OT: "there is no point in having wind power or solar power in the UK"

[The Natural Philosopher]

[Chris Hogg]

Amen to those! Nobody with a logical and comprehending approach to the CO2 problem (if indeed it is a problem) would opt for renewables.

[GB]

There's a small local industry in North Norfolk maintaining the Sheringham Shoal wind farm. It's a few miles out to sea, so nobody is bothered by the noise. It looks picturesque. The wind is pretty consistent that far offshore, so it's a reliable source of electricity.

Why does it trouble you so?

[Tim Streater]

Except that it isn't ...

... so therefore it isn't.

What it however *is*, is extremely expensive for what you get out of it.

[Harry Bloomfield]

GB used his keyboard to write :

Because 'pretty consistent' is just not good enough.

[Chris Hogg]

Capacity Factor for Sheringham Shoal 41%. Load-Duration curve spread pretty evenly across the range, from >98% for 1% of the time, to ~0% for 8% of the time, so hardly 'pretty consistent' as you put it. In fact, pretty variable, as are the outputs of all renewable energy generators.

and scroll down to get the Load-Duration curves, freezing the graph when it reaches Sheringham Shoal.

And you can be sure that maintenance costs will be high relative to its output, and its lifetime will be a lot shorter than for a nuke.

[Tim Streater]

Correct. The wind industry should be forced to buy in power at market rates when the wind doesn't blow. I dunno why we let them make their intermittency problem - which is what it is, *their* *problem* - our problem.

[GB]

I really wonder whether that is entirely true. There must be people who can delay their consumption. It usually doesn't matter what time your car is charged or when your washing machine runs. Your freezer can get by for a few hours. Your night storage heaters need to heat up, but when exactly does not matter. Some industrial users are prepared to reschedule production in return for cheaper energy. We may need to change our habits and expectations a bit

In any case, the wind is very, very consistent is closer to the mark.

[GB]

I don't think the wind ever stops blowing there, so I really don't understand why the load fact6or goes down to 0% so much of the time. Maintenance?

[Tim Streater]

Good luck with that when we tell people that it's unnecessary, and it's being forced on them "for their own good".

Well, it's consistent in that it blows from time to time. That's all, though.

[Harry Bloomfield]

GB was thinking very hard :

What, all of them off line at the same time for maintenance? Extremely unlikely.

[Chris Hogg]

I think GB is forgetting that wind generators need a minimum wind speed to operate of about 8MPH.

[dennis]

Facts are better than "thinks". There are lots of times when wind output is close to zero.

[The Natural Philosopher]

(a) It's not reliable (b) I have to pay twice as much for anything it does generate

[The Natural Philosopher]

And it was a lie anyway. Its pretty inconsistent.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, 'the wind is utterly inconsistent' is nearer the mark.

But don't let facts interrupt your rose tinted narrative...

[The Natural Philosopher]

No. The wind stopped blowing.

>

[Tim Lamb]

You are singing the phone home meter tune.

Plenty here while I was spraying on some knotting solution.

[GB]

Thanks. I didn't know the number. I still find it hard to believe that

8% of the time the wind speed is below 8MPH a few miles offshore, but I guess there's no point arguing with the power measurements.

There's been remarkable unanimity amongst posters that wind energy does not work very well. It's good to see you guys being so agreeable. :)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Turnip want Chinese built nukes. As a Brexiteer and right wing loonie, he will do anything to get rid of jobs in the UK. After all any socialists must be punished. Anyone else who is too just collateral damage.