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

21–30 of 334 posts

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#21

Post by moooo99 »

rapsey wrote: post #15
tomaytotomato wrote: post #6

A family member lives on the Outer Hebrides of Scotland. There is a community trust on one of the islands which has built wind turbines. However it took about 2 years before they were certified and connected up to the grid, and rather disappointingly it hasn't made local prices cheaper. The electricity is sold to the grid and that money goes to the community trust. Which seems bureaucratic? I wish we could have decen…

Wind turbines are not base load, so they do not lower electricity prices.

That is just false. Of course wind turbines can and do lower prices, regardless of wether or not they‘re base load not

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#22

Post by Arrath »

rapsey wrote: post #17
dollylambda wrote: post #11

Dumping excess energy into something like Bitcoin mining is an interesting way to spend excess green energy that would otherwise fizzle. Mining Bitcoin is sort of ideal for this type of situation because it doesn't matter the frequency/time/duration for which you mine Bitcoin, and the coins can be quickly liquidated to recapture revenue.

And from the heat of bitcoin mining you could heat homes.

This still faces the rather fundamental problem of getting the excess power from point of generation across the grid to somewhere than can consume it.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#23

Post by jacquesm »

tomaytotomato wrote: post #6

A family member lives on the Outer Hebrides of Scotland. There is a community trust on one of the islands which has built wind turbines. However it took about 2 years before they were certified and connected up to the grid, and rather disappointingly it hasn't made local prices cheaper. The electricity is sold to the grid and that money goes to the community trust. Which seems bureaucratic? I wish we could have decen…

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 isn't fair to consumers and commercial grid operators have taken over resources paid for by those very same consumers and are milking them for every penny while slow-walking the required investments so they get more subsidies.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#24

Post by SXX »

dollylambda wrote: post #11

Dumping excess energy into something like Bitcoin mining is an interesting way to spend excess green energy that would otherwise fizzle. Mining Bitcoin is sort of ideal for this type of situation because it doesn't matter the frequency/time/duration for which you mine Bitcoin, and the coins can be quickly liquidated to recapture revenue.

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.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#25

Post by misiek08 »

3D30497420 wrote: post #7

This website doesn't provide much context if you're not familiar with the situation. I found this article helpful: https://www.the-independent.com/climate-change/octopus-energ...

Thanks. This make it even more crazy. Paying for not produced energy (probably some great deals secured there - with guarantees from both sides no matter the reality) and also same owners of both types of production sites. Funny how such deals get done, probably only to meet the magic "2030" rules, without taking into account situations like the one happening right now.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#26

Post by hgomersall »

IshKebab wrote: post #10

Probably the simplest solution is just to not pay for curtailment. If you build your wind farm in Scotland then you just have to accept that you aren't connecting it to an "infinite demand" grid. I think people have also suggested paying for electricity based on the location in the UK but the grid financial system is already so insanely complicated due to Thatcher's energy privatisation that making it even more compl…

It would make sense for energy to be given away locally before we have curtailment used. Why is that not a thing?

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#27

Post by Gigachad »

SXX wrote: post #24
dollylambda wrote: post #11

Dumping excess energy into something like Bitcoin mining is an interesting way to spend excess green energy that would otherwise fizzle. Mining Bitcoin is sort of ideal for this type of situation because it doesn't matter the frequency/time/duration for which you mine Bitcoin, and the coins can be quickly liquidated to recapture revenue.

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.

True. But if the energy is free then you could probably use last gen hardware too. It must not be worth it still since no one is doing it.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#28

Post by fifilura »

Arrath wrote: post #22
rapsey wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And from the heat of bitcoin mining you could heat homes.

This still faces the rather fundamental problem of getting the excess power from point of generation across the grid to somewhere than can consume it.

Decentralize by throwing out the heater in each house and putting a miner there instead?

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#29

Post by raverbashing »

daedrdev wrote: post #4

The UK has notoriously long build times for new power lines which heavily contributes to this problem. I think the FT said a new connection for a big user or power supplier often takes ten years, with planning alone now reaching 4.5 years and half of all new connections getting sued, which is insane considering the productivity loss and how it’s a already known problem. Sadly the government seems dar more interested…

NIMBYs dragging things down as usual

They would probably object to battery installation next to the generators as well

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#30

Post by grues-dinner »

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 this objection from a village near (but not actually on) the underground stretch near Manningtree: https://holtonstmary-pc.gov.uk/assets/Documents-Parish-Counc...

Post reply on HN