Wind Turbines

[GliderRider]

cml24, I can't find any anticipated financials from pre-project, however, there is quite a bit more technical detail and photos of the build in this powerpoint: Meygen build & installation

[HaiKarate]

thegreenhell said:

Mount them on the cars. A bit impractical - you'd have to avoid low bridges and other obstacles all the time, but at least you could generate power as you drive along, even on calm days...

The energy created would be lost by increased drag.

[StanleyT]

springfan62 said:

robinh73 said:

You may not like the look of them but would you like to live next to or look at a nuclear or coal power station.

I like Electricity Windmills. They are quite hypnotic.

I loved looking at the coal fire power station across the river from where I lived. I used to count the number of cooling towers venting and that told you how many burners and turbines were running. British coal and power at it's best.

I could stare all day at a nuclear power station. Twenty years worked in the industry. Partly admiration for the people that built them, and how on earth did you make something so complicated work, and partly and now how on earth are we going to get rid of that.

S-I-L in Ireland was offered the chance to "host" some wind-farms on her land. (20 years ago so these were small MW ones, not todays GWs) Fortunately she had the sense top visit a few other places and decided the resonant noise wasn't for her - visited one with her and whilst you had the normal wind gusts there was this strange "ommm-nommm-woo-shooom" that really got you once you noticed it.

Dunno what happened with quote edit?

[paua]

GliderRider said:

The reason we don't have more underwater tidal energy turbines is that MPs can't get a 'green' photo opportunity standing next to something that is submerged and working.

Underwater would be a good place for most politicians, until they turn green.

[RobDickinson]

The modern 100-110m blade ones are put so far off shore you can't see them anyhow

[robinh73]

The issue I have with the wind turbines and in particular the offshore ones, is the fact that they aren't exactly "green energy". They are in a hostile environment which does take its toll on them moreso than on land. The magnets in them contain a very rare earth which has to be mined in China and then shipped around the globe. Then there is the fuel used in all the vessels used to erect the things. It is in staggering quantities. One support vessel (say 20m in length) will use a couple of tons of fuel a day minimum. Then there is the support ship moored nearby, much much larger and consuming even more fuel.
I am all in favour of renewable energy, but these things aren't exactly green in their construction. Oh and then there is the inbuilt generator which each one has during construction, running constantly drinking fuel. Not as green as some may think.

[RobDickinson]

robinh73 said:

The issue I have with the wind turbines and in particular the offshore ones, is the fact that they aren't exactly "green energy". They are in a hostile environment which does take its toll on them moreso than on land. The magnets in them contain a very rare earth which has to be mined in China and then shipped around the globe. Then there is the fuel used in all the vessels used to erect the things. It is in staggering quantities. One support vessel (say 20m in length) will use a couple of tons of fuel a day minimum. Then there is the support ship moored nearby, much much larger and consuming even more fuel.
I am all in favour of renewable energy, but these things aren't exactly green in their construction. Oh and then there is the inbuilt generator which each one has during construction, running constantly drinking fuel. Not as green as some may think.

Yes they are as green as they are supposed to be.

Yes they also cost some resources to build but that is insignificant compared to the alternatives.

And what in built generator??


Theres plenty of studies showing large wind turnbines are massively efficient, cheap and positive for the environment.

[RobDickinson]

Here is some study data for you.. the graphs show 20-30 times energy return. Aka 1 year of production offsets its construction.

https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/ES...

Life-cycle energy analysis and energy yield ratio
Considering a total service life of 20 years for the two systems studied, the total
net life-cycle energy produced (net life-cycle output minus the embodied energy
and energy required for maintenance and operation) and the energy yield, were
determined. The net life-cycle energy produced over a 20-year period was
588 TJ and 2049 TJ for the 850 kW and 3.0 MW wind turbines, respectively.
Based on an emissions factor of 60 kg/GJ, this equates to a saving of 35,265t and
122,960t of greenhouse gases for the 850 kW and 3.0 MW turbines over their
service life, respectively.

The EYR ranges from 21 for the 850 kW turbine to 23 for the 3.0 MW
turbine (Figure 3). This shows that both turbines produce a significantly larger
amount of energy than is required for their manufacture, operation and
maintenance during their effective life. These EYRs are expected to increase to
32 and 35 for a service life of 30 years, as seen in Figure 3, demonstrating the
potential benefits of maximising wind turbine service life

[anonymous-user]

Wind turbines also have a very useful, but not often mentioned advantage, in that they are really easy to take down again! Build a huge, complex and dirty power station of any kind, and the decommissioning takes years, cost millions and is horribly polluting (esp. nuclear!) By comparison, cutting down wind turbines is easy, clean and cheap, leaving at worst a (relatively) small concrete base and that's it! So, we can build lots of them, and if they turn out to be a short term solution (when we have a fusion break through for example) then we haven't really lost that much and we can just tear them all down if we wanted.......

[zetec]

Imagine if one got hit by lightning

[Evanivitch]

robinh73 said:

I am all in favour of renewable energy, but...

Is this like when people say "I'm not racist, but..." and then say something that is racist?

You've posted a load of crap.

[robinh73]

Evanivitch said:

robinh73 said:

I am all in favour of renewable energy, but...

Is this like when people say "I'm not racist, but..." and then say something that is racist?

You've posted a load of crap.

Cheers for that, pleasure. I do have an insight into the wind turbine industry and in particular the supply vessels and costs involved.

Edited by robinh73 on Saturday 25th May 09:19

[paulguitar]

Is there any truth in US ‘president’ trumplethinskin’s claims that wind turbines:

1. Cause cancer?

2. Kill many many eagles?

[Einion Yrth]

paulguitar said:

Is there any truth in US ‘president’ trumplethinskin’s claims that wind turbines:

1. Cause cancer?

2. Kill many many eagles?

I offer this as evidence, I have not researched it any deeper and there may be a debunking somewhere, I do not know and your mileage may vary.

[paulguitar]

Einion Yrth said:

paulguitar said:

Is there any truth in US ‘president’ trumplethinskin’s claims that wind turbines:

1. Cause cancer?

2. Kill many many eagles?

I offer this as evidence, I have not researched it any deeper and there may be a debunking somewhere, I do not know and your mileage may vary.

Some more here:

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statement...

And on the bizarre cancer claims:
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statement...

[Evanivitch]

robinh73 said:

Evanivitch said:

robinh73 said:

I am all in favour of renewable energy, but...

Is this like when people say "I'm not racist, but..." and then say something that is racist?

You've posted a load of crap.

Cheers for that, pleasure. I do have an insight into the wind turbine industry and in particular the supply vessels and costs involved.

Edited by robinh73 on Saturday 25th May 09:19

And? There's peer reviewed research papers that say you're wrong. Very, very wrong.

In reality what you've admitted to is only knowing half the argument. You know that the ships are expensive and create pollution. But you don't know how much energy the wind turbines create throughout their life.

[Condi]

Some interesting comments...

The new wind turbines will be built offshore, irrespective of the higher cost of construction. The load factors of offshore turbines built off Scotland or in the North Sea are many times that of onshore turbines. Also the newer models have a much wider operating window, allowing them to generate full power across a large range of wind speeds. Its really quite impressive compared with older onshore stuff.

Someone commented on the ease of removing the infrastructure. What is starting to happen is that as older turbines reach the end of their 20 year lifespan newer models are being installed on the existing sites, making it quite a cheap upgrade. Turbine tech is so much better now than it was 20 years ago its economic to replace the older models even without any subsidies.

I dont think there are any generators on them? They do draw a bit of power from the grid when there is no wind at all, but as far as I know there are no fuel generators needed. Also the comment regarding the fuel used by the support ships is negligible in the grand scheme of things. The new wind farm SSE have just built is a 600MW station using 80 something turbines. To generate the same amount of power from coal would require upwards of 300t of coal per hour, so a couple of tonnes of heavy fuel oil per day is inconsequential compared with the equivalent thermal generation.


EDIT - looking at wind power on any given day is a bit pointless. Some days it does more, some days it does less. At times wind power has been responsible for over 40% of the UK power demand. So far this year renewable power (solar/hydro/wind and biomass) has been on average 30% of demand.

Edited by Condi on Thursday 30th May 18:17

[Gandahar]

Max_Torque said:

Wind turbines also have a very useful, but not often mentioned advantage, in that they are really easy to take down again! Build a huge, complex and dirty power station of any kind, and the decommissioning takes years, cost millions and is horribly polluting (esp. nuclear!) By comparison, cutting down wind turbines is easy, clean and cheap, leaving at worst a (relatively) small concrete base and that's it! So, we can build lots of them, and if they turn out to be a short term solution (when we have a fusion break through for example) then we haven't really lost that much and we can just tear them all down if we wanted.......

Good post because currently nobody has yet decommissioned a nuclear power plant fully and the costs seem to just get bigger and bigger over time for our 50's onwards ones in Lancashire and Scotland.

So I wonder how cheap a new Chinese nuclear power plant is compared to other production? Not very is my guess. I think as solar and wind turbine tech gets cheaper, far more so than nuclear is not getting cheaper. it will screw nuclear.

Why the UK is still going down the nuclear path when any problem has a huge cleanup bill is rather strange.

[Gandahar]

Einion Yrth said:

paulguitar said:

Is there any truth in US ‘president’ trumplethinskin’s claims that wind turbines:

1. Cause cancer?

2. Kill many many eagles?

I offer this as evidence, I have not researched it any deeper and there may be a debunking somewhere, I do not know and your mileage may vary.

looking at offshore turbines the work to put them in decreases wildlife around them at the time. The structure then increases wildlife over time afterwards.


That is sub sea rather than birds though.

[anonymous-user]

Gandahar said:

Why the UK is still going down the nuclear path when any problem has a huge cleanup bill is rather strange.

two words: Energy Density.

IMO, Nuclear and Renewables make terrific partners to provide a robust generation mix. Nuclear is not cheap, but it is reliable and powerful. As we ween ourselves off our 100 year addiction to cheap, plentiful but massively polluting fossil fuels, the cost of our energy is going to increase, but we, imo, need a nuclear base load to provide both the necessary stability and the requisite quantity to meet future demands. You will hear people moaning about how expensive electricity generated by nuclear actually is, and they are right it is expensive, but that moaning is nothing compared to the moaning you'd hear when energy rationing is forced on those same people and the lights go out during the evening...........