Your Blog

TURBINES OUT OF ACTION FOR A YEAR. Please read

Posted by Lizabeth on Monday, 08 January 2007 11:33:01

‘Turbines out of action for a year'. Please read, as this is about openness and justice.

The article in the Newcastle Journal 06/01/07 is an understatement and I wish to offer some comment which I hope your ‘green' advisors Goldsmith and Polly Tonybee will read.

Both Blyth Offshore, and Blyth harbour, must both be mentioned, particularly as they have always been given a high profile. When the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) document was launched for consultation, Bob Gibson, Chair of the North East Assembly named Blyth Harbour and Blyth Offshore Wind farms as Flagship projects (Source North East Renewable Energy Group NEREG).

Neither Blyth onshore or offshore wind turbines are working as expected I have read Blyth harbour (onshore turbines) are to be increased in capacity In 2005 their load factor was 13.3% In 2005 one turbine was out of action for 8 months and the second turbine seems not to have worked at all. In fact I can not locate any registered ROC s at all on the Ofgem website for the second turbine

Wind turbines were meant to reduce carbon emissions to help fight global warming.

As I have said so many times they are not working in the north east of England, so why are we continuing to build them?.

Below is an abstract from a document produced as a result of the 2001 cable fault. Did anyone take notice?

BLYTH HARBOUR WIND FARM -

OPERATIONAL ASPECTS

AMEC Energy Ltd

CONTRACT NUMBER: W35/00563/00/00

URN NUMBER: 04/1052

2.4.1 Cable Fault

In early 2001, there was a cable fault on the link between the two

turbines. This was the result of poor installation. The attachment

of the cable to the seabed was to be carried out by divers. The

installation of the cable was carried out in October and the

visibility became poor. The contractor thought enough had been

done to secure the cable for the winter and planned to finish the

work in the spring. Unfortunately this was not the case.

The cable protection where the cable left the J-tube came loose

and slipped down the cable. The current then caused the cable to

wear on the end of the J-tube and the cable was cut through.

There was sufficient spare cable in the link to allow the damaged

section to be pulled into the tower and cut off. However the spare

length was at the far end and had to be worked along to the

appropriate end. There were three attempts to do this, mainly

frustrated by combinations of weather and tides. In the end the

entire length of cable was suspended on floatation bags and

pulled along with a small tug. Again this was a diver operation and

required good visibility. The cable was out of service for

approximately three months.

The cable was then secured at intervals to the sea-bed and the

supports at the entrance to the J-tubes were supported by shaped

cement filled bags. A video of the cable route and securing

arrangements was made for reference.

Spare cable for a repair was available but was not needed in this

case.

The lessons learned from this problem were;

Try to use installation methods with no or very little diver

intervention

•The detail of the cable entry is very important and requires

close cooperation between the steelwork designer and the

cable laying contractor

•Detailed repair strategies need to be worked out in advance.

We are still being given partial truths when we need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. We are being kept in he dark!

, ,

You could comment if you logged in | Read comments


 

Don't miss these