A really interesting blog. We’re switching to Bulb as soon as our current contract is up.
Great to hear @tim_g, no need to wait though. We’ll pay your exit fee, so you can leave your current contract whenever you like.
One of our most respected Times journalists (Matthew Parris) recently called Trump an idiot. One suspects he is probably neither stupid or ignorant so one must presume he is a calculating lying idiot.
Some of his tweets appear incompatible and made without careful reflection - this just makes him a bigger lying idiot.
We all know it and should not hold back from stating this in a calm unemotional fashion.
It is a fact not an opinion and certainly not a term of abuse. It may however be that he takes offense for as well as being an idiot he appears to have a big ego and a thin skin.
The tecnology of battery storage is developing rapidly. It is a key factor in the viabity of wind power which I note the article does not mention
Have always been a fan of pumped hydro. So clean, no development or clean up costs, just making energy whenever it’s needed.
Summary of Wind Disadvantages
We have to stand up against the Big Wind lobby bullying and bribing nearby home owners to gain planning permission. These are the reasons:
Technically, wind is intermittent and cannot be dispatched like efficacious power plant (gas, coal nd PWR nuclear); peak wind rarely coincides with peak demand (National Grid reports this happens for only 8% of peak periods). It cannot be made available when it is needed but is left to churn out its pathetic output at all the wrong times at huge cost either way to the consumer.
Wind often meets <1% of demand and needs coal and/or gas spinning reserve running at inefficient low loads to cover the sudden drops. The alternative is using OCGT distillate oil plant which can be run up in a few seconds but is very expensive.
Wind costs us dearly through obscenely huge, ‘guaranteed strike price’ or ROC, subsidies paid directly by the electricity consumers (on-shore is about double average pool price and off-shore over three times average pool price).
Wind farms kill birds and bats despoiling our countryside to no advantage except making rich land owners richer.
The Load Factor reduces with age and it is only 24% to begin with. This is why it was never developed before the CCA 2008. It gets more ineffective as it ages.
Wind is paid ‘not to generate’ (constrained-off) as the dash for wind subsdies has outstripped the grid infrastructure capacity to export it.
It reduces house prices in the vicinity and health issues are rife from the low frequency noise emissions. Wind farms are enormous eyesores, spoiling views.
It cannot be stored without huge expense for more pumped storage (itself a net user of power).
As a low density energy source (like even more expensive solar follies) it takes-up many hectares of land to produce little output compared with gas, coal, oil or nuclear.
We gave up wind for steam over 100 years ago. Wind is unreliable and retrograde for our lifestyles. The ultimate control of our lives will be the so called smart grid which if, heavens forbid, is ever enacted will cut off individual appliances in our homes when the wind drops.
Frack on for shale gas and of course a return to coal plant such as Germany has just been doing, having just built a score of new coal-fired power stations with another 10 on order.
Renewables are a failure except for hydro which is controllable but still heavily subsidised in the UK to about double average pool price.
The intention for the UK to replace the existing ageing nuclear plant with new nuclear is also a viable way to go but the build time for nukes is over a decade. New CCGT gas power plant can be built and running within 3 years.
Please feel free to add to the list. Does wind have any advantages?
Below is the usual pathetic rubbish by the Fossil Fuel / Fracking Lobby! http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/45241/scotland-sets-two-wind-power-records/
Trump is right on all 3. Wind turbines are also damn ugly too and very disturbing. Here we are in the 21st century and we’re littering our precious countryside with monstrosities because loony environmentalists are scared of nuclear power; and conned everyone else into thinking nuclear power is an environmental threat.
Criticism 3 is most apt. Because they offer only intermittent power wind must be backed almost 100% by another energy source. In practice that will be fossil fuel. It forces us to build double the capacity, and to subsidise the fossil plants when they’re not running. All this subsidy (to the wind as well) destroys any sense of a market.