The plan to smother Wales with Windmills

[OwlHoot]

With a nuclear, fuel does not grow on trees, the energy that must be spent on:

1) Mining

2) Milling

3) Uranium conversion

4) Enrichment

5) Fabrication

6) Transport of radioactive materials

7) Used fuel

8) Reprocessing

I'm sure the example you provide considers the infrastructure required to support all those processes, right?

and how do you think they make and install tens of thousands of 450' tall windmaills, you complete muppet? Grow them?

Can you imagine how much concrete is needed in the foundations for a start, and metals and rare earth elements in the motors?

Also, extracting wind energy on that scale isn't "free" even ecologically. Wind carries heat from the equator towards the poles, and if impeded will lead to more droughts and powerful and damaging hurricanes.

[hyperD]

What have you people got against change?

Harvesting energy from natural resources such as wind as opposed to making the fuel removes so much unnecessary processing, safety concerns, bureaucrat red tape it's little wonder the windmill population is exploding. Processes cost money, the cost of operating, maintaining and decommissioning a nuclear power plant would almost bail out a bank.

Sadly scooterscot, although I sympathise with this viewpoint, especially as it ticks all the feel-good greenie pixie boxes, it's this type of simplistic fairy tale thinking about how we imagine our national energy model works that is the heart of this misguided propaganda that is saturating every facet of the ignorant MSM and its consumers.

Our energy requirements consist of a base load and peaking power mix that the National Grid utilises to provide all of us, our hospitals, our businesses, our infrastructure with a flexible 24/7 continual power supply, reacting to a high demand during the morning and evenings and providing a base line supply during the day and night.

During peak demands, the National Grid operators buy peak power from the energy spot market whose providers are legally obligated to guarantee that amount of power at that time. In the case of a CCGT (gas turbine plant) operator it takes less than an hour to have the plant ready to provide the peaking power or it’s bought in via the 2,000MW England-France Interconnector or various other peak power stations, such as the pumped storage facility of Ffestiniog in Wales.

Now Farmer Giles and his onshore windfarm, or Capt Birdseye and his offshore windfarm are at the beck and call of the changing wind conditions and cannot give that guarantee. In effect, it’s pot luck. All they can say is that yes, the blades are turning now, not so sure in a few hours from now to be honest. Invariably the NG operators ignore them. Or if they are connected to the grid regardless, they cause so many problems with grid spiking due to wind variance that operators normally disconnect them from the grid.

And you got to ask yourself the question: when the wind isn’t blowing 80% of the time, where do you get your power from? Coal fired power stations?

Do you know how long it takes to start one of them up?

At least a day from a black start. By the time the flapping has started, the lights are out and the heart patients are dead.

So, what you do is keep your coal fired power stations burning fossil fuel on standby spinning while the windmills are turning, saving…absolutely nothing but the Pontius Pilate handwashing of eco-guilt from the ignorant.

Which is why Denmark has not and cannot remove any existing fossil fuel power stations without becoming more reliant on Scandanavia's increasingly squeezed hydro energy infrastructure.

[scooterscot]

and how do you think they make and install tens of thousands of 450' tall windmaills, you complete muppet? Grow them?

You do it once for windmills.

Nuclear fuel requires continuous manufacturing throughout the reactors life.

[Troll]

What have you people got against change?

Harvesting energy from natural resources such as wind as opposed to making the fuel removes so much unnecessary processing, safety concerns, bureaucrat red tape it's little wonder the windmill population is exploding. Processes cost money, the cost of operating, maintaining and decommissioning a nuclear power plant would almost bail out a bank.

8th January 2010

From Thursday 17 December 2009 to Friday 15 January 2010 the UK experienced a spell of very low temperatures and significant snowfalls which affected almost the whole country. This was the most widespread and prolonged spell of this type across the UK since December 1981/January 1982. Large areas of England, Wales and Northern Ireland regularly saw night-time temperatures falling well below freezing, and on occasion below -10 °C, while in Scotland night-time temperatures in the Highland glens regularly fell to -15 °C or lower. Daytime temperatures in many areas frequently struggled to rise above freezing, often remaining several degrees below.

+

Wind Speed: Now 3.1 mph (1.4 m/s) upto 12.1 mph (5.4 m/s) From North-Northeast
Wind Speed: Ave 4.8 mph (2.1 m/s, Force 2, Light Breeze) From North
Wind Speed: Ave. Max. 5.4 mph (2.4 m/s, Force 2, Light Breeze) at 00:52
Wind Speed: Max Gust: 13.2 mph (5.9 m/s) at 00:44

Wind generated Electricity feck all

[scooterscot]

Sadly scooterscot, although I sympathise with this viewpoint, especially as it ticks all the feel-good greenie pixie boxes, it's this type of simplistic fairy tale thinking about how we imagine our national energy model works that is the heart of this misguided propaganda that is saturating every facet of the ignorant MSM and its consumers.

Our energy requirements consist of a base load and peaking power mix that the National Grid utilises to provide all of us, our hospitals, our businesses, our infrastructure with a flexible 24/7 continual power supply, reacting to a high demand during the morning and evenings and providing a base line supply during the day and night.


And you got to ask yourself the question: when the wind isn’t blowing 80% of the time, where do you get your power from? Coal fired power stations?

Do you know how long it takes to start one of them up?

At least a day from a black start. By the time the flapping has started, the lights are out and the heart patients are dead.

Where is it written wind turbine performance is linked to supply and demand?

Where would we get such an idea from that this needs to be the case? Is this a fine example of closed thinking typical of government.

When you press the accelerator to demand more speed do we quickly fill up the tank to replace the lost chemical energy? No? Why ever not? I need more speed now.

I'm not saying wind power is perfect, last year Scottish were paid nearly a £1M to switch off turbines instead of converting the energy for later use, i.e. pump the water back up the mountain.

To me the argument you presented attempts to place a old infrastructure on a new technology. As long as we continue this way of thinking we'll never change.

And you got to ask yourself the question: when the wind isn’t blowing 80% of the time, where do you get your power from? Coal fired power stations?

Do you know how long it takes to start one of them up?

I'd be more worried about the levels of smog the UK would be sitting in with that loss of wind.


In the end Germans will have the last laugh while we're still tinkering with Rovers in the backyard.


Our choices are simple embrace change or die.

[hyperD]

Where is it written wind turbine performance is linked to supply and demand?

Wind turbine performance supply and demand is not written about because it physically cannot supply the demand patterns required by our National Grid. It cannot fit as the base load provider nor the guaranteed peak power provider, nor for the sake of efficiencies of base load power stations, a turndown provider.

Where would we get such an idea from that this needs to be the case? Is this a fine example of closed thinking typical of government.

Quite the opposite, actually. This is exactly the sort of thing our politicians love: the excuse for more taxes, more control, more legislation, taxpayer funded big business, large public sector employment etc. It can be summed up in one succinct statement:

"Those Huhne the gods wish to destroy, they first turn mad..."

When you press the accelerator to demand more speed do we quickly fill up the tank to replace the lost chemical energy? No? Why ever not? I need more speed now.

Unfortunately you are simplifying our National Grid energy delivery model as I’ve tried to outline above. This is the sort of straw man the tabloid press uses ad infinitum.

I'm not saying wind power is perfect, last year Scottish were paid nearly a £1M to switch off turbines instead of converting the energy for later use, i.e. pump the water back up the mountain.

Let me give you an example of pumped storage I mentioned earlier: Ffestiniog. It is not a net supplier of electricity, it simply uses cheap National Grid off peak (night) electricity to pump the water up its reservoir and then in the afternoon when peak demand is highest, it sells its power on the spot market. It is profitable not because it's a net generator of power, because of the differential of energy market prices over time.

To me the argument you presented attempts to place a old infrastructure on a new technology. As long as we continue this way of thinking we'll never change.

To me, if you use our wealth to inflate and subsidise an energy source that is incompatible with the way the real world operates, food prices, clothes, schools, commodities, hospitals, fuel, business, transport, heating... just about every single thing that we use, the spiralling energy costs will drag us down into poverty.

One of the greatest things of the 21st century was the prevalence of cheaper energy to enable the growth of business and to encourage prosperity.

What the eco-religion of deception is doing, is making energy an unviable commodity and thus reducing us virtually back to the pre-industrial times of rationing and privilege.

I'd be more worried about the levels of smog the UK would be sitting in with that loss of wind..

The portmanteau of smoke and fog had its day before the 1956 Clean Air Act.

In the end Germans will have the last laugh while we're still tinkering with Rovers in the backyard.

E.ON Netz notable conclusions is that wind energy cannot replace conventional power stations to any significant degree, despite the huge amounts of taxpayer’s subsidies.

Our choices are simple embrace change or die.

I think the choice that is being said here is embrace the religious prophet of doom and be driven into poverty and starvation, or allow the future historians to point to this embarrassing episode of our evolution whereby the majority allowed the ignorant minority to take us to the brink of chaos…

… until hopefully sanity restores our normal goal of enterprise and raising the global standards of living via reducing the cost and increasing the availability of energy to everyone around our world.

[wim121]

You do it once for windmills.

Nuclear fuel requires continuous manufacturing throughout the reactors life.

Other people covered other points .....

Nuclear does require new fuel ..... But not as much as you might think ......

Wind turbines frequently throw blades that need replacing. The coils in the generators burn out and need replacing periodically. They arent maintenance free at all.

[Fred Bloggs]

Sadly scooterscot, although I sympathise with this viewpoint, especially as it ticks all the feel-good greenie pixie boxes, it's this type of simplistic fairy tale thinking about how we imagine our national energy model works that is the heart of this misguided propaganda that is saturating every facet of the ignorant MSM and its consumers.

Our energy requirements consist of a base load and peaking power mix that the National Grid utilises to provide all of us, our hospitals, our businesses, our infrastructure with a flexible 24/7 continual power supply, reacting to a high demand during the morning and evenings and providing a base line supply during the day and night.

During peak demands, the National Grid operators buy peak power from the energy spot market whose providers are legally obligated to guarantee that amount of power at that time. In the case of a CCGT (gas turbine plant) operator it takes less than an hour to have the plant ready to provide the peaking power or it’s bought in via the 2,000MW England-France Interconnector or various other peak power stations, such as the pumped storage facility of Ffestiniog in Wales.

Now Farmer Giles and his onshore windfarm, or Capt Birdseye and his offshore windfarm are at the beck and call of the changing wind conditions and cannot give that guarantee. In effect, it’s pot luck. All they can say is that yes, the blades are turning now, not so sure in a few hours from now to be honest. Invariably the NG operators ignore them. Or if they are connected to the grid regardless, they cause so many problems with grid spiking due to wind variance that operators normally disconnect them from the grid.

And you got to ask yourself the question: when the wind isn’t blowing 80% of the time, where do you get your power from? Coal fired power stations?

Do you know how long it takes to start one of them up?

At least a day from a black start. By the time the flapping has started, the lights are out and the heart patients are dead.

So, what you do is keep your coal fired power stations burning fossil fuel on standby spinning while the windmills are turning, saving…absolutely nothing but the Pontius Pilate handwashing of eco-guilt from the ignorant.

Which is why Denmark has not and cannot remove any existing fossil fuel power stations without becoming more reliant on Scandanavia's increasingly squeezed hydro energy infrastructure.

Excellent post and 100% true. Wind Power is a complete con and one that is bleeding us energy users dry paying huge subsidies to send our money back to Germany and France who own the power companies. You couldn't make it up, that's how stupid it really is. The wind mils aren't even made here.

[TimberWolf]

Other people covered other points .....

Nuclear does require new fuel ..... But not as much as you might think ......

Wind turbines frequently throw blades that need replacing. The coils in the generators burn out and need replacing periodically. They arent maintenance free at all.

The entire wind turbine only lasts about 20 years.

With nuclear, the nuclear fuel only makes up a small part of the total cost, currently. It can take weeks to turn a reactor off and on too - which is probably slower than waiting for the wind to pick up.

[SizeZero]

Read the information I posted before you make a fool out of yourself.

Given a choice between the following, which would you personally choose?

1) Nuclear Powerstation 200 yards from your house
2) Windmill 200 yards from your house
3) Brownouts/electricity supply for only x hours each day.


If you don't choose option 1, you're just another NIMBY (refer to your own quote). I know what I'd choose, but then again, I already live on the more pragmatic european mainland.