By Steven Goddard
In Wednesday’s Guardian, their lead environmental story made this bold claim about The Whitelee Wind Farm:
Europe’s largest onshore wind farm, which is already powerful enough to meet Glasgow’s electricity needs
There was no discussion in the article about how Glasgow would handle extended periods of cold and calm winds, such as was often seen this past winter.
If the wind isn’t blowing, the turbines aren’t spinning and no electricity is being generated. This tends to happen on the coldest days, when the electricity is needed the most.
The flaw in The Guardian’s logic is a failure to acknowledge that Glasgow needs a consistent power supply 24x7x365. The fact that Whitelee has a lot of windy days and a high annual energy potential, does no good on the cold, calm days. I’m going to try to help The Guardian out with their logic using a few analogies they should understand.
- On average, there is lots of ice in the Arctic during the year – but that doesn’t stop The Guardian from being concerned about the possibility of a few ice-free days.
- Penguin chicks may get plenty to eat most of the year, but during the times when they don’t, many of them starve to death.
- Getting a pay check nine months a year would not pay the bills for the other three.
- Having toilets available only five days a week would not be satisfactory to most people.
- Having only five days a week without being in an automobile crash would not be satisfactory to most people.
- The rainy season in Australia may produce floods, but that doesn’t stop animals from dying of dehydration during the dry season.
- Having your watch functional 90% of the time would not be adequate.
- The fact that a restaurant is not responsible for food poisoning on most nights, may not make you want to eat there.
- Being careful on the edge of the Grand Canyon 90% of the time may not be enough.
- Practicing safe sex 90% of the time is not recommended.
It would be disastrous for Glasgow if they did not have the ability to obtain 100% of their energy from conventional sources on any given day of the year, when the wind isn’t blowing. If The Guardian is attempting to propose that Glasgow could cut off their supply of conventional electricity sources, they should just come out and say that. The implication is both clear and incorrect. “already powerful enough to meet Glasgow’s electricity needs”
Is The Guardian part of the Climate Industrial Complex?
Why do we hear nothing of the geothermal energy that is powering much of the city of Southampton, U.K.? It might well be worth examining the economics of this unheralded project that seems to be almost completely ignored by the media here.
Another thought, has anyone any statistics on how many birds are killed per turbine per year when they are operating. Syncrude in Alberta is facing a $500 000 fine because about 500 ducks died in their tailings pond.
Of course, but an intermittent energy source is not sustainable.
Well Steve, I think part of the problem, is that in most legislative body workplace establishments; the toilets only work on two days a week; those being the weekend when the legislators are all out on the golf course; and of course you know what they do during the week days, they dump all their **** out on us; the taxpayers.
A bridge that only goes 80% of the way across the gorge, is another useful public convenience.
George
Dear Guardian: Please disconnect your buildings and presses from the grid and connect them directly and exclusively to the wind farm. If you do this, I’ll eagerly subscribe.
It is clear that John Boy knows how to string words together:
It is just as clear that he knows little about practical matters.
As new wind farms are added to the national grid capacity credit or value falls.
Germany has reached a point where new wind farms will only produce at 8% of nameplate capacity.
http://lightbucket.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/the-capacity-credit-of-wind-power/
The greenies are always talking about sustainability. Where’s the sustainability in wind?
Trash that straw man by intentionally not understanding,
Jeff Alberts (09:48:53) :
The more sustainable our energy sources the better. Better for our planet, our environment, and our and our children’s futures.
Of course, but an intermittent energy source is not sustainable.
Oil and coal will eventually run out.
Sun and wind will not, not in any time frame that will matter.
The Boy of John
Germany loves brown coal more than wind.
http://www.energy-business-review.com/news/germanys_power_capacity_to_rise_67_by_may_15_2009_090508
Not only can the Whitelee Wind Farm not power Glasgow on clam days, it can be expanded to also not power all the other cities of the world on clam days too.
With capabilities like this, we will have Anthropogenic Global Warming entirely under control in less than a millennium.
Re: MartinW (09:44:21) :
Probably because it isn’t. According to wiki the scheme provides 16 GWh of heat per year which is used to heat buildings, not generate power.
AnonyMoose (09:54:19) :
Beat me to it though I would add their homes and autos (they do use all electric cars don’t they?). I would also suggest the politicians and government agencies do the same. Of course they’re in the dark already so they might not notice when the lights go out.
Wind farms take up very little actual space. You can easily farm around them. So the argument of how much space they take up is bogus. As is the claim that wind is the answer to our problems.
Perhaps we could persuade the Guardian to go truly green and power it’s presses 100% with wind generated energy, then we would only have to put up with this nonsense, say, one day in ten!
Compare the frosty photo above to the one in the Guardian article –
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/5/20/1242816478797/Whitelee-Wind-Farm-Scotla-001.jpg
It looks as though global warming has struck. The ice cap (now reduced to a puddle) has evaporated to the point where the tundra isn’t being held down.
.
There was no discussion in the article about how Glasgow would handle extended periods of cold and calm winds, such as was often seen this past winter.
My ancestors handled it by moving to Illinois.
john boy,
Suppose that the electrical needs of Glasgow were to double over the next twenty years, but they did not also double the conventional electrical generation capacity. Also consider that many existing UK power plants are due to be decommissioned over the next 5-10 years, which will cause a net decrease in dependable capacity.
How would they supply the grid on low wind days? BTW – good luck with that solar energy idea in Scotland. Ever wonder why Scots have such fair skin?
I’m not trying to kill your cuddly, lovable straw polar bears. This is an exercise in logic.
BTW – Here is the picture from The Guardian Article
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/5/20/1242816478797/Whitelee-Wind-Farm-Scotla-001.jpg
Note that the air is completely calm, as evident from the perfect reflection in the pond.
Other than visually polluting natural vistas with big windmills instead of using tiny ones that go on rooftops and parking lots, I don’t see how they would supply anything on a calm day unless they had ultracapacitors.
We can just keep powering our cities with good-ole-coal, it will emit CO2 and the plants take it in, no concern if you look at this link (the top)
http://www.iceagenow.com/Record_Lows_2009.htm
165 Record lows tied or broken in 28 states, you practically need something special to pull that off O.o
“A ship with a hull 99.99% intact still might be unsafe”
We already know how to generate enough energy from fusion to power the entire world.
The problem is that the spatial and temporal distribution of energy from thermonuclear explosions might not be ideal for generating a safe, consistent supply of energy.
The point being that the total amount of energy available from an energy source, may not be particularly useful information.
I see proponents of AGW using the abbreviation WWUT. I am curious as to what this is supposed to represent. Boy of John, I’m looking at you.
For all industries, machine down time is unacceptable and every minute of down time is lost of revenues. For the industries it is unacceptable, why should it be for people.
Here is another one: Having an open-heat surgery done at 90% is not recommended.
I could be mistaken , but aren’t wind turbines shut down during periods of excessive wind speeds ? It seems I read that somewhere .
The extended phrase 24/7/365 (“… 365 days a year”) specifically denotes a service that is available year-round, such as police, firefighters, and emergency medical services.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24/7