Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

wastedwind.energy

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 334 posts

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#161

Post by Loughla »

arethuza wrote: post #94
grues-dinner wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People oppose everything. * Lattice overhead powerlines? Eyesore (should use the new T style ones), house values, wind noise, hums, WiFi interference, cancer, access roads, hazard to planes, birds * T-frame pylons: boring ( https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/13/electr... ), eyesore (we prefer the lattice ones), most of the above too * Underground: damaging to the environment, end stations are eyesores…

We can see a lot of windmills from our house - probably at least 60 in a few different windfarms. They are all nearly 40km away, but I actually like seeing them. There are others much closer, which I also rather like seeing (closest is about 2km) but you can't see them from where we live.

I don't mind them in the distance. I would love if these stupid things were 40km away. The closest is like 500 meters away from my house.

They're awful.

I live in the country for the peace and quiet and dark at night.

Now with a wind farm, there is a constant background hum that reminds me of living near a highway in the city, and a swishing noise that's louder than the cicadas and other night time bugs. Also, the red blinking safety lights do actually keep me up at night, but I might just be very sensitive to light.

I fully supported and still support the wind farm, even though I knew I wouldn't be able to host a turbine (and therefore benefit at all from these things). But, I really, really, really don't like the side effects at all.

Is that NIMBYism?

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#162

Post by jacquesm »

ghusto wrote: post #52
jacquesm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we do have decentralized grid generation. What we do not have is fixed price transit rights and the ability for smaller generators to make direct deals with local customers. If I put up a lot of solar panels I'm not even allowed to give my electricity to my neighbors, they have to buy it from the grid which I am allowed to sell it to at a stupendous discount. The so called free energy market has mostly failed, it…

Out of interest, what would happen if you were to sell/give it to your neighbours anyway? Is it a slap on the wrist, or are we talking of multi-thousand pound fines? I ask because whilst I believe there are no doubt (probably very strict) regulations around the selling of electricity, I wonder how enforceable they are on the average Joe. If I were to run a cable to my neighbour and just deny I was sharing my electric…

Hypothetically for obvious reasons, I would put a socket on the outer wall of my garage with a sign saying 'do not use'. This would enable an enterprising person to siphon off up to 3600 Watts continuously while the breaker in my garage would be in the 'on' position. I could use my home automation setup to determine whether there is a surplus generated and only enable that socket through remote control as well.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#163

Post by sandos »

ErikCorry wrote: post #130
p_l wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heard lots of grumbling from an acquaintance in Germany that a big issue is, I quote, "Bavarians not wanting either overground nor underground power lines that would bring power from north to south, so at best we sell wind power from north to west and the south of germany buys nuclear from france" ;)

It's a huge issue, see the depressing web page on Südlink. Massively delayed, much more expensive, and less efficient because it has to be underground. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suedlink Germany, like the UK, has dynamic national electricity pricing, which makes no sense when the interconnections are not powerful enough to actually make it a single electricity market.

Dynamic pricing is often touted as the solution, since it will encourage both transmission and building generation where its needed the most.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#164

Post by jacquesm »

manarth wrote: post #109
ghusto wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, what would happen if you were to sell/give it to your neighbours anyway? Is it a slap on the wrist, or are we talking of multi-thousand pound fines? I ask because whilst I believe there are no doubt (probably very strict) regulations around the selling of electricity, I wonder how enforceable they are on the average Joe. If I were to run a cable to my neighbour and just deny I was sharing my electric…

10% of turnover (Electricity Act 1989). Realistically, no-one's going to care about running a cable to your neighbour. If you start running cables to multiple neighbours, or connecting the cable directly into the mains supply of the other properties, you may attract attention. Mostly for the potential of microgrids to upset the delicate balance of power-delivery and frequency-stability of the wider grid. There are a…

> or connecting the cable directly into the mains supply of the other properties, you may attract attention.

That would be a stupendously bad idea.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#165

Post by eigart »

ragebol wrote: post #104
eigart wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! It would be interesting to see how this looks on a map. Electricity exports (/prices) is a MASSIVE controversy in Norwegian politics, so it would be pretty funny if Norwegian power is replacing the curtailed wind power.

I've only heard about this, but do I understand correctly that: - Norwegian hydro-electricity is normally quite cheap - 'They' built a cable from Norway to the rest of Europe to couple the markets - Since the markets are coupled, mainland Europe buys the hydro-electricity from Norway, driving up prices in Norway. - People are pissed, understandably I guess. Correct?

That is correct. The historical price for consumers is by my guesstimate $0.03-0.05 USD, now it’s at least double. Grid fees come on top of that.

The anger is completely out of proportion, IMO, as the net effect is probably very positive. 1. Hydro is typically state owned and taxed at a very high rate 2. 50% of the price difference between markets is pocketed by the public grid operator (reducing grid fees) 3. We also import power when needed and typically at a net profit.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#166

Post by Phil_Latio »

cedilla wrote: post #137
Phil_Latio wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote aggressively expanded. It doesn't make sense to build wind in a region where it's only profitable due to subsidies. > Wind power is so cheap Germany has the highest energy costs in the world. The alledged price points for wind and solar do not account for the total cost: Negative electricity prices when there is too much demand, increased costs managing the grid (redispatch), the need for a double-infrastruct…

Electricity prices are only very tangentially related to production cost. As you say yourself, grid costs are a factor. > France has lower electricity prices France has incredibly high subsidies for nuclear power, and it's still not enough. And their newest power plant cost 20 billion just in construction for a paltry 1.6GW, and to even begin new ones they need to subsidy them with 100€ per MWh (which is about thirty…

Well the whole clean energy transformation in Germany has a tax payer burden of 3 trillion or more till 2045. Frances nuclear plants didn't even receive 1 trillion of subsidies in total since their existence (according to my quick research). But let's say France and Germany are even in subsidies or France pays slightly more: I thought it's about Co2? Again: France has 1/6 of the Co2 emissions compared to Germany. Just by that metric it's a colossal failure!

When you say Germany can't just build nuclear plants now you are right. But the solution can't be to expand solar and wind, while destroying coal and nuclear plants - which is what they do. The last minister for these matters had the unironical idea to shutdown industry when the renewables don't produce. The idea was to move from a demand driven industry, to a supply driven industry. Total madness. The idea to produce wind in the south of Germany is part of such madness.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#167

Post by jcattle »

dollylambda wrote: post #40
SXX wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even of we agree it's a good idea most likely this doesn't make financial sense. Crypto minimg hardware costs a lot of momey upfront, getting outdated fast and to make profit it must run 24/7 which is obviously impossible when there is no energy excess.

You don't need to run it 24/7 to make a profit because the energy is essentially free or stranded, therefore the only cost is that of the equipment. I think the amount here is more than enough to pay for a few SHA256 specific CPUs attached.

That would work if the energy was actually free. Instead, since it is a single market, as soon as curtailment kicks in you do not get the energy for free anymore, you get it for the price you pay for the gas plants that replace the wind generation which can't be transmitted.

This also doesn't change if you consume all the energy at the place where it is produced, since you still need to supplement the normal load with gas. There's only two ways out of this: split the markets, or build transmission.

Oh well.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#168

Post by Tor3 »

pards wrote: post #150
mixedbit wrote: post #32

I wonder how practical it would be to build a system that would let home appliances cheaply overuse energy when there is a peak in wind or solar production. For example: * Let heat-pumps heat homes to say 23C instead of 20C * Let freezers decrease the temperature to say -30C instead of -18C * Let electric water heaters heat water to say 70C instead of 50C, such water can then be mixed with more cold water Such overus…

My parents had a off-peak hot water system when I was growing up. The insulated tank would fill and heat up during off-peak hours (i.e. late at night), and merely keep it warm during the rest of the day. The downside was that once the hot water was gone, we had to wait until the next day for more. The last person to shower occasionally got a cold shower. On-demand systems win here.

Good water heaters are key. Mine is 200 liters and I've experienced cold water exactly once in three decades: One day 3 guests took hour-long showers each. Normally a family of five will never experience cold water.

The one I'm getting now has two coils, one to quickly heat water at the top half, the second to heat from the bottom - they're never on at the same time. Internal heat around 75 C, mixed to cooler on the way out, and it can keep hot water for 2 weeks if disconnected from power.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#169

Post by p_l »

ghusto wrote: post #52
jacquesm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we do have decentralized grid generation. What we do not have is fixed price transit rights and the ability for smaller generators to make direct deals with local customers. If I put up a lot of solar panels I'm not even allowed to give my electricity to my neighbors, they have to buy it from the grid which I am allowed to sell it to at a stupendous discount. The so called free energy market has mostly failed, it…

Out of interest, what would happen if you were to sell/give it to your neighbours anyway? Is it a slap on the wrist, or are we talking of multi-thousand pound fines? I ask because whilst I believe there are no doubt (probably very strict) regulations around the selling of electricity, I wonder how enforceable they are on the average Joe. If I were to run a cable to my neighbour and just deny I was sharing my electric…

Well, unless you invest non-trivial extra work, you're going to start showing up on grid monitoring and finally someone will drill down in problem looking for broken substation and find you doing exactly the things that caused the problems and the reason for it being illegal to "just hook up".

It's just that often in many places law lagged in ways of dealing with islanded operation, and semi-islanded cases (where you invest in serious gear to separate your local micro grid from external grid preventing the issues that cause technicians to show up and report you)

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#170

Post by Cthulhu_ »

notTooFarGone wrote: post #47
grues-dinner wrote: post #30

Something like 400,000 people are opposing the Norwich-Tilbury power lines to bring wind energy to where it's used. Including a Green Party MP: https://www.dissmercury.co.uk/news/24840985.green-mp-adrian-... . And you'd better believe wherever they buried the lines they'd have objections and expensive consultations about the disruption and the HoUsE VaLuEs caused by trenching, drilling and service structures. Like th…

Who opposes Power lines? Never heard that this is a thing. As a foreign influence I'd be delighted to target all infrastructure proposals and bombard it with trolls.

I would, overhead powerlines are not something you want near any houses for various reasons. Underground is fine.
Post reply on HN