Internet, much of it has iffy sources or just plain conjecture presented with a lot of belief.

Just sYing it's usually pretty easy to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I too don't think wind power is the complete picture but it's an important string in the bow, we don't have much hydro or thermal opportunities, and tide and wave are nowhere near enou yet.

Plus technology and costs will improve.

Also it's worth remembering that MM doesn't think global warming is a real problem.

[mockney piers]

And I do think theyre beautiful too.