Claim: The Wind Turbine Industry is Running Out of Money

Essay by Eric Worrall

h/t JoNova; The promised green Eldorado has turned into a nightmare of big layoffs, supply chain problems, and razor thin margins.

Opinion: Distribution of value in the wind industry is broken – it’s time for a new settlement

27 June 2022 by Ben Hunt

Former Siemens Gamesa insider says turbine manufacturers are in dire need of the bright future they were promised

One of the first responses I received was very instructive: “When I joined more than 15 years ago, I was told that I was joining the sector with the brightest and most promising future. The problem is that it is a future that seems never to come.”

And here is the paradox of the wind energy industry in 2022: if net zero and other decarbonization targets are to be met, the industry should be on the cusp of a growth phase that would dwarf anything experienced so far.

The question is whether the western manufacturing sector will be in any sort of shape to deliver that growth, or it will endure the fate of the long lost solar industry, a spectre now regularly raised by industry leaders.

Instead the news is full of stories of lay-offs, factory closures and eye-watering financial losses. And the resources required for the necessary investments are in jeopardy.

Read more: https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1791224/opinion-distribution-value-wind-industry-broken-–-its-time-new-settlement

The problem is obvious. Nobody genuinely wants or needs their product.

A lot of people like the idea of renewable energy, but surveys have repeatedly demonstrated renewables are at the bottom of people’s lists of priorities. Even in green Germany, renewable energy is at the bottom of the list, compared to important issues like cost of living, job security and public safety.

You can see this process of addressing other priorities ahead of green energy happening right now in California. California is planning to send people cash payments to help with the high cost of living. They could have spent that money building renewable energy infrastructure, but politicians decided voter dissatisfaction with the high cost of living is a higher priority.

When politicians run short of taxpayer’s cash, it is renewable energy which consistently loses out to other priorities.

4.8 58 votes
Article Rating
228 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
June 30, 2022 2:04 pm

Texas already has too much wind on it’s net for stability.

Reply to  Tom Halla
June 30, 2022 3:30 pm

When Texas gets cold in February the wind speeds are low.

Bryan A
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 4:27 pm

Wind Energy is Running Out of Money…

Wind Energy is Running Out of Excuses!
Wind Energy is Running Out of Steam!
Wind Energy is a Bunch of Hot Air!
Wind Energy is Like Vacuum Energy, it Sucks!
Wind Energy is a Pile of Concrete onto which You Throw Vast Sums of Subsidies!

Thomas
Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 8:15 pm

Twain, not Shania, would have said, “a wind turbine is an energy production device, being sold to you by a liar.”

Bryan A
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 4:40 pm

That’s OK RG, when it gets really cold in Texas the windmills freeze up anyway so a lack of wind makes no difference

Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 5:01 pm

They were too cheap to get the optional blade heaters.
Half the windmills had icing problems in February 2021.
Wind power in February was forecast at only 6% of nameplate capacity. Actual output with half the windmills frozen averaged 4% of capacity, except for the hours before the blackouts when there were the usual random hours (happens almost every week) with really low wind output.

The windmill’s performance in 2021 did not cause the Texas blackouts. There should have been functioning backup to easily cover zero output from windmills in February, which is always a low output month.

The Texas energy infrastructure, beyond power plants, is not capable of handling extremely cold weather. They knew that in 2011. Building lots of windmills was not the recommendation after the February 2011 rolling blackouts that affected over 3 million Texans. There was very little wind power in 2011 so that was not the cause of problems in 2011 either. It was the unusually cold weather in 2011 — even colder in 2021, and the extreme cold lasted longer.

Drake
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 6:25 pm

Blade heaters? Another waste of money on top of already building something that requires “functioning backup to easily cover zero output from windmills in February”

Just build the “backup”, not the crap bird choppers with the “necessary” blade heaters, a TOTAL waste of money.

Anyone who thinks “renewables” i.e. unreliables are worthwhile must hate the poor, since the resources wasted on that crap could be used for productive benefit of society, “lifting all boats”, even the poor.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 7:42 pm

It was the fault of the wind. Because the wind boondoggle sucked up most of the available capital to build reliable, dispatchable power. Which has to be built anyway to provide that “…functioning backup to easily cover zero output from wind…” So since it has to be built anyway let’s just build it and keep that unreliable s*** the h*** out of the d*** way!!!

MarkW
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
July 1, 2022 11:46 am

Wind can’t be held responsible for the problems it causes because everybody knows wind is unreliable and should have planned for it ahead of time.
Or at least that’s the claim.

AndyHce
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 7:56 pm

Multiple reports showed 25% to 27% of total demand filled by wind energy for the same period over the three previous years, thus the same for another year was the general expectation. With almost all of that suddenly gone for a number of days, wind failure certainly played a major part in the problems. Other factors came to light but without the wind failure they might not have been triggered or even been noticed.

Thomas
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 8:18 pm

There was very little wind power in 2011 so that was not the cause of problems in 2011 either.” Did you really just type that?

ihfan
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 8:48 pm

There should have been functioning backup to easily cover zero output from windmills in February, which is always a low output month.

Nice of you to admit that for every watt of nameplate generation capacity by a windmill you need a watt of reliable supply.

PCman999
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 11:31 pm

The Carbon phobia is the root cause of the Texas blackout. The natural gas pipelines used to power the pumps with Engines powered by….. natural gas, obviously, as it’s right there. However the carbon phobia caused normally sane engineers and managers to worry about their carbon emissions so they got the pipeline converted over to electricity powered by the grid which had lots of wind and solar and hence would make their carbon footprint smell better.

However, when the cold and calm weather drastically reduced the amount of wind turbine produced power, the various local grids started doing rotating black outs – which turned off the gas which then also turned off natural gas power turbines.

Obviously there were some power plants still able to run, and somehow they got the pipelines running again (I have feeling lots of electrical workers going around in the bitter cold starting up the natural gas pumps that might still have been in place, or favouring the grids powering the pipeline and preventing them from being blacked out).

But it’s not the natural gas power being at fault if it’s the renewable power, that it depended on to power the pipeline, that didn’t show up for work.

If the grid had been all renewable all the Texans would have frozen to death.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2022 12:13 am

And the blade heaters run on what? Pixie dust?

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
July 1, 2022 5:39 am

They probably use more energy than the windmill produces.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
July 4, 2022 1:34 pm

Especially if the wind stops blowing!

James
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
July 1, 2022 9:10 am

the same pixie dust as the gearbox heaters run on! They are a parasitic load on the grid when the wind is not blowing

Greytide
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
July 1, 2022 12:32 pm

Obviously power from the wind turbine…. Oh no, silly me……

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2022 7:19 am

Alex Epstein said it best: “While wind may have only been part of the problem, it was none of the solution”. Building unreliables is a non-solution to the non-problem of globalclimatewarmingchange.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Barnes Moore
July 4, 2022 1:35 pm

They’ve obviously never heard that if it ain’t broke, don’t FIX it!

AZeeman
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2022 9:47 am

The windmills where designed using computer models which predicted much higher winter temperatures. After adjustment it will be found that the temperatures were actually much higher than thermometer readings at the time, and icing could not have occurred. Because of this “force majeure” will apply and no warranty claims are possible.

MarkW
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2022 11:45 am

I can’t imagine the thermal stresses a blade heater would add to those blades.
Not to mention the fact that those blade heaters would consume most of the power being generated by the turbine.

You can have cheap blades, and no power when it gets icy.
Or you can have expensive blades, and almost no power when it gets icy.

What a choice.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2022 12:09 pm

Is this your advice, then, Richard: “Click your heels together three times and say ‘There’s nothing like a wind energy nirvana.’ and you’ll be there.” Yeah, if they’d just spent more money on FF backup there would have been no problem. Of course, Texas’ electricity market wouldn’t pay for FF backup.

Marty Cornell
Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 7:13 pm

Bryan A, right before winter storm Uri, Texas wind turbines were producing over 30 gigawatts into the grid. Starting late on February 14th, and lasting four days, that contribution to the grid dropped to less than 8 gigawatts while the demand peaked to over 70 gigawatts, which forced dispatchable gas and coal plants to run full out. Most of that wind energy during this period came from the coast, which hosts about 20% of turbine capacity; the other 80% of capacity, concentrated in West Texas, was down, not because the turbines froze, but because the wind died.
A high-pressure ridge extended from Canada to South Texas, idling or greatly reducing all turbines in that path. This is reflected in data from the SWPP and MISO networks as well as that of the Texas ERCOT system. Many of those “Yankee” turbines were winterized; don’t matter if the wind doesn’t blow. MISO and SWPP have sufficient reserves of thermal generation capacity, including coal-fired unites, that covered for their idled wind turbines.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Marty Cornell
July 1, 2022 5:25 am

“winter storm Uri”

Oh, is that what they call it? What’s the name of the storms currently going across the U.S.? Naming storms is ridiculous, imo. I prefer to refer to it as the February 2021 acrtic cold snap.

Naming storms is just another attempt by alarmists to make it sound like the world is out of control. Don’t buy into their climate propaganda. They are just trying to scare people into conforming to their version of reality.

And the windmill problem was not limited to Texas during this storm as you pont out. It was suggested above that Texas windmills were not ready for very cold weather, but windmills from Texas to Canada had the very same problem: lack of wind. The cold was not the only reason the windmills stopped producing electricity.

And Texas *does* have too many windmills on its grid. One is too many.

griff
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 1, 2022 1:59 am

Texas ahs a problem with un-winterised fossil fuel plant…

Tom in Florida
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 4:19 am

With so much global warming that shouldn’t have been a problem.

Andy Wilkins
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 4:53 am

Surely they could use power generated by the windmills to unfreeze the plants?
Oh, hang on…

Admit it Griff, your hallowed renewables are complete rubbish

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 5:32 am

Griff has a problem with reality.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 5:38 am

How do you winterize a wind turbine?

Bryan A
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 9:57 am

Texas had the problem of unavailable unreliables And a lack of 100% fossil backups

MarkW
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 11:50 am

It really is amazing how tightly you cling to disproven lies.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 12:21 pm

Griff, in the real world it costs money to winterize facilities. The Leftist ideologue-designed Texas energy market wouldn’t provide for such funds. Since the socialist governmental bodies told energy suppliers they would soon phase out FF production, how could anybody forecast a rate of return for investments that would be idled? Normal capital investments don’t flow from politicized governmental largesse.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 2, 2022 2:30 am

Presumably, the windmills located farther north than Texas were “winterized”, yet they all had the same problem during the arctic cold snap, which was a lack of wind. This happened from Texas to Canada so “winterizing” the windmills did no good in this situation for anyone, and would have done no good in Texas, either.

Griff, claiming Texas windmills were not winterized properly is missing the point. No amount of winterizing would have fixed that problem.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Tom Abbott
July 4, 2022 1:46 pm

Yes, just as no amount of ‘renewables’ will ever be enough to supply all of our needs! THIS is the main fallacy being foisted off on everyone and no one seems able to see it!

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 4, 2022 1:44 pm

When there isn’t enough energy to supply the demands on the grid, HOW can the windmills be ‘winterized’?

Dave Fair
Reply to  IAMPCBOB
July 5, 2022 9:19 am

The point of my comment was that nobody was going to invest in the upkeep of reliable energy (FF) given clear governmental intent to destroy them and that the existing governmental-driven market would not pay for that.

rbabcock
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 2:29 pm

You really need to build a complete, robust fossil fueled backup system that can power the entire grid and then layer the windmills and solar on top of it. So why not just eliminate the windmills and solar? It’s easy to see why the lunatics have taken over the insane asylum.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  rbabcock
July 4, 2022 1:47 pm

It’s simple,, really. All of those subsidies are sought by the greedy people who are becoming filthy rich from them!

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  griff
July 4, 2022 1:42 pm

No, Griff, Texas, like so many other states, has bought into the fables about ‘renewables’! Basing their grid on such a huge percentage of solar and wind power will cause many MORE people to die or at least suffer when there is another polar cold snap! The UK is getting ready to find out how BAD it can get, too! There simply isn’t enough ‘renewable’ energy to go around!

DCE
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 1, 2022 4:50 am

As South Australia learned, once wind became above ~10% of the generation capacity the grid stability greatly deteriorated. There were an increasing number of blackouts as a result. Another result: almost every home and business has their own generators so they can keep the power on. The Greens’ efforts to reduce carbon dioxide have had just the opposite effect because the electrical grid was no longer reliable.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  DCE
July 1, 2022 5:40 am

The Green Energy plan is starting to unravel. it was inevitable. It’s an unworkable plan whose problems are starting to become visible.

Alarmist will keep forging ahead with this failed plan if given the chance. They can’t see an alternative, even when it is right in front of their faces (nuclear).

Green energy is crashing and burning. It can’t come soon enough for our economies and our futures.

All caused by dishonest temperature data bastardizers. How much blood do you figure is on your hands now, bastardizers? A lot. With no end in sight. There’s a special place in Hell for Liars like you.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
Janice Moore
June 30, 2022 2:05 pm
  1. Windmills are NOT “green.”
  2. Windmills are NOT “renewable energy.”

3. Windmills are negative EROEI/ROI, bird and bat slaughtering, ugly, worse-than-useless, garbage.

Big Wind is a SCAM.

The sooner it dies, the better.

Reply to  Janice Moore
June 30, 2022 3:46 pm

Every time I bring up Sulpher Hexaflouride,
I hear “I never heard of that”.
It gets very little attention on climate skeptic websites.

Also, my Windmill Formula gets no attention:
One windmill + no wind = no electricity
One bazillion windmills +no wind = no electricity

One of the biggest problems with windmills, of many, involves an extremely powerful greenhouse gas that leaks from the electrical switchgear used for windfarms. It is possible the greenhouse gas leaks from the switchgear over time will cause more of a greenhouse effect than the reduction in the use of fossil fuels.

Sulfur Hexafluoride: The Nightmare Greenhouse Gas That’s Just Too Useful To Stop Using | Hackaday

Climate change: Electrical industry’s ‘dirty secret’ boosts warming – BBC News

Drake
Reply to  Richard Greene
June 30, 2022 6:33 pm

Funny thing about Fluoride, it is such a bad poison that they companies that produced it while making other stuff had to get rid of it in drinking water!

They found another place to put it which is actually a useful and does not poison the environment apparently. GHG, IDNK.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Drake
July 1, 2022 2:18 am

somehow industrial waste added to water doesnt appeal. and until they DID use it in water thats how it was classified i believe

jeff corbin
Reply to  Janice Moore
July 1, 2022 8:54 am

And now they want more of our money.

MarkW
Reply to  jeff corbin
July 1, 2022 11:52 am

From what my leftist acquaintances tell me, it isn’t our money. It all belongs to the government because without government, nothing is possible. Therefore we owe government for everything we have. So if government asks us to return some of it, we are obligated to comply.

ResourceGuy
June 30, 2022 2:10 pm

Let’s finish them off with no profit margins using slave labor in western China making products promoted by lobbyists as essential and supported by tax credits and imports over domestic producers. Does that sound familiar?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
June 30, 2022 3:47 pm

Slave labor and coal energy in China.
Can’t beat that.

Steve Case
June 30, 2022 2:11 pm

Needs no explanation:

Bird Chopper.png
Jeroen B.
Reply to  Steve Case
June 30, 2022 2:28 pm

omg, I’m SO stealing this one and sharing it!!!

Steve Case
Reply to  Jeroen B.
June 30, 2022 2:40 pm

Consider it a gift (-:

RicDre
Reply to  Steve Case
June 30, 2022 2:52 pm

Very appropriate because, if I recall correctly, the Australians painted their P-40s with that distinctive paint job prior to the Flying Tigers using it.

I posted the picture on JoNova’s site giving credit to you for positing it here.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  RicDre
June 30, 2022 6:28 pm

The claim of being the first ‘teeth’ aircraft is a bit complex.

Going by memory but I believe the ‘current’ accepted first was some of the German Bf110 Zestroyer gruppen in 39 or 40.

I mean, yeah, they look pretty awesome, but also… style over substance. The claim always was that they inspired fear in the enemy, but I am pretty sure that in real terms it was the sound of their bullets striking your fuselage that caused the real brown trouser moments.

roaddog
Reply to  Craig from Oz
June 30, 2022 10:01 pm

But an Ace is always an Ace.

Bryan A
Reply to  roaddog
July 1, 2022 11:32 pm

Unless it is the Ace Of Holes

Steve Case
Reply to  RicDre
June 30, 2022 8:20 pm

Very appropriate because, if I recall correctly, the Australians painted their P-40s with that distinctive paint job prior to the Flying Tigers using it
______________________________________________

Zactly what was used to create the “Bird Chopper” image.

Thanks for the credit. The original was posted on Pookie’s Toons in the comments section.

paul
Reply to  Steve Case
June 30, 2022 4:37 pm

120%…. no words needed !

Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 2:18 pm

“California is planning to send people cash payments to help with the high cost of living.”

Buying people’s votes with their own money to keep the Red wave at bay!

Ron Long
Reply to  Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 2:38 pm

California also announced today that they are giving illegal aliens, sorry, climate refugees, food stamps. This appears to be a calculated return on investment scheme wherein they buy votes with other peoples money.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Ron Long
June 30, 2022 2:56 pm

And providing “free” medical coverage. The State has a $100B surplus, in a $300B budget. But concern has been noted that we are starting long-term commitments with short-term money.

Patrick B
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 30, 2022 4:33 pm

The State has about $1 trillion of unfunded pension liability. It does not have a surplus of any amount unless you use political accounting.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Patrick B
July 1, 2022 5:47 am

And with the Baby Boomers retiring in seriously high numbers those liabilities will be showing up very soon.

AndyHce
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 30, 2022 8:00 pm

Outstanding debt is probably more that the sum of all other financial catagories.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 2:55 pm

No danger of a Red Wave in California.

Streetcred
Reply to  Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 6:35 pm

Invest $1.20 / $1.00 share with me, I will guarantee you a return of 20% in year 1 and thereafter whatever. 🙂

ihfan
Reply to  Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 8:52 pm

“California is planning to send people cash payments to help with the high cost of living.”

And in unrelated news, the rate of inflation continues to increase against expectations of the Bai-den administration.

roaddog
Reply to  Old Man Winter
June 30, 2022 10:03 pm

Collecting money from taxpayers and then returning it to taxpayers is obviously more efficient than never collecting it at all. I’m sure California does it at no cost at all. LOL (Deep State Stories).

Randle Dewees
Reply to  roaddog
July 1, 2022 6:09 am

Kali collects plenty money from me, I’m pretty sure I will see none “returned” as my income will be well north of whatever limit the state imposes.

MarkW
Reply to  roaddog
July 1, 2022 11:55 am

The problem with that is almost all of the collecting is being done from about 10% of the taxpayers, while the bulk of the money is going to be distributed to the other 90% of the taxpayers.

George Daddis
Reply to  Old Man Winter
July 1, 2022 7:11 am

I think I’ve got it:
People are suffering from the effects of inflation.
Inflation is caused by too much money in the economy.
The solution is to hand out more money.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Old Man Winter
July 1, 2022 12:26 pm

But they believe its OPM.

T Gasloli
June 30, 2022 2:24 pm

This what running out of other people’s money looks like.💵

Peter Wells
Reply to  T Gasloli
June 30, 2022 2:29 pm

Looks like an excellent finish to me.

Danley Wolfe
June 30, 2022 2:27 pm

Or you might have put it … the wind industry is running out of wind.

Danley Wolfe
June 30, 2022 2:28 pm

But the really good news is the EPA and liberals no longer can regulate climate change.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Danley Wolfe
June 30, 2022 2:57 pm

Not exactly. The SCOTUS decision did not go that far, regrettably.

Drake
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 30, 2022 6:36 pm

Yet.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 30, 2022 7:52 pm

Well, it sort of did. What the liberals have not yet realized, stopping the War on Fossil Fuel was just an added fringe benefit; what that decision really did was put the entire Swamp on notice that you can’t just make up new regulations out of 40+ year old legislation. If you want to expand your agency’s duties, you will have to go to the legislature and get them to pass additional legislation to give you that authority. It’s almost: Turn Out The Lights… The Party’s Over!

roaddog
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
June 30, 2022 10:05 pm

Yeah, every 14 years or so common sense prevails.

mikewaite
Reply to  roaddog
July 1, 2022 12:47 am

“the arc of the universe is long , but it bends towards justice ”
M L King Jr.

Dave Fair
Reply to  mikewaite
July 1, 2022 12:31 pm

Only with firm pushes by armed patriots will the universe arc that way.

roaddog
Reply to  Danley Wolfe
June 30, 2022 10:04 pm

And I laughed, and I laughed, and I laughed.

arjan duiker
June 30, 2022 2:38 pm

What a beautiful front picture. Love it.
Let’s hope wind industry is truly broken.

Rud Istvan
June 30, 2022 3:23 pm

This was inevitable.

Wind investment doesn’t happen without subsidies. As Climate Etc post ‘True cost of wind’ calculated years ago, the ‘real LCOE of CCGT is about $58/MWh, on shore wind based on the ERCOT grid is $146.

As penetration increases, the grid problems of intermittency grow and the subsidies slow except in climate deranged places like UK and Germany.

In addition, there is a fundamental and near unsolvable engineering problem with the newer bigger turbines; axial bearing loading is inherently uneven since near ground and top of turbine blade windspeeds are different because of surface drag. So they crack and fail as the image shows. So they don’t last the warranted 20 years as the subsidy farming operators are now finding as they go broke also, since the turbine manufactures can no longer afford to honor their warranties.

A house of cards does not stand for long in even a slight breeze. And the situation is more than a slight breeze. It is a financial tropical storm.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Rud Istvan
June 30, 2022 3:58 pm

They should have asked manufacturers of front loading washing machines about bearing problems!

MarkW
Reply to  Rud Istvan
June 30, 2022 4:16 pm

In addition to the slow change in pressure as the blades go from bottom to top of their arc, there is also a thump as each blade passes the tower.

PCman999
Reply to  MarkW
July 1, 2022 12:06 am

While turbines in general are a waste of resources, from a geek perspective the ‘coolest’ design I’ve seen is ‘pusher’ 2-bladed prop design (it doesn’t really push, but it’s like the planes that have the prop on the back) and the tower is angled and cantilevered with no rotating nacelle. It’s an off-shore design that spins in the water to match wind direction and for maintenance the whole thing is angled down to the water – so no cranes would be needed in its construction.

Doesn’t eliminate the unreliable wind from the equation but it’s a nice elegant design – with the potential for lots of cost savings in construction and maintenance.

PCman999
Reply to  PCman999
July 1, 2022 12:27 am

comment image

PCman999
Reply to  PCman999
July 1, 2022 12:42 am
Reply to  PCman999
July 1, 2022 8:02 am

“once anchored to the sea bed” … they clearly have no idea how often anchors fail.

Dave Fair
Reply to  PCman999
July 1, 2022 12:38 pm

This marketing blurb is all any Leftist politician needs to decide to spend billions on this new, untested technology.

PCman999
Reply to  Rud Istvan
June 30, 2022 11:56 pm

And IIRC, the cost of battery backup is about the same as onshore wind – for just 4 hours worth! A recent analysis coming out of the UK iirc, said that about 24 days – DAYS – of storage would be needed for a 100% renewable grid ( and that’s based on the UK’s weather ymmv).

So 144x the onshore price – what, roughly $80/MWh? So $11520/MWh for a reliable backup capacity based on years of wind data.

So obviously better to use backup gas generators instead – but then why bother with the wind turbines then?

(The backup power level has to be equal to the complete renewable grid level because of the distinct likelihood that the wind just stops all over)

I have yet to see any projections based on a continental scale power grid, preferably done by skeptical researchers instead of turbine salesmen.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Rud Istvan
July 1, 2022 6:37 am

Rud, your statement motivated me to look into the bearing problem a bit. There were no real surprises there – it’s basically economics. These machines are extreme, like say a race car or a jet aircraft, but are treated like an ordinary appliance. There would be essentially no bearing “failures” if the gearboxes were maintained properly. That would be regular and timely gearbox rebuilds with, yes, new bearings! The problem is, of course, that the proper care would be extremely expensive and the down time excessive. Your “house of cards”.

Walter Horsting
June 30, 2022 3:23 pm

An alternate to California’s proposed 4.2 GW offshore wind project:
 4.2 GWs = roughly 680 6MW turbines or 252 17MW turbines
·        Miles offshore with an expensive undersea power network
·        No thermal use for industry
·        Radar Interference is a security threat
·        Intermittent low-density Energy
Vs
The least impacting energy source on nature:
https://businessdevelopmentinternational.biz/seaborg-co/
 
21 Seaborg 200 MW CMSR power barges or 5 GW CMSR power barges
·        Float them into any sea or river port near the local grid
·        24-year return to the shipyard for recycling
·        Thermal Industrial and Desalination use 
·        The least impacting energy source on nature
·        24/7/365 Energy inexpensive as Coal

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Walter Horsting
July 1, 2022 11:21 am

Are these even available to order?

Having just looked into the Diablo Canyon situation, the main factor forcing the closure (apart from Jerry Brown’s antipathy to nuclear power) is the CA regulation restricting cooling water intake from estuarine environments. This was in response to section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which requires regulations for water intakes from estuarine environments in excess of 2 million gallons a day.

I assume the floating power barges use a once through cooling design pulling in ambient water. I don’t know at what power level cooling water intake would hit the 2 million gal./day, but for reference the cooling intake for the new Vogtle unit 3 and 4 reactors (1,117 MW @) has a gross capacity of 72 million gal./day. That suggests that even the small 200 MW barges would need to meet the new stringent CA restrictions.

Last edited 1 month ago by Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
2hotel9
June 30, 2022 3:26 pm

THANK GOD!!!!!!

June 30, 2022 3:41 pm

“The problem is obvious. Nobody genuinely wants or needs their product.”
One thing is obvious – they sure are buying it. 13.1% increase globally in installed capacity, 2021.

comment image

RickWill
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 30, 2022 4:28 pm

Politicians throw some discretionary cash at the wind industry to look good in front of voters 

This is not how it works. Government is picking winners for consumers by forcing consumers to pay subsidies to the subsidy farmers.

Then there are the unintended consequences of forcing up the price of dispatchable power forcing it to shut down for economic reasons.

Australia now has the absurd situation of forcing consumers to pay for dispatchable capacity, a payment for generators to sit idle but prepared to produce given notice. All those existing subsidy farms that are already getting consumer cash are not dispatchable.

You have to wonder who could dream up such foolish nonsense.

Dave Fair
Reply to  RickWill
July 1, 2022 1:01 pm

The great President Ronald Reagan: “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” 

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 30, 2022 4:30 pm

I didn’t say people aren’t buying their product, I said nobody genuinely wants or needs their product.”
Eric, you were talking about the problem for turbine makers. If people are buying, their business is doing well. Even if you think they shouldn’t be buying.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 30, 2022 5:15 pm

Well, the article also says
“Wind is a cost effective, inexhaustible and clean provider of secure energy that isn’t going to further poison the planet.”
Which bits do you like? There is nothing quantitative on the supposed industry problems. But he seems to say, not that the industry is doing badly, but that it isn’t doing as well as he hoped it would. Maybe he is of overly hopeful disposition. The fact is, they are selling lots of turbines.

Willem post
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 5:53 pm

I do not like that it’s output is random, as is the wind

Streetcred
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 6:43 pm

Nick, how much does that cognitive dissonance really hurt … you’re spinning right off your axis.

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:03 pm

Since wind is not cost effective or clean, it’s no wonder that a business whose foundation is built on lies is not doing well.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Drake
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:12 pm

I have asked before. Why do you hate poor people Nick.

All “renewable” energy requires 100% backup power generation capacity, making unreliables unnecessary. The funds used to enrich crony capitalists while building useless bird choppers is cheating the poor out of improved living standards to enrich cronies.

Derg
Reply to  Drake
June 30, 2022 7:36 pm

This ^

Derg
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:35 pm

With subsidies. Take your clown show elsewhere

Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 30, 2022 8:41 pm

The source here is not “the wind industry” but “Former Siemens Gamesa insider…””.

Disputin
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 2:17 am

They are not selling lots of turbines to free purchasers. They are selling to governments using other people’s money.

Even you should be able to see the difference.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:12 pm

Typical deflection, Nick:

1) Cost Effective — Yet financially and operationally subsidized.
2) Inexhaustible — Yet doesn’t work 60 to 70% of the time.
3) Clean — Except for mining of its components, despoiling natural environments and killing endangered birds, bats and insects.
4) Secure — See 2).
5) Not poisonous — CO2 is not a poison and see 3).

Do you have money invested in wind energy projects?

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 30, 2022 7:14 pm

No Eric – they are not doing well according to Nick’s chart as well.

The growth rate is pretty stable, which shows the new sales/orders – which is what the manufacturers are concerned about – are NOT increasing.

If you sell 100 units this year, and only have orders for 100 units next year, you are not growing your company.

Nick’s data actually supports the original argument. The industry is not growing.

ironicman
Reply to  Craig from Oz
June 30, 2022 11:30 pm

Its a hiatus.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Eric Worrall
July 1, 2022 7:00 am

And Wind Europe agrees.. In a press release on 14th June 2022 they said the following.

“In the first quarter of 2022 all five European wind turbine manufacturers were operating at a loss”

The press release was publicising a report about offshore wind farms and the imminent lack of sufficient and suitable ships to build all the offshore wind farms planned before 2030.

“The lack of specialised vessels for offshore wind operations is just one indication of the poor condition of Europe’s wind energy supply chain.”

“shortage of FIVs. WTIVs and CLVs poses risks for project execution worldwide”

(FIVs are Foundation Installation Vessels, WTIVs are Wind Turbine Installation Vessels and CLVs are cable laying vessels that connect the wind farms to the mainland.)

The report found there would be shortage of FIVs and WTIVs as early as 2024/5 and for CLVs the gap between supply and demand over the next eight years would be even greater.

https://windeurope.org/newsroom/news/europes-offshore-wind-expansion-will-depend-on-vessel-availability/

Reply to  Dave Andrews
July 1, 2022 7:21 am

A fuller quote:
The European wind industry is facing an unprecedented combination of overlapping challenges: the post-COVID rebound and its effect on the costs of materials and shipping, ongoing lockdowns in China and their effects on global supply chains and the war in Ukraine further reducing the availability of key raw materials. In the first quarter of 2022 all five European wind turbine manufacturers were operating at a loss.”

There is no lack of demand for their product. Just various current obstacles to supply.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:29 pm

Nick, you misunderstand the long-term financial problems facing the wind industry. Spain has proven to investors that fickle governments can and do change the rules. Warren Buffett and other investors know that without government financial and operational subsidies wind (and solar) cannot compete.

Having conducted and managed planning and financing studies and made investment decisions, I tell you that uncertainty kills enthusiasm for particular investments in long-term assets. The renewables investment markets are enabled and shaped by governmental decisionmaking. In times of crisis, such as today and for the foreseeable future, investors loose faith in governmental decisionmaking and the markets dependent on their consistency. This is just one of the reasons that governmentally planned economies consistently fail.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Dave Fair
July 1, 2022 4:24 pm

When I was in long range capital expenditure planning for a major telephone company we had the same world view that you mention. We *never* assumed taxes would go down in the future, not ad valorem taxes, not income taxes, nothing. Not even when the politicians said they were going to cut taxes and limit deficits.

Guess what? We *never* went wrong assuming that!

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 4:20 pm

There is no lack of demand for their product. Just various current obstacles to supply.”

A difference with no distinction. A company, in order to make a profit, has to have both the demand *AND* the supply. If you have nothing to sell your cash flow won’t support the business!

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 2, 2022 8:16 am

According to IRENA, the International Renewable Energy Agency,in their latest ‘Renewable Energy Highlights’ 2nd Aug 2021

Renewables equal 26% share of electricity generation “but public investment in renewable energy continued to decline in 2019, total investment was USD 17bn compared to USD 22bn and USD 34bn in 2018 and 2017 respectively”
So investment in renewables has halved over two years.

Last edited 1 month ago by Dave Andrews
Tim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 3:59 pm

Name-plate capacity means nothing when the wind doesn’t blow! As so many people are finding out. More will find out every year!

Reply to  Tim Gorman
June 30, 2022 4:27 pm

“Name-plate capacity means nothing”
It means everything to the turbine makers.

Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 4:45 pm

And Nothing to the end user

Dennis
Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 6:26 pm

Even the AEMO (Australia) rely only on the Capacity Factor.

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:04 pm

That’s true, because they can charge more for bigger turbines.
However it means nothing to those who are freezing in the dark because the wind isn’t blowing.

Derg
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:36 pm

For the subsidies.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 4:45 am

Only because they make more money by selling machines that only work part-time. Do you think an agricultural company making tractors would sell many if the tractors never met their horsepower claims? How about microwave ovens that only reach their power rating when popping popcorn? How about an EV that only reaches highway speeds with a tailwind? How about a sailboat that is “guaranteed” to make 20 knots?

When you buy a product the expectation is that it will meet its nameplate rating at least a majority of the time it is in use. Purchasing a product that only works at the whim of Mother Nature and then telling the users that they must also pay for it is a ridiculous action to take.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 5:42 am

I’ll repeat: “Name-plate capacity means nothing when the wind doesn’t blow!”

Why has no one yet filed a lawsuit against turbine makers for the turbine not meeting its name-plate capacity, assuming people purchase wind turbines based on name-plate capacity?

Just wait, it’s coming. I’m totally surprised TX hasn’t filed a lawsuit yet!

Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 1, 2022 7:13 am

assuming people purchase wind turbines based on name-plate capacity?”
Bad assumption. Turbine companies sell capacity. They don’t sell wind. Everyone knows that.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 9:00 am

Clown show.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:37 pm

And people buy turbines based on the average expected wind availability and the projected market price of anticipated generation. To the extent that governments’ decisionmaking affects the market price, investors’ estimates of the likelihood of governmental destruction of markets will affect the prices paid for turbines.

Your frivolous distractions become tedious, Nick.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  Tim Gorman
July 1, 2022 3:04 pm

I’m sure the makers don’t sell to anybody without tight contractual understanding of exactly what they are delivering – wind turbine equipment with a rated capacity. What the buyer does with it is the buyers business.

Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 4:17 pm

What are the units of capacity measurements in that table Nick?

Mr.
Reply to  Mr.
June 30, 2022 4:22 pm

Just to clarify, I opened the linked reference page, and did the old “Ctrl F” to search for any mentions of Gw HOURS.

(my searcher must be on the fritz – it came up with “No Results” for anything to do with Gw HOURS)

Reply to  Mr.
June 30, 2022 4:26 pm

MW

roaddog
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 10:08 pm

MythicalWatts.

ex-KaliforniaKook
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:14 pm

You missed his point – even though he used capital letters.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 4:50 am

You just confirmed your lack of knowledge about electric generation. I suppose you think that 0 MW for hours on end is perfectly fine!

Graemethecat
Reply to  Jim Gorman
July 2, 2022 12:39 pm

Nameplate capacity in MW is completely irrelevant. Consumers buy electricity in KWh (kilowatt-hours), or energy. They don’t buy it in KW or power. Stokes seems unaware of the distinction.

Last edited 1 month ago by Graemethecat
MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 4:18 pm

As usual, Nick can’t tell the difference between government mandates and an actual market.

Reply to  MarkW
June 30, 2022 5:08 pm

These are figures for MW actually installed. That is what counts for the turbine makers.

Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 5:29 pm

Yes, yes it does Nick.

But when several thousand Mrs Smiths plug in their electric frying pans to cook supper for several thousand Mr Smiths all relying on the same grid network, and the lights flicker and go dim, all those Mr & Mrs Smiths won’t give a flying duck what the turbine makers thought counted to them.

Especially when their smart meters tell them they now have 3 minutes 28 seconds of Powerwall battery capacity left to cook suppers. Maybe.

Streetcred
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 6:46 pm

Yep subsidy paid by installed name plate capacity … actual output not so much. They should be paid only for what they produce … LCOE would knock them out of the ballpark.

Reply to  Streetcred
June 30, 2022 7:08 pm

Where is subsidy paid by installed name plate capacity? Nowhere that I know of.

AS for LCOE, I listed that here. Renewables are way ahead – total LCOE comparable to just the fuel cost of gas and coal.

comment image

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 12:02 pm

Not that chart again? What is it with you acolytes and your eagerness to keep using disproven data.

One of the biggest subsidies is the government mandate that all the output of the turbines must be purchased, whether it is needed or not and at fixed prices well above wholesale.

Reply to  MarkW
July 1, 2022 7:01 pm

There is no such government mandate.

LdB
Reply to  MarkW
July 3, 2022 4:59 am

yeah that chart is pure bullshit and he doesn’t even try to deal with that.

LdB
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 3, 2022 4:58 am

You have been told about that chart it is bullshit

First it isn’t even a chart it’s a calculator and it has lots of sliders you can play with. They are at the top slide them all fully left or right and have a ball.

The bullshit chart you publish are just the values in the calculator at the default position and there is no claim that those are the correct settings for the current world economics.

For someone as nit-picking as you Nick that is a doosey.

Last edited 1 month ago by LdB
MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:05 pm

Either Nick didn’t understand my comment, or he’s pretending ignorance again.

Drake
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:13 pm

“turbine makers”, you mean crony oligarchs?

Dennis
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:14 pm

Only Capacity Factor delivers, in Australia under 30 per cent of installed Nameplate Capacity.

Reply to  Dennis
June 30, 2022 11:36 pm

People who by turbines do so knowing the CF. The turbine makers get paid by the nameplate MW.

Dennis
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:46 pm

And the buyers base their purchase decision on multiples of wind turbine units revenue potential which is based on Capacity Factor, the average output per unit, obviously.

Investors are only interested in the Return On Investment.

Last edited 1 month ago by Dennis
Mr.
Reply to  Dennis
July 1, 2022 7:25 am

Warren Buffett said:

“We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms.
That’s the only reason to build them.
They don’t make sense without the tax credit.” 

Reply to  Mr.
July 1, 2022 8:10 am

That was more than ten years ago. Tax credits have gone down a lot, and wind profitability up a lot, since then. In fact, the US tax credits he is talking about phased out last year.

Mr.
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 8:45 am

Insomnia Nick?

Here is an article you might find confronting, but interesting none the less.

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2022/06/26/chasing_utopian_energy_how_i_wasted_20_years_of_my_life_839185.html

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:41 pm

Who cares, Nick?

Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 4:44 pm

And factoring in “Capacity Factor” a 13.1% increase in capacity equates to a 4% increase in projected generation available from the source

Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 5:18 pm

No, it means a 13.1% increase (prima facie).

MarkW
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:06 pm

And again, Nick has to pretend he doesn’t understand the issue being discussed.

Reply to  MarkW
June 30, 2022 9:39 pm

No, just insisting on correct arithmetic.

Bryan A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 10:21 pm

No, just insisting on correct arithmetic.
No, just insisting on incorrect arithmetic.

Reply to  Bryan A
June 30, 2022 11:33 pm

OK, if I really have to spell it out:
if you have 742458MW nameplate, and it increases by 97272MW, the increase is 97272/742458*100=13.1%

And if you “factor in” a CF of 0.3, the increase is
(0.3*97272)/(0.3*742458)*100=13.1%

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:43 pm

Who cares, Nick?

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 5:58 pm

Nick,
Are your rates of growth gross, or net after deducting replacement of retired units? Geoff S

Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
June 30, 2022 6:04 pm

They are just differences between installed capacity, year on year. So any sales they make to replace retired units are a bonus.

Streetcred
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 6:47 pm

So in other words meaningless.

Drake
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:16 pm

And poor people still live in hovels while cronies make billions building unnecessary bird choppers. Gee, all those resources that could actually make peoples lives better totally wasted for the benefit of the ruling class..

Reply to  Drake
June 30, 2022 8:21 pm

Sounds like Marx. They have filled their pockets with the sweat of the workers.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:45 pm

No, they have filled their pockets with the largesse Leftist politicians have wrung from the sweat of the workers.

Streetcred
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 6:41 pm

Thanks to generous subsidy, there is no economic imperative.

We’re rapidly heading for the proverbial pile in Queensland as I now read that FF powerstations will be closing sooner than originally intended.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 7:09 pm

Thanks Nick.

Some very useful numbers that to be honest you probably shouldn’t have posted.

First let us look at the Rest of the World is about 16% of the total, and has been about that for the entire period displayed on the table.

Conclusion? The vast untapped market of the Rest of the World has remained untapped. It is the usual suspects just continuing to do their thing.

Next let us not look at the growth figure as a percentage of the existing. Let us instead look at the growth figure in comparison to the previous year. 13.1% DOWN from 14.3%

Remember the argument being put forward here is not about the total wind farms in existence, it is about the fact the ‘wind industry’ is meant to be a massive GROWTH industry. The discussion is not how many units have been sold overall, it is how many new orders are coming in and have they been steadily increasing over the year.

And… these figures so helpfully provided by Nick are clearly demonstrating that the industry is at best stable.

Conclusions – Not a growth industry.

thanks Nick. 🙂

Reply to  Craig from Oz
June 30, 2022 8:18 pm

“Some very useful numbers that to be honest you probably shouldn’t have posted.”
To be honest, I did. No-one else seems to.

“Remember the argument being put forward here is not about the total wind farms in existence, it is about the fact the ‘wind industry’ is meant to be a massive GROWTH industry”

No, the claim here is “The Wind Turbine Industry is Running Out of Money”. And in fact it is growing. The year-year MW differences from 2018-9 on are 60238, 92673, 97272. 2020 growth was a lot higher than 2019, but 2021 was higher still, although the % growth was slightly less (Covid?). 

meab
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:04 pm

What’s growing are losses. That’s why bird chopper companies are laying workers off. What happened is a lull in subsidies.

The installed capacity has absolutely NOTHING to do with the health of the industry. It’s profit that matters. If a company is losing money on each bird chopper it’s not doing well no matter how many of them it sells.

You should be able to understand that, Nick. After all, don’t you have a degree in Math(s)?

Reply to  meab
June 30, 2022 11:40 pm

You can’t do maths without numbers. Where are yours? You are just arm-waving.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 5:18 am

According to the USEER 2021 report wind employment went up 1.8% (2000 new jobs) at the end of 2021 and solar went down 8.1% (-25,000 jobs). Not a good report for renewables.

Dennis
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:10 pm

Installed Capacity also known as Nameplate Capacity, say, 100 MW

Capacity Factor rated by AEMO (Australia) 30-35 per cent, best 35 MW

Records maintained for AEMO data by a JoNova contributor revealed CP of wind turbines in Australia average under 30 per cent.

Last edited 1 month ago by Dennis
Graeme#4
Reply to  Dennis
July 1, 2022 3:29 pm

To be precise Dennis, 29%.

jeff corbin
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 9:14 am

California case in point. Since 2013 gigawatt out put has gone up an average of 3.5% a year. I don’t know about the dollars but I wouldn’t call it massive growth in actual output. Capacity growth has flatlined since2012. Could be the market saturated as the rolling 10 year expiration of tax subsidies put a big hit on growth. Who can love profit making industries that depend on tax payers for growth and while paying a premium for a crappy grid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_California Look at the capacity and output graphs. The verbiage is obfuscating.

Last edited 1 month ago by jeff corbin
jeff corbin
Reply to  jeff corbin
July 1, 2022 9:25 am

I wonder what percentage of Germany’s woodlands will be deforested this year has people try to stay warm without Russian NG depending on North Sea Windmills. They better start cutting down and splitting those trees now cause Germany prohibits burning wood with more than 25% moisture.

jeff corbin
Reply to  jeff corbin
July 1, 2022 9:26 am

Goose down will be very popular in Europe this year.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 1:48 pm

We’re losing money on each sale, but we’ll make up for it by increasing production volumes.

Redge
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 30, 2022 11:44 pm

One thing is obvious – they sure are buying it

Yes, Nick, they sure are buying it.

Andy Wilkins
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 5:07 am

I tell you what is obvious Nick: the companies who got involved in the wind scam have been losing money hand over fist. Just because your table shows govts have been spaffing taxpayers’ money up the wall on unicorn breath machines and rainbow catchers doesn’t mean companies are making any money

Siemens writes off €2.8bn as energy spin-off struggles

Siemens has written off an eye-watering €2.8bn (£2.4bn) after a sharp fall in the share price of its former energy division.
The German industrial giant said the drop in the value of Siemens Energy meant its 35pc holding in the spin-off was “significantly below the book value”.
The turbine maker, which split from Siemens in 2020, has lost about 40pc of its value on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange since the start of the year.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/07/01/ftse-100-markets-live-news-cost-living-inflation-russia-gas/

Now, do you want to keep insisting that unreliables are a cash bonanza?

Last edited 1 month ago by Andy Wilkins
Dave Andrews
Reply to  Andy Wilkins
July 1, 2022 7:11 am

Wind Europe have recently said ” In the first quarter of 2022 all five European wind turbine manufacturers were operating at a loss.”

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Dave Andrews
July 1, 2022 7:16 am

Bur Nick says it’s a success, so Wind Europe must be lying \sarc

Andy Wilkins
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 5:12 am

Bottom line Nick: companies getting involved in the wind scam are losing money hand over fist. Would you invest in this?

Siemens writes off €2.8bn as energy spin-off struggles

Siemens has written off an eye-watering €2.8bn (£2.4bn) after a sharp fall in the share price of its former energy division.

The German industrial giant said the drop in the value of Siemens Energy meant its 35pc holding in the spin-off was “significantly below the book value”.

The turbine maker, which split from Siemens in 2020, has lost about 40pc of its value on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange since the start of the year.

The decline in value has been driven largely by the struggles of its wind energy subsidiary Siemens Gamesa, which has struggled to turn a profit despite surging demand for renewable energy.

Reply to  Andy Wilkins
July 1, 2022 7:04 am

Would you invest in this?”

despite surging demand for renewable energy.”
Someone is going to. And they are. Who is investing in coal-fired stations?

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 1, 2022 7:14 am

The “surging demand” is from govts spending people’s taxes. That’s not sustainable.
Why would you invest in a company that’s losing so much money?

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 2, 2022 5:17 am

You just hit the nail in describing why there is an energy shortfall when wind and solar can’t produce. Think blackouts.

LdB
Reply to  Nick Stokes
July 3, 2022 8:53 am

Probably the East Coast of Australia when the lights go out or maybe the Eastern States politicians may wise up and actually reserve some gas. However more likely you lot will just stumble from disaster to disaster.

David Elstrom
June 30, 2022 3:53 pm

Oh no! Part of the Climate Change scam is goi h broke? Well…great!

Bryan A
Reply to  David Elstrom
June 30, 2022 4:37 pm

Oh Great…Just Fecking Great…How in the Sam Hill am I supposed to get the Subsidy Payments I need to be able to afford to Fill My Gas Tank now???

MarkW
June 30, 2022 4:07 pm

The problem is that it is a future that seems never to come.

Amazing how often that happens in the AGW/Renewable energy industries.

Mr.
June 30, 2022 4:13 pm

Even the UN was confronted by what is happening in the real word –

they ran a survey of 7 million people in 194 countries a few years ago, and it told the UN that “Action On Climate Change” rated LAST of 16 needs priorities people have in life.

(couldn’t find the link on the UN site again, I think it has been disappeared. But I’d saved a screenshot)

UN My world 7 million survey life priorities.jpg
Last edited 1 month ago by Mr.
RickWill
June 30, 2022 4:14 pm

Trying to make, transport and erect these things with the erratic power they produce is not possible. There has been an illusion of sustainability while coal cost no more than its cost of extraction and transport to a furnace. The price of coal now reflects all the artificial imposts on mining the resource and growing demand from manufacturing centres like China; an issue of restricted supply with unbridled demand.

Australia is planning to spend squillions on an intertwining web of high cost transmission lines for the sake of an illusion that the sun is always shining and wind always blowing somewhere. It is fantasy. If Australia can install just 10 times more the existing wind and solar capacity and 100X the existing battery capacity then say good bye to fuel costs. The fact that China will need a humungous amount of Australian coal to make all this stuff and keep doing on a replacement cycle averaging around 20 years does not get thought about.

Streetcred
Reply to  RickWill
June 30, 2022 6:49 pm

Australia has hardly recognised the substantial cost of urban electrical reticulation infrastructure upgrades required for all of those EVs. Already issues with localised brown-outs.

Last edited 1 month ago by Streetcred
Andy Pattullo
June 30, 2022 5:37 pm

No sympathy for those in the industry. They chose to take advantage of a demonstrably irrational and rigged government scam in the absence of a proven need for or delivered value from the wind industry. They were counting on sucking up taxpayer cash with unfair market protections for delivering essentially nothing but waste and environmental destruction. That they may now be financially stranded because of that decision is only a modest recompense for their collaboration with the conspiracy.

Dennis
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
June 30, 2022 6:51 pm

The Morrison Coalition Government of Australia was criticised by the renewable energy industry when in 2019 they announced the end of Renewable Energy Target and subsidies would be 2030.

However, only the State Governments can approve development applications and have primary responsibility for the supply of electricity in each state. They privatised the coal fired power stations and the transmission lines after a Federal Labor Government made provision for the RET with subsidies for incentives to the private sector.

Dennis
June 30, 2022 6:21 pm

This article contains very interesting business background on wind turbine energy supply, and why those businesses are likely to be one installation only ventures, when the removal and replacement time arrives the costs exceed the profits;

https://stopthesethings.com/2017/03/13/born-lucky-stars-align-perfectly-for-pms-son-with-mammoth-bet-on-wind-power-outfit-infigen/

Philip
June 30, 2022 6:31 pm

The businesses making a success of solar power are small companies who make kits for recharging our electronic gadgets. I have a highly portable 12,000mAh battery with solar set up I use for travel and hiking/camping that I now couldn’t do without. As for using solar and wind to replace fossil fuels simply costs too much money, takes up too much land, and on that scale is not reliable nor efficient, and the maintenance costs eat up the profits, if any without the subsidies provided by governments. Thank God the good Ol ‘reliable taxpayer is footing the bill. No corporate entity would suffer the expense for nil return over what? decades?

Dennis
Reply to  Philip
June 30, 2022 6:46 pm

US citizen and multi-billionaire investor Warren Buffet commented long ago that renewable energy was not worth investing in without specific government/taxpayer subsidies for profit.

Kit P
Reply to  Philip
June 30, 2022 8:39 pm

I have a highly portable 12,000mAh battery with solar set up I use for travel and hiking/camping that I now couldn’t do without.”

You need gadgets to go hiking?

I have a 6500 watt generator to run air conditioning and keep my beer cold when traveling.

The only pupose of solar is too tell people about it.

Dennis
June 30, 2022 6:54 pm

Transition to renewable energy is effectively economic vandalism, the perfect solution to a problem (climate hoax scare) that doesn’t exist, natural climate and weather prevails.

June 30, 2022 7:58 pm

So….my company has invented and developed grounding(earthing) technology that would save the wind turbine industry a ton of money and increase productivity very significantly. By adhering to many-decades-old technology for fault dissipation, they ensure problems with repair costs and operational uptime: Old traditional grounding is inert to steep-wave-front lightning events.

Their response so far:
“Not interested unless it’s free”.

Well….it’s never gonna be free, but if you’d like to have an actual shot at real return on investment, opening your minds, wind guys, would be very helpful to your cause.

We’ve installed our tech across the US at broadcast, E-911, healthcare, mission-critical, and household sites. We have a very deep range of proof of effectiveness, and economic benefits.

Maybe the cash-strapped wind turbine biz will wake up and realize how THEY can change their economics and protection schemes very desirably — and importantly.

.KcTaz
June 30, 2022 9:12 pm

One Year After Texas Blackouts, ERCOT Expects Massive Increase In Solar And Wind Capacity
https://bit.ly/3BwTesO
2/17/22

This is an excellent article Texas energy issues and the issues with wind and solar. There is discussion of the blackout and links to more information on that. Texas has done nothing to solve their energy problems except build more windmills and solar. They had best pray for AGW because they are ill-equipped to handle cold weather and, I wonder if they will even be able to continue providing the electricity for A/C in summer?
It’s difficult to believe even half-way intelligent people who lead governments do not see the energy disasters waiting to happen.

roaddog
June 30, 2022 9:58 pm

The supply available of taxpayer funding for subsidies in the US is (theoretically) unlimited. Just ask that brilliant economist AOC.

Dennis
Reply to  roaddog
June 30, 2022 11:50 pm

Tax revenue from private sector taxpayers also forced to pay for the rising cost of electricity the transition the so called renewable energy industry is causing.

Last edited 1 month ago by Dennis
griff
July 1, 2022 2:01 am

Not running out of money in the UK… more offshore wind in development than ever.

In Germany a new set of laws/policies should remove current issues delaying wind projects.
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-2022-renewables-and-energy-reforms

IanE
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 3:05 am

Yes, but what does one expect with the fat clown ‘in charge’?

Redge
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 5:08 am

Not running out of money in the UK… more offshore wind in development than ever.

Not running out of other people’s money…to compound the issue

Graemethecat
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 7:16 am

Griff must be the only person on Earth who considers Boris Johnson competent in his decision-making, apart from BJ himself.

I dread this coming Winter, when the consequences of this government’s folly will come to pass.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Graemethecat
July 1, 2022 2:06 pm

By “BJ” do you mean “A Lewinsky?”

Dave Andrews
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 7:27 am

Maybe not running out of money but certainly running out of ships to build all those planned offshore wind turbines.

Wind Europe 14th June 2022

” shortage of FIVs. WTIVs and CLVs poses risk for project execution word wide” and

“The lack of specialised vessels for offshore wind operations is just one indication of the poor condition of Europe’s wind energy supply chain”

(FIVs are Foundation Installation Vessels, WTIVs are Wind Turbine Installation Vessels and CLVs are Cable Laying Vessels that connect the turbines to the mainland)

They foresee a shortage of FIVS and WTIVs as early as2024/5 and say the gap between supply and demand for CLVs “will be even greater over the next eight years”

Last edited 1 month ago by Dave Andrews
Richard Page
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 9:35 am

More ‘proposed’ development – only 1 being built, though. Of those existing sites, most are barely breaking even – even with the government subsidies, they aren’t making much money as the electricity cost is being driven down. The whole thing is a gamble – the wind industry is gambling that they can survive the lean years until most or all fossil fuels have been removed and they can name their own prices, effectively putting the government over a barrel with collective bargaining.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
July 1, 2022 12:06 pm

Amazing how government believes that the money will never run out.

How any rational person can conclude that government bulldozing through local objections is evidence that wind mills are both successful and popular eludes me.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
LdB
Reply to  griff
July 3, 2022 5:06 am

Lots of wish and prayers for legislation that may never see the light of day in that beat up.

The positive from it was

Among the first measures, the federal parliament has already changed the Renewable Energy Act (EEG) and abolished the renewables surcharge that consumers pay on the power price. Planned for 2023, the government moved the end of the surcharge forward to 1 July 2022. While it was originally meant to lower electricity prices to incentivise consumers to switch to electric driving and heating systems, it is now mainly going to work as a relief measure for consumers suffering under high energy prices.

ozspeaksup
July 1, 2022 2:12 am

and just HOW? do they propose to make turbines etc in EU when they have stuffed up their major generation means to keep factories running? yeah they kickstart some of the closed coal plants but until they pull their idiot heads in over Russia gas n oil, theyll be paying hugely just to keep basic amenities functional. and mining machinery uses fuel theyre looking a tad bit short of;-))

Michael ElliottMichael Elliott
Reply to  ozspeaksup
July 1, 2022 5:28 am

We hear a lot about how battery storage will solve the problem with variable power outputs from renewables.

But what is not mentioned is the fact that batteries a both a low voltage device, & that it’s direct current D.C.

So to be able to be fed into the Grid system it has to first be converted to Alternating Current A.C. then transformed from low voltage to the Grids high voltage., about 230,000. Volts AC.

All this takes a lot of energy. Plus as windmills are usually a very long way from the Urban centres where the energy is needed requires long & costly transmission lines.

There is a loss of energy in moving power long distances.

As the batteries usually only have capacity for about 8 minutes, it’s not a practicable way to power a Grid.

It’s expensive, thus needing taxpayers subsides to survive..

No doubt we will be told that to Save the Planet, we must make sacrifices.

So let’s start with our Politicians.
Perhaps a 50 % cut in their salaries may cause them to seriously consider the facts of the so called “Climate Emergency”.

Michael VK5ELL

Gordon A. Dressler
July 1, 2022 6:52 am

I can do the above article’s headline one better:

Fact: The Wind Turbine Industry is Running Out of Other People’s Money

observa
July 1, 2022 12:14 pm

You can see this process of addressing other priorities ahead of green energy happening right now in California. California is planning to send people cash payments to help with the high cost of living.

Not to worry there’s plenty more Green taxes to be had for doling out-
California approves lithium tax despite industry’s warnings (msn.com)
They just have to look around at BIG Gummint everywhere if they’re going to lose revenue from fossil fuels and ICEs-
Victoria’s controversial EV road user tax to increase from July 1 (thedriven.io)
Saving the planet takes a lot of admin grants and slushfunding.

rhs
July 1, 2022 6:59 pm

A bit late to the comments but still makes one wonder how often this happens:
https://kdvr.com/news/local/wind-tower-falls-over-in-logan-county-colorado/amp/

Peter Barrett
July 2, 2022 1:21 pm

Oh dear,
what a shame,
never mind.

%d bloggers like this: