|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 7:49:49 GMT 1
"Science" according to the Oxford dictionary, in it's simplist terms means knowledge. I provided a link in my earlier post to the knowledge Eon UK have gained through the "experiment" of installing wind generators. They have found that 92% of installed wind capacity needs "backing up". www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/195/8061708.htm"To assess the extent to which investment in wind capacity will be able to replace thermal plant on the system while ensuring that peak demand can be met at the same level of reliability, we need to assess how much wind capacity on the system can be relied on to meet peak demand at a dependability of 95%. Our assessment of winter wind generation data in 2007[5] indicates that the system operator could rely on 8% 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% 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." So instead of waffling amongst yourselves, I wonder what any of you have to say about the ability of wind generators to "replace" thermal plant and subsequently about how we will power the nation. Facts, figures and links supporting any posts would be good. |
|
|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 8:13:53 GMT 1
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. Havelock, a quick google on 'ROCs 5MW' will clarify what you are getting at here. Basically ROCs is for large schemes (> 5MW) and so do apply to large scale wind farms. Schemes between 50kw and 5MW can choose FITs or ROCs. Schemes under 50kw care only eligible for FITs. You could have checked this out yourself before posting. |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 9, 2010 8:24:05 GMT 1
I have had to check all of rsmith7's 'facts' already and found them to be misleading (to be charitable)
I understand FiTs and ROCs are political measures. I am happier discussing the science and so found your post re eon to be very interesting and informative, thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 9, 2010 9:27:47 GMT 1
"I understand FiTs and ROCs are political measures."
If it weren't for the above, no wind or tidal device would ever be built.
That's a bit of a show stopper especially in these financially straightened times.
Or do you have other ideas havelock?
Or possibly you'll claim ignorance of basic arithmetic - that would put your scientific arguments at a bit of a disadvantage, I suspect.
Which branch of the MOD did you work for? Met office by any chance?
|
|
|
|
Post by kiteman on Sept 9, 2010 11:41:04 GMT 1
No it isn't capacity It is production I'm not being obtuse - I'm being precise I have the capacity to run a mile in just over 8 minutes. I am currently producing a speed of zero.... (Edited to re-position italics) |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 9, 2010 11:48:57 GMT 1
Which branch of the MOD did you work for? Met office by any chance? No - Army |
|
|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 12:31:50 GMT 1
No it isn't capacity It is production I'm not being obtuse - I'm being precise I have the capacity to run a mile in just over 8 minutes. I am currently producing a speed of zero.... (Edited to re-position italics) Absolutely Kiteman, a good analogy and although I haven't yet found firm figures for the 'installed capacity' of wind generators in the UK, I have got this fascinating link that shows the percentage of electricity 'produced' by wind turbines in thie UK (and it's 0.5% in the last 24hrs): www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp.php#generation_by_fuel_type_table(Unfortunately the BWEA, the trade lobby group for the wind industry, are (I suspect deliberately) lax in their use of terminology.) |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 9, 2010 12:45:51 GMT 1
I've also been looking around and found this recently issued report by a group (that includes eon) that says "The Offshore Valuation Group came together to answer a central question for the United Kingdom: What is the value of our offshore renewable energy resource? What we found has exceeded our expectations. In harnessing 29% of the practical offshore renewable resource by 2050: • the electricity equivalent of 1 billion barrels of oil could be generated annually, matching North Sea oil and gas production and making Britain a net electricity exporter;" and "We assessed the extent of the practical resource through a detailed mapping process based on five electricity generating technologies: wind with fixed and floating foundations; wave; tidal range; and tidal stream. The full practical resource - 2,131 TWh/year - exceeds current UK electricity demand six times over." www.offshorevaluation.org/downloads/offshore_valuation_exec.pdf[oh - and the figure of 6.6% of the UKs energy coming from renewable sources comes from DECC although they don't seem to break this down further. As I'm pretty sure we don't have a huge amount of solar or geothermal, 2.5% from wind as stated by BWEA sounds reasonable] |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 9, 2010 13:04:23 GMT 1
Electricity is only a small fraction of UK fuel usage.
But what makes you think this pie in the sky "projection" even from a highly subsidised sector, is likely to be met? Have any other targets or projections for renewables ever been met - except those facilitated through a declining industrial economy? Can you provide the evidence?
|
|
|
|
Post by lazarus on Sept 9, 2010 13:06:05 GMT 1
They have found that 92% of installed wind capacity needs "backing up". Of course it does, it isn't windy enough all the time. There has always been back up and it's need will continue. It doesn't detract anything from the idea of wind generation. Part of the problem is storage. Turbines don't always store generated power when there is over capacity to put back into the grid when it is needed. |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 9, 2010 13:25:11 GMT 1
I have also found the detailed government figures that confirm BWEAs figure of wind energy contributed 2.5% to the UKs fuel mix last year - so no, this was not spin or misleading information from a trade body www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/dukes/dukes.aspxChloepink - perhaps you'd care to retract your unfounded accusation "(Unfortunately the BWEA, the trade lobby group for the wind industry, are (I suspect deliberately) lax in their use of terminology.)" |
|
|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 13:30:00 GMT 1
They have found that 92% of installed wind capacity needs "backing up". Of course it does, it isn't windy enough all the time. There has always been back up and it's need will continue. It doesn't detract anything from the idea of wind generation. Part of the problem is storage. Turbines don't always store generated power when there is over capacity to put back into the grid when it is needed. I didn't know that some wind turbines did store generated power; please would you provide more information on some such turbines? |
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 9, 2010 13:34:28 GMT 1
chloepink - you asked for potential alternative views supported by links to evidence.
I've shown you a couple - any comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 13:38:06 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by chloepink on Sept 9, 2010 13:44:30 GMT 1
chloepink - you asked for potential alternative views supported by links to evidence. I've shown you a couple - any comments? Yes, what's going to back up the wind and if it's another renewable, then why bother with the wind in the first place? |
|
