The Wind/Tidal Energy Farce.

[rsmith7]

Have you found out how much wind generators get paid for their electricity yet?
Get back to me when you do with some comments. I'll ignore your little rants if I may.

[helen]

Love Motorhead, saw the classic line-up of Eddie Clark, Phil Taylor and Lemmy in 1977......superb: www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQVwi_Jb_og&feature=fvst However, your complaint that you've been trying to get a scientist to destroy your argument is a fruitless task R-Smith, you're approaching the arguments the wrong way. You cannot disprove a negative.....think about it. It's no wonder folk get enraged at you!

[havelock]

Have you figured out how to find and reference reliable evidence yet?

This is a science board - not a political one

[rsmith7]

Helen,
You saw the original Motorhead! I'm impressed. No Sleep to Hammersmith is permanently in my car.
My approach was to put up a controversial op and invite critism and conflicting arguments. All I got was sillyness like havelock's last post
I've learnt not to rise to the bait. Quite an achievment for me.

[rsmith7]

p.s. Bomber! awesome

[helen]

Havelock's post was as valid as any other. You cannot ask folk to refute a negative, you know damn well that it is impossible. Stop doing it it. Let's have some science.,

[rsmith7]

I asked him to find out how much wind and tide generators get paid for the electricity they produce.
Not a difficult assignment - I don't enjoy searching the net so he can do it as effectively as me.
Here's what I have on file (from my politician days )
Wind 500kW - 1.5MW - feed in tariff 9.4p/unit PLUS one ROC (£46.25/MW)

So this common sized turbine would receive 55.65p/ unit.

The ROC price was accurate as of 19th Jan 2010. For an update look up www.e-roc.co.uk/trackrecord.htm

I'm sure a pensioner would love to pay 55.65p/unit to keep her heater on in the winter.

[havelock]

From my limited reading around the subject of cost of energy (after all it's not science is it?) I understood that feed in tarrifs are limited to 5 MW systems and so don't apply to the large scale wind farms.

I admit that I don't know a lot about this but I question why it should be discussed on a science board.

[rsmith7]

Because if energy is unaffordable it's pretty useless isn't it?

[chloepink]

I think the first question to look at regarding electricty generation by wind turbines, is whether they 'wind generators CAN replace fossil fuel generators'.

According to Eon UK (and bear in mind they are very experienced in this field as their German counterpart is Eon Netz, the German grid operators) in their submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Economics of Renewable Energy, for every 100MW of installed wind capacity, only 8% can be relied upon to meet peak demand and the remainihg 92% would need backing up with firm generators i.e. coal, gas, oil, nuclear.
They are quite explicit about this (see point 10) at the following link.
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/195/8061708.htm

So at the moment wind turbine electricity generators are far from able to "replace" fossil fuel generators.

And then look at what the Tyndall Centre for Climate change has to say about CO2 emissions regarding backup generators:
“Tyndall Centre Technical Report 30, July 2005 Conclusion 5, Security of decarbonised electricity systems” refers to the back up plants needed for wind turbines: "We observed that wind generation has a relatively small capacity credit. At lower levels of wind penetrations the capacity credit of wind generation is found to be about the same as the average load factor of wind. However, as the level of wind penetration rises, the capacity credit begins to tail off. That is why in order to maintain the same level of system security a significant capacity of conventional plant will still be required.
However, these conventional plants will be required to run either occasionally and/or at part load when shortages of supply are likely to occur due to a low total wind power output. Considering that conventional plants at full load are the most efficient and generate the lowest amount of CO2 emission (per electricity produced) such occasionally and/or part-loaded plants will be less utilised and/or produce more CO2 per electricity produced."

Without getting into the detail of the increased generation costs, wind is already looking unfit for our purposes.

[kiteman]

Sept 8, 2010 11:17:06 GMT 1 rsmith7 said:

There simply isn't enough energy density in the wind or tide to EVER produce electricity at an affordable level.
Any of you scientists wish to disagree?

With what?

You haven't given us anything to disagree with.

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

As far as I am aware, wave energy densities range between 15-70kW/m of the UK's Atlantic coastline (lower values in shallow water, higher values in deep water).

Peak electrical demand in 2008 was 60GW

Unless my maths has failed me, that's 4000km of wave generating machinery in the coastline with the lowest energy-density to meet the UK's peak demand, or 571km of deep-water wave power to meet the typical demand.

However, you may have missed my comments on the BBC regarding joined-up thinking; no single technology should be considered as a replacement for fossil-fuel generation.

Intelligent planning would mix-and-match technologies with seasonally-varying local resources and national demands. Wave, wind, deep-current turbine, the various versions of biomass etc etc, and, yes, even solar.

[rsmith7]

Kiteman,
Please point to where I mentioned wave energy.
Have a look at the stock footage of the pelamis wave generator online www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-9P2VflRWU
You'll see that it's under tow. It didn't hold together long enough to get the publicity shots. marvellous

There's plenty energy in the waves (ocean swell more accurately) except they've been trying to harness it for 60 years with no success. They just can't make a machine that will generate in moderate conditions and stand up to extreme conditions.

[rsmith7]

Kiteman, here's a very pertinent quote from your "indestructables" site:

''Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities'' - Voltaire.

Very true.

[rsmith7]

www.power-technology.com/projects/strangford-lough/

Look at the published figures from the strangford loch turbine. You need to do the maths but the truth is there.
I wonder why they don't just publish their yearly production in pounds sterling. Well yes I do.
How many homes they can "power" is much less ambiguous.

[lazarus]

Sept 8, 2010 15:52:41 GMT 1 @havelock said:

BTW - do you acknowledge that you were mistaken when you said that wind energy contributed 0.2% to the UK's electricity mix?

Just read to the end of this thread and Boy am I glad I didn't hold my breath waiting for this!

Mr Smith does say somthing rather silly very early on;

"There simply isn't enough energy density in the wind or tide to EVER produce electricity at an affordable level."

How it it rational to say that on a science board?

The one thing even a would be politician should be capable of realising is that the cost of fossils fuels, due to their increasingly difficult extraction and oft dependence of support from unstable regimes, can only ever get more expensive over the long term.

Alternatives, which includes wind, due to increasing installed capasity, economies of scale, improvements in manufacturing and tecnological development, can only ever get cheasper.

It is inevitable that there will come a point in future, even without feed in tariffs or paying more because it isn't fossil, that they will be at an affordable level, even the most affordable depending on area.

When it happens is debatable but most, including wind, are likely to be within our life time. I could say I know this because I have a friend, and yada, yada yada, but case studies and research actually predict this.

Some examples;
www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-03/windpower-biomass-to-be-competitive-rwe-s-vahrenholt-tells-sueddeutsche.html
www.agea.org.au/media/docs/mma_comparative_costs_report_2.pdf

See Table 3.1 in the last link for a quick compare of predicted power generation costs in 2020 and 2030. By then wind is actually as cost effective as coal and gas. Only PV remains very uncompetitive.