Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wind farms - ugly truths

1…2829313334…47

Comments

  • #902
    Markcheese
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/22/wind-and-solar-power-likely-to-match-gas-on-cost-by-2020-say-uk-climate-advisers

    Really interesting article on predicted energy prices in the near future -
    A bit something for everyone but the expected price per kWh for new build gas plants in 2020 and 2025 is kind of eye watering - as to how they can predict the gas price this far out - and what level of useage their predicting for the gas plants ( if a lot of their job in the uk is backing up new renewables they're going to want a minimum level work of energy production/or just income to warrant the investment )

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • #903
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Classy - Your graph actually shows energy emmissions little changed since 1990 so your initial arguement doesn't hold much water…
    What argument is that? I was countering your point that drops in emissions are related reduced energy consumption. But, as is evident from the graph below (source), energy consumption has remained relatively constant:

    Elforbrug-og-produktion_2015_tih_UK.jpg

    So, even though the same amount of electricity is being produced and consumed, emissions related to energy production are dropping. I wonder why?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    You graph also shows that general energy use has declined by nearly a third which was the point I was making in terms of energy saving technology.
    No, the graph shows GHG emissions derived from energy use have dropped.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Actually it appears the sharp drop in emmissions in the late 90's also conceded with the increased replacement of coal with natural gas in Denmarks energy supply.
    It was probably a factor. I wonder what else might have been a factor?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Also Denmarks "wind performance" depends heavily on its ability to dump excess wind generation on windy days onto neighbouring grids
    …
    Which shines a totally different light on the Danish grid as one that is heavily dependent on its neighbours to keep the lights, despite spending vast amounts on wind power, which is reflected in the fact that it has the highest retail energy costs in the EU.
    In other words, sometimes Denmark exports electricity and sometimes it imports electricity? This is bad because?


  • #904
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    Its nonsense to say wind is cheap…
    I demonstrated, a few posts back, using your figures, that wind is a cheap and effective way to reduce emissions from electricity production.

    Have you encountered new figures that might change this position?
    fclauson wrote: »
    wholesale prices are meaningless in reality
    Why is that? Because it’s more difficult to make an argument against investment in wind if we consider wholesale prices?


  • #905
    fclauson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Bollocks.
    I think this just might be against board etiquette - unless of course you are using the Richard Branson excuse - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Never_Mind_the_Bollocks,_Here%27s_the_Sex_Pistols#cite_note-25

    but then again not sure what priests have to do with it either
    djpbarry wrote: »
    I demonstrated, a few posts back, using your figures, that wind is a cheap and effective way to reduce emissions from electricity production.
    what you showed was that using some rough numbers - unquantified by me that you might be able just based on the turbine investment get €34/Mw - as you know well this is such a small part of the storey compared to the overall costs and implications. It might be helpful if you came back with your own calculations as to the costs (the Irish Government have failed to do so and you seem only to keen to provide such commentary) and show where you got your numbers and if they are valid and peer reviewed.
    Have you encountered new figures that might change this position?
    Why is that? Because it’s more difficult to make an argument against investment in wind if we consider wholesale prices?

    Again - as reading a number of your posts - you miss the point

    The wholesale price of petrol ex vat and duty is very little but what I pay at the pump is massive - same with wind electrical energy - who cares what the wholesale price is - its the end price to the consumer which counts
    and again - time for your own research please - on what basis do you consider that wind is the best form of financial investment and environmental damage to be the best in reducing CO2 emissions combined with reducing the external cost to Ireland of importing fuel

    I look forward to you well researched answer


  • #906
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    fclauson wrote: »
    Its nonsense to say wind is cheap - its nonsense to say wind makes sense

    wind is expensive to the end user (wholesale prices are meaningless in reality)
    Crude oil is $45 a barrel. Which works out at 25c a litre.
    That's about the same price farmers get for milk.

    The wholesale price has a base of 4c/unit around now. If you took that 4c off the 24.07c on your graph the remaining price is still more than the current standard Electric Ireland rate. https://electricireland.ie/switchchange/detailsDualGreenExt.htm


    Wind is cheaper than new nuclear in the UK. And wind subsidies are going down while nuclear still gets sneaky handouts and an uncertain clean up cost.


  • Advertisement
  • #907
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Markcheese wrote: »
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/22/wind-and-solar-power-likely-to-match-gas-on-cost-by-2020-say-uk-climate-advisers

    Really interesting article on predicted energy prices in the near future -
    A bit something for everyone but the expected price per kWh for new build gas plants in 2020 and 2025 is kind of eye watering - as to how they can predict the gas price this far out - and what level of useage their predicting for the gas plants ( if a lot of their job in the uk is backing up new renewables they're going to want a minimum level work of energy production/or just income to warrant the investment )

    So wind/solar will only be compeditive if gas is taxed to the hilt. Hardly a compelling arguement and makes the title of that piece rather misleading - and its not the first time the Guardian has put out misleading stories like this such as that nonsense story from a few months ago about wind providing 140% of Denmarks power . In any case gas,coal, oil etc. will still be needed as baseload to back up wind/solar no matter how much of this capacity is installed.

    PS: And thats not the only dodgy conclusions in that that report. Its likely that gas prices internationally will remain low anyway on the back of increasing production in many parts of the world(notably the US which is now self sufficient in NG) and declining per-capita energy consumption in many Western and other developed economies. The days of rapid growth in many developing countries look numbered too with the likely pro-longed sharp slow down in China and the anemic look of many BRIC economies in the coming years


  • #908
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    .htm


    Wind is cheaper than new nuclear in the UK. And wind subsidies are going down while nuclear still gets sneaky handouts and an uncertain clean up cost.

    Only the subsidies for new wind farms are going down(and predictably a load of projects have been cancelled on the back of this which says it all about the financials of wind). Existing ones continue to get fat handouts from bill payers no matter what power they produce.


  • #909
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    what you showed was that using some rough numbers - unquantified by me that you might be able just based on the turbine investment get €34/Mw - as you know well this is such a small part of the storey compared to the overall costs and implications. It might be helpful if you came back with your own calculations as to the costs (the Irish Government have failed to do so and you seem only to keen to provide such commentary) and show where you got your numbers and if they are valid and peer reviewed.
    I got the cost figure from you, remember?

    You claimed here that the total cost of wind “infrastructure” was €4 billion.

    I then showed here that, on a per MWh generated basis, that’s actually a reasonably good investment.

    Now, you’re either questioning my calculations, in which case I challenge you to produce a more accurate calculation, or you’re revising your cost estimate.

    Which is it?
    fclauson wrote: »
    The wholesale price of petrol ex vat and duty is very little but what I pay at the pump is massive - same with wind electrical energy - who cares what the wholesale price is - its the end price to the consumer which counts
    So the obvious conclusion, based on your logic, is that using internal combustion engines to power vehicles is a bad idea because the final cost to the consumer of fuelling them is much higher than the wholesale cost of the petrol?
    fclauson wrote: »
    and again - time for your own research please - on what basis do you consider that wind is the best form of financial investment and environmental damage to be the best in reducing CO2 emissions combined with reducing the external cost to Ireland of importing fuel
    When did I say it was the best?


  • #910
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Markcheese wrote: »
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/22/wind-and-solar-power-likely-to-match-gas-on-cost-by-2020-say-uk-climate-advisers

    Really interesting article on predicted energy prices in the near future -
    So electricity from gas might cost 11% more. But if they reach our levels of renewables they'd save about a third of the overall gas usage. So that 11% drops to 8%. Then again since the renewables are coming in slightly under the the gas price you could probably offset another % off that gas price increase.

    So could be covered by a VAT reduction.

    Thursday’s report predicted that the full cost of new gas-fired generation would reach £85 per MWh for new plants coming online in 2020, and £95MWh for 2025, including the likely cost of carbon. This compares with onshore wind and ground-mounted solar projects that are under contract to deliver electricity at £83MWh from 2016-17. However, these prices rise by about £10 per MWh if the intermittency of the renewables is taken into account.


  • #911
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    What argument is that? I was countering your point that drops in emissions are related reduced energy consumption. But, as is evident from the graph below (source), energy consumption has remained relatively constant:

    ?

    Actually that makes the argument for wind in the Danish model even less compelling given that despite little change in energy consumption, Denmarks CO2 emmissions have not dropped significantly compared to 1990 when it relied much more heavily on coal. Doesn't say much for their massive and expensive bet on wind energy:confused:

    Some reading on these issues

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2009/12/17/denmark-is-energy-smart-think-again


  • Advertisement
  • #912
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    So electricity from gas might cost 11% more. But if they reach our levels of renewables they'd save about a third of the overall gas usage. So that 11% drops to 8%. Then again since the renewables are coming in slightly under the the gas price you could probably offset another % off that gas price increase.

    So could be covered by a VAT reduction.


    Sorry - are these figures based on intalled wind capacity or actual output?? cos the evidence from the Irish grid is that retail energy prices have risen sharply with increasing wind "capacity" despite a sharp fall in wholesale gas prices over the last few years.


  • #913
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Sorry - are these figures based on intalled wind capacity or actual output?? cos the evidence from the Irish grid is that retail energy prices have risen sharply with increasing wind "capacity" despite a sharp fall in wholesale gas prices over the last few years.
    which part of a third of the overall gas usage did you misunderstand ?

    In 2010 gas was 64.06% of our fuel mix. Last year it was 41.66% ie. down by a third.
    In 2010 renewables were 12.11%, last year they were 34.46%.
    http://www.allislandproject.org/GetAttachment.aspx?id=8d4d40c5-07dc-4f64-9c8d-070badf7da85

    BTW
    which component of the retail price pays for renewables ?
    Because over the last few years most of the subsidies have gone to fossil fuel plants.


  • #914
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    which part of a third of the overall gas usage did you misunderstand ?

    In 2010 gas was 64.06% of our fuel mix. Last year it was 41.66% ie. down by a third.
    In 2010 renewables were 12.11%, last year they were 34.46%.
    http://www.allislandproject.org/GetAttachment.aspx?id=8d4d40c5-07dc-4f64-9c8d-070badf7da85

    BTW
    which component of the retail price pays for renewables ?
    Because over the last few years most of the subsidies have gone to fossil fuel plants.

    The % varies widely from year to year based on prevailing weather. 2010 was exceptionally cold with many near record low temps on still nights for much fo the winter. Wind performed poorly as can be seen in the figures for % output based on wind capacity. 2014 had a mild windy winter which mean't more wind on the system and lower heating demands on the system overall. In any case there was little evidence of any benefit to energy users as retail power prices continued to increase steadily thoughout 2014 as the table at the top of this page shows - this despite sharp falls in oil and gas prices during this time.

    As for the wind component of retail energy prices. The latest figures recently released show that wind is likely to be the largest component of the PSO levy for the 2015/16(http://www.cer.ie/docs/001034/CER15142%20PSO%20Levy%202015-16%20%20Decision%20Paper.pdf) , then there is constraint payments and the costs of wind related pylon rollout and maintainance that are not included on the PSO levy but are still taken out of energy users pockets.


    PS: Interesting link here outlining the hidden cost of wind(outside the PSO) on a grid

    http://www.atinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Hidden-Cost.pdf


  • #915
    Markcheese
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    So what we really need is a graph . showing several years of wholesale electricity prices -retail prices - wholesale gas prices and Shure we could throw coal prices into the mix too -
    Probably be a good idea to have a graph showing the pso levels and what sectors it went too .
    ( hint it's only a wee while ago or so that gas prices were quite high - and coal was correspondingly high too - )
    Also since apart from moneypoint a lot of our generation capacity is relatively new gas there's a fairly high capital cost to factored in - ( although they should use less fuel per kWh produced )

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • #916
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Its likely that gas prices internationally will remain low anyway on the back of increasing production in many parts of the world(notably the US which is now self sufficient in NG) and declining per-capita energy consumption in many Western and other developed economies.
    What’s your basis for these repeated claims about declining energy consumption in the developed world?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Only the subsidies for new wind farms are going down(and predictably a load of projects have been cancelled on the back of this which says it all about the financials of wind). Existing ones continue to get fat handouts from bill payers no matter what power they produce.
    Indefinitely?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Actually that makes the argument for wind in the Danish model even less compelling given that despite little change in energy consumption, Denmarks CO2 emmissions have not dropped significantly compared to 1990 when it relied much more heavily on coal.
    Might have something to do with the fact that electricity generation in 1990 (just over 20 TWh) is the lowest generation figure on the graph? Generation levels are roughly 30% higher now than they were in 1990, yet emissions are roughly 20-25% lower. Not that comparing two data points in isolation is all that meaningful, of course. What really matters is the overall trend.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Some reading on these issues

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2009/12/17/denmark-is-energy-smart-think-again
    I read the first few paragraphs and then I stopped. I can tell why you like the article – the author seems have a similar interpretation of data to yourself. For example, he states that…

    “ Earlier this year, Energinet.dk, the operator of Denmark's electricity and natural gas grids, published a report showing that in 2007, carbon dioxide levels from electricity generation totaled about 23 million tons, about the same level as they were back in 1990, before the country began its frenzied construction of wind turbines.”

    …while failing to mention that Denmark generated about 60% more electricity in 2007 than it did in 1990.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    As for the wind component of retail energy prices. The latest figures recently released show that wind is likely to be the largest component of the PSO levy for the 2015/16(http://www.cer.ie/docs/001034/CER15142%20PSO%20Levy%202015-16%20%20Decision%20Paper.pdf)
    Even though the figure of €180.9 million is for all renewables, let’s just assume it’s all for wind generation.

    Let’s assume Ireland gets an average of about 730 MW from wind over the course of a year. That equates to...

    730 MW x 24 hours x 365 days = 6,394,800 MWh

    ...over the course of the year, which means that the “wind portion” of the PSO levy is costing Irish consumers...

    €180,900,000 / 6,394,800,000 kWh = €0.028 /kWh generated from wind

    But of course, people consume electricity from the entire grid, so spreading that cost system-wide (assuming average demand of about 4 GW), the additional cost comes in at...

    €180,900,000 / (4,000,000 kW x 24 hours x 365 days) = €0.005 /kWh

    Hardly breaking the bank, is it?


  • #917
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    ...over the course of the year, which means that the “wind portion” of the PSO levy is costing Irish consumers...

    €180,900,000 / 6,394,800,000 kWh = €0.028 /kWh generated from wind

    But of course, people consume electricity from the entire grid, so spreading that cost system-wide (assuming average demand of about 4 GW), the additional cost comes in at...

    €180,900,000 / (4,000,000 kW x 24 hours x 365 days) = €0.005 /kWh

    Hardly breaking the bank, is it?

    As i pointed out in my post, the PSO levy is just one cost element of wind power borne by the consumer, something you conviently ignored on your back of the envelope calculation. It does not cover the cost of pylon sprawl and other network costs etc. imposed by wind. You continue to pretend that the high cost of retail power on grids with high wind capacity is somehow entirely accidental despite the mountain of evidence from Europe,US and Canada.


  • #918
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »


    What’s your basis for these repeated claims about declining energy consumption in the developed world?

    “ Earlier this year, Energinet.dk, the operator of Denmark's electricity and natural gas grids, published a report showing that in 2007, carbon dioxide levels from electricity generation totaled about 23 million tons, about the same level as they were back in 1990, before the country began its frenzied construction of wind turbines.”

    …while failing to mention that Denmark generated about 60% more electricity in 2007 than it did in 1990.
    Even though the figure of €180.9 million is for all renewables, let’s just assume it’s all for wind generation.


    ?

    That is due to the fact that it has to dump excess wind energy(ie.generation) onto surrounding countries energy grids at times of low demand and then has to import hydro,nuclear and coal energy at times of high demand. Underlining again what an expensive farce the billions wasted on wind energy has been in a country where actual energy demand has hardly changed in 25 years - and little savings on emmissions since 1990 when they had FA wind and plenty of coal.


    And energy consumption is indeed declining in many Western Countries

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30518649

    http://aceee.org/blog/2014/02/us-electricity-use-declining-and-ener


  • #919
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    As i pointed out in my post, the PSO levy is just one cost element of wind power borne by the consumer, something you conviently ignored on your back of the envelope calculation.
    Oh, of course, I’m sorry – the hidden costs. That nobody knows about. Because they’re so well hidden.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    It does not cover the cost of pylon sprawl and other network costs etc. imposed by wind. You continue to pretend that the high cost of retail power on grids with high wind capacity is somehow entirely accidental despite the mountain of evidence from Europe,US and Canada.
    So how about we see some evidence for all these additionally costs you keep referring to? Let’s put a figure on them.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    That is due to the fact that it has to dump excess wind energy(ie.generation) onto surrounding countries energy grids at times of low demand and then has to import hydro,nuclear and coal energy at times of high demand. Underlining again what an expensive farce the billions wasted on wind energy has been in a country where actual energy demand has hardly changed in 25 years - and little savings on emmissions since 1990 when they had FA wind and plenty of coal.
    What on earth are you talking about? In 2007, supply met demand almost perfectly. In 1990, when there was virtually no power being generated from wind, there was a huge shortfall.

    You are so attached to the idea that wind is a complete waste of money that you can’t even objectively assess the evidence in front of you.


  • #920
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Oh, of course, I’m sorry – the hidden costs. That nobody knows about. Because they’re so well hidden.
    So how about we see some evidence for all these additionally costs you keep referring to? Let’s put a figure on them.
    .

    So your claiming that wind does not impose any extra costs on a grid?? Thats a hell of a claim. I suggest you read some of the documentation from Eirgrid on the Gridwest and Grid25 projects. Here is a good analysis on the matter by Colm McCarthy

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colm-mccarthy/colm-mccarthy-case-for-wind-must-be-proven-on-costs-29798897.html

    "
    wind produces electricity over large geographic areas, often remote from the centres of demand, requiring extensions to the national grid. Ireland


    " There would be limited need for grid investments were it not for the expanding wind industry, which does not pick up the tab for extra transmission."


    and

    "it is clear from the Grid 25 documentation that a substantial portion of the cost of around €4bn arises because of the continuing proliferation of wind farms.


  • #921
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    So your claiming that wind does not impose any extra costs on a grid?? Thats a hell of a claim. I suggest you read some of the documentation from Eirgrid on the Gridwest and Grid25 projects. Here is a good analysis on the matter by Colm McCarthy

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colm-mccarthy/colm-mccarthy-case-for-wind-must-be-proven-on-costs-29798897.html

    "
    wind produces electricity over large geographic areas, often remote from the centres of demand, requiring extensions to the national grid. Ireland


    " There would be limited need for grid investments were it not for the expanding wind industry, which does not pick up the tab for extra transmission."
    I notice that a figure for these grid investments is conspicuous by its absence. He does cite a figure of €1.5 million per MW as being typical for new wind installations. If we assume a 1 MW installed capacity produces an average of 300 kW and it lasts for, say, 20 years, that gives a cost per kWh produced of about 2.85 c, which is pretty damn low.

    But of course, the hidden costs!


  • Advertisement
  • #922
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I notice that a figure for these grid investments is conspicuous by its absence. He does cite a figure of €1.5 million per MW as being typical for new wind installations. If we assume a 1 MW installed capacity produces an average of 300 kW and it lasts for, say, 20 years, that gives a cost per kWh produced of about 2.85 c, which is pretty damn low.

    But of course, the hidden costs!

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0521/702841-mayo-wind-farm-refusal/


    "A 100km-long power line planned by EirGrid was intended to connect with two large wind farms in north Mayo."

    Heres a figure for gridwest

    http://www.thejournal.ie/eirgrid-to-put-grid-west-underground-1532191-Jun2014/

    "The Grid West project is the largest Grid25 project in the west, with pylons projected to cost €240 million"


    240 million to service 2 wind farms in Mayo - cheap as chips as you say:rolleyes:


  • #923
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    .

    But of course, the hidden costs!

    So you continue to claim there are no additional costs of having wind energy on a grid.

    http://www.atinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Hidden-Cost.pdf


    Ireland must be unique so!!:rolleyes:


  • #924
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    What on earth are you talking about? In 2007, supply met demand almost perfectly. In 1990, when there was virtually no power being generated from wind, there was a huge shortfall.

    You are so attached to the idea that wind is a complete waste of money that you can’t even objectively assess the evidence in front of you.

    Are you now claiming that Denmark does not dump excess wind energy onto to surrouding grids during low demand periods and imports substantial amounts of energy during peak demand?? I suggest you re-read my post and link on this subject

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97461946&postcount=900


  • #925
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0521/702841-mayo-wind-farm-refusal/


    "A 100km-long power line planned by EirGrid was intended to connect with two large wind farms in north Mayo."

    Heres a figure for gridwest

    http://www.thejournal.ie/eirgrid-to-put-grid-west-underground-1532191-Jun2014/

    "The Grid West project is the largest Grid25 project in the west, with pylons projected to cost €240 million"


    240 million to service 2 wind farms in Mayo - cheap as chips as you say:rolleyes:
    Wow – an actual figure. Now we’re getting somewhere.

    Okay, let’s assume the extreme scenario in which that power line is being built exclusivity to accommodate the proposed 650 MW of wind generation planned for North Mayo. Let’s say those wind farms produce about 200 MW on average and they live for 20 years. That means that the cost of the power line works out at €240,000,000 / (200,000 kW x 24 x 365 x 20) ≈ €0.007 per kWh.

    Are you trying to argue that’s expensive?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    So you continue to claim there are no additional costs of having wind energy on a grid.
    I never said anything of the sort. What I am saying is that various figures have been produced over the course of this thread (and others) for the cost of wind generation and every time a quick calculation shows those figures to be pretty reasonable, a claim is made that there are further, “hidden” costs that must be taken into consideration.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Are you now claiming that Denmark does not dump excess wind energy onto to surrouding grids during low demand periods and imports substantial amounts of energy during peak demand?? I suggest you re-read my post and link on this subject

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97461946&postcount=900
    I already responded to that post. It’s interesting that when Denmark imports energy from other countries, you use the word import, but when other countries import from Denmark, the word “dumping” is used.

    Besides, I don't remember saying that interconnection was a bad idea.


  • #926
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Wow – an actual figure. Now we’re getting somewhere.

    Okay, let’s assume the extreme scenario in which that power line is being built exclusivity to accommodate the proposed 650 MW of wind generation planned for North Mayo. Let’s say those wind farms produce about 200 MW on average and they live for 20 years. That means that the cost of the power line works out at €240,000,000 / (200,000 kW x 24 x 365 x 20) ≈ €0.007 per kWh.

    Are you trying to argue that’s expensive?
    I never said anything of the sort. What I am saying is that various figures have been produced over the course of this thread (and others) for the cost of wind generation and every time a quick calculation shows those figures to be pretty reasonable, a claim is made that there are further, “hidden” costs that must be taken into consideration.
    .

    You still haven't explained why despite all this "cheap" wind power, our energy bills have risen so much in recent years despite falling gas etc. prices.

    Indeed your changing your tune now - suddenly hidden costs are a factor. Despite your dubious back of the envelope calculations the extra connection costs associated with wind farms are dumped up front on the energy user no matter what the output of any wind farm happens to be and we in any case still have to pay the costs of the conventional power plants that will always be needed as constant back up,spinning reserve, plus contraint payments, wind subsidies etc. If 240 million(and that cost does not include ongoing maintanance of these extra pylons which is likely to be high given the exposed locations of such windfarms, on blanket bogs etc or near costs with salt issues) is the cost of connection just 2 wind farms than it is easy to see why the cost of retail energy in Ireland has spiralled with increasing wind capacity - the same trend that can been seen across the EU,US and elsewhere.


  • #927
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I already responded to that post. .

    Yeah - and as usual you refused to accept any of the facts or address any of the issues discussed on this matter.


  • #928
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    You still haven't explained why despite all this "cheap" wind power, our energy bills have risen so much in recent years despite falling gas etc. prices.
    The onus is on me to explain this because? I don’t ever recall stating that retail prices would drop on the back of falling gas prices?

    But I’ll offer an opinion all the same. In saying that wholesale gas prices have fallen in the last year or two, you forget that they rose drastically in the preceding years. Between about 2009 and 2013, gas prices across the EU roughly doubled. Given that Ireland has a relatively high dependence on gas for electricity generation, it’s not surprising that this pushed retail prices up quite substantially. They’ve fallen back a bit since then, but energy companies tend to book wholesale prices years in advance, so the savings are never going to be passed on in real time.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Indeed your changing your tune now - suddenly hidden costs are a factor.
    I’m not sure you’ve even reading my posts at this stage, because I have consistently challenged the use of the term “hidden”.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Despite your dubious back of the envelope calculations…
    Perhaps you would like to correct them for me? Have you spotted an inaccuracy?
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    …the extra connection costs associated with wind farms are dumped up front on the energy user no matter what the output of any wind farm happens to be…
    Oh you mean like I already stated was the case in this post over a month ago?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97003654&postcount=686
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    …and we in any case still have to pay the costs of the conventional power plants that will always be needed as constant back up,spinning reserve, plus contraint payments, wind subsidies etc. If 240 million(and that cost does not include ongoing maintanance of these extra pylons which is likely to be high given the exposed locations of such windfarms, on blanket bogs etc or near costs with salt issues) is the cost of connection just 2 wind farms than it is easy to see why the cost of retail energy in Ireland has spiralled with increasing wind capacity - the same trend that can been seen across the EU,US and elsewhere.
    Thank you for illustrating my point beautifully. You throw out a figure for a power line, I show that it’s actually not all that expensive in the grand scheme of things, so you then claim that there must be a bunch of other costs that are not being taken into consideration, with absolutely no attempt made whatsoever to quantify said costs.
    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Yeah - and as usual you refused to accept any of the facts or address any of the issues discussed on this matter.
    Here is my response to the post in question:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97466263&postcount=903

    What “facts” have I refused to accept and what issues have I failed to address?


  • #929
    Birdnuts
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,945 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    djpbarry wrote: »
    The onus is on me to explain this because? I don’t ever recall stating that retail prices would drop on the back of falling gas prices?

    But I’ll offer an opinion all the same. In saying that wholesale gas prices have fallen in the last year or two, you forget that they rose drastically in the preceding years. Between about 2009 and 2013, gas prices across the EU roughly doubled. Given that Ireland has a relatively high dependence on gas for electricity generation, it’s not surprising that this pushed retail prices up quite substantially. They’ve fallen back a bit since then, but energy companies tend to book wholesale prices years in advance, so the savings are never going to be passed on in real time.
    I’m not sure you’ve even reading my posts at this stage, because I have consistently challenged the use of the term “hidden”.
    Perhaps you would like to correct them for me? Have you spotted an inaccuracy?
    Oh you mean like I already stated was the case in this post over a month ago?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97003654&postcount=686
    Thank you for illustrating my point beautifully. You throw out a figure for a power line, I show that it’s actually not all that expensive in the grand scheme of things, so you then claim that there must be a bunch of other costs that are not being taken into consideration, with absolutely no attempt made whatsoever to quantify said costs.
    Here is my response to the post in question:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97466263&postcount=903

    What “facts” have I refused to accept and what issues have I failed to address?

    All you do is pedal the "wind is cheap" line while failing to explain why all the evidence to date across the EU,US etc. suggests otherwise. Its getting rather boring at this stage after 62 pages

    On the subject of gas prices - in 2014 alone the price of gas dropped a whopping 27% yet retail energy bills finished the year 5% higher. Riddle me that??

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97465391&postcount=901

    http://vayu.ie/2014-energy-market-report-irish-wholesale-gas-prices-27-2014/


  • #930
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 95,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Oh, of course, I’m sorry – the hidden costs. That nobody knows about. Because they’re so well hidden.
    Very well hidden.

    Lots of links to opinion pieces, but very few links to specifics.
    Lots of stuff about how many gas plants are needed to backup wind whilst ignoring the bit they'd be needed anyway. Even at normal maximum demand on a windless winter evening we have 2GW of spare capacity.

    There are a lot of grid upgrades that have nothing to do with renewables. But of course they'd be lumped into pylon sprawl, rather than linked to new gas plants or to provide redundancy or to increase capacity.


    The skin effect limits the size of conductors you can use on AC. You can't just use thicker wires.

    This is why, in addition to any lightening protection wire at the very top, you frequently see more than three wires on a pylon instead of just three thicker wires. When a pylon reaches capacity you can replace the cables with an aluminium alloy containing zirconium. They don't conduct electricity any better, but they keep their strength at a higher temperature like when you are pushing 50% more current through them. Beyond that it's using bigger pylons and / or another set of them. And at that stage for operational reasons you could run the other set on a different route to extend the grid while you are at it.


    Oh by the way transmission costs are dropping in real terms. See graphs on last page. https://www.esb.ie/esbnetworks/en/downloads/esb_networks_summary_statistics.pdf?v=2014f


  • Advertisement
  • #931
    SeanW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,539 ✭✭✭SeanW


    djpbarry wrote: »
    What “facts” have I refused to accept and what issues have I failed to address?

    Let's see:
    1. Why Denmark and Germany have the highest electricity costs in Europe and both are among the top 20 in the world (with electricity being cheapher in a tiny, remote Pacific island chain like Kiribati than Denmark).
    2. Or more generally, why there is such a strong correlation between renewables usage and higher electricity costs, that a trend can be shown with such a low standard deviation.
    3. What affect windspread renewables usage will have on wildlife. Windmills are very hostile to birds and extremely lethal to bats - wind mills are up there with White Nose Syndrome as an existential threat to the threatened bat population. In fact I've shown that nuclear power run at its worst by a group of Category 1 gob****s (the Soviet Union) is kinder to wildlife than your lovely windmills. You've given no reason why we should accept an existential threat to our bat populations on part with White Nose Syndrome. None. Nada.
    4. Windmills and solar panels require a massive land take to generate any electricity. It was shown previously that to replace the output of a single nuclear power plant would require the usage of vast tracts of land solely for solar panels, or windmills. You've given no reason why we should accept this. I provided detailed figures some time back they were ignored.
    5. To get the best out of these things, you have to pretty much carpet bomb your nations most scenic areas. Like mountain tops with wind turbines 3 times the size of the Spire, or solar panels where the Captain even suggested putting them on Sandymount strand!
      Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
      There's a lot of unproductive surface area in this country. If you could put panels on stilts you could fit a lot on Sandymount strand.

      I couldn't make this stuff up!
    6. The reality that these things are not reliable, and all the trouble that causes.
    7. I've shown previously that the effect of large scale renewables on the German grid has been extremely problematic for sensitive industrial users - even small micro-fluctuations can cause tens or even hundreds of thousands of euros worth of damage to sensitve industrial machinery, goods in production. Such fluctuations are now a regular occurance in Germany.
    8. I've also shown repeatedly that an unplanned excess of electricity from renewables cannot be used and will threaten a grid with overpowering unless there's some radical action that can be taken to bring supply and demand back into equilibrium, like closing the gates of a massive group of hydroelectric dams. You've failed abysmally to explain the fact that Germany is destablising the power grids of Poland and the Czech republic by dumping unusable surpluses on them.
      djpbarry wrote: »
      France exports electricity: look at the brilliant nuclear power!

      Germany exports electricity: bloody wind power destablisiing grids!!!
      Exactly. French exports are actually usable, Germany's "exports" are a threat to their neighbors national security. If this was meant to be humourous, I would consider it a concession that you cannot explain what's been going on with Germany's Eastern neighbors in a way that makes your windmills look like anything other than a menace. Hence the sarky bs.
    9. There has been no evidence whatsoever that the actions of France in the 1970s were not a good idea.
    10. There has been no justification for wasting a fuel such as gas, that has such a high opportunity cost, as backup for unreliable wind and solar generators.
    11. There has been no justification whatsoever for increasing Europe's reliance on Russian gas - which a large scale move towards gas driven backup generation would inevitably require.
    12. There has been nothing resembling a plan to have 90%+ non-fossil energy sources, like France.
    13. You haven't answered the questions from other posters about why the current renewables-strategy has not been subject to a Cost Benefit Analysis.

    https://u24.gov.ua/
    Join NAFO today:

    Help us in helping Ukraine.



Advertisement