Is this the answerA wind turbine seascape
Is this the future? Will it work?
Onshore in the North east are not producing electricity or carbon redustions as promised. Wicks press release for Fullabrook Down wind farm has vindicated the fact that reductions are about half those previously claimed
(Something CO Durham and other groups have been saying but seemingly ignored)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7135299.stm
More on the Energy Minister thread

A new topic, accepted by the Moderators so perhaps you will comment.

We've got loads of windmills off the coast of Blackpool - alongside the gas field - and to be honest I don't even notice them that often, you can only really see them on a very good day, so as far as I'm concerned I think it's a great idea.

And as I wrote and told Tony Blair I thought he ought to do this in 2001 - I'm just amazed it's taken the Labour party as long as it has to get around to announcing it.

I gave them 4 objectives.

1. Peace in Northern Ireland
2. Sustainable and self-sufficient energy production
3. Turn the UK into an off-shore tax haven
4. Peace in the Middle East

I didn't realise it was going to take this long and they've only resolved number 1 to my satisfaction so far. Not impressed, but the sooner they get into production making some offshore windmills, the better .... that should give a bit of a boost to the engineering sector and I'm all in favour of helping home grown manufacturing.

Wow lizabeth
you are the windmill expert of the world ,hurrar.

Jolly good with facts,

Your a star.
:)
kindness
phyz

Physics
Facts not fiction is all you need
Astrocat
No problem with what you have said. The reason it has taken so long is simply money
Now the increase in the already excessive ROC subsidy and the proposed changes to planning procedures,investor confidence could increase.Even so there are teething problems on the current offshore projects,cables,gearboxes etc

Remember I am a sceptic re the technology but anti re the methodology that has been used to promote it


A wind turbine seascape
Is this the future? Will it work?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7135299.stm

Moving machinery needs maintenance and a proper quality initiative seems to be lacking in their construction, installation and planned maintenance.

The machines operate in a constant adverse environment, unlike a power station, so will we have a reliable electricity supply? - I have severe doubts especially as wind is now deemed to supply all the UK's future power!

I don't think wind can supply all of the UK's power needs and we will need nuclear for the foreseeable future.

But, if the moving parts require manufacture, transport, installation and maintainance, that's going to create jobs.

Either way, it's a better prospect than being held hostage to the Middle East or Russian cartels who have the option of turning off the gas and oil on a whim. The sooner we reduce our dependency on fossil fuels, the better.

Hi Liz - how do all these dinky wee windmills synchonise their current to the grid? do they do themselves or is their a fat controller somewhere up the line?

Sorry folks I'm digressing but....

A juggling act maybe Astro, but hey if I have oil and you have gold then we can exchange good business. Unless of course legal sanctions prevent that or you cripple my oil reserves with a strike.

or ethanol or hydrogen makes oil redundant because no-one is going to keep handing over money for a commodity which continues to increase in price and over which they have no control.

Besides which I thought oil was paid for in dollars not gold.

or maybe trading oil in Euro's would cripple the US Dollar which would cripple China whose currency is pegged to the dollar.

And with Russia backing Iran and wanting to sit at the table with Europe ... what do I need to pay you gold for when I can cripple your country with sanctions from the Security Council till you make the Euro the oil reserve trading currency?

OK you win let's trade in Euros.

Thought you'd like that one Scrubs!

Meanwhile, lets not put all our eggs in one basket and if we can produce energy from a number of sources (wind, nuclear etc.) that are not dependant on foreign investments or the currency markets and if we can become less reliant on the vagaries of world politics, then that places us in an enviable position.

And I think we should forge ahead with these plans just in case the rest of the world goes belly up.

Keep debating as I have only time to read
However please remember the crux of the thread is will it work? Subsidy alone will not do it. I seem to remember that offshore has always claimed to have a load factor of more than 40% Why not check the LF's of those currently operational. If I were an investor I would

For interest
Extract from a letter in the Telegraph 11th Dec
John Hutton, the Secretary of State for Business, has just unveiled plans to build around 7,000 wind turbines off the coast of Britain. This adds up to roughly one wind turbine for every half mile of coast.


Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are over the moon.

Comment:Wonder what they think about Partick Moore's article Dec10th
An adviser to government and industry, Dr Patrick Moore is a co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace, and chairman and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies.link to full aricle is on the Greenpeace thread

Link to related article by Booker is on Howard's Way thread

Isn’t that quote of a wind turbine for every half mile of coastline a little misleading? I’d assume they’ll build them in packed phalanxes out there.
Like that you can bunch together a few hundred quite easily.

As such I’ve not really much of an opinion on offshore wind turbines. Me thinks, if they can build drilling platforms off the coast, why not turbines?

Though I think it’s more a case of ‘every little helps’ rather than them really providing a stable energy supply. Then again, the companies that seek the planning applications must know why they want them. If there’s money in it, there must be some degree of solid supply they can deliver.

I think on land it’s the scale of these things which defeated the general support they first enjoyed. If we all envisaged some elegant structure perhaps the height of a telegraph pole, we were all rather stunned to see huge monsters bestriding the landscape.

My worries regarding all things green at the moment, are that hey are politically ‘fashionable’ and hence quickly become unquestionable, therefore enjoying the ‘wholehearted support’ of every politician going.

For purposes of political positioning one supports whatever is tagged ‘green’, no mater if it makes any sense or not.

Such complete, embarrassed consensus always tends to make me suspicious.
It always leaves me painfully aware of not knowing the facts and hence unable to really form a solid opinion, as I fear I’m being misled from the start.

Phantom says "I think on land it’s the scale of these things which defeated the general support they first enjoyed. If we all envisaged some elegant structure perhaps the height of a telegraph pole, we were all rather stunned to see huge monsters bestriding the landscape.

My worries regarding all things green at the moment, are that hey are politically ‘fashionable’ and hence quickly become unquestionable, therefore enjoying the ‘wholehearted support’ of every politician going"

Thankyou for those points which everyone will understand
One turbine for every half mile of coastline is a sort of journalist' poetic licence!
Will try to find time to comment further

apologies if this has been answered elsewhere, but, I would've thought that there would be an argument for promoting hydro electric power on the grounds that it rains quite a lot in the UK.

It would seem to be relatively clean energy - notwithstanding the inevitable outcry about CO2 being produced at build time, and a valley or two being flooded to hold the water.

Andrew,
Not sure if we’ve got expendable space and gradients in sufficient quantity to use hydro-electric power in a big way.
I grew up in Switzerland, where hydro is a big thing. But then once you see the Swiss terrain you understand why. (and even the Swiss have several nuclear plants to back that up)

So if we're to use hydro it would be in places like the North Yorkshire National Park, Snowdownia or the Lake District. Can't see that happening. Can you?

Unless we find a means of using the sea, I don’t see how hydro could come into it in a big way in Britain.

I remember how they floated out to sea a wave generator once in a blaze of publicity. If I recall it didn’t last out the first night, but sunk without trace.

The Severn Barrage is one option, but if that will ever get past Bill Oddy and the RSPB is another thing…

This is where the lack of credibility in the argument kicks in

In the face of imminent doom

(1) where we're all going to drown or fry - best not slow any of that down offsetting (its not enough)
(2) flooding Snowdonia (it won't look nice - not that it will look any nicer when its flooded with sea water),
(3) go nuclear (we all(?) believe that we'll fry or grow 4 heads if the waste products leak).

etc

and to cap it all, likely as not both sides of the argument are argued by the 'green lobby'.

How are we supposed to believe (or take seriously) that doing nothing (because doing something is 'only a start') is sensible ?

For interest
Wind target faces grid jam
Vicki Shiel, Planning, 14 December 2007
A major overhaul of grid connections is needed if the government's plans to expand offshore wind power are to be realised, according to experts.
full article