logo
Article

It is time to end this lunacy

Press and Journal|Stuart Young|March 26, 2010
United Kingdom (UK)Energy Policy

The announcement of plans for a £200million windfarm at Moy, near Inverness, was accompanied by the claim that it would provide power to 100,000 homes. This great lie is perpetuated every time a new wind development is reported. People need to understand what is actually being claimed, and this can be found in the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) publication Calculations for Wind Energy.


The announcement of plans for a £200million windfarm at Moy, near Inverness, was accompanied by the claim that it would provide power to 100,000 homes.

This great lie is perpetuated every time a new wind development is reported. People need to understand what is actually being claimed, and this can be found in the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) publication Calculations for Wind Energy.

BWEA claims: "A typical turbine therefore produces enough electricity each year to meet the needs of 1,000 homes."

I have no argument with this statement. A 1.75MW turbine at 30% load factor will annually generate 4,599MWh, which is close enough to the 4,700kWh average annual consumption per home for me.

But does it actually meet the needs? …

... more [truncated due to possible copyright]

The announcement of plans for a £200million windfarm at Moy, near Inverness, was accompanied by the claim that it would provide power to 100,000 homes.

This great lie is perpetuated every time a new wind development is reported. People need to understand what is actually being claimed, and this can be found in the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) publication Calculations for Wind Energy.

BWEA claims: "A typical turbine therefore produces enough electricity each year to meet the needs of 1,000 homes."

I have no argument with this statement. A 1.75MW turbine at 30% load factor will annually generate 4,599MWh, which is close enough to the 4,700kWh average annual consumption per home for me.

But does it actually meet the needs? The answer is no. To meet the needs, the power needs to be there when needed.

At 2am on March 19, the 1,588MW connected windpower metered by the National Grid was generating 1,355MW when nobody wanted it, and at the morning peak demand time of 8.35am on March 20, the same 1,588MW wind fleet could manage only 107MW.

The overnight excess generation wasn't used by households, and when it was needed at breakfast time, it just wasn't there. An average of 731MW was generated over the period, but it was needed at breakfast time, not over the period. This surplus generation formed part of the "electricity produced each year", but it didn't "meet the needs" of homes.

So what happened to that surplus wind-generated electricity? The wind conditions on March 22 provide a good example.

At midnight on March 21, the output from the metered windfarms was 305MW. This rose steadily to 1,024MW at 8.05am on the 22nd, then fell steadily to 456MW at midday.

It continued falling after midday, but let's just consider this 12-hour period.

As the wind output rose, National Grid was switching off output from coal-fired power stations and, as the wind output fell, the same power stations were being reconnected.

Note that coal output was switched off, not that the coal fire was doused. During that 12-hour period, almost the same amount of coal was burned as would have been if the power was being fed into the grid.

That coal was burned and no benefit whatsoever was derived from it. It was burned solely so that wind energy could be used.

It was an obscene waste of a valuable and rare resource. The wind-generated electricity the consumer was forced to buy - because the government says the National Grid must take wind energy when it is being generated - cost about three times the coal-generated power, and the cost of constraining off the coal plant was almost as much as the electricity would have been.

During this period, our electricity was about four times the cost of coal-generated power, and virtually no carbon emission was saved.

Then there is the other great lie. BWEA says: "Electricity from wind turbines replaces the output of coal and gas-fired power stations as these are the most flexible plant on the system."

Actually, this is not a lie, simply throw a switch and you stop the electricity being transmitted, and throw it again and electricity flows into the system once more. You can't get any more flexible than that.

The great lie is in the unspoken implication that just because you are using wind energy, carbon emissions are being reduced.

The coal stations can't be turned off. The wind is about to drop, but nobody knows when.

In the 12 hours from midday on March 22, wind generation went down from 456MW to 405MW, up to 554MW, then down to 381MW, up to 511MW, then down to 460MW, up to 679MW, and then down to 522MW at midnight, after which it fell to 322MW at 4.35am on March 23.

All of these swings required juggling coal power stations on and off to keep the grid balanced, and all the switches were costly.

Not one ounce of carbon emission was saved.

It is time to end this lunacy.

Start by challenging the claim "Enough power for X thousands of homes".

Follow on by exposing the deceitful disingenuity of "Electricity from wind turbines replaces the output of coal and gas-fired power stations".


Source:http://www.pressandjournal.co…

Share this post
Follow Us
RSS:XMLAtomJSON
Donate
Donate
Stay Updated

We respect your privacy and never share your contact information. | LEGAL NOTICES

Contact Us

WindAction.org
Lisa Linowes, Executive Director
phone: 603.838.6588

Email contact

General Copyright Statement: Most of the sourced material posted to WindAction.org is posted according to the Fair Use doctrine of copyright law for non-commercial news reporting, education and discussion purposes. Some articles we only show excerpts, and provide links to the original published material. Any article will be removed by request from copyright owner, please send takedown requests to: info@windaction.org

© 2024 INDUSTRIAL WIND ACTION GROUP CORP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
WEBSITE GENEROUSLY DONATED BY PARKERHILL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION