Wind farms - ugly truths

Fabo · 28-05-2014 2:54pm

djpbarry wrote: »

But you haven’t shown that there has been a significant increase? And how about providing a link to the raw data you used to generate your plot?

There is no official study done....you have to sit down with a pencil and calculator and work it out.

Before we do point you in the direction, do you consider yourself open-minded ? Have you changed your mind before on a subject, once presented with new evidence.

Old diesel · 28-05-2014 3:59pm

This popped up on twitter

https://twitter.com/readyforwinter/status/471662590779994113/photo/1

thought it was interesting in the context of the thread - as they are calling on people to cut electricity demand on calm days

Says it all really

djpbarry · 28-05-2014 4:34pm

Fabo wrote: »

only a fool could believe this. capacity payments for starters........

You know the cost of the wind turbine up front. You’ve got a pretty good idea what the maintenance cost will be and you can forecast over the long term how much power will be generated.

So, if we say a cost of about £1 million per MW for installation, add say 20% for maintenance over a lifetime of 20 years and assume a capacity factor of say 30%, that works out at less than £0.02 per kWh.

That’s pretty damn cheap.

Fabo wrote: »

When Mark O'Malley was requested to supply information held on the environment through AIE, he refused.

Care to elaborate?

Fabo wrote: »

So wind farms do require back – up…

Name a form of power generation that does not require “back-up”?

Fabo wrote: »

demand will only ever rise to 2006 levels…

Ever? Really? Demand will never exceed 2006 levels?

Fabo wrote: »

due to the above, the opposite would be the case.

That statement makes no sense.

Fabo wrote: »

once again, these savings are pointless when new fossil fuel plant are given connections to the grid.

They’re obviously not pointless – Ireland’s emissions from power generation are declining quite rapidly.

Fabo wrote: »

UK consumers were quicker to spot the wind scam than their Irish counterparts. Due to slightly more independent media.

Are these the “slightly more independent media”-educated UK consumers who aren’t entirely sure whether the UK is in the EU or not?

I'm not sure I'd be quite so quick to trust their judgement.

Fabo wrote: »

There is no official study done...

I didn’t ask for one – I just asked for the source of the raw data used to generate the plot.

djpbarry · 28-05-2014 4:34pm

Old diesel wrote: »

This popped up on twitter

https://twitter.com/readyforwinter/status/471662590779994113/photo/1

thought it was interesting in the context of the thread - as they are calling on people to cut electricity demand on calm days

Says it all really

It doesn’t say anything at all - it’s just some guy on Twitter?!? It’s not like it’s a government agency or something.

visual · 28-05-2014 6:03pm

househero wrote: »

Slightly off topic brain fart....

Doesn't Germany manufacture these turbines

...who's pushing for EU countries to reduce carbon emissions while holding the solution?

Germany was leading the windfarms roll out dispite it costing every user 229 euro more
but it was the realisation that there grid was unstable and having to ramp up fossil fuel stations to meet demain and avoid blackouts that has forced germany to stop it wind energy in its tracks.
The intention was lots of wind energy and decommissioning of nucular plants reduction in CO2 plus Siemens are big player in turbines was a nice sweetener.

There is a dirrect relationship between Germany windfarms and their increased Co2.
Decommissioning nuclear stations didn't help but wind power didn't provide expected capacity.

The problem with wind energy is a simple one it is the wrong technology to provide a constant predictable supply. .

carbon tax is made up TAX that Europe self imposed our EU rep seeking pat on the head put forward that ireland could achieve 40%

The cleanest energy is the one with a bad rap nuclear and the public won't consider nuclear untill they are sitting in the dark without heating

ted1 · 28-05-2014 8:16pm

Old diesel wrote: »

This popped up on twitter

https://twitter.com/readyforwinter/status/471662590779994113/photo/1

thought it was interesting in the context of the thread - as they are calling on people to cut electricity demand on calm days

Says it all really

Actually the night is the worse time for Co2 emissions. They should be looking for people to increase demand when the system load drops below 2 GW

fclauson · 28-05-2014 8:19pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You know the cost of the wind turbine up front. You’ve got a pretty good idea what the maintenance cost will be and you can forecast over the long term how much power will be generated.

So, if we say a cost of about £1 million per MW for installation, add say 20% for maintenance over a lifetime of 20 years and assume a capacity factor of say 30%, that works out at less than £0.02 per kWh.

That’s pretty damn cheap.

So I question your maths

Turbine costs €1.5M/MW (http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colm-mccarthy/colm-mccarthy-case-for-wind-must-be-proven-on-costs-29798897.html)

Maintenance @ 2.5% (see references below)
Inflation @ 2%
Time frame 20 years

€1.5M invested - total maint €911K
@ 2000 peak output by 20 years -> 40Gw -> 6c per Kwh
@ 30% capacity output by 20 years -> 52.5 Gw -> 4.6c per Kwh

And this takes no account of Grid25 which is costing (I think) €5B needed to support wind or the backup generation capacity that has to be built to cover when its not running

It come back to my original point - wind is not as cheap as it might look

references for maintenance costs per annum of initial expense
bit of an old article by 3 to 5%
http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1010136/breaking-down-cost-wind-turbine-maintenance

another article 1 to 2%
http://www.windmeasurementinternational.com/wind-turbines/om-turbines.php

EWEA guidance 2 to 3%
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/WETF/Facts_Volume_2.pdf

ted1 · 28-05-2014 8:29pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You know the cost of the wind turbine up front. You’ve got a pretty good idea what the maintenance cost will be and you can forecast over the long term how much power will be generated.

So, if we say a cost of about £1 million per MW for installation, add say 20% for maintenance over a lifetime of 20 years and assume a capacity factor of say 30%, that works out at less than £0.02 per kWh.

That’s pretty damn cheap.
.

Don't forgot the cost of providing spinning reserve, the CMP, the BNE cost to make up the shortfall. The added cost of transmission and distribution to the grid for maintaining a distributed grid.

All these costs are involved and can't be ignored.

fclauson · 28-05-2014 8:44pm

and for another graph - source eurostat - note that irish is the most expensive in europe (baring cyprus and malta) and this price has ramped since wind was introduced compared to many other economies

Click to inlarge image

Source data - http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/graph.do?tab=graph&plugin=1&pcode=ten00114&language=en&toolbox=close

fclauson · 28-05-2014 9:24pm

just found this to add to the argument - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The UK chart is interesting and probably comparable to Ireland (given my last post)

Also this - appreciate its old - but I think the slide on page 8 says it all - that there is a significant add on cost to cover the cost of back up for wind
http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/publications/list/reports/cost_of_generating_electricity.pdf

ted1 · 28-05-2014 10:23pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You know the cost of the wind turbine up front. You’ve got a pretty good idea what the maintenance cost will be and you can forecast over the long term how much power will be generated.

So, if we say a cost of about £1 million per MW for installation, add say 20% for maintenance over a lifetime of 20 years and assume a capacity factor of say 30%, that works out at less than £0.02 per kWh.

That’s pretty damn cheap.
Care to elaborate?
Name a form of power generation that does not require “back-up”?
Ever? Really? Demand will never exceed 2006 levels?
That statement makes no sense.
They’re obviously not pointless – Ireland’s emissions from power generation are declining quite rapidly.
Are these the “slightly more independent media”-educated UK consumers who aren’t entirely sure whether the UK is in the EU or not?

I'm not sure I'd be quite so quick to trust their judgement.
I didn’t ask for one – I just asked for the source of the raw data used to generate the plot.

Gas turbines have a lower LCOE

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 11:58am

visual wrote: »

The intention was lots of wind energy and decommissioning of nucular plants reduction in CO2 plus Siemens are big player in turbines was a nice sweetener.

Let’s not start bringing conspiracy theories to the discussion.

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 11:59am

fclauson wrote: »

So I question your maths
…
@ 30% capacity output by 20 years -> 52.5 Gw -> 4.6c per Kwh

Fine – that’s still pretty cheap, no? I mean, how much is the average Irish household paying for their electricity right now? A hell of a lot more than 4 or 5c per kWh, right?

fclauson wrote: »

And this takes no account of Grid25 which is costing (I think) €5B needed to support wind or the backup generation capacity that has to be built to cover when its not running

Electricity distribution needs modernising right across the world, wind power or no wind power. Attributing those costs specifically to wind power doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

As for “back up”, as I’ve already said, it makes no more sense to claim that wind needs back-up than to claim that a gas-fired plant or a nuclear plant requires “back-up”.

fclauson wrote: »

and for another graph - source eurostat - note that irish is the most expensive in europe (baring cyprus and malta) and this price has ramped since wind was introduced compared to many other economies

Has it? I’d like to see a source for that claim.

As far as I’m aware, Cyprus has very little wind power and Malta virtually none. And yet, you’re trying to claim a correlation between wind power roll-out and electricity prices?

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 12:09pm

fclauson wrote: »

I'll accept the abuse this is not peer reviewed

but it does show madness if its true...

By the way, I'm still waiting for you to provide your raw data for this.

fclauson · 29-05-2014 2:24pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Fine – that’s still pretty cheap, no? I mean, how much is the average Irish household paying for their electricity right now? A hell of a lot more than 4 or 5c per kWh, right?

thats just the generation cost - not the profit and distribution costs

and our old mate - backup costs x 2

Electricity distribution needs modernising right across the world, wind power or no wind power. Attributing those costs specifically to wind power doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

but we do not need masses of HV cables from widely distributed wind farms if we had power generation in a small number of specific places - so it is a costs purely associated with wind

As for “back up”, as I’ve already said, it makes no more sense to claim that wind needs back-up than to claim that a gas-fired plant or a nuclear plant requires “back-up”.

You are still missing the point

Wind needs backup when its running AND when its not running - if you read the US report previously linked to you will see that wind cannot be classed as dispatchable - and hence the need for the backup I keep going on about

Gas only needs backup when its running

So for every bit of wind you install you need 2 x backup - have I failed to make this clear - the RA Eng document linked to by me previously makes this point abundantly clear.

fclauson · 29-05-2014 2:26pm

djpbarry wrote: »

By the way, I'm still waiting for you to provide your raw data for this.

I have asked the graph creator to provide me with the source of the data but I believe if you trawl hard the Eirgrid site you will find all the data you need

visual · 29-05-2014 3:32pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Let’s not start bringing conspiracy theories to the discussion.

Go play on eirgrid and semo web site with figures.

This is the problem with this hole area self appointed experts who play science in a wind tunnel then go quite when the optistic data models fail.

Was RTE researchers wrong has wind energy been placed hold in germany. Has Co2 increassed as claimed.

Without Carbon tax and premium paid for wind power its not viable. No country so far has had the expected energy from their wind farms yet these are going up here without question.

The devil is in the detail but sometimes too much detail only blinds everyone with science.
X amount to build y amount to maintaining z amount of overhead vs power actually produced.

If germany end user pays 229 euro extra to have wind energy and Co2 is increasing not dropping then its a failure

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 4:11pm

fclauson wrote: »

and our old mate - backup costs x 2

Ah yes, the double back-up that doesn’t exist?

fclauson wrote: »

but we do not need masses of HV cables from widely distributed wind farms if we had power generation in a small number of specific places - so it is a costs purely associated with wind

No, it isn’t. The idea of distributed generation is not specifically to cater for wind power, but for a variety of small-scale power sources.

fclauson wrote: »

You are still missing the point

No, I’m not. You keep claiming that wind requires two backups, but you have produced nothing to support this statement. I have challenged you on the basis that if this backup nonsense were true, Ireland would have far, far more installed generation capacity than it actually does and so far, you’ve come back with nothing – you just keep repeating the same claim.

fclauson wrote: »

So for every bit of wind you install you need 2 x backup - have I failed to make this clear ..

Yes, you have failed spectacularly, because there is no evidence to support your claim.

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 4:13pm

visual wrote: »

No country so far has had the expected energy from their wind farms...

Ireland has?

djpbarry · 29-05-2014 4:48pm

On the subject of distributed generation:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/the-rise-of-the-personal-power-plant

Fabo · 29-05-2014 10:14pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You know the cost of the wind turbine up front. You’ve got a pretty good idea what the maintenance cost will be and you can forecast over the long term how much power will be generated.

So, if we say a cost of about £1 million per MW for installation, add say 20% for maintenance over a lifetime of 20 years and assume a capacity factor of say 30%, that works out at less than £0.02 per kWh.

funnily enough, I have just worked out capacity factor for local windfarm in the 12 mths to April 2014. 8.5% I got. Yes, 8.5%. I thought it would have at least made 15 but no, its worth repeating again - 8 . 5 % capacity factor.

That’s pretty damn cheap.

I would dispute that its "cheap" but in any case value is the only thing that matters. And Ireland never worked out the value from windfarms. In fact they chose to leave that section blank in their NREAP. Ireland’s NREAP went from Section 5.2 to Section 5.4. There was zero information in relation to impacts, such as costs and benefits.

Name a form of power generation that does not require “back-up”?

the RATIONALE for wind farms is that it de-carbonizes power generation, not the opposite !!!

Ever? Really? Demand will never exceed 2006 levels?

you might not be aware of the Celtic Tiger and the carbon intensive industries (eg cement and concrete) that sprung up around the country that have now disappeared

I didn’t ask for one – I just asked for the source of the raw data used to generate the plot.

Look up Eirgrid Adequacy Reports and Generation Capacity Statements for the past few years. See Appendix 2 for dispatchable generation chart.

Old diesel · 29-05-2014 10:21pm

Fabo wrote: »

funnily enough, I have just worked out capacity factor for local windfarm in the 12 mths to April 2014. 8.5% I got. Yes, 8.5%. I thought it would have at least made 15 but no, its worth repeating again - 8 . 5 % capacity factor.

I would dispute that its "cheap" but in any case value is the only thing that matters. And Ireland never worked out the value from windfarms. In fact they chose to leave that section blank in their NREAP. Ireland’s NREAP went from Section 5.2 to Section 5.4. There was zero information in relation to impacts, such as costs and benefits.

the RATIONALE for wind farms is that it de-carbonizes power generation, not the opposite !!!

you might not be aware of the Celtic Tiger and the carbon intensive industries (eg cement and concrete) that sprung up around the country that have now disappeared

Look up Eirgrid Adequacy Reports and Generation Capacity Statements for the past few years. See Appendix 2 for dispatchable generation chart.

How were you able to work out the capacity factor for your local wind farm????

8.5 percent is definitely woeful though

fclauson · 30-05-2014 6:32am

Old diesel wrote: »

How were you able to work out the capacity factor for your local wind farm????

8.5 percent is definitely woeful though

Easy - go to www.sem-o-com - and go to market data/dynamic reports

you can then run a report for your particular unit

unit details can be found at http://www.sem-o.com/Publications/General/List%20of%20Registered%20Units.pdf

fclauson · 30-05-2014 7:49am

Fabo wrote: »

Look up Eirgrid Adequacy Reports and Generation Capacity Statements for the past few years. See Appendix 2 for dispatchable generation chart.

A good summary is available http://www.windawareireland.com/economic-issues/irelands-back-generation-capacity-analysis/

djpbarry · 30-05-2014 9:52am

Fabo wrote: »

funnily enough, I have just worked out capacity factor for local windfarm in the 12 mths to April 2014. 8.5% I got. Yes, 8.5%. I thought it would have at least made 15 but no, its worth repeating again - 8 . 5 % capacity factor.

Meanwhile, on a national level, the capacity factor comes in at more or less the value we would expect – around about 30%.

Fabo wrote: »

the RATIONALE for wind farms is that it de-carbonizes power generation, not the opposite !!!

You’re saying that Ireland’s power generation is becoming more carbon intensive? Because any figures I’ve seen suggest otherwise.

mikep · 30-05-2014 10:00am

I have been keeping an eye on this and am somewhat intrigued by it all...

I think eveidence that wind energy works can be found by the fact that big pharma see it as a part of their plans for the future.
From what I know of these companies they tend to avoid big investments that won't give any payback..

http://www.thejournal.ie/wind-turbines-cork-lower-harbour-1492510-May2014/

To the OP, is it just wind energy you are against? As we can see you have another thread going about the "health effects" of wind turbines.

fclauson · 30-05-2014 10:04am

djpbarry wrote: »

You’re saying that Ireland’s power generation is becoming more carbon intensive? Because any figures I’ve seen suggest otherwise.

I think the nub of this part of the discussion is why is more carbon plant being built in parallel to wind when it should be just add on wind.

fclauson · 30-05-2014 10:19am

mikep wrote: »

I have been keeping an eye on this and am somewhat intrigued by it all...

I think eveidence that wind energy works can be found by the fact that big pharma see it as a part of their plans for the future.
From what I know of these companies they tend to avoid big investments that won't give any payback..

http://www.thejournal.ie/wind-turbines-cork-lower-harbour-1492510-May2014/

To the OP, is it just wind energy you are against? As we can see you have another thread going about the "health effects" of wind turbines.

To answer the for/against question - I am neither
I want to know does it make sense
is it safe
do we know the implications
why are their so many hyper-pro people and hyper-anti people
what is the effect of being subject to a profile of continuous noise/done

I wanted to cause a discussion on this in open forum - its a shame that just few people have joined in (so welcome and please add you comment)

To answer why a phama might put a turbine on its site has to be looked at in the context not only of the energy produced but also all the other financial benefits which they may be able to avail of by doing so. Obviously as I do with my PV I use as much of the power locally, I program my systems (heating, h/w, dishwashers etc ) to use as much as possible when its available and sell back what I do not need - but this model - and I appreciate this - would cause problems if everyone in the country does it.

Macha · 30-05-2014 10:41am

fclauson wrote: »

I think the nub of this part of the discussion is why is more carbon plant being built in parallel to wind when it should be just add on wind.

Which thermal plants are being built in Ireland right now? Genuine question because we have an over capacity of gas and I don't know of any coal or peat plants being built.

mikep · 30-05-2014 10:47am

I am in the pro camp, but not hyper pro. I think it needs to be used in conjunction with other renewables. Ireland has an abundant wind resource but as pointed out repeatedly here the wind does not provide a constant supply so I think we need to increase the use of boimass, pumped storage hydro, and waste to energy (this could make me a pariah) It seems our hydro resource from rivers is pretty much done, excluding micro generation.
On the health effects I have done some research into subthreshold noise and it seems that machinery contributes way more to this than wind turbines. I don't know much about the shadow flicker issue..

Finally OP, is all your electricity supplied by PV?

fclauson · 30-05-2014 11:06am

Macha wrote: »

Which thermal plants are being built in Ireland right now? Genuine question because we have an over capacity of gas and I don't know of any coal or peat plants being built.

See http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Generation%20Capacity%20Statement%202014.pdf

I may have used the term thermal which probably should have read fossil to cover net new gas

fclauson · 30-05-2014 11:06am

mikep wrote: »

Finally OP, is all your electricity supplied by PV?

Unfortunately not - I produce 4000kwh/annum - and this matches my heating/hw demand (which is provided by a Heat Pump where I get around 3Kw out for every 1Kw approx.)

I use the grid as an interseasonal store (and hence my comments that if every one did this they I would be adding to the problem but when I built the house I was not into understanding grid load balancing etc). I push around 1800Kwh onto the grid in the summer to suck it back in the winter. I get paid 9c for the units sold and around 9.8c to buy them back (night time rate). My payback will be around 8 to 10 years to cover the costs of the install assuming my original model holds true.

fclauson · 30-05-2014 11:11am

djpbarry wrote: »

Meanwhile, on a national level, the capacity factor comes in at more or less the value we would expect – around about 30%.

I have not done extensive work on this just yet but looking at numbers from SEM-O inland wind farms seem to underperform and be supported by costal farms which perform much better. My research has only really looked at Wexford and has not covered whole year samples as yet but there is a trend which allows me to take this view. The very rough split is that inland farms around the 20% mark for the periods I have looked at.

With the additional of more inland farms it will be interesting to see if the 30% sticks

djpbarry · 30-05-2014 11:26am

fclauson wrote: »

I think the nub of this part of the discussion is why is more carbon plant being built in parallel to wind when it should be just add on wind.

You keep making these sort of statements, when there is absolutely no evidence to support them. The Generation Capacity Statement you linked to actually shows a projected decrease of about 200MW in installed thermal capacity in Ireland over the next ten years.

fclauson · 30-05-2014 1:29pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You keep making these sort of statements, when there is absolutely no evidence to support them. The Generation Capacity Statement you linked to actually shows a projected decrease of about 200MW in installed thermal capacity in Ireland over the next ten years.

Check out http://www.eirgrid.com/media/TSOGate3StatusReportaspublished19thDecember2013.pdf

You will see there is 710 of OCGT and 215 of CCGT either on its way or already connected

the above link seems to not work - try http://www.eirgrid.com/gate3/

djpbarry · 30-05-2014 1:50pm

fclauson wrote: »

Check out http://www.eirgrid.com/media/TSOGate3StatusReportaspublished19thDecember2013.pdf

You will see there is 710 of OCGT and 215 of CCGT either on its way or already connected

The Generation Capacity Statement shows there is 591MW to be added over the next ten years, but 804MW is to be removed (decommissioned).

Fabo · 30-05-2014 2:13pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Meanwhile, on a national level, the capacity factor comes in at more or less the value we would expect – around about 30%.

yea the trick pulled there is that some wind farms reach 30% peak for a low number of hrs each year.

You’re saying that Ireland’s power generation is becoming more carbon intensive? Because any figures I’ve seen suggest otherwise.

no thanks to wind. the opening of gas plants is an isolated issue to that under discussion

fclauson · 30-05-2014 2:17pm

djpbarry wrote: »

The Generation Capacity Statement shows there is 591MW to be added over the next ten years, but 804MW is to be removed (decommissioned).

Not sure where you get the 591 from page 27 shows 1232 being added

The 804 being removed is partly Tarbert which was due for decommissioning in 2012 (see the 2011 report where it drops to 0) is now only going to go on belching C02 upto 2021

Fabo · 30-05-2014 2:35pm

djpbarry wrote: »

The Generation Capacity Statement shows there is 591MW to be added over the next ten years, but 804MW is to be removed (decommissioned).

There are also connection agreements in place for a 445MW CCGT plant in Ballakelly along with 3 smaller OCGTs not included in this. See Table 3-2 of Eirgrid’s 2014 Capacity Statement.

djpbarry · 30-05-2014 4:33pm

fclauson wrote: »

Not sure where you get the 591 from page 27 shows 1232 being added

Table 3.1. It states in the report that it is possible that not every plant in Table 3.2 will be commissioned:

Of the plant in Table 3-2, only Great Island CCGT has a firm commissioning date in the next year. EirGrid has taken the prudent view that not all of the other planned plant in the table above will be commissioned.

But anyway, regardless of which figure we use, we’re still a very long way off the level of new capacity that you’re claiming is required to “back up” wind.

Old diesel · 30-05-2014 4:46pm

Anyway this is my last contribution to this thread -

But some outstanding issues with regard to wind - imo

1) Planning - yes that old chesnut again - what is an appropriate setback distance OR EVEN BETTER how do we calculate an appropriate setback distance - taking into account the type/size of turbine etc.

The standard I would like to achieve in relation to planning and setbacks is this - where a home is pleasant to live in prior to the wind farm been built in the area or nearby - I would like to see this continue when wind farm is operational.

Pleasant is a subjective term - but I choose the term - because it relates to what a home is like to live in - and doesn't go down the road - of - right don't want turbines - but instead opens the door to discussion on PROPERLY planned turbines that don't interfere with everyday living.

2) Planning for the future of communities

Do we just look at communities as places to put a wind farm - or do we take a more positive outlook on communities as places where people live. Id like to see as many communities as possible continue - as COMMUNITIES - not just seen as places to put wind turbines. That doesn't mean NO turbines - it means doing our best to plan wind farms in a manner that is as compatible as possible with COMMUNITY living.

3) Performance - how do we improve the consistency of performance from turbines in future - and how do we embrace the idea of looking at other alternatives to wind in the renewables field - so we have a mix of options.

Biomass for example - does have its flaws - but should be able to operate on days when turbines aren't moving due to low wind - this would assist in the short term in meeting our renewable targets - and would reduce the number of turbines needed to reach targets.

I say biomass would assist short term because it does have its flaws - but it could help bridge the gap while alternatives are developed

ted1 · 30-05-2014 9:44pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You’re saying that Ireland’s power generation is becoming more carbon intensive? Because any figures I’ve seen suggest otherwise.

It's being up and down the past few years.
http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Emission_Factors/Electricity_Emission_Factors.pdf

Our moving away from peat and the increase in CCGT would skew the results for wind.

ted1 · 30-05-2014 9:49pm

mikep wrote: »

I have been keeping an eye on this and am somewhat intrigued by it all...

I think eveidence that wind energy works can be found by the fact that big pharma see it as a part of their plans for the future.
From what I know of these companies they tend to avoid big investments that won't give any payback..

http://www.thejournal.ie/wind-turbines-cork-lower-harbour-1492510-May2014/

To the OP, is it just wind energy you are against? As we can see you have another thread going about the "health effects" of wind turbines.

You'd be surprised. Lots of it is just PR. I've seen pharma plants make a balls of their calculations and end up dumping heat from The CHP for 8 months of the year.
I work with most pharma and manufacturing plants and what they do dorsnt always make sense. They buy energy at much lower prices. Capex on energy can be financed very cheaply and written off so without it actually turning they can break even

djpbarry · 30-05-2014 10:50pm

ted1 wrote: »

It's being up and down the past few years.
http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Emission_Factors/Electricity_Emission_Factors.pdf

Our moving away from peat and the increase in CCGT would skew the results for wind.

It's on a downward trend and I never said that newer gas-fired plants did not play a role.

Macha · 30-05-2014 10:58pm

ted1 wrote: »

It's being up and down the past few years.
http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/Emission_Factors/Electricity_Emission_Factors.pdf

Our moving away from peat and the increase in CCGT would skew the results for wind.

My guess is that the increase from 2011 to 2012 was experienced across Europe as cheap shale gas in the US allowed them to export their coal (and emissions) into Europe and the weak ETS did nothing to keep it out. Coal has been beating gas on most wholesale power markets across Europe for quite some time.

Birdnuts · 31-05-2014 12:03am

mikep wrote: »

I have been keeping an eye on this and am somewhat intrigued by it all...

I think eveidence that wind energy works can be found by the fact that big pharma see it as a part of their plans for the future.
From what I know of these companies they tend to avoid big investments that won't give any payback..

http://www.thejournal.ie/wind-turbines-cork-lower-harbour-1492510-May2014/

To the OP, is it just wind energy you are against? As we can see you have another thread going about the "health effects" of wind turbines.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/blow-for-council-as-wind-power-fails-to-light-up-20m-park-29709815.html

Hope it works better than this farce. I suspect a lot of this nonsense is PR related to make corporations look like they care. In most cases its simply empty green wash.

Birdnuts · 31-05-2014 12:08am

fclauson wrote: »

With the additional of more inland farms it will be interesting to see if the 30% sticks

The 30% figure is rarely reached in this country - just look at Eirgrids figures since 2005. Notable that during the extreme cold winter of 2010 the figure was under 25%. This is a trend seen across Europe which is why more coal is being used in places like Germany

Macha · 31-05-2014 8:29am

Birdnuts wrote: »

The 30% figure is rarely reached in this country - just look at Eirgrids figures since 2005. Notable that during the extreme cold winter of 2010 the figure was under 25%. This is a trend seen across Europe which is why more coal is being used in places like Germany

Ugh no it's not. I just explained above why more coal is being used across Europe, in Germany and practically every other country as well. Are you just making stuff up because it fits your narrative? I don't know, nor have I read, any credible energy analyst who would equate more coal use in Germany as a result of renewable installation capacity factors. Everybody knows its related to American shale gas, especially the European coal industry itself.

I don't understand the obsession with capacity factors on this forum and my guess it it comes from an inability to break with the idea of baseload. In a flexible energy system, energy is more valuable if it can respond to demand, can engage in balancing markets, provide ancillary services, how it interacts with energy technologies on the system, where it can be built, if it reduces the need for transmission. In this sort of system, for example, wind turbines that can capture energy more efficiently in low wind conditions are extremely valuable.

Solar panels probably convert about 20% of the sunlight into electricity: coal power probably converts about <0.001% of the original sunlight into electricity. Let's get a bit of perspective on this.

Jim Martin · 31-05-2014 10:42am

Old diesel wrote: »

Biomass for example - does have its flaws - but should be able to operate on days when turbines aren't moving due to low wind - this would assist in the short term in meeting our renewable targets - and would reduce the number of turbines needed to reach targets.

I say biomass would assist short term because it does have its flaws - but it could help bridge the gap while alternatives are developed

I don't think biomass is the answer as it would not be as instantaneous as gas fired!

Macha · 31-05-2014 10:45am

Jim Martin wrote: »

I don't think biomass is the answer as it would not be as instantaneous as gas fired!

Biogas?

Wind farms - ugly truths

Comments