Are wind farms as “useless” as the Duke of Edinburgh claims?

‘The Sunday Telegraph’ has reported how the Duke of Edinburgh made a fierce attack on wind farms, describing them as "absolutely useless" and "a disgrace". He also criticised the industry's reliance on subsidies from electricity customers, claimed wind farms would "never work" and accused people who support them of believing in a "fairy tale".

When Esbjorn Wilmar, of ‘Infinergy’, which builds and operates turbines, introduced himself to the Duke at a reception in London, he found himself on the end of an outspoken attack on his industry. Mr Wilmar said his attempts to argue that onshore wind farms were one of the most cost-effective forms of renewable energy received a fierce response from the Duke.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-philip/8901985/Wind-farms-are-useless-says-Prince-Philip.html

Britain has 3,421 turbines, 2,941 of them onshore, with another 4,500 expected to be built under plans for wind power to play a more important role in providing Britain’s energy. Chris Huhne, the Energy Secretary, has called opponents of the plans “curmudgeons and fault-finders” and described turbines as “elegant” and “beautiful”.

Who do you agree with, the old Duke or Chris Huhne, and why?

As Huhne is a bit of a one-man 'wind farm' himself, I would agree with HRH that he is absolutely useless and a disgrace...

Mr Hornby. I trust there are no wind farms anywhere near your club, where no doubt plenty of hot air is generated if ever such a dastardly subject should be mentioned.
:affraid:

Iffin I had the werewithall, I would see Huhne's "elegant" remark as a red rag to a bull and apply to put a couple outside his patio window!!

When, inevitably, the UK finds that it is importing more energy than it can generate for itself, attitudes may modify.

oftenwrong wrote:When, inevitably, the UK finds that it is importing more energy than it can generate for itself, attitudes may modify.

I don't think so as I pointed out elsewhere wind power is very expensive and useless as it has to be backed all the time normal energy producing sources for when the wind doesn't blow or blows too hard and of course has a nasty habit of producing at the wrong times. Huhne is a Lib Dem pillock possibly a criminal and whose judgement is flawed as evidenced by swapping his wife for a even less attractive model

When in doubt, change the subject.

Apparently, it was too windy yesterday for the wind farms to work. Not only are they expensive to run they have to turn them off. Have they become an oxymoron, or is that being left to the boardmembers of the left/liberal persuasion to carry the banner? Minus the oxy of course!

Here's a link to a study comparing the amount of steel and concrete (they're 95% of total resources) used in the manufacture of nuclear and wind generation. Wind uses over 10x more steel and over 4x more concrete than nuclear.
 
http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/07/per-peterson-information-on-steel-and.html
 
If you then bear in mind that Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs) use under half of the resources of the conventional reactors used in this study, it's fair to claim that LFTRs are the greenest form of electrical generation.
 
For an instant perspective on the comparison of the ecological effects of:  Coal - Uranium - Thorium, see:  http://lftrsuk.blogspot.com/  with a link to the 38Degrees website for UK Manufacture of LFTRs.

What will future Historians write about our 21st. Century dilemma? Modern civilisation demands ever-increasing energy supplies, but decries the means of providing them.

Coal is described as too dirty and supplies of any fossil fuel are by definition finite, so Oil or Natural Gas are short-term alternatives. Nuclear power is readily available and theoretically infinite, but we don't know what to do with its deadly waste. So to harnessing the Earth's abundant "free" energy - sunlight, wind power, tidal forces and wave-power. All requiring elaborate and expensive mechanical intermediary devices, which nobody wants to be visible. Volcanic activity is unfriendly to human life but gives free hot water to some communities, so is that the way forward, with heat-pumps?

The Gods must be chuckling at our inability to solve problems of our own creation.

Our nuclear 'left-overs' are not waste, they're assets worth billions of pounds. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs) can 'burn' our Pu239 stockpile and other transuranic 'waste' to output profitable electricity; the remaining fission products can be chemically separated into many valuable (saleable) elements; and the minimal remainder decays to background radiation levels in 300 years (technologically easy and cheap to store).
 
The end is not nigh - in fact it can be brilliant for the ¾ of humanity that use only ¼ of the energy, because clean and affordable LFTRs can supply every individual on the planet with all of their energy needs (at developed world standards) for hundreds of thousands of years, from the virtually inexhaustible availability of thorium fuel.

The recent nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan, renewed fears about spent fuel safety in the USA, where 65,000 tons of nuclear waste have piled up at power plants — waste that produces more radioactivity than the reactors themselves.

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/28/138707937/nuclear-waste-piles-up-as-repository-plan-falters

oftenwrong wrote: the USA, where 65,000 tons of nuclear waste

 
The USA's nuclear 'left-overs' are not waste either. 'Burning' it in a breeder reactor (IFR or LFTR) is the inevitable way to go. Yucca Mountain has disappeared off the radar and nobody in the UK is talking about a repository now. Closing the fuel cycle is the only way to stretch uranium resources into the 1000s of years instead of the100 years projected using the open fuel cycle, which is in place at Sizewell B and due to be used on the 8 'New Nuclear' plants to be built in the UK.

Once again to get back on topic wind farms are now officially useless read the recent report on the subject in yesterdays papers

(Jagger/Richards)

Who wants yesterdays papers
Who wants yesterdays girl
Who wants yesterdays papers
Nobody in the world

After this time I finally learned
After the pain and hurt
After all this what have I achieved
I've realized it's time to leave

Cause
Who wants yesterdays papers
Who wants yesterdays girl
Who wants yesterdays papers
Nobody in the world

Living a life of constant change
Every day means the turn of a page
Yesterdays papers are such bad news
Same thing applies to me and you

oftenwrong wrote:http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/storage-spent-fuel-fs.html

 
Watch this space!

RenewableUK reckons there will be nearly 90,000 jobs in wind energy industry over next decade. The National Infrastructure Plan, unveiled in the Autumn Statement, committed the government to developing five centres for offshore renewable engineering in Humber, Tees, Tyne, Lowestoft/Great Yarmouth and Sheerness.

In three of these five locations (Humber, Tees and Tyne), offshore renewables projects will form part of an enterprise zone development strategy and will benefit from enhanced capital allowances. The plan also restates government support for investing up to £60 million over the next four years to develop offshore wind manufacturing facilities at UK ports.

Siemens will create 700 jobs at a new wind turbine plant planned for Hull docks, with many more jobs likely in supply chains. It’s part of a plan to develop a renewable energy hub at Green Port Hull in the Alexandra Dock area of the city, with Siemens investing £80 million and ABP £130 million. Meanwhile, Mabey Bridge the UK’s only indigenous manufacturer of wind turbine towers, is expanding to a 24-hour operation to meet growing demand, creating 45 new jobs. It’s also transferring 50 workers from its bridge-building operation, to join the 102 staff already on site, almost doubling the workforce.

A 'Sunday Times' YouGov poll shows 56% of the public support expansion of wind power, with only 19% against.

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/12/15/support-grows-for-wind-energy-jobs-and-power/

Anyone who knows the Hebrides will know the wind never stops blowing there, and trees find it hard to grow. The local economy is effectively subsidised by the mainland, but would be transformed by cheap electrical power.

A barrage at the mouth of the River Severn like the one opposite at Dinard across the River Rance which generates 10% of the energy needs for the whole of Brittany, could make life easier for the under-employed of South Wales.

What's the delay?

According to latest estimates by the Royal Academy of Engineering, one KWh of electricity produced by nuclear power was cheaper than wind produced electricity just 7 years ago, but now it is now more costly than one KWh of electricity produced by wind power, things are changing rapidly.

The facts are pretty clear, electricity produced by carbon fuels are getting more expensive, whilst electricity produced by renewable sources are becoming cheaper, and whilst the argument of green sceptics did stand up only a few years ago, they are now fast losing the argument.

At the present rate of price rises in electricity prduced by carbon sources, renewable sources will be a clear economic winner in just a few years from now, the current building programme is planning for the future.

Did you know that coal, oil and gas is getting more scarce ?

What happens to the price of commodities that become scarce ?

sceptics - think about it

Heh, yeah, but even if all fossil fuel energy sources were replaced tomorrow, the politicians and CEOs would find a way to monopolize wind so they can charge us $30 per hour for a breeze, $50 per hour for gusts, and $100 for a gale.

And if we don't comply, they'll stop talking, and that would cut us off from the world's largest source of wind power.

.
Will Cameron really go to war with his own core voters over the Localism Bill? I myself think not? What do you think?


as we are having meeting in our villages called by the local Tory party who are up in arms over wind Turbines. me I back it, as you cannot even see the place they plan to put it. but the Tories hate even these.

Countryside campaigners are worried, too, about the Localism Bill, which is at the report stage in the House of Lords, meaning that amendments can be made. The coalition claims that this will shift power from central government back into the hands of individuals, communities and councils. The idea is that the government has become too big and bureaucratic and that "community empowerment" through "neighbourhood plans" is the answer.

The reality is rather different. Much of the so-called localism is a myth. The bill includes a "top-down" override that makes it impossible for local communities to choose - or, more importantly, block - developments that contradict the "core" principles of the bill and the NPPF, including EU laws and all national "policy", such as that default "yes" to development.

How did it come to this? The UK's green fields and picturesque villages have long been considered sacrosanct by the property classes of Middle England, so why have the Tories embarked on a collision course with their core voters? Just as Cameron was able to steal centre-left support from Labour by zealously backing public services, schools and the NHS, so Labour (the party that banned fox hunting) has been quick to seize political capital by repositioning itself as "countryside-friendly". The shadow secretary, Mary Creagh, won the first victory when she described the coalition's plans to privatise England's forests as "environmental vandalism". A swift retreat followed.
http://www.newstatesman.com/environment/2011/09/planning-turbines-countryside

Im not a big fan of wind farms, despite being a rabid environmentalist. They kill way too many birds...not to mention bats.

The TEN turbines at the Nissan Sunderland site have not turned ONCE since LAST WEDNESDAY 18, Jan 2012!

Good EH?

Researchers have found the cause behind mysterious bat deaths near wind turbines, in which many bat carcasses appeared uninjured.

The explanation to this puzzle is that the bats' lungs effectively blow up from the rapid pressure drop that occurs as air flows over the turbine blades.

"The idea had kind of been floating around, because people had noticed these bats with no injuries," said Erin Baerwald of the University of Calgary and lead author of a study about the finding in the journal Current Biology.

Researchers examined a large sample size of hoary and silver-haired bats found under wind turbines, performing necropsies on the bats within hours of their death.

The damage from rapidly expanding air in the lungs caused by the sudden drop in pressure was clear. Ninety percent of the bat deaths at the southern Alberta site involved internal hemorrhaging consistent with such damage, called barotrauma, while only 50 percent showed signs of collision with turbine blades
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/08/25/wind-turbine-bats.html

We need bats to control pests that eat crops.
White-nose syndrome has already killed over a million bats in North America. Many colonies are down by 90%. We just can't afford to lose any more.

If you like turbines, Stox, next time you head to Scotland, take the picturesque road from Jedburgh to Dalkeith A68 (or from Wooler to Dalkeith A697). Dun Law Wind Farm on the A68 near Gilston. Photos on Google Earth. If these things are providing power for the Juniper Lea Hotel and Carfrae Mill Hotel then I am all for it. Else they are oot in the middle of nowhere.

Stop in Carfraemill Hotel for pee&tee and when you continue your sojourn, the visage is obscured by many of these 'carbuncles' If the wind is right strength and direction, you may be able to pick up the racket from them as well.

Cameron has backed himself into a corner by declaring his Government to be the Greenest Ever! How many turbines are around his house at chipping norton, or his other pile at chequers? OR at his wife's daddy's wee hoosey?

Obviously he is a NIMBY

"Royals' £1m wind farm hypocrisy: 45 wind turbines described by Charles as a 'horrendous blot' to be built on Crown land"

Tamara Cohen writes:-

The Royal Family could soon be cashing in on dozens of wind turbines – even though they have been condemned by Prince Charles and Prince Philip. Energy firms have been given the green light for 45 windmills on Crown Estate land, which will rake in £1 million a year in subsidies. Those who will live next door to the wind farms in Wales and Lincolnshire accused the Royal Family of hypocrisy, after the Prince of Wales described them as a "horrendous blot on the landscape", while his father called them "useless" and "a disgrace".

For the full article:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2132878/Royals-1m-wind-farm-hypocrisy-45-wind-turbines-described-Charles-horrendous-blot-built-Crown-land.html

The Jury is still out in Britain, but wind-power has been enthusiastically adopted by other European countries. The largest producer of wind power in Spain at the end of 2009 was Iberdrola, with 25.5 percent of capacity, followed by Acciona on 20.9 percent and NEO Energia (EDP Renewables) with 8.3 percent. On particular windy days, wind power generation has surpassed all other electricity sources in Spain, including nuclear.

It has transformed prospects in the Province of Navarra. Navarre lacks thermal, nuclear, coal, oil, gas fields, or hefty hydro-electric power stations, but does possess considerable renewable resources, Navarre was entirely reliant on imported energy until wind-power development and utilization began to progress in 1996.

Windmills kill nearly half a million birds a year, according to a Fish and Wildlife estimate .... but not many fish.

Germany Could Be a Model for How We’ll Get Power in the Future

From an article by Robert Kunzig:-

Germany is pioneering an epochal transformation it calls the 'energiewende' — an energy revolution that scientists say all nations must one day complete if a climate disaster is to be averted. Among large industrial nations, Germany is a leader. Last year about 27% of its electricity came from renewable sources such as wind and solar power, three times what it got a decade ago and more than twice what the United States gets today. The change accelerated after the 2011 meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, which led Chancellor Angela Merkel to declare that Germany would shut all 17 of its own reactors by 2022. Nine have been switched off so far, and renewables have more than picked up the slack.

What makes Germany so important to the world, however, is the question of whether it can lead the retreat from fossil fuels. By later this century, scientists say, planet-warming carbon emissions must fall to virtually zero. Germany, the world’s fourth largest economy, has promised some of the most aggressive emission cuts — by 2020, a 40% cut from 1990 levels, and by 2050, at least 80%.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/11/climate-change/germany-renewable-energy-revolution-text