England just not windy enough for wind farms, admits renewables boss

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/07/ britain_not_windy_enough_wind_energy_says_windy_bloke/
The head of the wind industry’s trade body in the UK has admitted England isn’t windy enough for any more wind farms.
“We are almost certainly not talking about the possibility of new plants in England. The project economics wouldn’t work; the wind speeds don’t allow for it,” Hugh McNeal, head of Renewable UK told the Telegraph.
McNeal joined the lobby group from the civil service, where he was “Director of Change” (a real job title) at the Department of Energy and Climate Change during its most wind-friendly phase.
Subsidies for new onshore wind projects were canned on 1 April this year.
But if the UK isn’t windy enough for wind then surely it’s sunny enough for solar? The UK has long been a destination for Mediterranean folk seeking blue skies (steady now Ed.); Shakespeare called it “this sun- bleached isle” (That’s enough sarcasm Ed.).
Strangely, no.
In his final interview before his untimely death, DECC’s chief scientific advisor called it an “appalling delusion” that the UK could meet its energy needs from renewables.
Wind turbines were simply a "waste of money" in winter, for "when the wind blows you are going to have to either turn those wind turbines down or something else down that you have already paid for like the nukes or the CCS", he told Mark Lynas. Solar only worked in really sunny countries.
REF’s current "real" spot price for wind power is £101/MWh once the train has been filled with gravy.
Only at the BBC are renewables cheap. Solar only works in really sunny countries, and a spate of high profile crashes (SunEdison and Abengoa, for example) suggests that where state subsidies are involved, even then it isn't a banker.
The international renewables agency IRENA recently admitted that renewable usage is actually falling in China, India and Mexico (pdf)
The EU quietly dropped its mandate that 10 per cent of transport be powered by renewables 2020 earlier this year.
Bill Gates has called for the huge renewables subsidies wasted on wind and solar to be diverted to more potentially useful low carbon innovation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jethro_uk wrote:

*Britain*

*England*

*UK*
People need to be clearer what they're talking about.
--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/06/16 11:22, Mike Barnes wrote:

Well that would mean it would be easier to spot the lies.
Renewable UK are the trade shills that are allowed to lie, because they themselves are not a commercial organisation selling windmills and solar panels, just funded by those that and staffed by members of those that do.
That makes them a 'political' organisation, and as such exempt from prosecution for fraud or sanctions by the ASA.
Basically if you see Greenpeace, Foe, Renewable UK anywhere in an article, you can discount what their agents say as total fabrications all the time.
I have even given up reading the small print. Its just lies from start to finish.
--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
..I'd spend it on drink.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 12:06:35 UTC+1, Mike Barnes wrote:

ed England

ew plants

s don’t

raph.

Is there a problem Scotland is generally winder than England isn't it ? They seem to have more rain and less sun on average.
Perhaps solar power is more useless in scotland than England and wind power is useless in England but workable is scotland.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In the west of Scotland, the BBC installed a small relay transmitter power by both solar and wind. It needed to spend part of its power on a wiper to keep the seagull sh** off the solar panel. There was a storage battery as well.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The other worry to me is this. When we take power from the wind, surely that effectively will change the climate around that area, as you get very little for nothing. It could be that if you did decide to build more of them, the result would be local climate issues. Brian
--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 08/06/16 11:54, Brian Gaff wrote:

Well environmental impact is something the Renewable UK lot never mention.
The fact that a 100 acre field now is sterile because its covered with solar panels and any sunlight that does get in causes weeds which have to be sprayed off, to pop up...
Fortunately there are so few wind turbines overall that it doesn't make a huge difference to anything except the cost of electricity.
--
“But what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!”
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 08/06/2016 11:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I doubt intercepting the wind would make any noticeable difference to the climate. It's the local birds that suffer.
And on solar farms - a lot of light gets to the ground between the rows. There are always gaps so they don't shade each other on a sunny day, and on a cloudy day the gaps get a decent amount of light. They also get all the rain they ever did - why can't they ground be used for grazing?
Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Have to ask a farmer. But might it work if the solar stuff were all held 15 feet off the ground, so farm machinery could get underneath. Or would that be nonsense on stilts?
--
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to
lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Must be given that no one has chosen to do it that way.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/06/16 23:01, Tim Streater wrote:

The panels then become a roof to a vast open area that receives no sunlight, and is therefore sterile
--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/06/2016 07:45, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

They certainly aren't sterile but they probably don't produce enough cash crops to make it worth while. Many have much more wildlife in them than the "sterile" fields that farming makes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 18:03:13 +0100, dennis@home

In Cornwall, planning applications for solar farms invariably get refused if on agricultural land of Grade 1 or 2, and a very good case has to be made for ones on Grade 3a land. Solar farms on poor quality land, Grades 3b, 4 and 5, are treated more favourably by the planners. http://tinyurl.com/zhdl2q2
--

Chris

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/06/16 21:49, Vir Campestris wrote:

I see you have no idea about growing stuff.

--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The thing is that it is cost effective to feed micro generate solar back into the grid, it is not possible to cost effectively feed micro generated wind power back into the gird (so its cost effective use is limited to places where the grid doesn't currently reach).
The point that the power might be generated at the wrong time of day/year is a separate issue.
tim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Provisional 2015 renewable electricity data from DECC 6th May 2016
9073 MW onshore wind capacity 5118 MW offshore wind capacity
23.026 TWh onshore wind generation 17.416 TWh offshore wind generation
Provisonal load factor for whole of 2015
29.9% onshore 41.3% offshore
Provisonal load factor for quarter 4 2015
36.7% onshore 50.9% offshore
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/511940/ET_6.1.xls
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/511939/Renewables.pdf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/06/16 13:18, The Other Mike wrote:

Look closer at the data. These are not 'measured' these are 'estimates'
--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Well wait another seven weeks then for the actuals, which on the basis of provisional and actual data released for the past decade or two will be within a fraction of a point of the provisonal estimates.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/06/16 13:26, The Other Mike wrote:

Yoiu domnt understand how much 'noram,alisation' there is in there
Using BM reports data wcho only counts actual metered wind output,. the average capacity factor has been shown to be around 23% onshore and 27% offshore.
--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

BM Reports is purely operational metering data and it has limitations. The figures DECC use are derived from actual settlements metering data, triplicated, very high resolution, using high accuracy voltage and current transformers and transducers across the entire electricity network.
To consider comparing them is foolish, to consider operational metering a more valid data source than settlements data is quite frankly ridiculous.
PS BM reports also does not segregate offshore and onshore wind either so there is no valid method of determining an onshore and offshore capacity factor.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.