Another wind electricity generation record today

I’m sure Mothman did not simply pick 6.12.08 out of random curiosity!

Wind is probably the most predictable element of the weather in forecasting terms in Ireland. Most days they can’t predict when and where the sun will be shining or where it will be raining, but wind levels are predictable with good accuracy, usually many days in advance.

http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forecasts/d/charts/medium/deterministic/

The English botanist David Bellamy is continuously waging a loud mouthed campaign against wind energy on the grounds of his perceived need for “spinning reserve” to match wind generation plant. One suspects that he is ideologically prejudiced against wind energy, rather than speaking from an expert knowledge of electricity generation systems, which does not appear to be his field.

A combination of diversity of location of windmills (on and offshore, in all parts of the country), combined with grid interconnectivity with other countries (essential for backup and exporting the net surplus which would arise if the industry was allowed to develop to its full potential), and diversity with other renewable energy systems (eg wave, tidal, solar, hydro, and pumped storage) would minimise the need for replacing old thermal generation plant to act as backup.

The ESB is committing its financial capacity (which derives directly from Ireland's high priced electricity - the most expensive in the EU) to electricity generation projects all over Europe, while the Irish grid (and its international connectivity) remains in a total mess. Not dissimilar to Aer Rianta’s (ie the so called “Dublin Airport ‘Authority’”) with its forays at Dusseldorf, Birmingham, Moscow and other airports, while leaving the Irish airports it operates in chaos for decades. Dysfunctional state agencies misbehaving as private corporations, diverting their resources anywhere and everywhere – except where they should be. Another version of the “Fás Space Challenge syndrome” in Florida!

On top of that, most of the capital investment in generation capacity continues to go into non-renewable energy plant – mostly gas burning. It would be far more energy efficient to retain the gas for direct consumption by gas users. No plan. No strategy. No direction. The system is allowed to fumble along year in, year out, consuming large amounts of scarce resources (eg money and non-renewable energy) in the process.

BendiBus wrote: »

Has that actually been demonstrated? Irish electricity prices are not proof.

Although your carefully worded "fuel that keeps going up in price" is a clever effort.

You can always manufacture a "fact" if you throw in enough suppositions.

"Green energy requiring a massive R&D effort, enormous development costs, high maintenance and with a limited, and often unknown, lifespan is always more expensive than reliable fossil fuel power which is falling in price"

In December 2003, ESB charged 10.75 c/kWh for domestic electricity.
In December 2008, the charge was 15.97 c/kWh.
An increase of 48.6% over five years - almost 10% per annum.

If they keep this rate of price inflation up, it will be about 24c per kWh in five years time + VAT. Hardly a stable basis on which to build a competitive economy.

Established green energy systems - eg wind and hydro are simply capital intensive. They have very low operating costs, and zero fuel costs. Interest costs are low, and will remain low for the foreseeable future, making capital intensive projects cheaper to fund. It is possible to lock-in low interest rates now for 20 to 30 years by issuing long term bonds to fund projects. There is a very strong market for bonds at the moment, due to the fall off in demand for equities.

The current drop in oil prices is short term, and is a direct result of the "cardiac arrest" that has hit the global economy. Oil prices (and all other fuel costs) will be back up with a vengeance once the global economy shows signs of emerging from its current state - due to the inevitable growth in consumption in Asia and the Middle East itself and the fall off in discovery of new oil wells.

The real cost per kWh of electricity generated by a green energy resource that doesn't require fuel inputs falls every year over its useful life. The cost per kWh rises on the other hand, typically at rates several times that of the general inflation rate, in electricity generation systems which are fuelled by hydrocarbon sources.

When you are funding a new power station, or planning for a national economy, short-term falls in oil prices are irrelevant. What matters is the input costs over the 30 odd year life of the project.

There are no R&D costs with wind energy, you buy the latest kit on the market at a fixed price, and that's it. Its expected useful life is well established. Any R&D involved in creating the product is built into the price of the equipment. As for wave and tidal energy, while they are less mature, the waves and the tides keep flowing. The La Rance tidal power plant in Brittany has been operational for over 40 years, and still keeps working away. It cost €94 million to build, and today produces €94 million worth of electricity at ESB prices every year (600 M kW/h)! It is controlled remotely from an EdF grid management centre, and the maintenance costs are minimal and predictable.

While wave energy still needs some time and money to mature, its current situation reflects the fact that it has been starved of R&D funding. It is not unlike the drug and health industry. They put billions into developing drugs and diagnostic systems for various illnesses - many of which are caused by inappropriate diet - because there is big money to be made on drugs (in the same way as there is big money in oil and gas). In Ireland alone, the HSE has a budget of over €14 billion per annum. One wonders how much they spend teaching school children and parents (many of whom are obese) the benefits of healthy eating? At most a few "quid".

It seems to me that several posters to this thread haven't a clue what they are talking about, and they are just spamming the thread in a silly attempt to protect some vested interests....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_tidal_power_plant

BendiBus wrote: »

To prove that's caused by using fossil fuel instead of renewables, tell me what would electricity cost now if renewables generated most of our electricity?

The cost per kWh delivered at any point in time depends on when the infrastructure was built, and the cost of fuel, if any consumed – among other factors. I get my electricity from hydro and incineration of our waste and waste clean wood, and it has remained at about 9c per kWh for the past seven years or so. Including VAT. Fossilized ESB output costs about twice this amount. The price and availability and security of supply of fossil fuels have been going in the wrong direction from the consumers’ perspective for some time – at least since 1973, and the trend has been escalating as demand increases, and hedge funds play speculative games with the petroleum industry. Aside from the fact that gas and oil supplies are quickly running out, and even dirty coal reserves appear to have been grossly overstated – aside from the difficulty of getting people to work as coal miners in 2009.

The capital cost can be very significant depending on the lifespan of the project. Maintenance costs can rise as systems get older. Overall cost relative to newer systems (or older systems already paid for) may make a system uncompetitive. These possibilities drive business investment decisions.

Waffle! I have yet to see “our windfarm is broken again” stories. “We can’t afford a new blade or gearbox part or" ...... Evidence please. The reason I mentioned the tidal system at La Rance was due to its age and the low cost per kWh delivered (1.8c per kWh) – cheaper than nuclear (where most of the costs are swept under the carpet for future generations to discover and deal with).

Base rates might be low, but commercial interest rates (if you're even able to get funding) aren't necessarily low. Ditto bonds. The bond market is strong because companies have to offer a premium to get anyone to buy them.

Utility type businesses have no problem raising bond finance, because they offer a stable cash flow. Bond yields have fallen. In a recession people can do without a new car, new clothes, a new house, etc – but they do need food and electricity. While people can trade down to cheaper food and eating out less, most people can’t do without lighting, heating, and power for their everyday business. EdF bonds are currently yielding just over 3%.

Basic point is that investing in renewables is not a guaranteed winner.

Nothing is guaranteed absolutely in this world we live in. When the wind stops blowing permanently, wind farms will have a big problem. When the sun stops shining, solar energy farms will be out of business – as will everything else.

Depends on how you account for depreciation/amortisation.

How one accounts for depreciation / amortization is irrelevant. If you invest €100 million in a wind farm with an expected life of 25 years, your write-off of capital will be €100 million max. Of course you could write off everything in the first year, and make a €100 million + loss in that year, but you would have fat profits in years 2 ... 25 with no depreciation expense. Please stop insulting peoples’ intelligence!

But as you state a couple of lines later, you actually do pay for the R&D when you buy the product.

So what? When you buy a new car, you pay for the R&D that went into the car, but you don’t care. You just want to know what the price of the car is. That is your cost. The price of the glass, engine, transmission system, tyres, etc is irrelevant. As is the share of R&D cost amortized into the car’s retail price. Your gas turbine, oil or coal burning generation system also has R&D and all these other replacement costs – no doubt a lot more than a simple turbine turned by wind or water movement.

La Rance is an exception in that it can't be replicated just anywhere. I'm not aware of a suitable site in Ireland. Although maybe there is one?

The only reason I mentioned La Rance in this thread (as stated above - but seems to be worth REPEATING!) is by way of a simple example of how long green energy projects can deliver electricity, and how dirt cheap their output becomes with the passage of time. The direct opposite to fuel based generation systems.

Who should be providing the funding?

There would appear to be a queue of investors interested in green energy projects. It offers a far better prospect of a stable return compared with a brain dead property speculation. And even if there weren’t any interested parties, it would be a far better use of government borrowing power for the ESB to invest in green energy projects (including HVDC interconnectors with other countries) compared with other less productive deployments of national financial capacity.

I don't know if I'm included but if I have a vested interest then it's in renewables as that's where I try to invest. However this means I require evidence rather than opinion dressed up as fact.

I actually agree that renewables are the way to go but I'm fearful of the historic route to failure which is to over-promise and under-deliver.

Forgive me, but you come across as being a tad "schizophrenic" if you are someone who invests their money in green energy and posts some of the stuff one has seen on this thread! But you do say that you “try to invest” – so perhaps you are playing games with words!

The wind energy potential of Ireland is quite easy to model given the track record of the limited installed base of plant at this point in time. Met Eireann has detailed data on wind speeds over every few km2 of land in Ireland from its HIRLAM model. It is possible to extrapolate the economic contribution from 10x, 20x etc the current installed base of wind farm capacity on and offshore, taking into consideration the cost of HVDC connectivity to export / import electricity and the market prices available for electricity in neighbouring countries at various times of the day. France has large capacity interconnections with Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Belgium, etc and has exchanged power in both directions with these countries for many years. The variables are quantifiable.

While France is stuffed to the gills with nuclear power kit at present, the powers that be know that nuclear fuel supplies are running out and plan to get renewable energy supplying 23% of France’s electricity within 11 years from now.

The risks are manageable. I’m not suggesting that Ireland goes 100% green energy overnight. It is an incremental process over time. It just needs to be put on a solid footing, and the hydrocarbon vested interests kept at bay from choking off initiatives. While I expect that there will be a substantial increase in business insolvencies in Ireland over the next few months, I would be surprised if wind farm operators or their suppliers (eg Vestas) will be facing the same difficulties!