Wind Power to the rescue

[slider]

You dont need batteries to store energy. I am reminded of a hydro electric plant that worked by using excess off peak energy to pump water up to a reservoir, and then release it during peak demand, allowing the turbines to generate the power needed by the grid. Then pump it up again during the next off peak period.

Quite agree but unfortunately you then run into even more complex problems with the anti-everything (so long as I have my home comforts) brigade. - building new dams that would flood potential environmentally rich areas, displacing people and sustainable farming systems, blocking designated rights of way, covering the burial place of aunty freda's dog etc etc

[Clunkclick]

You dont need batteries to store energy. I am reminded of a hydro electric plant that worked by using excess off peak energy to pump water up to a reservoir, and then release it during peak demand, allowing the turbines to generate the power needed by the grid. Then pump it up again during the next off peak period.

Exactly. I would presume that as a matter of grid generation policy, that most turbines arrays can't be guarenteed to always be on-line (With the possible exception off-shore wind farms) and therefore won't be committed to supplying essential "Base Load" to the generation system but will be operating mainly "Off-line" in filling-in gaps in the variable generating requirement by say supply leccy to uses such as pumping water for later hydro release during peak demand.

Nick

[Clunkclick]

Quite agree but unfortunately you then run into even more complex problems with the anti-everything (so long as I have my home comforts) brigade. - building new dams that would flood potential environmentally rich areas, displacing people and sustainable farming systems, blocking designated rights of way, covering the burial place of aunty freda's dog etc etc

There are already a fair number of suitably vallied and desolate areas in this country (Wales and Scotland, Pennines, Cumbria) that are already being used for this purpose. So extra generating capacity is there for the asking simply by adapting existing facilties. And that's not to say that capacity couldn't be easily increased without loss of amenity.

New pumped water reservoirs could be mainly sited at the coast. Especially at the areas subject to or in danger from coastal flooding and erosion. Travelling from sea to land, the order would be sea, brackish water reservoir, land. In addition to providing coastal defences (A large body of still water is a good defence against turbulent water - think of harbour walls and moles), turbines embedded in the "reservoir" walls providing hydro on the ebb and flow of the tide with wind turbine power use to add to to the tidal volume by pumping extra water.Part of the the power generated could also be used, as the need arose, to de-salinate water in a special section of the reservoir, providing fresh water and salt for the chemical industry. The wind turbines could be sited on-top of the reservoir walls, as could a road and rail and telecomms linkage - think of Holland (Avoiding the shout-ups about where the next HS2 line will run).Once you've built a coastal barrier its there for all time - unlike nucleur and the rest.

Nick

Edited 10 December, 2011 by Clunkclick

[slider]

There are already a fair number of suitably vallied and desolate areas in this country (Wales and Scotland, Pennines, Cumbria) that are already being used for this purpose. So extra generating capacity is there for the asking simply by adapting existing facilties. And that's not to say that capacity couldn't be easily increased without loss of amenity.

New pumped water reservoirs could be mainly sited at the coast. Especially at the areas subject to or in danger from coastal flooding and erosion. Travelling from sea to land, the order would be sea, brackish water reservoir, land. In addition to providing coastal defences (A large body of still water is a good defence against turbulent water - think of harbour walls and moles), turbines embedded in the "reservoir" walls providing hydro on the ebb and flow of the tide with wind turbine power use to add to to the tidal volume by pumping extra water.Part of the the power generated could also be used, as the need arose, to de-salinate water in a special section of the reservoir, providing fresh water and salt for the chemical industry. The wind turbines could be sited on-top of the reservoir walls, as could a road and rail and telecomms linkage - think of Holland (Avoiding the shout-ups about where the next HS2 line will run).Once you've built a coastal barrier its there for all time - unlike nucleur and the rest.

Nick

excellent points

[Golf-Fiend]

You dont need batteries to store energy. I am reminded of a hydro electric plant that worked by using excess off peak energy to pump water up to a reservoir, and then release it during peak demand, allowing the turbines to generate the power needed by the grid. Then pump it up again during the next off peak period.

Yes, but this relies upon the natural geography of the area. You need a bloody big mountain with a reservoir on top to provide enough fall to generate instantaneous peak demands required. Now this ain't going to happen in any areas where there are no mountains is it? The idea of pumping water in brackish areas of the coast to provide natural sea defenses etc just wont provide enough fall either. You need to barrage a large estuary to make it viable. Plus - barrages only generate power on the rise and fall of the tide. This can happen at 3am when people are sleeping. You still need to harness and store this energy for the cuppa teas at 6.30am etc. Smaller scale plans on coastal areas might provide power to smaller towns but you have to remember not all coastal areas have a great tidal range. The Severn Estuary is just crying out for it though. It could power most of South Wales, Bristol, North Devon etc.

Energy stores are the way forward. There just has to be investment and research into these areas. With the current gov. cutbacks into University research at the moment this just ain't happening. We WILL fall behinds and have to accept being anally reamed by Russia for our energy supplies.

[fabdavrav]

The anti's continually roll out propaganda tripe. Flocks of dead birds - what absolute twaddle. I have in on and around many wind farms and have never seen one. How many get hit by cars every day.

They may not be the answer to our energy problems but they are doing their bit in filing the gap till the next technology comes alone. The experience of developing wind turnbines has speedier the development of wave power.

The anti's never come up with the alternatives - nukes are probably the only viable technology we have at the moment!

You may not have see the dead birds but I deal and know people who work at these places (I sell rope access equipment)...and this is what the workers report, and I have seen pictures....Ask the RSPB......remember I am talking about the Highlands etc....this is the last "wilderness" in the UK....suposedly!!!

Nuclear power is the only power that is 100% on all the time that uses the least of the earths resouces....we need to invest in cold fusion and other better power forms like gas plasma energy from waste plants (there is one in Swindon).

Spending alot of money installing wind turbines which only operate at 33% max and need a back up additional power supply is a pointless exercise and a big waste of money. That money needs to be spent on refining other technologies!

As for being "green".......I have always lived a "waste not want not" life style.......I made a conscious decision to run my buisness iin my local town/village, and not in the nearby city..thus losing more income....but I walk to work......I consume very little energy at both the house and the shop and installed technologies (expensive)years ago that are now "the in thing"........

We don't need more power stations etc......we need to consume less......so stop decorating the outside of your house at christmas and saying "it's for the kids".......turn your thermostat down to 19C on your heating.....don't start you car up in the morning to get the engine etc warm, then go back inside for your breakfast..........

CONSUME LESS!!!!!!

P.S.........everything that we do in the UK is being wiped out by the polution from India, China, Brazil, etc etc......those contries need enforced "green" polices.....not us!!!!!

[slider]

Yes, but this relies upon the natural geography of the area. You need a bloody big mountain with a reservoir on top to provide enough fall to generate instantaneous peak demands required. Now this ain't going to happen in any areas where there are no mountains is it?

ehmm, well electricity manages to be transported nationwide via the current grid so transporting it from windfarms, which also happen to be mostly in upland areas also, is not an issue

[slider]

You may not have see the dead birds but I deal and know people who work at these places (I sell rope access equipment)...and this is what the workers report, and I have seen pictures....Ask the RSPB......remember I am talking about the Highlands etc....this is the last "wilderness" in the UK....suposedly!!!

Nuclear power is the only power that is 100% on all the time that uses the least of the earths resouces....we need to invest in cold fusion and other better power forms like gas plasma energy from waste plants (there is one in Swindon).

Spending alot of money installing wind turbines which only operate at 33% max and need a back up additional power supply is a pointless exercise and a big waste of money. That money needs to be spent on refining other technologies!

As for being "green".......I have always lived a "waste not want not" life style.......I made a conscious decision to run my buisness iin my local town/village, and not in the nearby city..thus losing more income....but I walk to work......I consume very little energy at both the house and the shop and installed technologies (expensive)years ago that are now "the in thing"........

We don't need more power stations etc......we need to consume less......so stop decorating the outside of your house at christmas and saying "it's for the kids".......turn your thermostat down to 19C on your heating.....don't start you car up in the morning to get the engine etc warm, then go back inside for your breakfast..........

CONSUME LESS!!!!!!

P.S.........everything that we do in the UK is being wiped out by the polution from India, China, Brazil, etc etc......those contries need enforced "green" polices.....not us!!!!!

Well I physically work on and around windfarms and I have seen NO evidence of any more dead birds that I would see anywhere else in the countryside.

In my view the RSPB are one of the most blinker single interest organisations in the country.

I do agree with you on the work local and consume less points but unfortunately there are many more people whose outlook is "do as I say not as I do"

Also agree with your points re. the emerging nations but that shouldn't stop us trying to do lead by example.

Finally to reiterate - I have already stated that current wind technology is not the final answer - but it is a step on the road and as another poster has pointed out - if we had given up on the development of the internal combustion engine 100 years ago because it was inefficient where would we be today. EVERY technology has to start somewhere and go through continual development to get cheaper, greener more efficient and available to the mass market.

Edited 10 December, 2011 by slider

[trundlenut]

You may not have see the dead birds but I deal and know people who work at these places (I sell rope access equipment)...and this is what the workers report, and I have seen pictures....Ask the RSPB......remember I am talking about the Highlands etc....this is the last "wilderness" in the UK....suposedly!!!

Nuclear power is the only power that is 100% on all the time that uses the least of the earths resouces....we need to invest in cold fusion and other better power forms like gas plasma energy from waste plants (there is one in Swindon).

Spending alot of money installing wind turbines which only operate at 33% max and need a back up additional power supply is a pointless exercise and a big waste of money. That money needs to be spent on refining other technologies!

As for being "green".......I have always lived a "waste not want not" life style.......I made a conscious decision to run my buisness iin my local town/village, and not in the nearby city..thus losing more income....but I walk to work......I consume very little energy at both the house and the shop and installed technologies (expensive)years ago that are now "the in thing"........

We don't need more power stations etc......we need to consume less......so stop decorating the outside of your house at christmas and saying "it's for the kids".......turn your thermostat down to 19C on your heating.....don't start you car up in the morning to get the engine etc warm, then go back inside for your breakfast..........

CONSUME LESS!!!!!!

P.S.........everything that we do in the UK is being wiped out by the polution from India, China, Brazil, etc etc......those contries need enforced "green" polices.....not us!!!!!

One potential issue with nuclear is that if we were to significantly increase our use of it then we will run out of uranium in something like 50 years. I believe even at current rates we have a problem by the end of the century. You are going to need something like thorium as an alternative feedstock for nuclear really.

As regards energy from waste, the more we recycle the less we have to burn, also there is no point in burning anything that ultimately originates from oil (e.g. plastics) as this doesn't actually help with carbon emissions and destroys a finite resource.

[Can]

More to the point what is your plan for the nuclear left overs?

Wind power is a white elephant and some of the ideas for offshore wind are laughable at best 90% of the UK's trade is sea based and you want to go and create man made dangers to shipping? Cutting of ones own nose to spite there face here.

What the answer is I don't know but improving efficency has got to be a good idea. But untill China India and the USA get on board we are ****ing into the wind and just costing the taxpaying in this country a small fortune for someones political posturing.

[TeflonTom]

I know this isn't related strictly speaking but I had an idle thought the other day when I was in London. You could use the escalators in the tube station to generate electricity, the weight of the people going down one side could act like a giant treadmill and could power the other one which is going upwards.. Free energy.. Or further more they could just be mechanically linked to each other via a gearbox which cuts out the electrical losses altogether..

Edit: oh yeh the other thing i thought of was sound farms.. Basically at big airports like heathrow you could have an array of enormous microphones on the ground to absorb the sound waves from the aircraft as they fly over and turn it into electricity, I know they only make very small power outputs, but you could have hundreds of them on an airfield

[Golf-Fiend]

I know this isn't related strictly speaking but I had an idle thought the other day when I was in London. You could use the escalators in the tube station to generate electricity, the weight of the people going down one side could act like a giant treadmill and could power the other one which is going upwards.. Free energy.. Or further more they could just be mechanically linked to each other via a gearbox which cuts out the electrical losses altogether..

Loving the Perpetual Motion/Energy ideas

Perhaps the whole Tube could be powered by Inverse Quantum Flux Resonator Reactor Drives

[fabdavrav]

As regards energy from waste, the more we recycle the less we have to burn, also there is no point in burning anything that ultimately originates from oil (e.g. plastics) as this doesn't actually help with carbon emissions and destroys a finite resource.

Actually they are going around and getting planning permission to start digging up all the old waste dumps!!!...There are big plans for this in Brazil and other places.....so a win/win situation.

THIS IS THE SPECS FOR JUST THE SMALL PLANT AT SWINDON!

Materials Recycling and Fuel Preparation Facility

150,000 tonnes of residual waste (Municipal Solid Waste) / commercial waste per year is accepted into our materials recycling and fuel preparation facility.

Recyclable materials (glass, metals and hard plastics) are recovered and then the non-recyclable materials are dried and shredded to create 90,000 tonnes of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF).

The Core Gasplasma® Technology

Fluid Bed Gasifier – first stage

The RDF is put into a fluid bed gasifier where it is efficiently transformed into a raw synthesis gas (syngas) that contains tars and chars. The bottom ash from the fluid bed gasifier is then transferred into the plasma converter.

Plasma Converter – second, separate stage

The raw syngas is passed from the fluid bed gasifier into a separate plasma converter which uses a plasma arc to crack the long chain hydrocarbons in the raw syngas. A pure, hydrogen-rich syngas is created and all the bottom ash is vitrified into a product called Plasmarok®.

Gas cleaning and condition

The pure syngas is then cooled, cleaned and conditioned in standard equipment before it is passed to the power island.

Power Island

Gas engines or turbines use the pure syngas to generate clean renewable power.

•16.3MWh net electrical output

As for "emissions"....

GAS emissions

◦The Plasma Converter stage breaks down all organic long chain hydrocarbons into hydrogen and carbon producing a very clean, hydrogen-rich synthesis gas (syngas) – much cleaner than syngas produced by other technologies

SOLID emissions

◦Inorganic elements are vitrified into an inert, environmentally benign aggregate called Plasmarok®

◦It consists principally of silica, lime and alumina plus some oxides of metals

◦In the UK it has been reviewed by the Environment Agency as a product not a waste and therefore can be sold into the secondary aggregate market

RECYCLABLES

◦APP’s Gasplasma® energy from waste plant design also includes a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) which takes out all the recyclable materials such as ferrous and non-ferrous metals, dense plastics and glass

More info on this link!!!.......

http://www.advancedplasmapower.com/swindon-gasplasma-plant.aspx

Full tech spec

http://www.advancedplasmapower.com/gasplasma.aspx

[trundlenut]

Unfortunately the residual MSW can still contain a high proportion of material which could be recycled or is derived from oil, and once you burn it you can't do anything else with it. There is also paper, wood etc which will not be removed.

There are big variation around the country as to how well waste is segregated/recycled.

Also digging up old landfills is going to be tricky as you may well struggle to find suitable ones. I have dug landfills dating from the Victorian to the 80s/90s and a lot from the early 1980s and before can contain all kinds of nastiness as people tended to pay put pretty much anything in the ground regardless of what the site was licensed for.

In order for these gasification/plasma plants to operate correctly they need to know what is in the feedstock and preferably for it to be consistent. There is potentially a lot of waste that can't be feed into these systems as it will cause problems.

Edited 12 December, 2011 by trundlenut

[Aspman]

I don't mind wind farms in an aesthetic sense. I do object to them not actually being very good at generating power.

Pumped storage isn't really suitable for every windfarm, not every area is hilly with the right sort of topology to created water storage even without the NIMBYs. I believe developments using novel things like liquid sodium batteries are not that far away.

We're not going to need less power any time soon. So we need more nukes.

[Clunkclick]

Green energy in effective, eh ?

This recent action by HMG, under lobbying pressure from the fossil fuel companies, seems to indicate that the latter are br*cking it . . . . . .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16291768

Nick

[trundlenut]

The tariff level for solar PV was set way too high. They government may have buggered up reducing it but they had to do it, the return rate on PV installations was silly.

[Can]

Wait so the hippies are getting paid to install solar pannels from tax payers money 42p for every 1Kw/H they provide to the grid yet the nation grid unit price for suppliers is 3.1p.

If my understanding follows correctly thats a 1354.84% subsidy And halfing that is wrong?

Jesus the God damn hippies have taken over the country.

[cheezemonkhai]

Wait so the hippies are getting paid to install solar pannels from tax payers money 42p for every 1Kw/H they provide to the grid yet the nation grid unit price for suppliers is 3.1p.

If my understanding follows correctly thats a 1354.84% subsidy And halfing that is wrong?

Jesus the God damn hippies have taken over the country.

No Worse than that.

They get paid 42p for every 1kW/H that they generate.

They then get to use it all for free (saving say 15p per kW/H) while taking that 42p even for the stuff they use, and to top it off get paid the 3.1p as an additional amount for everything they don't use.

So 45.1p for every kW/H they do not use but generate and 42p for the ones they generate but use.

I think if I was the government right now, I'd accept april and then tank the FIT to something really low, like 3p.

If the panels are so good, then surely they will pay for themselves?

The 42p per kW/H generated, is paid by the energy companies, which then pass the charges onto the customer.

The FIT is actually the cause of some of the increases in your electricity bills.

Edited 22 December, 2011 by cheezemonkhai

[Llanigraham]

Wait so the hippies are getting paid to install solar pannels from tax payers money 42p for every 1Kw/H they provide to the grid yet the nation grid unit price for suppliers is 3.1p.

If my understanding follows correctly thats a 1354.84% subsidy And halfing that is wrong?

Jesus the God damn hippies have taken over the country.

What an ignorant response!

I know at least a dozen people who have either gone ahead with PV installations, or are about to, and not one of them is anything like a hippy. Two are working hill farmers and the rest are normal working people. They are doing it simply to reduce their fuel bills and to try and save future generations from problems.

I also know of one family who are completely "off-grid". He has 2 streams on his land, both with over a 6' drop over a short distance. Both streams are flowing continuously, so he has fitted both of them with 9" turbines. Took some argueing with the EA and Severn Trent, but he feeds this into a large battery bank and has an inverter for all his needs. He also uses the streams as his water supply and only uses composting toilets.

[Can]

What an ignorant response!

I know at least a dozen people who have either gone ahead with PV installations, or are about to, and not one of them is anything like a hippy. Two are working hill farmers and the rest are normal working people. They are doing it simply to reduce their fuel bills and to try and save future generations from problems.

I also know of one family who are completely "off-grid". He has 2 streams on his land, both with over a 6' drop over a short distance. Both streams are flowing continuously, so he has fitted both of them with 9" turbines. Took some argueing with the EA and Severn Trent, but he feeds this into a large battery bank and has an inverter for all his needs. He also uses the streams as his water supply and only uses composting toilets.

So subsidising uneconomical business models is the right thing to do? That sounds like good old fashioned communist talk and we can all see how well that worked out for the USSR.

If you want to fit them go ahead I have no objection to that, but subissidising it at over 1300% that I have got a serious problem with. They are complaining that these instalations make no sence with that being halfed. Well then it shows that solar power is not a cost effective viable technology then.

If people are paying all the costs themselfs then thats a personal choice. Paying an unbelievably inflated rate to make an unviable comercial product viable is madness of the highest order.

If you want to live an alternative lifestyle thats your choice, go ahead I'll not stop you. However I realy don't see why the rest of the population should be forced into paying extra just to make your lifestyle choice economicly viable.

[Llanigraham]

There you go again!

None of the people I have mentioned are living an "alternative lifestyle". Read what I said. Two of them are Welsh hill farmers!!

Just because we live in the middle of Wales doesn't make us all hippies or "alternatives", although I might describe myself as an aged hippy.

[Can]

Ok I'll try and explain my point a bit more clearly.

I don't object to people fitting solar pannels etc to their house/ property.

What I object to is being forced to pay more for electricity so that subsudies can be paid to people to fit them.

It appears that the companies are worried that without the subsidies that these things just don't make finacial sence. Thats engineering an anti competative market.

Also on another point even if the UK went carbon neutral over night it would see a massive 1.471722394% reduction in global emissions based on only the top 19 countries so true number is likely 1.3% at best reduction and thats from us going carbon neutral.

If you want to fit them fit them just be aware of the facts and it shouldn't be bassed upon a subsidy being required.

[cheezemonkhai]

Regardless of the persons lifestyle, getting paid 42p per kW/h generated, even if they use it themselves plus an additional 3.1p on top of this if they don't is bonkers.

The point being made is valid. If solar PV is so good, then it will pay for itself just from the energy you don't buy from the suppliers, plus the 3.1p you get for any excess you feed back.

If it can't pay for itself like that, then it's not viable and should not be being installed at the expense of every electricity customer in the country. Take from the many to give to the few, great idea

FWIW turbines on streams or even generators on old water wheels are a good thing, but that's not the same as PV subsidy.

[Newera]

Personally I have nothing at all agains wind power but I can't stick NIMBYs. On the other hand if it must be nulcear sod the existing nasty methodology and go Thorium reactors!! Just plug into you tube and find out why.