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

231–240 of 334 posts

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#231

Post by lumost »

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…

I do wonder how much nymbyism is influenced by most individuals carrying 5-10 years earnings in their home. Such a potential liability might make one awfully concerned about liabilities.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#232

Post by ta1243 »

nashashmi wrote: post #60

Imagine if wind slowed down all across the country because of wind turbines. The long term effects would be less soil erosion and less mountain erosion and water turbulence. What would the short term effects be? Bird populations will find it more difficult to travel long distance with fewer winds? Temperatures would sore in some places while dropping in other places? Pollution will become more stationary instead of b…

The entire UK energy demand is about 10% of the kinetic energy of the wind over the UK on a typical day. You'd have to extract a lot of energy to make a measurable difference. The extra energy dumped into the atmosphere from climate change makes a far larger impact.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#233

Post by cedilla »

Phil_Latio wrote: post #177
cedilla wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what the name of the internet law is, but I think it goes something like: when someone tells you about a regulation and how outrageously stupid it obviously is, they probably misrepresented it or frames it in an adventurous way. In this case, there is no "increased subsidies for less feasible regions". And if you know anything about the region, it's very implausible. Southern states are generally not for…

> In this case, there is no "increased subsidies for less feasible regions" https://energiewende.bundeswirtschaftsministerium.de/EWD/Red... > The price actually paid is the bid price, which is adjusted up or down by a correction factor. This is higher in low-wind locations and lower in high-wind locations. Put simply, this means that where there is a lot of wind and yields are high, there is slightly less money per k…

I thought you were referring to that. But what's so bad about highly profitable places receiving less subsidy? Framed that way it's not as outrageous, right?

There's no malicious encouragement to build wind power where it does not make sense.

But why are there subsidies anyway? Well, all forms of power are subsidised, nuclear power the most, and renewables and coal about to the same tune (in Germany). Also, the electricity price is very low in Germany. Often lower as in France. You know, neither coal plant operators nor wind power operators profit from the extremely high consumer price point. So even though wind power is the cheapest form of energy to produce (in Germany), even it can't break even all the times, which is a scary prospect for investors.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#234

Post by robocat »

not_math wrote: post #152
robocat wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You change the metering to follow supply, and everything else will follow naturally. Tell me your wonderland where this has happened . . . There are whole countries with wireless meters. There must be papers showing how much effect it has on consumer consumption? Ignore one-off examples, I'm interested in population level effects and statistics.

There's a program called Hilo [1] in Québec where it's using the Hydro-Québec Rate Flex D [2] to automatically stop the heating during peak demand. > With Rate Flex D, you can save quite a bit of money, since most of the time in winter, you’ll be charged less than the base rate, except during occasional peak demand events, when you’ll be charged more than the base rate. [1] https://www.hiloenergie.com/en-ca/ [2] http…

"Ripple control" is vintage technology - hourly usage meters are not necessary.

Everyone imagines that consumers would change their behaviour if they were given price information. In my experience, I've yet to see any good data showing that on average consumers save electricity due to smart meters.

In New Zealand, I think the power companies design their consumer products to be unhelpful (what's the equivalent term here for dark patterns in marketing?). I believe few consumers watch their instant usage or review their hourly usage. Personally I changed away from a plan that used spot prices (after seeing the debacle from snow in Texas, and realising the rewards were low and that judging/managing the risks was hard).

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#235

Post by mapt »

citrin_ru wrote: post #207
bee_rider wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why somebody doesn’t open a datacenter in Scotland. Sounds like they have too much power… also it is a bit chilly, right?

Despite wind energy being in excess in Scotland AFIR end users are still paying very high prices due to marginal pricing used in the UK - electricity cost is set by the most expensive source of energy (even if it is 0.1% of the mix) and most of the time gas is the most expensive source. I think marginal pricing is detrimental but there is no political will to axe it.

Is there a rational reason to do that?

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#236

Post by ta1243 »

physicsguy wrote: post #13
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…

The Octopus energy guy Greg Jackson has come out swinging for regional pricing but the incentives are terrible given fair chunks of the country just aren't suitable for wind and a lot of the places that are are less densely populated and so it affects people less there too.

Gives incentives to build storage and interconnects. Maybe when people down south stop having their electricity subsidised, they'll be less likely to object to infrastructure.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#237

Post by mapt »

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.

Always has been.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#238

Post by boringg »

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…

Wait Green Party MP - that has to be the height of idiocracy.

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#239

Post by shawabawa3 »

mapt wrote: post #235
citrin_ru wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite wind energy being in excess in Scotland AFIR end users are still paying very high prices due to marginal pricing used in the UK - electricity cost is set by the most expensive source of energy (even if it is 0.1% of the mix) and most of the time gas is the most expensive source. I think marginal pricing is detrimental but there is no political will to axe it.

Is there a rational reason to do that?

The idea behind it is that everyone who supplies energy gets paid the same

E.g. it would be unfair to pay wind farms 10p/kWh and gas turbines 20p/kWh when the electricity they supply is the same and fungible

If there was enough grid storage this wouldn't be an issue, but because there isn't, there are always times where we need gas turbines to top up and those turbines won't turn on for less than it costs them, which is a lot

The upside of this is renewables are very profitable and incentivised

Re: The cost of turning down wind turbines in Britain

#240

Post by boringg »

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.

Power lines that cut over your property? I can buy that - thats a nuisance. I'm not saying I would I am saying that as a rural property owner that would be annoying.
Post reply on HN