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.
kadaka (KD Knoebel):
You are barking up the wrong tree. Ecogeek? I mean just the name makes me feel sick and I will not defend their nonsense. Nor am I defending whatever they do in China. So talk to them about it.
Jantar-
Appears that the NZ grid and the USA grid(s) operate on about the same principles-as you would expect.
Hu Duck Xing says:
June 20, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Troels Halken
http://tinyurl.com/ykevgd8
Thanks, for the link. My favorite quote from the post by Troels was this one:
“Wind energy is not the answer to everything. But it may be part of an answer to something.”
Fans of JEOPARDY! please feel free to provide the “question” to Troels’ answer.
My second was this:
“To me it does not really matter if it is green…”
And as for Troels and the other naysayers who claim this blog or this particular entry stray too far into politics, I would just say that this blog is a necessary animal in the search for climate truth. Unfortunately, the current nature of climate “science” is politically charged at its core. So the only way I can see to let the truth triumph is to counter the politics point for point.
Personally, I found the answer to many of my questions, originally thinking that hydroelectric storage was a viable solution to the inconsistencies of wind-generated energy. But the last post by Richard S Courtney was an eye-opener: There is no reason to fabricate an inefficiency into our power grid in the first place.
Wind energy looks like the answer to a question we don’t need to ask.
@Troels Halken
‘It’s the same when Jeff Id rant with his right wing-rhetoric: Taxes and big government.’
ROFL something most of us european never understand since we’ve been living with taxes and big government for, wait for it, ever.
‘Here in Denmark we have a saying that in rough translation goes like this: “Carpenter, stick to you trade”. That is also my advice for this blog.’
What a load of utter crap. Every person has not only the right, but also the responsibility to voice their opinion in a democratic society. So the carpenter shouldn’t only stick to his trade but also influence policy on trade itself, but not only that he has a right to influence policy to not have to pay a too hefty electric bill in the first place, especially with all the expensive “green electricity” being exported in favor of him having to buy dirty coal produced electricity which ought to be dirt cheap.
But if you only want stick to your field of expertise within the concept of engineering that’s your choice. :p
Government intervention distorting the market ?
One would think that given the goal of reducing the CO2 emissions – that the Government create an environment that would result in natural gas-fired producers to reduce THEIR power output during peak wind events. I think that everyone understands that one cannot easily ramp down base-load supplies (coal, nuclear), but natural-gas fired turbines are quite easily dialed up or down. They are the peak / swing producers most easily displaced by wind power.
Pricing might need to be deregulated perhaps, not sure how it works… Presuming that the wind guys have excess power to sell (beyond their contracted amounts) at peak events, the wind guys might offer the natural gas guys power at prices cheaper than they can produce to fulfill THEIR contracts. Otherwise – peak wind energy is lost.
Am I missing something here? Why pay to NOT use peak wind load? Somethings wrong… And I’m stupid I guess…
It sounds unprecedented but it’s not. In December 2009, some of the Copenhagen prostitutes were also paid money not to do their f-job exactly when there was the maximum number of maximally horny, f-ing consumers in the town.
http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article719339.ece
This is the inverse logic of the environmental movement. Everything is upside down. Just rotate your body, exchange the position of your skull and your buttocks (and their content), and you get the answers that the environmentalists will appreciate. 🙂
@ur momisugly Richard Courtney – repeating the falsehoods from a different thread does not make them true. My statements in reply to yours, on the earlier thread, stand.
You have a very peculiar definition of “useful.” But, you are entitled to be as wrong as you choose to be.
This is relevant to our situation in North America. Consumers are being encouraged to utilise alternative forms of energy, but the fact is our grid similarly is unable to manage the unpredictable and uncontrollable fluctuations in electricity input.
A friend who works in the industry tells me it will be at least another ten years in Canada/US before the completion of the grid restructuring necessary to accomodate individual tie-ins. Those who are 100% off-grid can do as they wish. However, if increasing numbers of individuals connected to the grid set up solar/wind, it will wreak havoc on the system.
In this event, perhaps the individual will also be forced to shut down during peak hours. Maybe they should also get compensated in the form of a rebate for the electricity they do not produce.
It’s not a non-story to those who where unaware of it, such as voters and politicians, perhaps because proponents of wind-power made a point of not mentioning it in their propaganda.
Troels Halken said on June 21, 2010 at 6:25 am:
That’s it? That’s your grand rebuttal? No mention of what was in the MIT Technology Review article, just ‘Ecogeek? Ewwww, that makes me sick!’
Ecogeek.org actually looks like a nice site, suitable for concerned environmentalists if not CAGW alarmists. I like their tag line, “Brains for the Earth.” See this part from the sidebar:
I can easily see this site being popular with the regulars here. And look at the Categories list! No “Global Warming,” (C)AGW… Looks good to me. See this recent headline on the homepage, “NREL Invents 90% More Efficient Air Conditioning Unit.” Now that’s interesting.
Hmm, this looks good. Currently identified as its #1 Most Popular Article:
More in the article on the site, and it’s good informative reading too.
Wow. This is Big News. If this pans out then there’s a viable alternative to the bird choppers, that possibly could survive without subsidies, that won’t uglify the landscape near as much. With this new and better technology, the vast fields of gigantic alien monstrosities may be abandoned sooner than anyone expected. And woe to the makers and promoters and sellers of the bird choppers.
I like ecogeek.org. Nice little site, well focused. I Recommend It!!
” Jantar says:
June 20, 2010 at 3:36 pm
We also run a full wholesale electricity market, and it is apparent that when wind is blowing the wholesale electricity price is extremely low, and when the wind isn’t blowing the wholesale price is extremely high. This makes for a very unstable pricing mechanism, and a low rate of return for wind farm owners.”
Finally, something that makes sense, i.e., letting the pricing mechanism dictate whether wind farms make good investments. The grid doesn’t like wind power, so the grid price for wind power is low implying that the investment required must also be relatively low. The fact that the investment costs are actually currently quite high is gotten around only by putting our tax dollars in the investors’ pockets via subsidies.
When someone finally builds a wind farm that can store power, they’ll be able to supply the market when prices are higher. Investors will like that and supply more of them (assuming returns are sufficient to supply them at all, that is.)
Legislators should limit their role (and their lawmaking) to ensuring that an economically successful wind farm not be frustrated by lack of access to a market. That is, they should ensure access to the grid. But they should stay out of the pricing game altogether. If wind farm power is desirable, someone will pay for it. If it’s not, they won’t, and investors won’t come to the table. Finding such legislators seems to be the real problem. They either want to “do something” or they are bought and paid for by special interests. Either way, we get these inane subsidies.
Peter H says:
June 20, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Lets just read what the article says…
So, the article is reduced to this pure scaremongering “It raises the prospect of hugely profitable electricity suppliers receiving large sums of money from the National Grid just for switching off wind turbines.” raises the prospect! We’re all gonna be taxed to death by ‘raising the prospect of’ something happening? I think not.
So, this is the usual WUWT scaremongering about either tax or big Govt – this time it’s tax.
Don’t buy it people, I don’t, I’m not going to be sacred by such propaganda.
__________________________________________________________________________
No it is not propaganda. As more and more Wind Farms come on line “spikes” will be come a problem and someone is doing their homework ahead of time. Wind power is erratic and a way of “storing” the energy is the major problem.
It seems that the drifting of the north magnetic pole is driving the people nuts up there! ☺
Can’t find another explanation for such a nonsense. No more comments needed. Call the closest psychiatrist and put all those guys under treatment, after tie them with straitjackets.
_Jim says:
June 20, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Troels Halken June 20, 2010 at 1:45 pm :
It’s the same when Jeff Id rant with his right wing-rhetoric: Taxes and big government.
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)?.
_______________________________________________________________
Unfortunately the Socialist do not realize that what they are actually doing is transferring Joe Sixpack’s wealth to the multi-billionaire central bankers.
1984 Grace Commission Report
“Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more widespread if people were aware that:
* One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey.
* Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken.
* With two-thirds of everyone’s personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.”
Phil. says:
June 20, 2010 at 8:59 pm
“John Cooper says:
Do they not have pumped storage in England? Oh, I guess they can’t – few real mountains to speak of.”
“In fact they do, the first was built in 1963 at Tan y grisiau for peaking in conjunction with the nearby Trawsfynydd nuclear power station (I visited them both in 1966).”
No they do NOT have pumped storage schemes in England. Dinorwig is in Wales!
Atomic Hairdrier – like I said, by all means WUWT should encourage debate about which sources of energy should be subsidised.
And on that issue, it’s gonna be a question of what non-CCGT genertating plant get’s the goodies!
But trying to develop an argument around whether wind should play a part in the UK balancing mechanism was a “dead Norwegian Blue” before the Telegraph went to print.
It’s a non-story. Don’t dignify it with indignation.
“A total of 7,000 turbines, on and off-shore, are either under construction, approved for building or seeking planning permission. Mr Clegg’s party wants 15,000 of them, and the Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, also a Lib Dem, has described them as “beautiful”. ”
Your country is a little small for all of that “beautiful” metallic government commissioned Picasso art.
“Notice the simple shapes he uses to construct this moment in history. Cylinders, triangles, squares, rectangles and circles make up his heavily weighted piece, massive in size and only black, white and gray. He depicts despair”
Zeke the Sneak says:
June 21, 2010 at 10:33 am
The only way these giant monsters can reproduce is through bribery and kept alive by subsidies. This is contagious because it is an easy method for making money.
They will stand everywhere as a reminder of corruption.
tallbloke says:
June 20, 2010 at 2:57 pm
……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.
________________________________________________________________________
I made that decision 15 years ago and left the “People’s Republic of Taxachusetts for 100 ac of farm & timber land in North Carolina.
Last Ice Age Map – North America
Last Ice Age Map – Eastern USA
Maps are from NORTH AMERICA DURING THE LAST 150,000 YEARS Compiled by Jonathan Adams, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
Now if only my countrymen will wake up and kick the hogs out of Washington DC, we might stand a chance.
“Walter Schneider says:
June 21, 2010 at 5:28 am
Everywhere” is a big place, but in Jasper National Park, Alberta, Canada, the road signs are in English and Japanese. I have never yet seen a sign in German there”
The Germans are so smart they can read a road sign in English !!!
But probably so can the Japanese (they write Ohm’s law as “U=RI”).
Well, it’s obvious that those wind mill farms aren’t using big enough spot lights to illuminate the wind mills at night.
Later, should the need arise, they can point to spot lights at some solar cells….
I think the offshore wind powerplants is the greatest folly of them all.
You will have to go out by boat to do maintenance…..
Talk about making it difficult for oneselves.
“LearDog says:
[…]
Am I missing something here? Why pay to NOT use peak wind load? Somethings wrong… And I’m stupid I guess…”
You’re not stupid. It’s a rigged market. I don’t know who invented it first, the Danes or the Germans: The feed-in tariff, a politically fixed guaranteed prize for every kWh produced over a lifetime of the generator of 20 years. The idea was to make it an absolutely risk-free investment, transferring all risks to society / the taxpayer / the consumer. It works! The whole risk IS transferred. That’s also why Troels likes this system so much – it makes his job risk-free. The Spaniards, the Brits, everybody imitates it. Some give extra subsidies even if no power at all is produced. European politicians all love it. Don’t ask me why they love it; i’m not a political scientist nor a psychiatrist.
“Jordan says:
[…]
And on that issue, it’s gonna be a question of what non-CCGT genertating plant get’s the goodies!”
How about none? (Assuming CCGT means CO2; i’m of the opinion that our emissions don’t harm the climate. YMMV.)
“Juan El Afaguy says:
[…]
If the article is to be believed, with all this expected excess production of electricity, we could easily produce Hydrogen, simply by electrolysis of seawater. Then we could burn the hydrogen, instead of natural gas to make electricity on calm days.”
Technically possible; but the efficiency of the hydrogen fuel cycle that you describe is about 10% with todays technology.