Wind Turbines

[JohnD]

I wonder why Justin has convinced himself that wind power is expensive.

I haven't heard such nonsense since the government allowed the Nuclear lobby to prepare the estimates.

 

[Justin Passing]

I wonder why Justin has convinced himself that wind power is expensive.

I haven't heard such nonsense since the government allowed the Nuclear lobby to prepare the estimates.

JD you're a lost cause, spilling your silly bile over anything you're bigoted and ignorant about. You need to moderate
your POS behaviour. The site's not here for trolling and supporting the labour party.
Just for a start - "I wonder why Justin has convinced himself that wind power is expensive." I haven't. You're being a dummy again. Stop trolling with made-up crap. You're a blight on the forum.


What I wrote is true:

I've just been reading odds and ends to find solid figures on wind vs gas etc.. Failed, on the whole, but there's plenty to suggest that wind power is not only far more expensive than gas over a period, but it's probably worse for the environment as well.
Hmm.

---

Notch and Itminion, Everything that's out there, needs to be checked, because, unless you hadn't noticed, electricity prices did not fall with the increased use of wind. Before the recent war-affected gas price, obviously.
ITM you aren't reading right. You're assuming I'm making a case, that you seem to want to argue against. I already said I'm not. Read.

One word you're missing is "IF".

And shooting yourself in the foot:

I answered your question - I didn't comment on the validity of the assumption on which your question was based.
Your question acknowledged the possibility that wind was the expensive bit, then asked an illogical question where you'd already provided the answer - if wind was indeed the expensive bit. Which I did not state it was.

Then you went on in similar vein. though,
----Itminion I don't want to sound insulting here but you've misunderstood a lot of what you've READ. Or rather not read - because it isn't there.
You're telling me I haven't understood what I've found when you're clueless about what I've found. How dumb is that?
"Blaming renewables for the increased cost of Gas generated power is madness." But I didn't flucking write that rubbish, did I. Only you did. Ditto.

If you can't understand why I posted the 2005 graph , stop being thick and try a bit harder. Remarkable figures and they show the change. That was as I said, the first hit.
Surely it's obvious that it's utterly pointless quoting wartime gas prices. That just makes you tiresome to answer. Sure gas prices will stay high but we don't know how high. Wind power is getting more expensive too - evidently it stopped going down.
The current gas price certainly tips the numbers towards wind being cheaper, - whatever's skewed in the reporting.

I said read what's out there. The first four or five pages of search engine hits and their referenced reports would give you a start.
Most of the pro-wind stuff and and anti-wind stuff is ridiculously biased. The BEIS report is farcical.

You quote a number for Hornsea, which doesn't include anything for installation or O & M, because it doesn't need to - HMG already paid a load of money! (It was Danish owned until they sold half of it off to the French)
Pricing isn't particlarly transparent, and only semi-fixed on a CfD auction basis, for 15 years, tied up with mean electricity price and carbon offset. The levelled cost - LCOE is different:

What after 15 years and will they last that long? Estimates are longer but we don't have the history.
These figures are missing from most of the articles. Assumptions asserted, eg in Awerbuch (2003), have turned out to be completely wrong.
Installation costs for wind are many times those for gas power plant - something like 7 or 8 times. And their service life is less.

Ultimately, wind and gas are both free. What's clear, as we've said above is that the customer prices are only loosely dependent on the resource prices. Demand pushes the price up, which only lines the suppliers' pockets, even if the resource is "ours". Would be good to see a breakdown of that.

 

[JohnD]

there's plenty to suggest that wind power is not only far more expensive than gas over a period

Justin thinks he didn't say that.

 

[IT Minion]

You're just wrong on this. And you're ignoring all evidence that disagrees. See CfD.

PS. Wind and Solar were cheaper than Gas before the pre war price rises.

 

[Notch7]

Notch and Itminion, Everything that's out there, needs to be checked, because, unless you hadn't noticed, electricity prices did not fall with the increased use of wind

The wholesale price of electricity isn’t connected to cost of renewable production.

Either you don’t understand that or making a false argument.
which is it

 

[Notch7]

"Blaming renewables for the increased cost of Gas generated power is madness." But I didn't flucking write that rubbish, did I. Only you did

You literally used that as your argument:

, “because, unless you hadn't noticed, electricity prices did not fall with the increased use of wind”

 

[Notch7]

Most of the pro-wind stuff and and anti-wind stuff is ridiculously biased

Is it?

 

[robinbanks]

compared to petrol/diesel ownership

At the start, when diesel cars were rare as rocking horse sheets, diesel was considerably cheaper than petrol

 

[IT Minion]

But hey, here's the UK government saying renewables are the cheapest form of power.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-0602/POST-PN-0602.pdf

US based:

Wind power prices now lower than the cost of natural gas

In the US, it's cheaper to build and operate wind farms than buy fossil fuels.

arstechnica.com

All pre-covid, let alone pre Russia's search for Lebensraum.

Now the price of Gas is higher, but importantly it isn't going to go back to previous levels in Europe. We are now going to be using far more liquified natural gas, which is notably more expensive than piped Russian gas. Since we buy on an open market we are going to be paying more even if that LNG is going to Europe.

You've gone full Ellal/Gas111 here.

 

[JohnD]

JD you're a lost cause, spilling your silly bile over anything you're bigoted and ignorant about. You need to moderate
your POS behaviour. The site's not here for trolling and supporting the labour party.
Just for a start - "I wonder why Justin has convinced himself that wind power is expensive." I haven't. You're being a dummy again. Stop trolling with made-up crap. You're a blight on the forum.


What I wrote is true:

---

Notch and Itminion, Everything that's out there, needs to be checked, because, unless you hadn't noticed, electricity prices did not fall with the increased use of wind. Before the recent war-affected gas price, obviously.
ITM you aren't reading right. You're assuming I'm making a case, that you seem to want to argue against. I already said I'm not. Read.

One word you're missing is "IF".

And shooting yourself in the foot:
View attachment 283270
I answered your question - I didn't comment on the validity of the assumption on which your question was based.
Your question acknowledged the possibility that wind was the expensive bit, then asked an illogical question where you'd already provided the answer - if wind was indeed the expensive bit. Which I did not state it was.

Then you went on in similar vein. though,
----Itminion I don't want to sound insulting here but you've misunderstood a lot of what you've READ. Or rather not read - because it isn't there.
You're telling me I haven't understood what I've found when you're clueless about what I've found. How dumb is that?
"Blaming renewables for the increased cost of Gas generated power is madness." But I didn't flucking write that rubbish, did I. Only you did. Ditto.

If you can't understand why I posted the 2005 graph , stop being thick and try a bit harder. Remarkable figures and they show the change. That was as I said, the first hit.
Surely it's obvious that it's utterly pointless quoting wartime gas prices. That just makes you tiresome to answer. Sure gas prices will stay high but we don't know how high. Wind power is getting more expensive too - evidently it stopped going down.
The current gas price certainly tips the numbers towards wind being cheaper, - whatever's skewed in the reporting.

I said read what's out there. The first four or five pages of search engine hits and their referenced reports would give you a start.
Most of the pro-wind stuff and and anti-wind stuff is ridiculously biased. The BEIS report is farcical.

You quote a number for Hornsea, which doesn't include anything for installation or O & M, because it doesn't need to - HMG already paid a load of money! (It was Danish owned until they sold half of it off to the French)
Pricing isn't particlarly transparent, and only semi-fixed on a CfD auction basis, for 15 years, tied up with mean electricity price and carbon offset. The levelled cost - LCOE is different:
View attachment 283371

What after 15 years and will they last that long? Estimates are longer but we don't have the history.
These figures are missing from most of the articles. Assumptions asserted, eg in Awerbuch (2003), have turned out to be completely wrong.
Installation costs for wind are many times those for gas power plant - something like 7 or 8 times. And their service life is less.

Ultimately, wind and gas are both free. What's clear, as we've said above is that the customer prices are only loosely dependent on the resource prices. Demand pushes the price up, which only lines the suppliers' pockets, even if the resource is "ours". Would be good to see a breakdown of that.

Are you feeling all right, dear?

 

[IT Minion]

What after 15 years and will they last that long? Estimates are longer but we don't have the history

What rubbish is this? There are plenty of early Wind Turbines that have lasted that long.

Delabole wind farm - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Built in 1991, still in operation now.

Vindeby Offshore Wind Farm - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

An offshore wind farm, built in 1991 and closed after 25 years

There is no reason to expect that, after 40 years of experience, wind turbine manufacturers have suddenly lost the ability to build long lasting systems.

 

[Dork Lard]

What rubbish is this? There are plenty of early Wind Turbines that have lasted that long.

Delabole wind farm - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Built in 1991, still in operation now.

Vindeby Offshore Wind Farm - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

An offshore wind farm, built in 1991 and closed after 25 years

There is no reason to expect that, after 40 years of experience, wind turbine manufacturers have suddenly lost the ability to build long lasting systems.

Triggers broom, it's had 17 new heads & 14 new handles, but it's still Triggers broom innit.

 

[IT Minion]

Triggers broom, it's had 17 new heads & 14 new handles, but it's still Triggers broom innit.

To a point, the turbines have been replaced once (after 20 years, which is longer than 15 obviously). But even that isn't the same as a new find farm as the interconnections are already there. Apparently they're the main cost now.

 

[Dork Lard]

To a point, the turbines have been replaced once (after 20 years, which is longer than 15 obviously). But even that isn't the same as a new find farm as the interconnections are already there. Apparently they're the main cost now.

It is incredibly difficult to get to the truth of the matter, almost everyone is lying through their teeth.

When you look into the FACTS as they are represented by the FIGURES then the economics of these wind farms simply do not add up. The profits of your average wind farm is basically equivalent to the subsidies.

 

[IT Minion]

It is incredibly difficult to get to the truth of the matter, almost everyone is lying through their teeth.

When you look into the FACTS as they are represented by the FIGURES then the economics of these wind farms simply do not add up. The profits of your average wind farm is basically equivalent to the subsidies.

What FACTs are those?

Also, recent CfDs are negative. They guarantee a price but it's at or below predicted market price.