The beauty of wind farms 18 April 05

Well, I live very nearby and I’m in favour. The area they’re talking about is a desolate stretch of high moorland on the climb up to Shap: I rather like it, for its bleak glare, but it’s already blighted by the M6 and a cement works at the top, and a few windmills won’t add much to that. I would object furiously if they put windmills on the Langdale Pikes, but they can’t anyway. On the big empty rolling-moorland sort of hills around Ravenstonedale I think they fit in quite well.

There’s already a small wind farm just south of there at Lamb Rigg, another one on the Duddon Hills to the west, a big one near Maryport and at least one huge offshore project underway. I suppose Cumbrians might reasonably feel that they were being picked on, but then space and wind are what you need, and that’s what we’ve got. Also rain. And sheep.

My theory is that windmills are a safe target for these latter-day Quixotes because they don’t visibly generate employment. Nobody in Cumbria is allowed to complain about Sellafield because the whole of the west depends on it for work, directly or indirectly, though it’s much uglier and more dangerous. You can pick on a wind farm without appearing to threaten any actual people.

I live on the edge of the Highlands of Scotland, and recently had a wind farm proposed 5 miles from my house. I was delighted. Wind energy is the cheapest and most technologically viable source of renewable power. It can provide between 20 and 30% of our Natioal grid needs. It should. I love wilderness, but with the highlands covered in sitka spruce plantations and gzazed to hell by sheep, they have already lost their wild feel for me. Wind is a positive step forwards, and what is a greater blight on the landscape, a few turbines, or thousands of people dying as the Ganges dry up?

The Golden Gate Bridge is an awesome sight from the photographs since I have never seen it in person.

It seems likely that both form and function can be combined to accentuate a landscape.

Not all man-made structures have to become a blight. A little focus on the aesthetics and positioning may be helpful.

We humans can be artistic like nature herself when we try!

Dan

There are many cities in the UK which have high wind exposure, Pplymouth, Liverpool, Glasgow, Hull to name a few, only in Liverpool (Kirby) is there a wind farm. Why?

Is it not unfair to place energy providing mechanisms in rural areas much like coal/nuclear power stations too), when the energy is mostly used in the cities. this creates more grid inefficiency (up to 30%), and imposes the impacts inequitously?

Would placing wind farms in cities remind people about the energy they use and its impacts?

Could nt wind farms be subject to joint local ownership, allowing lower local electricity charges, and a community aspect to them, which might garner more support?

I can see NIMBYism stalling present wind development plans, because they are being imposed from above with little (as far as I am aware) benefits to those who are subject to their impacts.

I think your question has merit. It seems that the rural environment is more conducive to a wind farm than an urban environment from buildings and other structures which create a natural wind break.

In fact, the topography of any geographic location is important in where wind generators are placed. You want them where the wind velocity is the highest.

This is because the physics of the available energy of wind can be calculated from the equation E = ½ mv2 where m is the mass of the air and v is the air velocity. Since velocity is squared, it shows the importance of wind velocity to the wind’s overall available energy.

With that said, the velocity of the wind is reduced and the available kinetic energy of the wind is reduced in urban areas.

In order for urban locations to work, either the wind generator has to be mounted on a tall building or placed in a area whereby the natural urban topography creates a wind tunnel where urban structures funnel the wind into a particular location increasing its velocity.

With respect to economics, if wind generators are not placed in the best locations, then they will produce less electricity for each generator. This would inevitably increase the costs of the total electricity generated.

In order to access the wind velocity, use a helium balloon and notice the direction it travels. Then, release another balloon and calculate the wind velocity by measuring the time it takes for the balloon to travel a known distance. Velocity = distance/time

The use of more than one observer plus cell phones may increase the accuracy of this procedure.

Calculate the available kinetic energy using the formula E = ½ mv2 and then do a percentage comparison which will also be proportional to the electrical energy and economics of placed generators.

The unknown variable m will cancel out in any percentage calculation which can help to compare one location over another!

I hope this assessment helped to answer your question on wind power at some level.

• Back to Nuclear: Unfinished business! *

I recently posted a methodology to research the answer to my nuclear question which I desire not to leave until it is sufficiently answered.

I still want your help in answering that question if you can aid me in obtaining the required information in order for me to perform the necessary calculations.

I invite others to join in because part of our own development is taking our discussions to a higher level of problem solving and my intention is to encourage this process.

Best,

Dan

When I went to N. California some 20+ years ago, I was excited to see wind generators on some hills. I thought it made those barren hills much more interesting. They could be painted green or blue, with natural-looking designs on their poles. The tourist shop could sell mini-mills & eco-products. Oh, heck, why not an eco-Disney theme park, with a Day After Tomorrow ride.

There is the rare bird problem – they get killed flying into the rotating blades, but I was thinking, if some other poles with perches higher than the wind generators were put up that might solve the problem.

There is another idea (or an additional one). I understand there are small wind generators that can be mounted on people’s roofs that apparently don’t make too much noise. I remember Jade Mountain sold them (before they sold out to Gaiam). And a little bit of noise actually helps people (esp. babies) sleep better.

A household could put up one, plus solar panels, and practically get off the grid, or sell excess to the grid & get energy from the grid on those windless cloudy days, which is possible in many U.S. states now. I think this should appeal to those ideologue climate skeptics, who fear the encroachment of government and losing freedom.

I think describes our good friend Norbert. How about it, Norbert, people getting off the grid, free at last from those nasty monopolies.

If and when the gov stops subsidizing & giving tax breaks to oil & coal, then these alternative energies (which keep coming down in price) will be cost-effective. I understand wind already is. We pay only about a $1 more per month for our Green Mountain 100% wind energy.

may depend more on the availability of the wind and its average velocity at a particular location.

Although I have never analyzed it, I believe that the economics should be very competitive to any other source of electricity if the available wind energy is high enough.

How could anyone not want to promote wind energy in any plan which will diversify how our electricity is generated? Using wind is a no brainer if used in the right locations!

The real question is how much can we expect from this particular source of energy to generate electricity?

And how much can it eliminate the need for coal, gas, and nuclear power plants? And finally, how much can it help reduce our GHGs?

Best,

Dan

Whenever anyone speaks against wind farms, my first thought is that it is fantastically ironic that it is probably the only way that CO2 can be used productively to create electricity – That is, any CO2 in the air is gushing invisibly past those large, graceful blades and ultimately rotating turbines…

Germany plans to generate 12.5% of its grid supply by wind by 2010. It already has 1600 wind turbines up and running.

It is starting to encounter problems with wind generation.

Anti wind farmers are questioning not just the visual aspect, but also the environmental cost of installing a turbine. The physical structure itself uses large amounts of steel/concrete, and a road is required to be laid up to every turbine for servicing purposes. That’s means 1600 small roads already in Germany, leading to water run off, environmental degradation and great cost.

The new evidence (from germany) suggests wind farming may prove to be uneconomical based on its installation costs, not to mention its servicing costs, which while much less than for conventional power plants, are harder to manage as in Germanys case there are already over 1600 sites to manage, usually in remote areas, requiring vehicular access, which contradictorily causes more GHG emissions.

I am more in favour of harnessing the suns energy (theres alot more of it, and it is literally regular as clockwork!), and hydrogen cell technology, which could be used to power any thing from entire skyscrapers (eg. New Yorks Conde Nast Skyscraper ) to wrist watches. Recently IBM and Sanyo collaborated to bring to market a laptop which uses a methanol based energy cell, admittedly its a bit clunky (so were mobile phones 15 years ago), but its surely the way ahead.

I am not 100% about this, but feel it (wind) could play a role similar to nuclear; biding time. Though there are no doubt areas where the plentifullness of wind could make them a permanent energy supply.

Why dont all governments impose a tax (perhaps equivalent to 1p) to generate investment revenue for research into renewables? We would get to a carbon neutral situtuation quicker, and therefore the tax would not have to stay for that long? Why are politicians so unimaginative?

By the way, for any people who do not reside in the UK; we are in the middle of a general election. Guess what, so far: no mention of the climate change issue. In the worlds 4th largest economy, where nobody wants for anything, people are still more concerned with how the economy is going to do, & hospital waiting lists (when we have a superb, free, health service).

Britain is supposed to be a world leader on the GW issue. Oh dear.

Yes, many important points of consideration. I think the major factor in wind economics is the consistent availability of the wind and its average velocity since what energy is derived annually from the generators will ultimately prove their economic success.

Regarding the economics, I think that we have to look at it in the long-term perspective. Tomorrow’s economics will be more favorable to today’s economics as the cost of fossil fuels and in particular oil will rise. With that said, the future economic benefits should reap a better rate of return on the original capital investment.

12.5 percent of the total electrical energy needs of Germany being met through wind power is a very positive accomplishment that I think offsets the liabilities you mention and worth all that investment. With respect to all renewable sources, every little bit helps us to get off fossil fuel sources and to reduce GHGs.

The runoff from the access roads used to maintain the windmills may be mitigated with bio-filters allowing the water to be absorbed in the ground. I recently learned quite a bit about this recently at my local Sierra Club. It involves having the water go into an area of permeable ground developed to absorb the water before it can collect and run off. Even permeable road surfaces are possible. Granted all this adds to the initial cost but some of this can be developed after installation as part of the regular maintenance addressing the greatest runoff needs first.

The key word for Googlers is “Low Impact Development” See site below:

http://www.toolbase.org/tertiaryT.asp?TrackID=&CategoryID=1402&DocumentID=2007

With regards to solar energy, it depends greatly on latitude, what the energy is used for, and cloudiness. Solar space heating favors a mid-range of latitudes since higher latitudes lack the available sunshine and low latitudes do not require substantial heating to justify the expense. Solar water heating and solar cooling (yes solar cooling can be done using absorption systems), is more viable at lower latitudes because the solar availability increases and with cooling in direct proportion to the need for cooling.

Use of solar energy for cooling purposes is therefore a good match in terms of need and availability and would help power generation because often the peak electrical demand is in the summer months because of a large cooling load on very hot days.

Solar cooling therefore helps to discourage the need for more electric generation to meet peak demand and can contribute to fewer power plants being built or blackouts from occurring.

Best,

Dan

Hello Brendon and Dan,

hope you are both well, have been away for two weeks and am trying to catch up with everything! Brendon, you mentioned the Liverpool bay windfarm: it (North Hoyle bank) is the first of three large off-shore windfarms in the area that are being developed and it makes a striking spectacle from the North Wales expressway. Maximum generating capacity (mgc) is 60mW. (see link http://www.natwindpower.co.uk/northhoyle/) The second, much larger installation (‘Gwynt y Mor’: ‘wind(of)the Sea’ in Welsh) will be about 10km further out into the bay and will have a mgc of 750Mw. This development has recently received funding approval. A third, smaller site is to the West on Rhyl flats and is still under assessment. We have links to a group that has an interest in an offshore tidal impoundment powerstation on Rhyl flats which would further complement this major offshore renewables development.

Why this location? not just windspeed, but wind yield: The turbines turn most days because there is wind in this location most days. Anti wind-farm groups claim its all a con because windmills only generate 20-30% of the time. That may be so in Continental Europe, but the UK Atlantic coast has a much better wind yield. Liverpool bay is a very shallow, wide area with a stable substrate that is suitable for the monopile construction and due to there being a gas field development a bit further offshore, there is a new,large gas fired powerstation onshore (mothballed though because it cannot generate cheaply enough at present) but it has a shiny new grid connection so that’s convenient to plug the windfarms into. Also its quite close to er… Liverpool, and Chester, and Manchester, and the whole of the industrial North West.

I totally agree about the need for community involvement in RE generation and we are supporting a number of groups who are in discussion with major utility companies about establishing ‘Energy Mutuals’: joint venture companies where communites become stakeholders and customers rather than just reluctant neighbours. Wales has had 250 years of exploitation and environmental degradation from the Coal, Iron, Steel and most lately Water industries. With a regional government for the first time since 1401, it is time that communities were empowered to start engaging with investors on equal terms to forge lasting beneficial, profitable relationships instead of being ignored or sold down the river by planning authorities.

I will keep you informed of some of the interesting projects in the pipeline as they develop. For starters though, have a look at these two which are up and running :

http://www.baywind.co.uk/pages/WOW.htm

and

Cwmni Gwynt Teg (The fair wind company) http://www.ashdenawards.org/winners_03_07.html

These kind of projects are achieveble and produce real benefits: we need lots more of them.

kind regards to all

Colin

Glad to see you back. Yes, the wind has to blow more often than not. My simple procedure I posted is pretty worthless for a real assessment.

Recording the wind speed above the minimum needed to turn the blades each hour and summing up the incremental energy for each hour over time would be more useful and the manufacturer specifications for the output for a given wind velocity instead of the basic energy equation would provide a better assessment of a location’s value.

I guess meteorological data of wind conditions and local topographical data supplemented by a few local measurements is sufficient for an analysis.

Thanks for the websites Colin. I particularly like the pictures of the beautiful countryside and the people who live there. I like the photo where everyone is having a picnic watching the raising of the turbine on its tower. I wish I could be there to enjoy the experience with them.

Wind power has that clean renewable feel to it and I sense it from the photos. It is the knowing that as long as the wind blows, you have energy. No real anxiety about any form of pollution or energy supply.

What is the value of reducing our anxieties? Maybe some of the intrinsic intangible values which cannot be analyzed such as freedom from anxiety may be more a guide to the value of which solutions are the best.

In that light, I bet you would not likely see a picnic gathering by local people around a coal plant or especially a nuclear power plant during its construction. Maybe protesters! ;-)

It is fortunate for the UK that you have so much available wind energy. I may never be able to visit Wales, but if I did, I sure would like to sit and listen to your stories.

Always the best,

Dan