Renewable Energy: Wind farms don't work.

61 to 90 of 151

- CommentAuthorChris Wardle
- CommentTimeSep 11th 2007
Electric cars look promising. They seem to be coming on in leaps and bounds in the last year or so. Does anyone know if there are any resource constraints that impact on the manufacture of the batteries? I understand lithium hydride batteries are the latest thing giving excellent range and performance. Can the materials involved be recovered and re-used?

Isn't it likely that the electric cars will mostly be recharged overnight on Economy 7? That seems the logical time to do it. This would help to smooth grid demand out and make better use of our existing power stations but I don't see how it helps with the wind power variability question.

Unless perhaps if all parking spaces had a power point to plug in at then the cars could be programmed to take a charge when there was a surge of power onto the grid due to windy or sunny weather? Same could be done with batteries in homes.

If the electric car breaks through into the market, I wonder what the response from Government will be as they see there fuel duty take edding away as people fill up on un-taxed electricity? Maybe this will be the catalyst for TEQs or a carbon tax on all hydrocarbon fuels whereever they are used in the economy?
- CommentAuthorbiffvernon
- CommentTimeSep 11th 2007
http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/2883#more is an article by Mark Yates that tells a great deal about electric cars, batteries and grid balancing.
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 11th 2007
Yes I agree having a large flexible power load is what is required to allow higher peneration of wind farms, a fleet of electric cars (plug in hydrids etc) which will be plugged in most of the time will allow network operators to balance the grid effectively. Smart metered homes and business allow further control of load to match generation.

If there is still cheap power to be bought I am sure schemes will turn up to utilise it, like Tom's hydrogen plant!
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 11th 2007 edited
Posted By: Chris Wardleif all parking spaces had a power point to plug in at then the cars could be programmed to take a charge when there was a surge of power onto the grid due to windy or sunny weather
Posted By: Jeff Norton (NZ)fleet of electric cars (plug in hydrids etc) which will be plugged in most of the time will allow network operators to balance the grid effectively. Smart metered homes and business allow further control of load to match generation
How would this smart metering work? How could the instantaneous national generation/load balance be signalled continually to millions of individual plug-in points, and cause them to regulate their output accordingly? The proposal (as in Biff's link) to charge the cars at night doesn't answer the minute-to-minute generation variation problem that this thread is discussing.
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
Hi Tom,

Network opertors can manipulate loads, like ripple controlled hot water cylinders. They send signals down the power lines to turn loads on and off at will. A couple of examples:

1) Smart meters allow for multi channel control of a wide range of loads (and potentially generation) by multi frequency signals, Channel 1 car charging, C2 storage heating, C3 HWC, C4 food freezers C5 office air conditioners C6 lighting etc , the networks will then have a range of loading options to connect or drop out according to generation capabilities (or by how much the wind is blowing).

2) Using your hydrogen plant as an example, if the plant was connected to grid but only cost effective to make hydrogen at 2p/kwh (when there is plenty of excess power around) then a smart meter would switch plant on at the correct spot rate which would again balance out excess generation.

Smart metering is part of the answer to effective use of existing power supplys, but no one can make money out of it!
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_meter
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007 edited
Yep, I get that - thanks.
- CommentAuthorted
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
A simple version of this is already possible.

The frequency of the mains alters as a result of the load on the total system - it's allowed to fluctuate between 49.5 and 50.5 Hz in the UK; i.e. 50Hz plus or minus 1%. The frequency drops when the system is heavily loaded. The electronics to monitor this is trivial and can be built into a simple plug. In fact I have one here - it's called a PowerMonitor.

We could all have fridges and freezers fitted with plugs that only allowed power to the appliance when the frequency was above 50.0Hz, for example. (OK as long as we knew that there would be x hours a day when this was so.) When demand was high and the frequency dropped below this figure these would all power off and the demand would drop creating a self-regulating system.

You can even monitor it from your PC. Have a look here: http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Data/Realtime/Frequency/Freq60.htm

The government also recently published a paper supporting further research on Dynamic Demand - http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file41011.pdf
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
So, in the light of all this, referring to the thread's title, Wind farms DO work, or could quite readily be allowed to supply a higher %age of total generating capacity without unbalancing the system. And for Wind farms, read renewable sources in general - if new renewable generating capacity was built hand-in-glove with load-balancing schemes like pumped storage (very limited by suitable sites), hydrogen electrolysis, introduction of smart metering, growth of electric car charging load - and the brilliant one - using your electric car's battery pack (while sitting on the driveway on-charge) to actually provide power to the house at moments of demand-balancing power cut.
- CommentAuthorbiffvernon
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
Yep, you've got it :)
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
So with that scenario, who says that only the slowing of economic growth will do the trick? It all sounds very growthful to me, featuring less fuel-burning, less CO2, maybe even nett sequestration, less primary resource-use because more recycling, and certainly less pollution. Please - sign me up for another 50yrs!
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
Just like green house building the energy industry should focus in the energy load side of the equation!
- CommentAuthorChris Wardle
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
I'd be encouraged too Tom, if anyone in power was implementing or even talking about any of this. If we could wind the clock back 20 years and implement this revolution back then, we would now be ready for Peak Oil and be in a position to really tackle emissions.

Variable demand metering (which sounds an excellent idea and I fully support) still doesn't change the fact that we need to get from 25% low carbon electricity (including renewables, nuclear and the interconnector from France which is mostly nuclear) to perhaps 90% by 2050 with little chance of overall demand reduction as electric cars take up the slack that our efficiencies in other areas leave. Drop nuclear and the starting point is 3% plus the rate of increase will be reduced (you need to build about 6000 wind turbines to provide the same generation as the nuclear plant they are building in Finland - try getting planning permission for a dozen...).

We are a victim of our own political system. No-one will vote for the change and the investment necessary until the crisis is upon us. No politician will give us the real truth because they know the voters won't like the logical consequences of what they say and will vote for the other guy who is offering more entitlements etc. Look at the main parties battle to make the money pit which is the NHS the number priority for their administrations. We are still stuck in the politics of the last century unfortunately.
- CommentAuthorBluemoon
- CommentTimeSep 12th 2007
Having driven today along a road having a house with a (stationary) wind turbine outside, it seems that the best location for wind generation is also the worst location for human settlement.
- CommentAuthorfuncrusher
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
Sorry to crush all your fun, but all these gismos will only have a marginal effect. people get more and more desperate when a crisis mounts and clutch at straws. The underlying crisis is unaltered and the size of the crisis and the inadequacy of windfarms is summarised as follows;
1 world population expands 2. industrialisation expands eg china 3. energy consumption per capita increases without limit in industrialised developed countries. 4 electricity consumption whilst expending itself is nevertheless a declining proportion of emissions in developed countries 5 . Wind power cannot even curtail growth in electricity emissions, for reasons fully stated earlier.

Windpower is a gross mis-direction of priorities.
- CommentAuthorfuncrusher
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
typo correction: 'expending' = 'expanding'
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
Posted By: funcrusher3. energy consumption per capita increases without limit in industrialised developed countries
So what are we doing on this forum, if not working to disprove that old bit of conventional wisdom? There's massive potential for a) demand reduction in existing activities, b) designing new activities to use only a fraction of hitherto. For the time being, humans are learning how to do more with less; in the longer term, once it's safe to do so again, humans will resume their historic pattern of harnessing more and more energy. e.g. inconceivable amounts for interstellar travel.
- CommentAuthorfuncrusher
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
fostertom: unfortunately in the real world if an item becomes cheaper in real terms (ie more economically efficient) it does not lead people to reduce their income and hence their total demand for goods and services. If cars get cheaper (as they have done in real (affordable)terms continuously since 1900), people don't reduce their income, they simply either buy more cars or spend their excess income in other ways. Increased energy efficiency is highly desirable, but it probably won't lead to reduced consumption overall, because 'savings' will be diverted elsewhere. Only higher prices for energy will reduce demand for it. British people got luxurious lives by cutting down all their forests, killing all the their large wildlife, digging up coal and burning it, tipping all their waste into rivers etc etc. Small wonder than N billion poor people in the world are hell bent on the same course of action. They do not wish to live in palm thatched squalor being eaten by parasites, and dying at 35 etc. These nations want industrialisation, prosperity and health NOW - and that requires a vast upsurge of electricity generation. EG china is building a new coal-fired power station every week, and plans to do this for the next 10 years.

The only way you are going to avert disaster is by convincong these nations that they can be supplied with nuclear power through international cooperation and supervision.
A handful of wind turbines erected in the developed world are irelevant - as are the smug musings of people like us on multifoil and hemp plaster.
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
Who's talking about things getting cheaper? Energy will get extremely expensive, so will many other commodities, which will drive the process we're beginning to get better at i.e. not just make do with less, but do more good things with less material, less energy, more recycling, more awareness about pollution. We'll be forced to live much more lightly on the earth, with more sophistication, and that will add up to much more economic activity (which equals opportunity for, or possibility of, change). I say 'economic activity' rather than 'economic growth' because the latter has come to mean 'consumption of resources, pollution, shopping fever'. Sure, in the developing world, economic growth probably will continue to mean all that, but they're good at learning fast. Meanwhile, let's be clear that it's possible to do it radically better, and it looks to me that economic necessity is going to push that along nicely, in the west.
- CommentAuthorChris Wardle
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
I recently read "Affluenza" which isn't a bad read. They wrote in one chapter about a battle that went on in America from early last century up until the 1970s, between those who wanted to use the fruits of industrialisation to allow more time for leisure and those who wanted to create higher levels of material wealth. Ultimately, with the election of Reagan in the 1980's, the latter group got the upper hand and here we are today with our hollowed out, miserable, consumer "societies" where the pursuit of material possessions is the number one priority of most of the population and we work just as long hours as we did 100 years ago. I don't think it is any coincidence that the US broke the link between the dollar and gold in 1971 allowing for unlimited credit creation to fuel a boom in material consumption.

If there is any hope then it rests in a realisation that we made the wrong choice and that we could now be enjoying a life of reasonable prosperity for 2 or 3 days work a week, spending our free time in more worthwhile pursuits, like spending time with our kids and getting back in touch with nature. Otherwise, as Funcrusher says, we will find other uses for our energy efficiencies. Problem is, how do you pay for a house without two full time incomes these days? We are trapped by the system we have created.
- CommentAuthorfuncrusher
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
Claims have been made on this site that multiplacation of windfarms negates the intermittency of wind through geographical averaging. That is emphatically refuted by pro-windfarm consulting engineers Garrad Hassan & partners of Scotland in a 138 page report commissioned by the irish government in 2003. Amongst myriad conclusions, it notes that there is a 94% correlation in minimal-wind periods between Ireland and Britain and states that therefore the Ireland-Wales interconnector proposed by the irish Government will serve no economic purpose in that regard. It also concludes that an infinite number of turbines constructed and operated without regard to cost could only supply a maximum 20% of electricity needs, but a great proportion would be curtailed (switched off due to lack of demand) most of the time, and a significant part of emission savings are squandered by impact on the efficient operation of conventional plant.
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007
Why is every body talking expansion? Growth?

We are at potentially the start of the biggest recession-depression know since the 30's or worse. The oil dependant USA empire/market has limited time and I cannot see the where China and India is going to sell it's materialist junk to?

We will be focusing on a steady regard action, at the bottom of the fiscal cycle we will be developing cheap alternative energies that we can afford. Resource rich countries like Canada, Russia, Australia will be only ones that can afford Nuclear energy!

30% unemployment does create more lesuire time though!
- CommentAuthorJeff Norton (NZ)
- CommentTimeSep 13th 2007 edited
Funcrusher,

I attended a conference on Peak oil 2 years ago by ANZSES and one key note speaker Danish engineer 'Thomas Ackerman' gave a very intereseting talk called "European Wind Power Integration Experiance" his display was very clear that a 300 wind turbines in small clusters spread over area produced a very constant flow of power, which contradicts your engineers!
- CommentAuthorbiffvernon
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
Meteorolgists would offer better advice than engineers here. Let the engineers build them but let the folk who study the weather say where they should go. There are very few days per year when there is no wind from one end of Britain to the other. As I said, the greater problem is dumping spare electricity on stormy days. The Danes do it by selling to France.
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
Posted By: biffvernonproblem is dumping spare electricity on stormy days
Yeah, so I'm chuffed to say that 'my' idea
Posted By: fostertomUse the wind electricity to electrolyse hydrogen from water, then burn that in turbines (or CHP plants) when the wind drops. Same problem/solution with photovoltaic generation - though note that photovoltaic (best in summer daytime) nicely complements wind (best on stormy winter nights)
seems to be the one! Don't know about efficiencies, but pumped storage might be even better, but very expensive to install, I'd have thought, and hard to find suitable natural sites. Relying on charging electric cars wouldn't do it because if we're talking about weeks on end (high summer, or a stormy month) when there's a surplus to be dumped, then there's more weeks when none can be spared for car charging and essential energy's being supplied out of storage. 'Smart' charging of cars will be invaluable for the smoothing the variations over a 24hr timescale. Electric cars won't get anywhere unless guaranteed full on-demand 'smart' supply at some point within every 24hr period of the year.
- CommentAuthorted
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007 edited
Another alternative, in times of excess renewables production, is the ' vanadium redox flow battery' that can store large amounts of energy.

A wind farm in Tasmania has installed one and is now able to contribute 50% of the islands electricity.

http://www.hydro.com.au/Documents/Renewables%20Development/5882Roaring40s.pdf
- CommentAuthorfuncrusher
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
Garrad Hassan and Partners are pro wind energy, and much of their report plays down objections of grid operators and often employs comforting assertions that technical problems will ultimately be overcome by further innovations. It is however emphatic that Danish experience is of a little merit. Much of the Danish hype arises from 'first mover' gains eg facility to export to the German grid, which has since dried up as Germany has developed its own windfarms and associated grids problems. The report includes reviews of the intermittency of wind, both on micro and macro scale, the possible gains from better forecasting, and advantages which might accrue from geographical pooling through inter-connectors. In summary, there are as always some gains conceivable from development work, but these are not expected to be very significant in the overall scheme of things.
- CommentAuthortony
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
Tom re: pumped storage they used to, in the 70's, pump water from a low reservoir in Wales to a high one using nuclear power during low demand periods and use it again to make hydro in order to mitigate the peak demand as there was a shortfall in total capacity the efficiency was dreadfully low ( 25% from memory). There must be better ways of storing power than that. What is the recovery rate from the red-ox batteries Ted?
- CommentAuthorfostertom
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
And what is the efficiency (or %age loss) from converting electricity to hydrogen and then later burning it to produce electricity? In both cases (redox and hydrogen) if there's loss, in what form is the lost energy - if heat, could it be captured and beneficially used?
- CommentAuthortony
- CommentTimeSep 14th 2007
I would say at a guess hydrogen including getting it back again to useful work or heat 10% and red-ox better 35% at the power station? I am guessing though

61 to 90 of 151



	Site Map \| Home \| View Cart \| Pressroom \| Business \| Links	Contact Us
Logout
© Green Building Press

Green Building Forum

Categories

Feeds

Renewable Energy: Wind farms don't work.