From The GWPF and Dr. Benny Peiser:
The European Commission is to order Britain to end wind farm subsidies. Officials have told ministers that the current level of state support for renewable energy sources must be phased out by the end of the decade. Taxpayer support for solar energy must also be cut, the commission will say. –James Kirkup and Bruno Waterfield, The Daily Telegraph, 3 January 2014
Scientists at the British Antarctic Survey say that the melting of the Pine Island Glacier ice shelf in Antarctica has suddenly slowed right down in the last few years, confirming earlier research which suggested that the shelf’s melt does not result from human-driven global warming. Dr Pierre Dutrieux of the BAS states bluntly: “We found ocean melting of the glacier was the lowest ever recorded, and less than half of that observed in 2010. This enormous, and unexpected, variability contradicts the widespread view that a simple and steady ocean warming in the region is eroding the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.” –Lewis Page, The Register, 3 January 2014
Fifty-two scientists and tourists rescued from a trapped vessel in the Antarctic still can’t get home. On Thursday, a helicopter flew the stranded passengers off the icepack in groups of 10 and 12. Their ship had been trapped in the ice for more than 10 days. Now, they’re stuck again, this time because the Chinese icebreaker that sent the helicopter fears it could get stuck as well. —CBN News, 3 January 2014
Yet another vessel has been trapped by global warming sea ice! The Xue Long icebreaker has sent out a distress call. Prof Turney tweets he is gutted by the news. I guess he can’t believe that climate warming could trap so many ships in sea ice. His communication manager just announced all the sea ice is caused by global warming. –Pierre Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, 3 January 2014
Climate experts say that global warming is melting sea ice faster than expected, which is why the poles currently have the most sea ice ever measured for the date. –Steve Goddard, Real Science, 2 January 2014
The Central England Temperature numbers for 2013 are now issued. Last year was the second coldest since 1996, second only to 2010, one of the coldest years of the last century. It has not been as low as this since 1990. –Paul Homewood, Not A Lot Of People Know That, 3 January 2014
If the IPCC reports were accepted for exactly what they are – exaggerated science with a large dollop of politics – this would be the end of the matter. Unfortunately, various bodies actively encourage us to believe the reports are entirely scientific, accurate and completely authoritative on all climate matters, this despite the IPCC’s charter and the political interference. –John McLean, The Age, 3 January 2014
With his gray beard, thick glasses, gentle laugh, and disarmingly soft voice, Richard Lindzen comes across as nothing short of grandfatherly. Granted, Lindzen is no shrinking violet. A pioneering climate scientist with decades at Harvard and MIT, Lindzen sees his discipline as being deeply compromised by political pressure, data fudging, out-and-out guesswork, and wholly unwarranted alarmism. In a shot across the bow of what many insist is indisputable scientific truth, Lindzen characterizes global warming as “small and … nothing to be alarmed about.” –Ethan Epstein, Weekly Standard, 13 January 2014
The public would hardly be aware of the statements made by all of the above if it wasn’t for the mainstream media. Journalists are supposed to be sceptical about all claims on all matters but that scepticism is usually absent when dealing with climate issues. Whatever the cause, journalists appear unwilling to question claims, unwilling to ask for the data so they might verify the findings and unwilling to follow-up predictions to see if they were correct. The silence on all these matters tacitly and falsely implies that the IPCC’s view is correct and it’s an authority on all climate issues. –John McLean, The Age, 3 January 2014
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Wind energy: sh*t happens. Have a look:
http://www.t-online.de/wirtschaft/energie/versorgerwechsel/id_67254014/rotor-abgerissen-mega-windrad-enercon-e-126-hat-fuer-schrecken-gesorgt.html
David L says:
January 4, 2014 at 4:22 am
How can the EU tell Britain what to do? I thought Britain didn’t ‘t join the EU?
David, the British joined what they thought was a trading zone, the European Economic Community (EEC). That has now morphed in the European Union (EU) which was the intention all along. It was supposed to be a United States of Europe to rival the USA. We were lied to then and we continue to be lied to. The European dream has become a nightmare with a very real threat to the future peace of Europe.
Non Nomen says:
January 4, 2014 at 7:45 am
From Google Translate – No other editing of the article linked above:
But it is actually (not quite as) worse than you think!
All wind turbine s worldwide have a global average of 21-23% availability factor: On average, over the year, they will only generate 22% of their nameplate rating. Now, of course, “at (uncertain) times” for “(uncertain and unpredictable) lengths of time” , they WILL generate all of their nameplate power (before suddenly cutting out to zero power when the windspeed gets too high!), so ALL of their support infrastructure (electric high voltage cables, transformers, control circuits, switchgear, cross-country interconnection cables, etc) HAVE to be sized for, designed for, and purchased and built for that (very seldom-achieved) full capacity. It’s like forcing a Tour de France bike racer to use a bike tire rated for 5x his weight, and 5x times his maximum speed, because “a bicycle can carry” 5x his body weight if it were used as a cargo vehicle in Senegal by a vender selling anvils and railroad ties.
Regardless, at any given point in time, 4 out of 5 slowly turning windmills are NOT generating their assumed nameplate load, but most of the time, “almost all of them” are generating a “little bit” of “part of their capacity” and are not actually using electricity from the grid. They are not generating useful, reliable power though.
They are ALL, every one of them, at all times, generating MONEY to the politicians’ friends and co-sponsors and fund raisers who ARE using the CAGW religion to take money from the taxpayers and rate payers to build and subsidize windmills for the politicians’ and academia’s profits, power, and influence!
Caz Jones says:
January 4, 2014 at 8:11 am
“We were lied to then and we continue to be lied to. The European dream has become a nightmare with a very real threat to the future peace of Europe.”
————————–
AH SO, …… thus it appears that Obamacare is little more than recent British history “repeating itself” here in the US of A.
The times they are a-changing…It is estimated, that since 1990 more laws were made in UK Parliament than from 1688(Bill of Rights) until 1990. And that is not because jurisdiction has become so difficult: 80% of these laws since 1990 were made because the Brussels Kommissars told the british Parliament they had to. No more lightbulbs but “energy-saving” mercury-bombs, And most ridiculous, a comforter-chain decree consisting of 52 pages. Happy Babyfaces all over Europe!
If Britian actual ends the wind and solar subsides, they’re going to have a huge number of unused rusted wind turbines cluttering the landscape (just as the USA does), along with a bunch of abandoned solar facilities. These things aren’t anywhere near close to being practical or competitive, and are a gross waste of taxpayer funds. But then I’m preachin’ to the choir here of course. :0)
I had an interesting encounter recently as a guest lecturer. A question was asked why we shouldn’t have all future energy supplied by wind turbines.
I asked the young lady to assume she worked the summer to buy a car. “A salesman showed you one and explained in glowing terms that it would run for free. Upon arriving home you read the operating manual to discover that you could only drive it two days out of the week. And to complicate things you couldn’t plan on the day or even the hour you could drive it…how would you feel?”
She wrinkled up her nose and in a college sophomore tone said, “…that sucks.”
RACookPE1978:
Thankyou for your reply to me at January 4, 2014 at 9:03 am.
Yes, I agree all you say.
The underlying problem is that the power of the wind increases as the cube of the wind speed. Hence, when a turbine is operating at near its maximal wind speed any gusts can provide blade acceleration which is too rapid for it to be countered by blade feathering. Modern wind turbines are big and the tips of their blades must not move faster than the speed of sound or the resulting instability would cause catastrophic failure.
As you say, assemblies of wind turbines are subsidy farms.
Wind turbines are expensive, polluting and environmentally damaging bird-swatters that only produce electricity some of the time and all of the time they produce NO electricity useful to an electricity grid.
For those who have not seen it, this explains why
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/courtney_2006_lecture.pdf
Richard
Richard
I know that in your part of the world there are a number of solar farm applications. We have one covering 50 acres being proposed close to us.
We both know how dull and dismal the weather here has been the last few weeks (not unusual in winter) and the idea that solar power has any place in a country such as ours makes the idea of wind turbines look (almost) sane.
tonyb
Oh, but it is even worse than you think!
Granted, at zero – 2 knots, wind turbines must not only go “off-grid (they cannot generate power at all) but must (randomly) take power from the grid to drive their gears and shafts to lubricate the bearings, keep their torque shafts and generator shafts from bowing and bending so they “can” be run when the wind picks … But, most often, they are unable to generate power at all when the wind is “below threshhold” of 6-8 knots. (Nautical miles per hour.) As gusts of regularly vary 4-10 knots close to the ground, realistically, they generate very little below 10 knots.
then, as the wind increases between 8 – 30 knots, they generate more and more power – as you pointed out, power increases as the cube of wind speed. However, the wind never increases steadily, but randomly as the storm cells pass by: some close to the tower, some several kilometers away. So the grid sees an ever-increasing-but-increasingly-varied power output from the EVERY wind farm that CANNOT be predicted nor controlled!
Up to a point. At maximum design winds, the area of wind farms IS putting out maximum power! Then, suddenly, just when the wind farm system IS generating their maximum output, that ENTIRE wind farm output will drop to ZERO because every wind turbine simultaneously has reached its speed limit and MUST stop and unload its blades immediately to prevent over-speed failures.
Now, perversely opposite to the case before the storm front, when the increasing winds gradually increased power irregularly but lowly as various turbines get ever-higher and higher winds, that high speed DROPS OFF turbine immediately and suddenly: sixteen or twenty five 6 MegaWatt wind turbines all suddenly all drop to zero in one second. Then, because the wind turbine controllers are automatically controlled and automatically re-synchronized, as that high-speed gust goes by, all twenty five (or only 6 or 10 of the 25) come back on because wind is back below the speed limit. The next gust comes by, and those 6 trip back off. Maybe. Or maybe not. Or maybe all 25 will cycle back on. And stay on. Or maybe not.
Hey! You are the grid operator responsible for the stability of the electric system that millions rely on for their lives and jobs. You tell us! 8<)
Oh, but it is even worse than you think. Sudden area-wide high speeds and great gust variations over wide areas are characteristic of cold fronts coming through an entire region with a massive area of high pressure cold air air behind the front. SO, when the system doesn't need the power (because temperatures have NOT yet dropped during the front's passage), the wind turbines are regionally generating their maximum, but may overload and trip off that maximum as well. Then, in the cold weather behind the storm front, when the electric power IS needed the most, the wind turbines are back rotating slowly and uselessly at idle in the calm but very cold high pressure air.
“Rhys Jaggar says:
January 4, 2014 at 6:09 am”
It is true Britain did join the EEC (Or Common Market) in 1973, but the Heath Govn’t did not have a mandate to do that. So, entry into the EEC was completely undemocratic. Now, Britain is subject to EU laws and regulations that have no madate from British voters. Fortunately, the pound was retained and the Euro was rejected by the British people.
tonyb:
As you say to me at January 4, 2014 at 11:41 am
Yes, all that is true, and it is not only applications here in Cornwall.
I know you come down here sometimes. If you are on the road from Helston to Falmouth then stop and walk up the drive of Edgecombe Methodist Church (it is big so you can’t miss it) then look from the front of the Church. You will see over the hedge on the far side of the road and view an immense solar farm.
This illustrates another problem with stopping the insanity of solar arrays in our country. Many people oppose windfarms because of the appearance and noise of the turbines. But most of those opponents do not know the real problems of wind power (as e.g. explained in this thread by RACookPE1978).
Solar arrays are less easily seen than windfarms and are silent. So, marshaling opposition to the more problematic solar arrays is more difficult than for windfarms.
Richard
PS This morning I shall be at Mawnan Smith and not Edgecombe.
There may be hope for you Brits, to wit:
Britain’s version of Tea Party rocks political system across the pond
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/04/britain-version-tea-party-rocks-political-system-across-pond/?intcmp=latestnews