Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published bySheila Kelly Modified over 9 years ago
1
‘Tracks’ are actually 5 metre wide roads of crushed stone with soil and rubble piled alongside
2
Construction of turbine bases
3
Turbine base with concrete (note person top left)
4
Turbine sections en route (1)
5
Turbine sections en route (2)
6
Getting turbine sections up hills
7
Delivery of generator section (Nacelle)
8
Huge machine holds turbine sections upright
9
Erected column & nacelle
10
Erection of columns. Moudy Mea in 2010?
11
Delivery of turbine blades
12
Blade attachment
13
Almost complete
14
Black Law w/f, Forth, Scotland. 12 turbines 330 ft high – note Transit van
15
Conclusions 1.Building wind power stations is heavy engineering on a massive scale 2.There will be inevitable damage and destruction 3.The risk of siltation and run off is high 4.Such structures cannot be ‘mitigated’ 5.The visual damage will last a generation or more
16
Outline 1.A brief look at the proposal 2.Building a wind power station on Moudy Mea 3.Misconceptions and myths about wind power
17
MISCONCEPTIONS Britain has a huge wind resource which can meet most of our power needs WRONG
18
Annual 1971-2000 2.3 to 8.0 8.0 to 11.5 11.5 to 16.1 16.1 to 20.7 20.7 to 27.6 27.6 to 34.5 34.5 to 36.0 Mph Guernsey = 14.1 mph Jersey = 13.0 mph ‘The climate of the UK and recent trends’. Published by the UK Climate Impacts Programme and the Meteorological Office. December 2007 MET OFFICE UK WIND SPEEDS
19
110 days Wind speeds in the UK – Met Office data
20
73% 27% Typical wind turbine power curve
21
73%27%
22
What this means for electricity supply A wind farm will produce no electricity for up to 110 days a year (3.5 months) It will run at less than 25% of its potential output for a further 150 days (5 months) So we will only have significant electricity production for about 100 days a year
23
So how do we manage on low wind days? We use BACK UP using coal and gas fired power stations
24
Homes supplied Developers always state that a certain number of homes will be supplied. In reality; NO homes will be supplied for 110 days a year Only about a quarter of those claimed will be supplied for another 150 days. WITHOUT BACK UP FROM COAL OR GAS- FIRED POWER STATIONS WIND WOULD TOTALLY FAIL DOMESTIC USERS
25
A lesson from Germany
26
MYTH Wind farms can replace nuclear power WRONG
27
Base load and demand Maximum ever UK demand was for 54,431 MW on December 10 th 2002 BASE LOAD – MAINLY NUCLEAR
29
Submission to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee Inquiry into the Economics of Renewables from Eon (UK) ‘…if the UK required 40,000MW of wind capacity to met its renewables target by 2020, only 8% (3,600MW) could be relied upon to meet peak winter demand. This means that 36,400MW of renewable capacity would need to be backed up by thermal plant’. Ref: SC/07-08/EA311
30
What does this mean? 36,400MW of new back up would require the building of; 20 to 30 new coal-fired new power station OR 40 to 70 new gas-fired power station TOTAL COST = over £200 billion
31
MISCONCEPTION Wind power stations reduce greenhouse gas emissions VERY LITTLE IF ANY
32
VANISHING CO 2 SAVINGS Mid- 1990s Dirty coal 1995- 2007 BWEA 2000 DTI mix OFGEM, DEFRA & GOVT TODAY DEFRA 2010
33
Quotation from the UKERC Report, The Costs and Impacts of Intermittency’, March 2006 ‘Actual CO 2 savings are dependent on what fossil fuel plant is displaced, reduced by efficiency losses in thermal plant ……’ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seimens, Science in Parliament 60/2, April 2003 ‘A 2% loss of efficiency in a coal-fired power station can increase CO 2 emissions by 10%’
34
ARE THERE ANY SAVINGS? “When plant is de-loaded to balance the system, it results in a significant proportion of the plant operating relatively inefficiently…… …..it has been estimated that the entire benefit of the renewables programme has been negated by the increased emissions from part loaded plant…….” David Tolley (Innogy plc), Jan 2003, Address to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
35
CATOTELM ACROTELM DRAINAGE AT CEFN CROES
36
Ditching round a turbine base
37
CO 2 pay back time for Stainmore wind power station CO 2 pay back time for Stainmore wind power station if no peat on site=2.3yrs If average peat depth is 1 metre=11.5yrs If average peat depth is 2 metres=21.6yrs Assumptions 12 X 2.5MW turbines, LF = 30%, 12km of ‘track’, 1 borrow pits, 15,000 tonnes of aggregate, 12,000 concrete, CO 2 displaced at 0.37t/MWh
38
What does the CO 2 saving really mean? If Stainmore is 12 x 2.5MW turbines the developer will claim a saving of 29,170 tonnes of CO 2 each year (based on 0.37t/MWh) You may well say that is a lot to save BUT look at it another way
39
What does the CO 2 saving really mean? If Stainmore saves 29,170 tonnes of CO 2 each year The Kingsnorth coal-fired power station proposed for Kent will emit 21,978 tonnes per DAY
40
MYTH We can’t meet our future targets without a massive wind power programme FALSE
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.