Feb
Wind turbines – The Truth
How efficient are wind turbines? Take a looksee at the UK online real time energy website.
“The BMRS website provides near real time and historic data about the Balancing Mechanism which is used by the National Grid (System Operator) as a means of balancing power flows on to and off the electricity Transmission System in Great Britain.”
I can’t help but feel that a resource like this breaks all the principles of AGW , but heck let’s not complain that for once we’re getting information. Once they know we know, it’ll vanish–trust me.
An unhappy commentator has noted:
“This winter we have experienced repeated cold spells when electricity demand has soared and wind power generation has failed to deliver.
“Yet again, as of 18-20 February, we are seeing a settled, continental weather system bringing cold weather to the UK. Demand rises as temperatures fall, meanwhile the 1588MW of wind capacity that is metered by National Grid, all in the windiest part of the UK (Scotland), is effectively delivering 0.0% of load.”
But wind turbines do look pretty don’t they?
Apologists for the wind industry are fond of telling us that intermittent wind power generation can be successfully integrated into the system because modern forecasting allows for the accurate prediction of wind power output.
This is not true. Firstly, only 1588MW of a total installed capacity of 4,115MW (BWEA figures, 20/02/2010) are metered and therefore visible to the National Grid. Secondly, National Grid’s own half-hourly forecast and outurn records show how inaccurate forecasting is in practice.
What do people expect – electricity?
Possibly related posts:
Good article. It’s becoming ever more evident that the use of wind power is more to do with political and socio-economic dogma than sound engineering judgement, as regards energy supply.
They are fine and dandy where, for example, the wind conditions are suitable for small communities a long distance from the major distribution network. But these turbines are not only expensive to manufacture they are also very expensive to operate and maintain and require huge amounts of copper cable.
Wind power is not an effective substitution for fossil fuel. Their energy output is problematic and difficult to integrate to support a “Base Load” on a national grid system. I’m also very dubious that they actually reduce C02 and they most certainly have only a small part to play in powering a growing industrial nation the size of China.
The use of wind power is nothing but a ponzi scheme/scam designed to raise our energy rates as they are paid for by huge government subsidies.
Despite thousands of people being affected by negative health impacts worldwide, governments resort to name calling us NIMBY. Health impacts have been studied by Dr. Nina Pierpont but the wind industry claims that she and her book are not peer-reviewed despite being peer-reviewed. Her website is http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com
Those hosting wind turbines are silenced by GAG ORDERS so we do not even hear from those individuals who are suffering ill health effects. Wind turbine farms are NOT fine and dandy as they are destroying people’s health and property values. Not only that, but are destroying viewscapes too.
Now they want to erect wind turbines in the Great Lakes, the world’s largest fresh water system. The likely potential outcome will be the destruction of the Great Lakes and its supply of drinking water. These “enviro-maniacs” are so short-sighted, they don’t see the big picture of their destructive ways. The Great Lakes are also one of the world’s largest migratory routes and we know the death of birds, bats and butterflies are on the increase because of these huge industrial machines.
The politicians are being lied to by the wind industry and their lobbyists. This scam needs to be halted worldwide and class action lawsuits need to be filed against the wind industry and their propaganda.
I believe Dr. R. Pachauri has direct links to the wind industry.
There’s so much that can be written about wind turbines that it’s best to select one defect at a time. Exposing the actual miserable contribution of wind power to the UK’s energy system is just one way to contest the propagandist agenda.
From memory one UK professor, I think it was Ian Fell, claimed that the whole of Wales would have to be filled with wind turbines to power the country. In a high wind it would probably be blown over to the USA (my little joke).
I’m not agaisnt having any wind turbines. They just aren’t the solution to providing substantial energy needs.
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/
1 25 – 30 % efficient
2 coal fired plants are not eliminated, they have to regulate wind energy.
3 cannot be stored for use when demand is greater
4 low frequency noise is not regulated
5 50 db is way to high
6 disrupts sleep at 1325 ft from dwellings
7 shadow flicker
8 property values greatly diminished
9 our tax money make the rich richer
Turbines are not the way to go for alternative energy. Why would a country spend billions on something that runs no more than 30 % efficiency. $$$$$$$$
Go nuclear give me an ejoyable outdoors back again
Philip
Bliss NY
Good list Philip, but I’d like to add that some 10 times the raw material is needed to generate a watt of intermittent, dirty(spikes) wind power. Also the danger to life and limb servicing units some 200 meters in the air.
And yes, nucs are the only answer.
That’s an impressive list Philip, and there are other problems too.
In a small country like ours with not much free space, any large farms are almost bound to occupy protected green space, and it seems highly hypocritical to protect the environment and ecology by covering it in steel structures, which unquestionably damage any habitat they occupy.
Lightning strikes and ice projectiles formed on the blades in cold weather are other hazards. For reasons I don’t understand yet the internet is full of pictures of damaged wind turbines. I want to investigate why.
About the only benefit is the creation of green jobs, but I believe that the UK’s only wind turbine producer has closed down and a massive Texan wind farm had its turbines built in – China.
I live a few miles from a wind farm in Scotland and can confirm that of its 16 turbines only one was turning this morning and it was very cold (-9 centigrade).
One point, though, just for correctness. In power generation the efficiency of a plant is the percentage of the available input energy that is turned to electricity. For most UK coal stations this is about 37% rising to about 50% for combined cycle gas turbines.
What we are referring to with wind turbines is their load factor which is less than 30% and has generally been lower than was anticipated when they were first commissioned.
Load factor is the number of megawatt hours generated divided by the total number of megawatt hours that could be generated if running at full capacity and this is normally measured over a year.
Some coal plants run at load factors below 30%, but the difference is that they are available to run for up to 85% of the time. The 15% downtime mostly due to planned maintenance which is normally carried out during lower demand periods in the summer.
As more wind turbines are commissioned, more coal plant has to be available to run at short notice to replace the lost energy when the wind doesn’t blow. In order to do this, the coal plant has to be running at below its maximum and most efficient rating which causes more carbon dioxide per megawatt hour than if it ran at full load. In the extreme, the coal plant has to be in a condition known as hot standby. This is when the boilers are kept hot and ready to run immediately. In this condition energy is being consumed with no power output.
A cold coal fired power station takes anything up to 36 hours to start. If there is forecast to be insufficient wind power in 36 hours time a coal plant will be given an instruction to start, but if the forecast is wrong and the wind picks up before then, that instruction may be cancelled. During that time it will have consumed a lot of coal and generated nothing.
Graham, you wrote, “About the only benefit is the creation of green jobs,….”
I would urge you to consider the implication of that statement. Looking at it from my perspective, I see an endorsement of ‘make work projects’ – paying one to dig and another to fill a ditch.
The money spent on ‘green’ projects would not be forthcoming if left to market forces. That means the return on investment is missing. The taxes extracted to pay for these projects mean that the money that people would spend on things they wanted has had its value demeaned, less was purchased than could have been.
In fact all government spending will reduce the efficiency of the market place, giving people less value for their effort. Those jobs? they would simply have been created in a different line of work but there would have been more of them and wouldn’t end when the subsidies stop.
BTW, keep up the good work.
My own suspicion is that these ‘green’ jobs are merely a fantasy invention anyway. As we have found in the UK (the Corus plant), carbon taxes merely push indutry into developing countries where they have greater freedom to pollute. Their goods are then shipped back to us, causing even more pollution.
There are many much more serious pollution issues that should be addressed before CO2.
No Graham,
The Jobs are real, just not what everyone is led to believe. All the UK ‘Green Jobs’ are actually a whole army of inspectors to make sure that all the honest working people can get fined on a regular basis for their ‘carbon crimes’. The green police advert shows these ‘Green Jobs’ in action.
NO WAY. NEVER.
Viva la Revolution
Look them up. Vestas LM Fibre and many others have laid off hundreds since 2008. Many of the factory jobs are foreign. There are no plants in america that employee the number of workers promised when they raised subsidy money to build.
We need to order the 10,000 turbines that are shut down and rusted to be dismantled.
http://hawaiifreepress.com/main/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1698/Wind-Energys-Ghosts.aspx
Wind energy’s ghosts. Huge junk yards.
I don’t see an end to this ponzi scheme very soon. They have just announced 715 huge monsters for the south end of Lake Erie. Our grandchildren will point and laugh at the idiocy and ignorance that left the countrysides and lakes covered with giant, useless “rube goldberg” machines.
[...] “Yet again, as of 18-20 February, we are seeing a settled, continental weather system bringing cold weather to the UK. Demand rises as temperatures fall, meanwhile the 1588MW of wind capacity that is metered by National Grid, all in the windiest part of the UK (Scotland), is effectively delivering 0.0% of load.” Complete Story [...]
Wind turbines also interfere with TV reception and if the wind turbine company corrects it by giving individuals basic sat tv they must sign a gag order.
Wind turbines also disrupt weather radar because of the turbulence they create in the atmosphere. It now becomes difficult to predict accurate tornadoes and other weather disasters.
Its all about money and greasing the coffers of politicians.
Philip
Bliss NY
The kinetic energy of wind cannot provide a constant power source. The power produced is of poor quality and not the same as the reliable on-demand power sources though wind MW are being reported as being the same. Industrial wind turbines are highly variable and power production goes up and down without any knowledge (between 0 and the maximum possible) what it will be in the next second, minute, hour, day or week (when turbines are operating). So the next time industrial wind production is determined to be “X” MW at a production post or site, realize it is not accurate as wind power output cannot be constant over time no matter how many are build as wind is random. If built industrial wind turbines are destined to be useless structures not producing anything of value creating the illusion of “green”.
Ontario, Canada
Grahm’s table of the National Grid’s Generation by Fuel Type Table for 19/02/10 is very revealing and deserves to be followed up, particularly on the colder days. Where are these National Grid tables to be found?
Roger
England
I did put the link in the original article Roger.
I’ll give you a link to the page where I got the link from and you’ll see it there
http://www.moorsydeactiongroup.org.uk/
It’s a UK group who oppose wind turbines in their area. The actual energy page has many real time data streams that update in your browser window when you click on it.
It’s a very useful tool for those who want to know the real effectiveness of wind power, and I’m surprised it’s left open to the public.
Roger, here’s another link to Canadian (Ontario) IESO stats:
http://reports.ieso.ca/public/GenOutputCapability/PUB_GenOutputCapability_20100224.xml
Here in Ontario, it is all open to the public. Lots of info. Just need to open a free account. http://www.sygration.com/
Also on our website we have real-time output for the 1,100 MW of installed windpower. Right now? 38 MW pathetic
http://windconcernsontario.org (sidebar)
[...] Power is a green pipe-dream, here’s the ugly truth, they can’t power [...]