|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 15:40:45 GMT 1
Yep, about the same as a very small thermal station. Pathetic. At what cost?  ? Is the next question? |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 15:42:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 15:45:46 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Sept 8, 2010 15:46:26 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 15:52:41 GMT 1
The only time the figure 10% occurs on page 5 (that I can find) is in the sentence "wind power has an annual average capacity factor of 28%; however, the average capacity factor during the top 10% of demand hours is over 36%" so I still don't know why you think that only 2.5% of the UK's electricity is produced when the capacity is 10% (that is what you mean isn't it or have I got the wrong end of the stick again?)
BTW - do you acknowledge that you were mistaken when you said that wind energy contributed 0.2% to the UK's electricity mix?
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 15:57:28 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 15:57:40 GMT 1
Surely you recognise the 'spin' that has been added to that story? During the coldest times last winter, the coal, gas, etc power stations upped their output considerably to cope with demand. That does not mean that - over the year- wind power was 0.2%. Do you understand the difference? |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 16:02:48 GMT 1
I'm sure the wind production has produced 2.5% at some point. Wouldn't you describe that as derisory from 10% installed CAPACITY? I've been through the whole report several times and I still cannot see where it states that the UK has 10% installed capacity. Please put me out of my misery and quote the sentence Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 16:05:30 GMT 1
"With 10% of the UK's electricity being generated by wind power"
Page 6.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 16:10:38 GMT 1
Surely you recognise the 'spin' that has been added to that story? During the coldest times last winter, the coal, gas, etc power stations upped their output considerably to cope with demand. That does not mean that - over the year- wind power was 0.2%. Do you understand the difference? Yes, of course I do. When we needed it most, wind failed miserably and produced ONLY 0.2% of our electricity. FACT It makes little difference if it produces a derisory 2.5% on a breezy August day when we don't need it. My opening post is confirmed by your argument rather than dis-proved. |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 16:12:04 GMT 1
Ah, I see your mistake - you think they're refering to actual installed wind power. If you read the whole paragraph, they say "With 10% of the UK's electricity being generated by wind power, 13GW of wind capacity, together with around 81GW of conventional capacity, would be required to meet the same level of reliability..."
They are talking about a potential scenario. They don't claim that there is 10% installed capacity right now (was produced in 2005 anyway)
I don't know what the current installed capacity is.
I do know that, last year, wind power contributed 2.5% to the UKs energy mix over the year (not 0.2% as you claimed which turned out to be only in a cold snap)
|
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 16:16:26 GMT 1
Yes, of course I do. When we needed it most, wind failed miserably and produced ONLY 0.2% of our electricity. Surely this is an argument form more wind farms? I suggest that actually, we do want wind power to be 2.5% and more during hot days in August too. There is a limited amount of natural resources and whether you think their CO2 is effecting the climate or not, finding and using alternatives should be considered a good thing surely? |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 16:17:30 GMT 1
And how much did this cost (bearing in mind it costs on average 30p/unit) and do you find this acceptable?
|
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 16:21:01 GMT 1
Before we move on to another argument; Do you accept that wind energy contributed 2.5% to the UK energy mix last year (not 0.2%)? Do you accept that this 2.5% did not come from an installed capacity of 10% Let's address one (all right two) points at a time  |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 8, 2010 16:24:02 GMT 1
"finding and using alternatives should be considered a good thing surely?" Even if you accept you'll have to pay a fortune for electricity, what source of energy will you use to mine the ores, transport them around the globe, smelt them and mix them to produce the metals required and fashion them into parts and transport them to sites and erect the silly things? WHEN THIS AMOUNT OF ENERGY WILL NEVER BE PRODUCED BY THE WIND TURBINE. Then there's the question of the massive block of concrete they stand on...... Sorry old chap, it's a fantasy. |
|
?
