Wind Woes in Europe

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

Wind energy suffers tough year in Europe with 12 nations failing to install a single turbine

I don't see the drama since space is finite and you can't very well install turbine after turbine until you run out of land but okay, it's horrible.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Do Schrödinger's Wind Turbines exist?

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

Wind energy suffers tough year in Europe with 12 nations failing to install a single turbine

I don't see the drama since space is finite and you can't very well install turbine after turbine until you run out of land but okay, it's horrible.

Well on their way to 100%!!

[ronwagn + 6,290]

14 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Well on their way to 100%!!

Whatever happened to wave power? Too much maintenance perhaps?

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

36 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Whatever happened to wave power? Too much maintenance perhaps?

Well, the wave was experimented with in the NFL and world soccer with limited success and sometimes even a failure of the support structures, which proved dangerous to people, even fatal.   

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

4 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Whatever happened to wave power? Too much maintenance perhaps?

technology is not there yet. There are several test sites, but estimates I hear is that they need at least 5 - 10 more years before the tech is mature. 

[NickW + 2,714]

On 2/24/2019 at 8:56 AM, Marina Schwarz said:

Wind energy suffers tough year in Europe with 12 nations failing to install a single turbine

I don't see the drama since space is finite and you can't very well install turbine after turbine until you run out of land but okay, it's horrible.

Most of the future development will be offshore

Round 3 in the UK has 26GW earmarked for development. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom#Round_3

Germany has plans in place to install 26 GW by 2030 (offshore)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany

The plan aims to decrease Germany's dependence on energy derived from coal and nuclear power plants.^[12] The German government wants to see 7.6 GW installed by 2020 and as much as 26 GW by 2030

France, Denmark, Spain, Ireland, Sweden, The Baltic states, Finland, the Benelux countries all have plenty of shallow seas for fixed offshore installations

Floating turbines have now been developed and are being commercalised. 

 

[markslawson + 1,042]

18 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Whatever happened to wave power? Too much maintenance perhaps?

This is another green power proposal that sounds good in theory but has proved immensely difficult to implement. My understanding of this is that the installations have to be huge to get any significant power - not sure why - and have to be made storm proof. The same objection might apply to putting wind turbines out in the North Atlantic but the yield for thos things is higher.  

[markslawson + 1,042]

25 minutes ago, NickW said:

Most of the future development will be offshore

Round 3 in the UK has 26GW earmarked for development. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom#Round_3

Germany has plans in place to install 26 GW by 2030 (offshore)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany

The plan aims to decrease Germany's dependence on energy derived from coal and nuclear power plants.^[12] The German government wants to see 7.6 GW installed by 2020 and as much as 26 GW by 2030

While this is all true to some extent the vital bit missing is that the installation listed are too small to make much difference in the short term. Remember that effective capacity for wind is only one third or so of its installed capacity. Also bear in mind that those countries have been building turbines for years and so far wind supplies about 14 per cent of energy in Europe (see article cited in lead post). Sure Germany wants to reduce its dependence on coal but all that's done is put the people who run the grid in a bind. They can't shut down the brown coal plants that the country mainly uses whenever the wind decides to blow so they have to dump electricity on Poland and the Czech republic. Then they claim they are mainly exporting the brown coal power and using the wind power in Germany. The craze for wind energy is having some truly absurd results. 

[NickW + 2,714]

16 minutes ago, markslawson said:

While this is all true to some extent the vital bit missing is that the installation listed are too small to make much difference in the short term. Remember that effective capacity for wind is only one third or so of its installed capacity. Also bear in mind that those countries have been building turbines for years and so far wind supplies about 14 per cent of energy in Europe (see article cited in lead post). Sure Germany wants to reduce its dependence on coal but all that's done is put the people who run the grid in a bind. They can't shut down the brown coal plants that the country mainly uses whenever the wind decides to blow so they have to dump electricity on Poland and the Czech republic. Then they claim they are mainly exporting the brown coal power and using the wind power in Germany. The craze for wind energy is having some truly absurd results. 

Offshore capacity factors are normally >40%. Probably nearer 50% for the >8MW models that are now being installed. 

Assuming a 40% capacity factor thats 182 TWH from UK and German waters alone. 

NOt sure if the Polish / Czech power dumping is a problem now. I think it happened when Germany didn't have enough north - south interconnectors. I think that has been resolved. 

 

[Steve Pipkin + 7]

Meanwhile in Texas...   I was surprised to read in the Houston Chronicle that wind provided over 15% of the Texas’ electricity in 2017. Land is cheap in the panhandle. Major markets are only a few hundred miles away. Transmission lines are getting to close to capacity though as supply has increased dramatically. Most planned installations are going to wind pockets close to the gulf coast to supply the burgeoning refinery industry. Go figure.

Don’t look for offshore anytime soon as there are plenty of cheaper onshore sites available.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

Fact: Most of Europe is merely Ok at best for wind to POOR.  UK/Ireland is an exception along with parts of Denmark.  The rest will always have mediocre/poor capacity factor.  It is even worse during the summer in Europe.  This is partially balanced by they get... "some" sun in Europe in the summer at least.  They are running out of Coal fast. 

Here: https://globalwindatlas.info/area/United States of America

Scroll over to Europe. Its ok

1) Set to 100m hub height(no one is there yet)

2) turn on surface roughness index

Notice how almost all of humanity lives nowhere near areas able to generate wind energy. 

Different topic:

Capacity factor in USA averages just over 40%

CF in Europe averages just over 32%

CF in China averages just over 20%

Now, how much of that power is actually USED instead of wasted(coal plants still burning) is anyone guess really. 

Areas of the world able to do wind energy: USA, Australia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, UK, Western Sahara, and Argentina.  Everyone else is SCREWED.  Oh, yea, the giant population of Greenland will be doing ok...

It comes down to energy storage. 100%

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

On 2/25/2019 at 3:49 PM, NickW said:

Offshore capacity factors are normally >40%. Probably nearer 50% for the >8MW models that are now being installed. 

Assuming a 40% capacity factor thats 182 TWH from UK and German waters alone. 

NOt sure if the Polish / Czech power dumping is a problem now. I think it happened when Germany didn't have enough north - south interconnectors. I think that has been resolved. 

 

It is over 50% CF, offshore in Scottland.  It is being expanded asap.  Texas and Iowa also are averaging right around 50% CF for their newer installation setups.  Both are over 40%.  So far this is the best in the world.  Till we can tap into Greenland and Antarctica...

Of course CF in wind energy means next to nothing as one can easily argue that they should just add additional generators for when the wind blows super hard so they do not have to shut down which would allow them to operate over a greater portion of the year, but would "decrease" their CF if you go by nameplate.  What should be the ratio should be a nominal CF rating and peak.  Because they claim that if the blades are spinning and generating 1kW, then this counts as producing power and since CF also means ratio of time producing power/year.....  In reality this is a "nice" lie. 

Hub height mattes more than anything else.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

On 2/25/2019 at 6:49 PM, NickW said:

Offshore capacity factors are normally >40%. Probably nearer 50% for the >8MW models that are now being installed. 

Assuming a 40% capacity factor thats 182 TWH from UK and German waters alone. 

NOt sure if the Polish / Czech power dumping is a problem now. I think it happened when Germany didn't have enough north - south interconnectors. I think that has been resolved. 

 

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/turbines/haliade-x-offshore-turbine

GE is claiming they can get their CE up to 63% with their 12 Mw turbine.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

1 hour ago, Meredith Poor said:

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/turbines/haliade-x-offshore-turbine

GE is claiming they can get their CE up to 63% with their 12 Mw turbine.

Sure, if you can find a perfect location.  Shallow seas around the UK are a perfect place.  So are the Great lakes here in the USA.  EDIT: The problem is the rest of the world where the vast majority of humanity lives, works, mines, manufactures goods.

Edited February 27, 2019 by Wastral
Hit click too soon like an idiot

[Boat + 1,315]

On 2/25/2019 at 10:18 PM, Steve Pipkin said:

Meanwhile in Texas...   I was surprised to read in the Houston Chronicle that wind provided over 15% of the Texas’ electricity in 2017. Land is cheap in the panhandle. Major markets are only a few hundred miles away. Transmission lines are getting to close to capacity though as supply has increased dramatically. Most planned installations are going to wind pockets close to the gulf coast to supply the burgeoning refinery industry. Go figure.

Don’t look for offshore anytime soon as there are plenty of cheaper onshore sites available.

I read somewhere that Texas will be at 20% renewable by the end of 2019.

 

[entertenter + 24]

In Estonia, there are strange problems why turbines installation has become difficult. One problem is that people think that wind turbines are dangerous, they are polluting their views and generating infrasonic waves they could not actually hear. Not in my backyard attitude.
Other problem is with military radars. New installations interfere with radar signals. Either radars should be relocated or new installations stopped. It is easier to stop new installation. So far wind turbines owners have received some subsidy for building these farms, but that has now stopped. So suddenly many obstacles appeared. Public opinion went from positive to negative and it became less profitable.

[NickW + 2,714]

2 hours ago, entertenter said:

In Estonia, there are strange problems why turbines installation has become difficult. One problem is that people think that wind turbines are dangerous, they are polluting their views and generating infrasonic waves they could not actually hear. Not in my backyard attitude.
Other problem is with military radars. New installations interfere with radar signals. Either radars should be relocated or new installations stopped. It is easier to stop new installation. So far wind turbines owners have received some subsidy for building these farms, but that has now stopped. So suddenly many obstacles appeared. Public opinion went from positive to negative and it became less profitable.

Living by the sea is lethal - the infrasound from breaking waves is 100-1000x that of a wind turbine

[NickW + 2,714]

11 hours ago, Wastral said:

It is over 50% CF, offshore in Scottland.  It is being expanded asap.  Texas and Iowa also are averaging right around 50% CF for their newer installation setups.  Both are over 40%.  So far this is the best in the world.  Till we can tap into Greenland and Antarctica...

Of course CF in wind energy means next to nothing as one can easily argue that they should just add additional generators for when the wind blows super hard so they do not have to shut down which would allow them to operate over a greater portion of the year, but would "decrease" their CF if you go by nameplate.  What should be the ratio should be a nominal CF rating and peak.  Because they claim that if the blades are spinning and generating 1kW, then this counts as producing power and since CF also means ratio of time producing power/year.....  In reality this is a "nice" lie. 

Hub height mattes more than anything else.

That is not how capacity factor is calculated.

For a 1MW turbine at 100% capacity factor this would mean 8760 MWH of output per year. If for 2018 that turbine produces 4380 MWH then the capacity factor is 50%

This can be scaled up to farms, groups of farms or an entire countries output from its collective fleet.It can also be used to compare year to year viability. Its also a measure of the reliability of the turbine as downtime equals lower CF.

You can look at other parameters such as availability factors - the percentage of time the turbine is available to generate or the operational  time which is the percentage of time the turbine is operating. This is often confused with capacity factor and its incorrectly assumed that a CF of 33% means the turbine is not operating for 67% of the time.

 

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

7 hours ago, NickW said:

That is not how capacity factor is calculated. SNIP

I have to wonder if you even bothered to read what I wrote... Why reply?

Do you enjoy taking the last sentence of posts and ignoring everything else? 

[NickW + 2,714]

29 minutes ago, Wastral said:

I have to wonder if you even bothered to read what I wrote... Why reply?

Do you enjoy taking the last sentence of posts and ignoring everything else? 

I did. I just thought it would be helpful to other readers to apply some syntax and actually explain clearly what capacity factor is as opposed to what its often thought to be.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 2/27/2019 at 5:01 AM, NickW said:

That is not how capacity factor is calculated.

For a 1MW turbine at 100% capacity factor this would mean 8760 MWH of output per year. If for 2018 that turbine produces 4380 MWH then the capacity factor is 50%

This can be scaled up to farms, groups of farms or an entire countries output from its collective fleet.It can also be used to compare year to year viability. Its also a measure of the reliability of the turbine as downtime equals lower CF.

You can look at other parameters such as availability factors - the percentage of time the turbine is available to generate or the operational  time which is the percentage of time the turbine is operating. This is often confused with capacity factor and its incorrectly assumed that a CF of 33% means the turbine is not operating for 67% of the time.

 

 

Have Middle Eastern counties who need fresh water tried using excess wind turbine or solar electricity in desalination. That would be as valuable as having a storage battery.

[NickW + 2,714]

On 3/3/2019 at 4:20 AM, ronwagn said:

Have Middle Eastern counties who need fresh water tried using excess wind turbine or solar electricity in desalination. That would be as valuable as having a storage battery.

Desal is one of the most practical ways of demand managing intermittent renewables in arid climates. 

The ME region for decades have been using surplus off peak power to run reverse Os desal so it stands to reason that if renewables are deployed on a large scale desal can be used to demand balance the grid. 

Wind resources are poor across the Gulf region except NW Saudi.

The Desal plant in Perth (OZ) is linked to a wind farm north of Perth and adjusts its output according to availability of wind. 

[Oil_Engineer + 86]

On 2/25/2019 at 2:47 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

technology is not there yet. There are several test sites, but estimates I hear is that they need at least 5 - 10 more years before the tech is mature. 

It makes sense.  Anything that has to work in or on the ocean needs twice as long and twice as much money to develop.