Wind turbines - can be DIY made?

[Andrew Mawson]

terms.

But the government of the day will slap a windfall tax on your gain and wipe the smile off your face !!!

AWEM

[Dave Liquorice]

I'd add a caveat: at the expense of other renewable energy sources.

If The money being spent of unreliable (as in availabilty), unsightly and noisy (at *all* frequencies not just "audible" ones) wind turbines was spent on smaller but widespread renewables and energy saving the returns, in reduced carbon emmissions, could be much greater.

[meow2222]

These basic collectors work quite well heating pools. Something more advanced is needed for domestic HW, though basic stuff could always be used to prewarm water feed to header tank or cold shower feed.

Hosepipe collectors are probably easier for pools though, and easier to make larger.

NT

[David Hansen]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 21:38:48 +0100 someone who may be Roger wrote this:-

So you assert.

Something the weather records would show happening regularly. I note that you didn't provide any evidence that they show this.

Even if such a thing was to happen (and it may do from time to time) that does not mean that wind farms in Scotland would be "useless". They would still be generating. The shortfall in generation in England and Wales would be made up in other ways. However, it is a mistake to think that this means dedicated backup just for wind farms. In an interconnected system backup is shared amongst all forms of generation.

Which is why I did not claim that Sloy is a pumped storage scheme.

Not a claim I made either.

However, the traditional operating regime was to run it six days a week to lop the peak in Glasgow. I suspect this has not changed.

You will agree that Sizewell B is rated at 1320MW, or so and is the largest single point failure?

says "Synchronised and spinning-in-air Emergency load pick-up rate from standby 0 to 1,320 MW in 12 seconds". Note that represents only four of the six 330MW sets.

Incorrect. Claims that 100% backup are necessary are mildly amusing, but still incorrect. Those who wish to study the subject can read the report at

but the summary is:

====================================================================

100% ?back up? for individual renewable sources is unnecessary; extra capacity will be needed to keep supplies secure, but will be modest and a small part of the total cost of renewables. It is possible to work out what is needed and plan accordingly

The output of fossil fuel plant will need to be adjusted more often to cope with fluctuations in wind output, but any losses this causes are small compared to overall savings in emissions Renewable energy, such as wind power, leads to a direct reduction in CO2 emissions

None of the 200+ studies UKERC reviewed suggested that the introduction of significant levels of intermittent renewable energy would lead to reduced reliability

If wind power were to supply 20% of Britain?s electricity, intermittency costs would be 0.5 - 0.8p per kilowatt an hour (p/kWh) of wind output. This would be added to wind generating costs of 3 -

5p p/kWh. By comparison, costs of gas fired power stations are around 3p p/kWh

The impact on electricity consumers would be around 0.1p p/kWh. Domestic electricity tariffs are typically 10 - 16p p/kWh. Intermittency therefore would account for around 1% of electricity costs

Costs of intermittency at current levels is much smaller, but will rise if use of renewables expands.

Wide geographical dispersion and a diversity of renewable sources will keep costs down

====================================================================

[David Hansen]

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 23:26:22 +0100 (BST) someone who may be "Dave Liquorice" wrote this:-

Incorrect, as the UKERC report demonstrates.

In your opinion.

When I visited Black Law, a large wind farm, I made a careful note of the noise outside the farm. There was no noise that I could hear from the generation of electricity. Motor vehicles were the loudest noise. After that there was the sound of humans talking, sheep, birds and the wind itself. It is a quiet enough area for the sound of humans and animals to carry some distance. Obviously there is some noise when one is standing near a turbine, but there is no problem speaking in a normal voice.

[David Hansen]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 22:04:54 +0100 someone who may be Roger wrote this:-

These white elephants were built during a fairly disastrous period of the nationalised industry, when money was squandered on gross overcapacity to fulfill fantasy predict and provide targets. Torness was entirely unnecessary and customers have been paying for it in their bills ever since. Export to England only covers some of the excessive cost foisted on people by those decisions. Defenders of that period seem to have forgotten about Inverkip too.

While I wouldn't have started from here there is a way out of the mess that doesn't involve new nuclear stations and allows the exports to continue.

In 2006 Scotland should get 19% of its electricity from renewables,

12% hydro, 7% wind.

[Mary Fisher]

In my opinioin wind turbines are not unsightly. The very large ones are beautiful. Small ones are no more unsightly than pylons, phone masts, radio transmitting masts, tv aerials, lorries, houses, people ...

:-)

[Mary Fisher]

I had the same experience when visiting the one at Ogden Water.

Motor vehicles are very noisy and many of them smell too.

Mary

[Roger]

The message from David Hansen contains these words:

Careful, your paranoia about nuclear power is showing.

How much from nuclear?

And how much is really exported to England?

[Roger]

The message from David Hansen contains these words:

Just watch the weather forecasts. Blocking highs are a regular feature of the weather at certain times of the year.

Wind farms in Scotland are not the answer to Englands energy problems. Scotland is just too remote from the centres of population South of the border and what might just work for a large thinly populated country with lousy weather doesn't for a densely populated area with much milder weather. Greater London alone has a larger population than the whole of Scotland.

So why raise it in the first place?

No. Why should I when most modern coal fired stations are 2000MW nominal or larger and Drax is 4000MW.

So, and that figure is gross. I am not sure whether the figures I have quoted above are gross or net but either way Dinorwig would be hard pressed to substitute for a single 2000 MW stations and couldn't for the loss of Drax.

Do please read what I wrote. Your own source claimed that:

"if offshore wind power alone were to provide 10 per cent of England and Wales's electricity demand, 3,500 megawatts of conventional capacity could be closed down, but an additional standby generating capacity of

3,135 megawatts would be required, negating most of the benefits."

At 20% the vagaries of wind power would make the situation even more problematical.

But 16% to the already more costly wind power.

And transmission costs up.

[Dave Liquorice]

*Provided* you have large area diversity. Any given wind turbine is only available when the wind blows and that is, on average, only 1/3 of the time at best and is unpredictable beyond a few days. By comparision to other generation sources that is extremely unreliable.

Am not entitled to my opinion?

Read what I wrote. There is a lot of measurement of "noise" done in relation to wind turbines but the vast majority of it is only at audible frequencies. Very little, if any, measurement is done for infrasound and little is known about the physiological effects low levels of infrasound has on people.

There are enough reports of "illness"(*) increasing in the local population when a wind farm is built that warrants further investigation. It is even more disturbing when people suffering from "illness" move away from the turbine site and their illness goes only to return when back near the turbines.

(*) Anything from increased headaches, nausea, or feeling of general malaise and apathy. All rather vague and as there isn't a pill to pop to cure it the medical profession struggle to make a diagnoses.

[David Hansen]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 20:12:24 +0100 someone who may be Guy King wrote this:-

Depends which part of the UK one is talking about. In Benbecula the conditions may well be exceeded for much of the year. In a deep valley somewhere the conditions may be rare.

[Dave Liquorice]

Pardon? I pay, even after the current increases and VAT, 7.55p/kWh. Even if I take into account the effect of the standing charge it only adds

0.5p/kWh to the price, so no more than 8.1p/kWh *all in*.

Even the expensive (but *very* good for low users) EquiPower tarrifs I have are 10.3p/kWh Std or 3.98/12.26p/kWh E7 again all in. No standing charge (not even a "hidden" one), flate rate per unit.

What world is this UKERC in 'cause it aint the one I inhabit. If they can't get basic, public, facts at least half right I'm afraid it casts doubt onto all of their figures that are not so easy to independantly check.

[tinnews]

Not if it produces worse effects than those it's replacing and not if the same money spent in other ways would do more good.

[Dave Liquorice]

Very ish. Think of a couple of main backbones, linked, with pockets of APs at intervals.

Yes, the Linux based servers bandwidth limit each user. Don't ask me what is actually used to do it 'cause I don't know but it works. Orginally it was free for all but one or three users would hog bandwidth and slow service down for everyone.

[Doki]

Wind turbines on top of your house are a load of bull until they become very cheap and simple to produce. You'd be better off spending your £1500 on insulating your house properly and putting in energy saving bulbs, sorting out all your radiator valves, and getting rid of all the lamp fittings with

3 or 4 bulbs in and replacing them with one bulb. In fact, it'd be better if everyone STFU pissing about with them and spent the money on insulation (ie, upgrades of insulation and energy efficiency for all houses, say by making the current subsidised insulation schemes mandatory, minimum insulation for conservatories etc).

[Guy King]

The message from David Hansen contains these words:

I'll bet if you compared it to population density it'd turn out that few people get a decent whack at it.

[Mary Fisher]

Yes, but you didn't say that it was your opinion, you said it as though it were a fact.

Mary

[Mary Fisher]

England's energy problems could be greatly reduced if people were less wasteful of energy. How much are you prepared to sacrifice?

Mary who has just been treading washing in the bath :-)

[Mary Fisher]

What worse effects?

How would you spend it? to do more 'good' (a subjective, value laden word at best)