Wind farms - ugly truths

fclauson · 07-12-2014 09:25PM

Grudaire wrote: »

T...
If anything it's a sad reflection on the anti wind side that this is the best that they have

That where there is a real issues

Pro-wind is making money and can afford PR, research etc

Against-wind typically is poorly funded because they are trying to position a set of arguments with little back up or resources and with state run business which are obstructive when it comes to responding to AIE requests

Anti-Wind are a different crowd and should not be confused with Against-Wind

Macha · 08-12-2014 09:35AM

fclauson wrote: »

Anti-Wind are a different crowd and should not be confused with Against-Wind

??

fclauson · 08-12-2014 10:04AM

Macha wrote: »

??

I was trying to draw a distinction between
the eco-pro-fanatic
the nimby-anti-fanatic
and to suggest that there is also a group who fall into the logically-based-on-data-against category.

Grudaire · 08-12-2014 11:27AM

fclauson wrote: »

I was trying to draw a distinction between
the eco-pro-fanatic
the nimby-anti-fanatic
and to suggest that there is also a group who fall into the logically-based-on-data-against category.

Is there a "logically based-on-data pro side" as well?

fclauson · 08-12-2014 12:12PM

Grudaire wrote: »

Is there a "logically based-on-data pro side" as well?

of course

so we have the scale in order

eco-pro-fanatic
logically-based-on-data-pro
logically-based-on-data-against
nimby-anti-fanatic

I lie between the middle two - based on currently installed base - how we intend to use the generated product - what to do when the wind stops blowing - grid resilience - cost benefits/return on investment ..... the list goes on and on

Old diesel · 08-12-2014 01:15PM

fclauson wrote: »

of course

so we have the scale in order

eco-pro-fanatic
logically-based-on-data-pro
logically-based-on-data-against
nimby-anti-fanatic

I lie between the middle two - based on currently installed base - how we intend to use the generated product - what to do when the wind stops blowing - grid resilience - cost benefits/return on investment ..... the list goes on and on

Part of winds difficulty - is the huge conflict in views - you've got studies showing wind is great - safe - no problem.

But you've got others showing potential for issues - heck even Colette Bonner at the Dept of Health has acknowledged this.

Is there potential ways forward for wind - I think potentially yes.

But the lndustry struggles to grasp the idea that goes on in other industries like cars and aviation - how do we make the product better - what are the flaws - how do we address the flaws.

However the issues are more then simply wind itself - but relate to planning GENERALLY.

Wind is being planned in complete isolation from anything else going on around it - its like to me - designing a car - and the axles, gearboxes, chassis and body not being able to be put together - because the gearbox guys, the axle guys, chassis guys and the designer of the body work NEVER spoke to each other.

So we are planning wind but not PROPERLY talking to horse industry, tourism, residents and communities (examples) to establish what their needs are - what their NEEDS are - so we could design solutions - which may be wind or not wind - that work okay - albeit not perhaps 100 percent perfect - for them.

We need renewables I think - but that shouldn't mean working to lowest possible standards - instead work to develop BEST possible solutions - and if those are STILL FLAWED - you work continuously to improve the solutions.

In fact that's what you should do anyway

Grudaire · 08-12-2014 01:35PM

fclauson wrote: »

I lie between the middle two - based on currently installed base - how we intend to use the generated product - what to do when the wind stops blowing - grid resilience - cost benefits/return on investment ..... the list goes on and on

I would agree that there are many things that need to be carefully managed when it comes to electricity supply..

The article linked however does not fit into a 'based on data' argument..

djpbarry · 08-12-2014 03:02PM

Fabo wrote: »

Then again subsidy junkies require plenty of fools without which they crumble

Subsidy junkies? Are we pretending that wind receives substantially more subsidies than other forms of electricity generation?

fclauson · 08-12-2014 07:15PM

Here's a question then - if we removed all capacity payments etc and say - "go to the market and sell your product"

which type of generator would be the cheapest ?

Currently wind has to be purchased before any other and gets a REFIT payment set in legislation

So if given this I ask the same questions if we removed all capacity payments etc and say - "go to the market and sell your product" but wind gets a REFIT payment as per legislation

which type of generator would be the cheapest ?

Is this a fair way of working out the costs ?

Capt'n Midnight · 08-12-2014 10:42PM

fclauson wrote: »

Here's a question then - if we removed all capacity payments etc and say - "go to the market and sell your product"

which type of generator would be the cheapest ?

It depends.

But you also have to factor in the costs associated with the climate stuff we've signed up to.

It's supply and demand. But there is a roughly 1GB difference between day and night and 1GB between summer and winter. Like or lump it the inefficient generators will be needed 24/7 365.

But you should really factor in stuff like we have to import almost all our fossil fuel and the knock on effects of that. Yes the EU only gets 30% of it's gas from Russia but it's still something you don't want to worry about.

One thing that should be allowed perhaps is that CCGT should be allowed to open open cycle as required.

Then again Enron is a shining example of why critical infrastructure should not be totally market driven.

Fabo · 09-12-2014 05:27PM

djpbarry wrote: »

Subsidy junkies? Are we pretending that wind receives substantially more subsidies than other forms of electricity generation?

what other subsidies ?

I dont want opinions, I want EU State Aid numbers.

Many thanks in advance

Fabo · 09-12-2014 05:28PM

Grudaire wrote: »

I would agree that there are many things that need to be carefully managed when it comes to electricity supply..

The article linked however does not fit into a 'based on data' argument..

All the data is not provided. In fact the authorities are doing their best not to provide the data. The other side have access to all the data and choose to use whatever parts thats fits in with their goal of robbing people

So again, all this is bull

Fabo · 09-12-2014 05:30PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

It depends.

But you also have to factor in the costs associated with the climate stuff we've signed up to.

One thing that should be allowed perhaps is that CCGT should be allowed to open open cycle as required.

.

Sorry, but the climate stuff is full of contradictions exactly like the one here above.

My blood pressure goes up everytime I visit this place

Macha · 09-12-2014 05:58PM

Fabo wrote: »

what other subsidies ?

I dont want opinions, I want EU State Aid numbers.

Many thanks in advance

The European Commission recently commissioned (ahem) a report on this. I can't tell you how much political wrangling went into it but the nuclear figures are a joke (ie the state-subsidised liability is so low it's considered negligible??):

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies/doc/20141013_subsidies_costs_eu_energy.pdf

Also, the report leaves out the entire transport sector and the presentation is a master-class in cherry picking but overall, the conclusion is that fossil fuels receive slightly more subsidies than renewables across Europe.

Grudaire · 09-12-2014 08:27PM

Fabo wrote: »

All the data is not provided. In fact the authorities are doing their best not to provide the data. The other side have access to all the data and choose to use whatever parts thats fits in with their goal of robbing people

So again, all this is bull

The official reports don't agree with your opinion... so they must be wrong?

Surely that argument belongs in the conspiracy theory forum!

fclauson · 09-12-2014 09:37PM

Macha wrote: »

The European Commission recently commissioned (ahem) a report on this. I can't tell you how much political wrangling went into it but the nuclear figures are a joke (ie the state-subsidised liability is so low it's considered negligible??):

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies/doc/20141013_subsidies_costs_eu_energy.pdf

Also, the report leaves out the entire transport sector and the presentation is a master-class in cherry picking but overall, the conclusion is that fossil fuels receive slightly more subsidies than renewable across Europe.

Thanks - chart on page X seems to be the summary - interesting to see the variation in prices between technically feasible loads and realized loads - basically plant not being run flat out is more expensive (and there for probably more inefficient)

Any one know where there is a C02/GW table - and if there is anywhere a chart which shows C02 (including embedded C02) / GW table. i.e. there are many arguments around the amount of C02 which goes into deploying a wind turbine (cables, steel, magnets, concrete etc etc) but I have seen no hard maths as to what this is exactly.

Fabo · 09-12-2014 11:57PM

Grudaire wrote: »

The official reports don't agree with your opinion... so they must be wrong?

Surely that argument belongs in the conspiracy theory forum!

yes the official reports that said there would be a soft landing in 2007, so yes of course must not question official reports.

you got me there buddy

that patrick nyberg was some ejit

Fabo · 09-12-2014 11:58PM

Imported fuel dependency went up according to SEAI today

Capt'n Midnight · 10-12-2014 12:04AM

fclauson wrote: »

Interesting blog on why wind is INCREASING C02 in certain circumstances

http://irishenergyblog.blogspot.ie/2014/11/dublin-electricity-generation-analysis_27.html

This one is from people selling Diesel
http://www.wartsila.com/en/power-plants/learning-center/overview/combustion-engine-vs-gas-turbine-part-load-efficiency
680x492xSatellite,qblobcol=urldata,ablobheader=JPG,ablobkey=id,ablobtable=MungoBlobs,ablobwhere=1278610253616,assbinary=true.pagespeed.ic.Abyc4rBeOT.jpg

680x492xSatellite,qblobcol=urldata,ablobheader=JPG,ablobkey=id,ablobtable=MungoBlobs,ablobwhere=1278610253616,assbinary=true.pagespeed.ic.Abyc4rBeOT.jpg

Diesel vs open cycle gas vs gas with waste heat used for steam turbine

Unlike gas turbines, Wärtsilä engine power plants have near full range capability of emissions-compliant turndown. As load is decreased, individual engines within the generating set are shut down to reduce output. The engines that remain operating can generate at full load, retaining high efficiency of the generating set. Flexicycle power plant efficiency is above 48 percent all the way down to 23 percent of full load (69 MW). Beyond the minimum load for the Flexicycle steam turbine, the engines will operate in simple cycle mode. Thus, the output of a 300 MW Flexicycle plant can be turned down to only 18 MW. As a result, Flexicycle power plants provide a much wider range of output flexibility than gas turbines without the constraints of turndown limitations or efficiency impacts.

Just in case anyone is confused. When we have wind supplying 50% of the power on the grid it means that gas turbines may run less efficiently, it depends on how many are on and their rating of course, the efficiency drop is completely overshadowed by the energy from wind.

fclauson · 10-12-2014 07:48AM

Does this bit of marketing blurb seems to position that their gen sets really do scale up and down - and I assume being diesel they will take a very short time to come on line
I knew of one at a data center which was on line with in 45 seconds of the go command

Also I note that at sub 50% it seems to allude to the destruction of a gas turbine engine due to emissions - not sure what they mean.

djpbarry · 10-12-2014 12:17PM

Fabo wrote: »

what other subsidies ?

You’re kidding, right? Subsidies for renewable power, globally, are dwarfed by fossil fuel subsidies:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27142377

Fabo · 10-12-2014 08:46PM

djpbarry wrote: »

You’re kidding, right? Subsidies for renewable power, globally, are dwarfed by fossil fuel subsidies:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27142377

Give me the EU State Aid number , not a left wing green BBC article.

I repeat, A State Aid Number

Fabo · 10-12-2014 08:47PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

This one is from people selling Diesel
http://www.wartsila.com/en/power-plants/learning-center/overview/combustion-engine-vs-gas-turbine-part-load-efficiency

Diesel vs open cycle gas vs gas with waste heat used for steam turbine

Just in case anyone is confused. When we have wind supplying 50% of the power on the grid it means that gas turbines may run less efficiently, it depends on how many are on and their rating of course, the efficiency drop is completely overshadowed by the energy from wind.

irrelevant to poolbeg which is the subject of that blog

Grudaire · 10-12-2014 09:06PM

Fabo wrote: »

Give me the EU State Aid number , not a left wing green BBC article.

I repeat, A State Aid Number

The figures provided don't agree with me, so I demand different figures... Really this argument again?

I did a quick Google, and this article seems to say that there may be forces trying to hide said figures...
http://www.euractiv.com/energy/oettinger-scared-fossil-fuel-sub-analysis-531291

Fabo · 10-12-2014 09:11PM

Grudaire wrote: »

The figures provided don't agree with me, so I demand different figures... Really this argument again?

I did a quick Google, and this article seems to say that there may be forces trying to hide said figures...
http://www.euractiv.com/energy/oettinger-scared-fossil-fuel-sub-analysis-531291

there are subsidies that all generators get e.g. tax reliefs, grants etc but wind is the only one that gets a guaranteed price + 15% kicker. Everyone else gets the market rate.

If coal got this, then it would have to be signed off by EU State Aid Dept otherwise would breach competition laws. So maybe I am unaware of one for fossil fuel, if so, please enlighten me.

This is not a request for "different figures" . This is how it works. EU have to sign off on it. The govt had to await EU clearance for the last REFIT introduced.

So there is a paper trail and a final EU State Aid Number.

We can all live in fairy land and invent evil enemies to suit our opinions but it doesnt advance things. Dont blame me for how the system works and that
it is different to your view of reality.

Macha · 10-12-2014 09:41PM

Fabo wrote: »

Give me the EU State Aid number , not a left wing green BBC article.

I repeat, A State Aid Number

If your spent less time dismissing other people's attempts to answer your question and more time reading the links provided, you might learn something.

The BBC is most definitely not left wing and green. They've just decided to leave the UK Green Party out of leaders debates in the run up to the UK General election next year.

I'll say it again, go and read the sources of links already provided. The BBC article is reporting an International Energy Agency study. You didn't even bother responding to the one I posted. And by the way, EU state aid numbers aren't everything. There are thresholds under which member states only have to notify DG COMP of the scheme and concrete numbers don't exist.

djpbarry · 11-12-2014 02:29PM

Fabo wrote: »

Give me the EU State Aid number , not a left wing green BBC article.

You asked for figures and they’ve been provided.

How about you produce something to show that wind (or renewables in general) receive vastly more subsidies than other forms of electricity generation.

Fabo wrote: »

there are subsidies that all generators get e.g. tax reliefs, grants etc but wind is the only one that gets a guaranteed price + 15% kicker. Everyone else gets the market rate.

What difference does it make whether a subsidy takes the form of a physical grant, a tax break or a guaranteed price per kWh? At the end of the day, they’re all subsidies. Now, you’re trying to claim that wind receives vastly more subsidies than other generators – it’s up to you to provide some figures to back up that claim.

Oh and by the way, the new nuclear plant at Hinckley Point here in the UK will receive a guaranteed price per kWh when it begins generating.

ted1 · 11-12-2014 08:57PM

Fabo wrote: »

Imported fuel dependency went up according to SEAI today

Considering we are pulling in 400+MW for half the day on the EWIC are you surprised. It has also reduced the wholesale price by quite a bit

Old diesel · 11-12-2014 09:15PM

ted1 wrote: »

Considering we are pulling in 400+MW for half the day on the EWIC are you surprised. It has also reduced the wholesale price by quite a bit

The point I think Fabo may have being making is that youd expect wind to REDUCE the need to import fuel.

So its reasonable to wonder why we are increasing imports of fuel if we are adding more renewables to the system.

Im not saying wind is causing this - but its a valid point I think

Old diesel · 11-12-2014 09:15PM

ted1 wrote: »

Considering we are pulling in 400+MW for half the day on the EWIC are you surprised. It has also reduced the wholesale price by quite a bit

The point I think Fabo may have being making is that youd expect wind to REDUCE the need to import fuel.

So its reasonable to wonder why we are increasing imports of fuel if we are adding more renewables to the system.

Im not saying wind is causing this - but its a valid point I think

Wind farms - ugly truths

Comments