Britain’s biggest wind farm companies are to be paid not to produce electricity when the wind is blowing.
Published: 9:00PM BST 19 Jun 2010
Energy firms will receive thousands of pounds a day per wind farm to turn off their turbines because the National Grid cannot use the power they are producing.
Critics of wind farms have seized on the revelation as evidence of the unsuitability of turbines to meet the UK’s energy needs in the future. They claim that the ‘intermittent’ nature of wind makes such farms unreliable providers of electricity.
The National Grid fears that on breezy summer nights, wind farms could actually cause a surge in the electricity supply which is not met by demand from businesses and households.
The electricity cannot be stored, so one solution – known as the ‘balancing mechanism’ – is to switch off or reduce the power supplied.
The system is already used to reduce supply from coal and gas-fired power stations when there is low demand. But shutting down wind farms is likely to cost the National grid – and ultimately consumers – far more. When wind turbines are turned off, owners are being deprived not only of money for the electricity they would have generated but also lucrative ‘green’ subsidies for that electricity.
The first successful test shut down of wind farms took place three weeks ago. Scottish Power received £13,000 for closing down two farms for a little over an hour on 30 May at about five in the morning.
Whereas coal and gas power stations often pay the National Grid £15 to £20 per megawatt hour they do not supply, Scottish Power was paid £180 per megawatt hour during the test to switch off its turbines.
It raises the prospect of hugely profitable electricity suppliers receiving large sums of money from the National Grid just for switching off wind turbines.
Dr Lee Moroney, planning director of the Renewable Energy Foundation, a think tank opposed to the widespread introduction of wind farms, said: “As more and more wind farms come on stream this will become more and more of an issue. Wind power is not controllable and does not provide a solid supply to keep the national grid manageable. Paying multinational companies large sums of money not to supply electricity seems wrong.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Troels Halken says:
[…]
But I can tell you this: The Danish citizens are some of, if not the happiest in the world year after year. That you can measure and you can find it on the website of the Economist.”
Darn, he’s right. They don’t even have comorbidity in treatment settings:
http://ar2004.emcdda.europa.eu/en/page123-en.html
Look at the table! No Denmark! Everybody else: Comorbidity. Opiate users. Drug addicts. Denmark: none!
Must be the wind power. Doesn’t always produce useful electricity but makes people grin all day. Who woulda thunk.
Troels:
“You cannot objective determine if big government and high taxes are ultimately good or bad.”
I think your mind is made up. But I’ll try once more:
Henry Hazlitt shows clearly in Economics In One Lesson that for every government job created, two private sector jobs are lost. A very similar analysis is found in Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom.
What you’re doing is dismissing quantifiable answers to objective decisions favoring or opposing more taxes and bigger government, with unquantifiable feelings such as ‘happiness.’ As P.J. O’Rourke says, money doesn’t buy happiness — but it provides a close approximation.
Stephen Brown, firstly it looks likely we will replace nuclear power stations in the UK and secondly I see no reason why you might not do what anti nuclear protesters do. Btw, it’s not proven windmills don’t work – dislike of, visceral dislike of even, is not proof. When the wind blows fast enough windmills generate electricity – and in the places they are set up that is much if not most of the time (yes, I know there are still days sometimes).
The windfarms are a scam. Another poster has written that Chris Huhne wants to build another 2,500 of the eyesores.
Come 2020 the only way we Brits will be able to keep warm is to jump up and down in front of them, flapping our arms and blowing hard in an effort to get the blades moving
Criminal enterprise.
If the Con-Lib government is serious about the deficit then they’ll end this. If not, the public’s wrath on them and their Labour predecessors will see the rise of a much harder English nationalism.
Wind machines could be engineered to store their energy by compressing air and then releasing it when the power is required. The V4 law would not be so much of a problem. The towers and the piping to the pneumatic generator might be used as reservoirs. It may be that such as system could have great utility in daily peak load clipping. This could make windmills truly useful as opposed to devices that are a public offence.
Troels Halken, FOR big government and high taxes ? – is this not a veritable leftist/socilaist position (although one probably would not consciencely admit to it in polite company)?.
.
.
Smokey “I think your mind is made up.” LOL, very ironic 😉
The way it works in Ontario Canada is that we have a base requirement of about 14,000MW — iow — we rarely dip below that requirement. So we want our wind turbines to supply when we get above that requirement. You never know when the wind will cut out, so, supplying the base requirement out of wind power could make a supplier look pretty foolish unless you can spool up a gas or water turbine almost instantly. If they are on standby, maybe you could. It depends on too much to go into in a short post.
So if you are in one of those rare dips you may as well shut down the turbines — it’s either or burn fuel, or draw water in idle mode.
If you get a dip in your economy you may indeed start finding that Wind Power is available when the base draw is quite low. So you have to shut down something. When you are close to that baseline amount (that you chose by observation) you are likely to want to keep your most reliable sources running.
Other issues may be contractual. If wind power starts to die out, your contracts with other suppliers may be that if they get a start-up order they get a certain amount of pay regardless — so you may as well take the reliable supply.
So yeah this is not a big surprise, but on the other hand I think it is way too much wind power as when wind is available the system is over required capacity. When there is no wind, maybe you will end up stressed. Wind power requires too much dancing on the head of a pin for my taste.
Go here
http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/
And look in the viability section for a lot more studies.
And 1984 just came a little late — that’s all.
Ha ha ha. “Seems wrong ????????” — dr. bill. Well doctor, it only seems wrong if you’re not among the receivers. I am perfectly will to cash big checks from the government for not producing power. I can not produce any amount of power you like.
And Troels! Hahahahahaha!!! You are a laugh riot. Love your name, too.
Dirk: That is correct.
Well, guys. I’m of to bed so no more fun.
Yes, I am a business developer and that is different from a sales developer or strategic sales man or whatever the term is, even thou some companies wrongly use the title for people who develop sales.
Yes I have worked in the wind turbine industry. I’m not in love with wind turbines and I don’t believe that they can replace fossil fuels. Wind power however is a reasonably clean source of energy and does have some benefits and can be part of a future energy mix that is less dependent on fossil fuels. The oil might be near it’s peak production and together with it’s dependency on unstable regions in the world and higher demand from India and China, it might be good to start developing alternatives. There is coal for the next many centuries, but it has other problems and global demand also making an impact here. So there is reasons to look for alternatives, even thou there is no doom and gloom from co2. And I don’t believe there is.
Wind has it’s advantages and it’s weakness. It is by no means a solve all do all thing. It is also a technology in it’s youth and so is the policies that are used to regulate the market for it. The world is not black and white but shades of grey, and so is wind power.
Sleep well, gentlemen.
This kind of fiasco which ranks with the EUs historic wine lakes and butter mountains was always inevitable if wind or solar power become a significant part of power generation. There are two categories of a power grid, baseline: minimum always required, needs a supply that is stable without alteration (nuclear ideal for this). The other, peak, needs to be 100% controllable to react in real time to demand surges such as a million kettles turned on during ad breaks in a popular TV show.
Wind and solar are uniquely badly suited to either baseline or peak. Their capriciousness can only be tolerated if they make a negligible contribution. Neither are a significant power solution. Britain’s politicians will no doubt think otherwise and find out the hard way.
@ty says:
“Ralph. Denmark is IN Scandinavia, I think you’ll find.”
“No it isn’t. Scandinavia is the peninsula where Sweden and Norway are situated.”
Rubbish! Scandinavia is Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
Stephen Brown says:
June 20, 2010 at 2:20 pm
A portion of my earnings is going to be taken from me whether I like it or not to pay for something which has been proven to be useless.
What to do?
I’m going to vote with my feet. My fellow countrymen grumble but won’t act in concert to end the madness. The latest paper from the solar physicists Dahau and de Jager say a long Maunder type minimum is on it’s way. I’m looking for some nice growing land nearer the equator.
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/06/20/imminent-grand-minimum-new-paper-from-duhau-and-de-jager/
Troels Halken says: June 20, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Then it is good that I’m a business developer and not a salesman, don’t you think?
—
Most definitely not, it just makes you more dangerous and opens the door for the salesmen. But in the UK, we’re caught between a ROC and a hard place I suppose. With other parts of Europe realising wind is better for generating subsidies than electricity, you’ll have to sell to somewhere. Shame we can’t convert these modern ones into housing like we did the last time we realised wind power was inefficient and ineffective.
June 20, 2010 at 1:06 pm
DaveF says:
June 20, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Think of the boon that would be on hot, windless, summer days!
We could use windfarms that way to keep sailboats going on the lake!
At last, a proper use for windmills. This actually makes more sense than trying to get power out of them.
Well, some farm operations get paid for not growing certain crops, and receive price subsidies for others. Since wind “farms” produce electricity ( instead of beets for example ) why shouldn’t they get the same treatment as any other farm? 😉
Navin R. Johnson: “Ah… It’s a profit deal. Takes the pressure off.”
Tony says:
June 20, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Wind machines could be engineered to store their energy by compressing air and then releasing it when the power is required. The V4 law would not be so much of a problem.
And how is this compressed air going to be used to generate electricity? Blow the wind turbine dynamos round with it? Any idea what the efficiency would look like?
“A very similar analysis is found in Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom.”
How appropriate! The Danes are good Europeans. Like the rest of the continental nations they enjoy subjugation by unelected dictators. We in UK however, hold democracy dear and hope to throw off the yoke of the unelected European Parliament some time soon – possibly when the Euro goes belly up?
I guess I just don’t get it.
Why would you PAY someone when you DONT buy their product?
Especially if you paid them to help build their facility?
Who cares if it’s only a dozen nights a year? It’s an ignorant foundation from which to start.
Peter H says at 2:41 pm [ … ],
You should be immensely proud of that incisive, heavily referenced, thoughtful, carefully argued, fact-filled comment.☺
Smokey, last one then.
“Henry Hazlitt shows clearly in Economics In One Lesson”
Do you really believe that you can learn economics in on lesson? Oh, and because two guys write something in some books doesn’t make it true. But I don’t know if it is true or not. You can have all the jobs you want, but when 10% of the American people sits on 90% of the wealth, then the average Joe has less to himself than the average Jens, even thou on average Jens is less rich than average Joe. Unemployment? 10% in the US? I think it is about 4% here ATM.
So you can have your two jobs. Just leave me with my high taxes, big government and my happy life 😉
Do they not have pumped storage in England? Oh, I guess they can’t – few real mountains to speak of.
In California, the Helms Pumped Storage Plant pumps water uphill to Lake Wishon (7200′) when there’s excess electricity, then lets it flow back down through the turbines to Lake Courtwright (5,500′) during times of increased demand.
This allows the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant to run at 100% even during times of low demand. The same principle would work with intermittent wind power.
@ur momisugly roger says:
“A very similar analysis is found in Hayek’s The Road To Serfdom.”
“How appropriate! The Danes are good Europeans. Like the rest of the continental nations they enjoy subjugation by unelected dictators. ”
Roger, if you knew anything about Danish politics you would know that Denmark, like the United Kingdom, has various opt-outs from some of the provisions of EU treaties.