Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
So can we stop messing about with Windmills now?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by KerrAvon. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Why? many people have to live near unsightly power stations and put up with the side effects of the power industry. Why should a few people living in sparsely populated areas not have to put up with the inconvenience of seeing a wind farm. They don't produce nuclear waste, they don't produce heated water discharges, they don't suck in and kill millions of fish, they don't render areas of land unuseable for centuries. They pay back the construction costs in about a year. They can be removed easily, cheaply and safey. We should have more of them.
Yeah sure as long as you don't mind letting the Japanese charge you whatever they like for electricity in a few years time
You good with that?
The whole point is to have a diverse energy supply so that no one source has a stranglehold over the market. We've become over reliant on Gas in recent years giving the (mostly Russians) almost a strangle hold on our energy supply
Swapping the Russians for the Japanese would be rather dumb
You good with that?
The whole point is to have a diverse energy supply so that no one source has a stranglehold over the market. We've become over reliant on Gas in recent years giving the (mostly Russians) almost a strangle hold on our energy supply
Swapping the Russians for the Japanese would be rather dumb
I was listening to the energy secretary , Ed Davey , being interviewed by John Humphrys , on the today programme this morning .
It was astonishing, that he stated that he had not entered into any discussion with Hitachi and did not have any idea as to what price they would be likely to be charging the UK consumer , for providingh the energy
It was astonishing, that he stated that he had not entered into any discussion with Hitachi and did not have any idea as to what price they would be likely to be charging the UK consumer , for providingh the energy
Whilst in the construction phase, as stated within
http://
The industry 'cost metric' for windfarms is currently £800K per rated MW. The highest value item in a windfarm development is the turbine (comprising nacelle, turbine blades and towers) which are typically estimated to account for up to 65-70% of the overall development cost.
However,as noted by
http://
Wind turbines under 100 kilowatts cost roughly $3,000 to $5,000 per kilowatt of capacity. That means a 10 kilowatt machine (the size needed to power an average home) might cost $35,000-$50,000.
And in the decommisiong phase, as noted by
http://
The other study estimated demo costs of $97K/turbine vs. $70K/turbine by Beech Ridge. The bottom line is that using the demolition costs from the other wind turbine project decommissioning study would translate to a Beech Ridge demo cost of $12.03 million, i.e., $3.35 million more the applicant’s $8.68 million estimate. (Note: In another very recent project I have just reviewed, the decommissioning costs were again severely underestimated by more than 50% by not taking into account recent crane rental rates, extremely low earth moving costs, and assuming high productivity rates (6 turbines/wk).)
As seen, there are costs involved with all construction, and electricity generation, it's just the choices made against the cost benfits which need addressing, but as the majority of UK based actually generate for under 20% of the time, then repayment of the costs inherent with wind farms will take longer than the assertion above, i.e They pay back the construction costs in about a year..
http://
A modern wind turbines will be designed to work for 120 000 hours throughout their estimated life-span of 20 years. This would be the turbine operating for approximately 66% of the time for two decades.
http://
The industry 'cost metric' for windfarms is currently £800K per rated MW. The highest value item in a windfarm development is the turbine (comprising nacelle, turbine blades and towers) which are typically estimated to account for up to 65-70% of the overall development cost.
However,as noted by
http://
Wind turbines under 100 kilowatts cost roughly $3,000 to $5,000 per kilowatt of capacity. That means a 10 kilowatt machine (the size needed to power an average home) might cost $35,000-$50,000.
And in the decommisiong phase, as noted by
http://
The other study estimated demo costs of $97K/turbine vs. $70K/turbine by Beech Ridge. The bottom line is that using the demolition costs from the other wind turbine project decommissioning study would translate to a Beech Ridge demo cost of $12.03 million, i.e., $3.35 million more the applicant’s $8.68 million estimate. (Note: In another very recent project I have just reviewed, the decommissioning costs were again severely underestimated by more than 50% by not taking into account recent crane rental rates, extremely low earth moving costs, and assuming high productivity rates (6 turbines/wk).)
As seen, there are costs involved with all construction, and electricity generation, it's just the choices made against the cost benfits which need addressing, but as the majority of UK based actually generate for under 20% of the time, then repayment of the costs inherent with wind farms will take longer than the assertion above, i.e They pay back the construction costs in about a year..
http://
A modern wind turbines will be designed to work for 120 000 hours throughout their estimated life-span of 20 years. This would be the turbine operating for approximately 66% of the time for two decades.
In short, the large offshore ones can pay for themselves and make a reasonable return, both financially and environmentally.
Onshore large ones are at best marginal economically but from a total CO2 life cycle analysis, a relative disaster. The little turbines that spin on houses and offices are a compete life cycle disaster and only delude the owner into feeling good in that they are reversing their electric meter into the grid.
The way forward, continue to explore wave and tidal and see if we can come down from $4k per MW towards $1k - and also highly efficient solar - and geothermal - however, renewables are not going to generate all the tricity we need, so a balance of ultra-efficient gas gen and nuclear is needed. If that is Japanese owned and managed, that is debatable....
Onshore large ones are at best marginal economically but from a total CO2 life cycle analysis, a relative disaster. The little turbines that spin on houses and offices are a compete life cycle disaster and only delude the owner into feeling good in that they are reversing their electric meter into the grid.
The way forward, continue to explore wave and tidal and see if we can come down from $4k per MW towards $1k - and also highly efficient solar - and geothermal - however, renewables are not going to generate all the tricity we need, so a balance of ultra-efficient gas gen and nuclear is needed. If that is Japanese owned and managed, that is debatable....
I do wish someone would ask the Government the very specific question about whether the taxpayer will pick up any of the decommissioning costs
No nuclear power plant has been built for 20 years because sucessive governments have refused to subsidise this
My nose for weasel words was twitching today
I find it suspicious that this impasse has just been broken
I think they were saying that the plants would not receive public subsidy
That is *building* them?
Are we going to get suffed with the decommissioning costs again?
No nuclear power plant has been built for 20 years because sucessive governments have refused to subsidise this
My nose for weasel words was twitching today
I find it suspicious that this impasse has just been broken
I think they were saying that the plants would not receive public subsidy
That is *building* them?
Are we going to get suffed with the decommissioning costs again?
The soaring cost of household energy bills has far more to do with the wholesale price of fossil fuels such as gas ( 40% in 2011 alone) than the contribution toward low carbon initiatives and green fuel sources ( £110 over the next decade)
http://
http://
Any UK energy policy has to offer a mix of energy sources to spread the risk of relying too heavily on any one source. In my view, Nuclear energy should play a significant part in that mix, as should renewable resources, such as solar, tidal and wind.
Offshore wind farms should be a no-brainer given our coastline. On-shore wind farms should play a part too, although they are less efficient. I personally have no issue with wind farms. I think they are aesthetically quite pleasing. :)
http://
http://
Any UK energy policy has to offer a mix of energy sources to spread the risk of relying too heavily on any one source. In my view, Nuclear energy should play a significant part in that mix, as should renewable resources, such as solar, tidal and wind.
Offshore wind farms should be a no-brainer given our coastline. On-shore wind farms should play a part too, although they are less efficient. I personally have no issue with wind farms. I think they are aesthetically quite pleasing. :)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.