[Closed] Wind turbines - love 'em or hate 'em?

Love, because we need more of them. It seems redundant for us to comply with ugly tarmac all over the landscape then winge at a few turbines!

When I own my own place I'm slapping solar panels and turbines all over that badboy

i love em too.would have no problems if any were built by me. 🙂

I don't mind them but I wouldn't want to see them on every visit into the countryside.

I like them, then again I like engineering on a grand scale. It's all the not I'm my back garden brigade that get on my t##s.

Love? No. Hate? No. Tolerate? Yes.

Wind turbines aren't too bad visually. They're certainly not the worst things we've polluted the landscape with.

I've never seen a single man-made thing that even comes close to being comparable with what nature had preceeded it with.

Hate them, mainly because they're bloody useless.

http://www.warwickwindtrials.org.uk/2.html

Those who actually know about and have objectively studied these things know that they're a waste of time, money and resources. We'll be ripping them out within 10 years.

When I own my own place I'm slapping solar panels and turbines all over that badboy

Probably not worth it - especially the turbines, but I appreciate your sentiment.

They remind me of a sort of benign version of War of the Worlds

You're not the only one 🙂

[img] [/img]

Backhander, are they not paid for and installed by private companies?

The government (this one, last one, one before that etc, etc) have already decided that we're having nuclear.

These things are just a sop, something to ease our consciences & make us think they are actually taking renewable energy seriously.

backhander - read your references:

"rooftop wind turbines"

not bigger turbines. Those who actually know about these things can tell the difference between them. 🙄

I struggle with long sentences! Could we have a summary please Backhander? 😀

Ugly subsidised monstrosities.

I like..there is something quite majestic and graceful about them

I don't mind them, but the landscape does look better without them.

I like the idea of industrial units/estates having their own wind turbine systems where it is worthwhile doing.
There's a massive Nike building in Belgium with several wind turbines and Wood Green Animal Shelter near Godmanchester has it's own wind turbine. Smaller scale stuff like that providing 'local' power seems like a good way forward.

1/10 on rate my troll backhander please try harder

from your own link

Non-technical readers should be aware that the findings of this report apply only to currently available models of building-mounted wind turbines, designed for connection to the national grid. As anyone who knows anything about wind power will attest, urban environments and building mounting is probably the most challenging context in which to try to make wind power work, and the findings of this study cannot be generalised to larger-scale wind, nor to freestanding wind of any size mounted on poles or masts well away from obstructions. All the evidence (and theory) is that wind power is an excellent and highly effective choice for such conditions, which exist widely across the UK away from buildings and towns.

The title was wind turbines, are you suggesting that rooftops are not wind turbines
I have recently looked a 2 off 30 meter masts located in the south west. Combined, these at peak load supply 12kW/day or 0.5kW/hour, . That'll do a couple of laptops however most days it's a fraction of this. Whats the production ratio on WTs; 13-26%? Its just greenwashing, the way that these things are being marketed and sold is a disgrace.
Edit; flowerboy, wind your neck in.

I like them too. The Scout Moor installation provides power for about 45,000 homes which is damn fine.

I like...although if you've ever played Simcity 2000 you realise you need an awful lot of them on the map before they match one nuclear power station 😉

Backhander - do you have any comparable figures for the big buggers like the ones on Scout moor. I've genuinely no idea.

Incidentally, they were all still last night. Not a breath of wind. That is very very unusual for up there though

Whats better a widturbine that doesnt pollute, and can be recycled, or a large nuclear pile of scrap, protected by armed police 24 hrs a day for ever, that we dont know how to recycle, or even keep safe for the next generation.

Bit like a chav neighbour,(nuclear power that is) as long as you keep throwing money at them, and having the police call round theyre happy, until theres a big bang.

Whats the production ratio on WTs; 13-26%?

13-26% of the wind which is free, so something for nothing. You are not talking about a 26% efficient engine that only gets 26$% of the energy from a litre of finite resources here - you are talking about efficiencies from FREE renewable resources.

wind your neck in.

The title was wind turbines

and the picture made it perfectly clear what he was talking about, like I said try harder

Wind turbines are not free, the opposite in fact. Flowerboys is just jumping on a subject he knows nothing about (just like rugby) because I'm posting. Rustynail has it correct, they are a plaster for a sucking chest wound.
http://www.windenergy-the-truth.com/

http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/eon-netz-wind-report-2005/

Even EON who have installed quite a few are aware of the poor performance of WTs.

Have not herd that phrase since I was at school. Internet hard man at work!
If you have nothing to contribute; **** off.

I love watching them - it's somehow calming to sit on a wall mid ride and watch them.

However as a genuinely useful energy source they are a little dubious. They are simply too inconsistent in energy generation and only produce about 30% of the claimed output in reality. If the huge grants and subsidies didn't support them and their erection wasn't forced on energy companies to meet imposed quotas I doubt they would be viable.

If you have nothing to contribute; **** off.

so far all you've contributed is a link that doesnt back you up in anyway and a couple of other dodgy looking links, could you provide any properly backed up facts?

I think that the E-ON wind energy report 2005 is about as respectable as you'll get.

Combined, these at peak load supply 12kW/day or 0.5kW/hour

Presumably you mean 12kWh per day or an average of 0.5kW - but I am not sure. Get it right.

I like 'em, not that ugly, supposedly helping with the environment etc.

But the cynical side of me worries that:
They don't provide much electricity
they aren't that green
During their life cycle they aren't even carbon neutral nevermind carbon reducing
They are being put up by private companies with massive grants from the government (ie it's a money earner not an earth saver)
The infrastructure implemented to build the things probably harms the environment more than it helps.

No stats to back any of this up, it's just my cynical expectations

I love them.

In fact, I have one on my hat which powers the windscreen wipers on my sunglasses.

They go really fast, especially when I ride down a steep hill!

Presumably you mean 12kWh per day or an average of 0.5kW - but I am not sure. Get it right.

I always find it funny that some people object so strongly to wind turbines and don't bat an eyelid about the single ugliest construction ever to scar our landscapes, the electricity pylon. I guess they've "always been there" though.

the E-ON paper references data from 2004 in a limited region of Germany. Therefore, it is limited in value due to date and geography.

Wind turbines are not perfect and are generally more efficient in production when sited offshore. The bigger the turbine the more efficient it is (laws of physics here kids) and the siting of them is all important.

They are part of an answer to a problem we've not yet solved - most of our power comes from finite resources that are becoming more expensive and the consumption of them pollutes and warms the environment. We will need a blend of generation techniques to provide enough energy for the future - especially as we go further towards a total electric requirement.

Whats better a widturbine that doesnt pollute

problem is you need a LOT of them to produce meaningful amounts of energy, which means lots of factories, materials, energy used in production etc.

I bet the energy payback time for a windturbine is massive. Not saying that they aren't good for some situations, but I don't think you can just blanket the land in them and expect our energy woes to disappear.

I think we need to stop using more energy to start with. Do we really need street lights all over the place at night? On motorways at 3am in the morning??
Industrial estates where all the buildings are left illuminated overnight, no doubt with 10's if not 100's of PCs using power unnecessarily, electronics on standby in millions of homes....everyone says, but it's only a few watts (for their household), but multiply that by every household in the UK & it starts to mean something....

GlitterGary - Where can I procure such a device? Did you make them yourself. I hope you've patented it 😀

I think that the E-ON wind energy report 2005 is about as respectable as you'll get.

what the one with the massive caveat which I quoted that is only about home mounted wind turbines...... you really do need to try harder.
which says

All the evidence (and theory) is that wind power is an excellent and highly effective choice

I think you'll find that kW=kWh.

No it doesn't. kW is power, kWh is energy.

most of our power comes from finite resources that are becoming more expensive and the consumption of them pollutes and warms the environment. We will need a blend of generation techniques to provide enough energy for the future - especially as we go further towards a total electric requirement.

I absolutely agree with this, I just don't think that wind is going to provide an amount of energy which will make a difference. There are currently some very interesting developments with wave/tidal technologies (the anaconda). I'm certainly not anti renewable but there is an awful amount of greenwashing going on.

There are currently some very interesting developments with wave/tidal technologies

Not that work effectively. Although I do believe we need to pursue them much faster and further. Then again, the environmental impact of a Severn Estuary tidal system would have been massive.

greenwashing

“In 2004 two major German studies investigated the size of contribution that wind farms make towards guaranteed capacity. Both studies separately came to virtually identical conclusions, that wind energy currently contributes to the secure production capacity of the system, by providing 8% of its installed capacity.

isnt that just a long winded 😯 way of saying the wind doent always blow?

Binners - I'm currently waiting for the patent to go through.

My plan was to ask Funky Duncy Bannatyne the Dragon for 6 billion dollars to get my company off the ground. I've got a sneaking suspicion that he and Theodopopopolous Paphitis the Dragon will come to fisticuffs in order to give me the cash.

backhander - Member
Presumably you mean 12kWh per day or an average of 0.5kW - but I am not sure. Get it right.

I think you'll find that kW=kWh. The hour was put in for those who may not know, get it right.

They aren't the same though??

watt = energy per second, 1W = 1 j/s.
1Wh = energy used by a one watt load in an hour, 1Wh = 1*3600 = 3600 j.

Or something like that......

I think you'll find that kW=kWh. The hour was put in for those who may not know, get it right.

Arf arf 🙂

Do we really need street lights all over the place at night? On motorways at 3am in the morning??

No, that's why these things tend to get turned off nowadays.

Although street lighting is quite important in towns. Walking home from the pub in pitch darkness could be fun and games. Esp if you're female say and alone. You wanna carry a torch around with you at all times?

No it doesn't. kW is power, kWh is energy.

Oh do come on.

Walking home from the pub in pitch darkness could be fun and games. Esp if you're female say and alone. You wanna carry a torch around with you at all times?

Perhaps we could adapt GlitterGary's idea and have a hat with a wind-turbine on it that powers a head-torch?

I think we may be going some way to solving our energy woes here

I love 'em.

I think they represent the ingenuity and good-will of man better than almost any other structure. We know that they basically work, there is some dispute as to how well efficient they are but as turbine, battery and superconductor technology improve they will just get better and better.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Still think we are going to need a decent supply of nuclear though to compliment our wind farms and to supply the seriously intensive industries like water purification.

No, that's why these things tend to get turned off nowadays.

Really? The only excuse I see given is saving council's money (not that that isn't another reason).

Although street lighting is quite important in towns. Walking home from the pub in pitch darkness could be fun and games. Esp if you're female say and alone. You wanna carry a torch around with you at all times?

Yeah, obviously don't just turn of ALL the lights, but there must be places where it isn't needed.
I seem to remember in Germany on many major roads (not sure if they were A-roads or motorways - it was a few yrs ago) there would be long unlit stretches at night with lighting provided at junctions/roundabouts etc. This doesn't seem quite so prevalent here; the whole length of road is lit.

The local environmental impact is probably the most damning thing against them.
They are often sited on sensitive moorland and their construction / access roads totally messes with the peat bogs natural systems, local hydrology, etc. Plus the energy required to build them, ship them from China and production and pouring of 1000's tonnes of concrete.

Also the impact on bird and bat populations has been proven. They are shown to kill bats both through impacts with blades but also the pressure change in proximity to the moving blades can cause bats to internally haemorrhage.

This link is interesting - you hear claims of wind power contributing 3-5% of total electricity in the UK. This is the real time measure of UK energy production by all means (you'll need to scroll down) - http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm

In the last 24 hours nationally wind provided 0.6% of UK power and right now is contributing 0.3%. So 3157 wind turbines are contributing less than 1% of total power supply.

I like 'em.

Planning a route with Mr Starship up onto Scout Moor via Peel Tower for next Saturday to get a closer look. Fat nurses welcome.

maybe after Bill Gates has eradicated malaria and bought his first nobel prize he'll realise that it looks odd on his mantle all alone.

Then he can get started on sorting out a safe renewable energy source for the world.

then again . . . . .

Oh do come on

😯

When you are talking about power generation there is an absolutely collosal difference between the two!

12kW is a totally different ball game to 12kWh/day!

Harry. Could you keep me posted on that one please fella? Wouldn't mind joining you, if you don't mind.

What? In context;

Presumably you mean 12kWh per day or an average of 0.5kW

I love em, but hate it when some people refer to them as wind MILLS! cretins!!

actually there has been some studies that the embodied energy (energy used in manufacturing, constructing it etc) in a wind turbine (or typical wind farm cant remember) is far more than the energy it will produce in its life time, so whetehr they are the "solution" or not remains to be seen!!

Backhander, are you seriously suggesting that Watts and Watt-hours are the same thing, only we don't generally write the "hour" bit because 'everyone knows that's what it means," or am I misunderstanding you?

Because if that is what you're trying to say, I think you need to stop talking and start listening.

If I've got the wrong end of the stick, apologies.

backhander - Member
What? In context;
Presumably you mean 12kWh per day or an average of 0.5kW

So, according to your presumption you'll get 0.5kW in what amount of time? (seeing as you've stated units in power, not energy).

I think molgrips means you'll get either 12kWh per day, as in the total energy 'created' by the wind turbine in a day will be 12kwh (measured in Joules).
Or you will get an average output of 0.5kw, i.e. you will get on average 500w out of the turbine constantly (measured in Joules/second).

Think of it as water coming out of a tap - you'll get Y litres of water out of a tap/second (analogous to watts) and if you catch it in a bucket you'll get Y litres * time the tap is on for in total (analogous to kWh).

I quite like the structures, although I agree with neninja that the associated access roads can be an unwelcome addition to the moors.

The coal-fired power industry likes them as well. No wind farm will ever lead to a conventional power station closing it's doors, but they're a useful sop to the public - shows that the government's putting its back into the renewables business.

So, according to your presumption you'll get 0.5kW in what amount of time?

At any given time it would be producing 0.5kW (assuming constant wind speed of course so this is hypothetical). You might as well ask how long it takes a 60W light bulb to 'use' 60W? It's using it all the time! Or you might as well ask how long would it take to travel 60mph on your bike?

Power is the time derivative of energy.

In rated power generation, how long would you expect a 10kW turbine to be capable of delinvering its 10kW

Indefinitely, given sufficient wind.

binners - Member
Harry. Could you keep me posted on that one please fella? Wouldn't mind joining you, if you don't mind

No problem. The more the merrier etc.

The rough plan is (subject to baby sitter availability) to start in Holcombe then do Peel Tower, Helmshore, Edenfield, Scout Moore, Rooley Moore, Nangreaves, Ramsbottom, The Rake and back to the car park. I’ve run off some maps so we can make it up on the go.

Saturday morning, 9:30 ish.

I’ll email you when we firm up the meeting point and the start time.

Not the question mol, in rated capacity how long should the WT take to deliver 10kW? or a heater? or a motor?
Rated power is per hour, so if you have a 10kW motor it is rated to deliver 10kW or power in 1 hour. 10kW x 1hr = 10kWh. As it's the same number, the h is often dropped. If I turn that 10kW motor off for 10 hours, I will save 100kWh.

in rated capacity how long should the WT take to deliver 10kW?

You are making no sense. Power is an instantaneous figure.

so if you have a 10kW motor it is rated to deliver 10kW or power in 1 hour

What if you run it for two hours?

Rated capacity.
kWh is KiloWatts Per 1 Hour. if a water heater had a 4.5 kW heating element, that ran for 1 hour (60 minutes, or 3600 seconds) it would consume 4.5 kWh of energy. If it ran for 2 hours, it would consume 9kWh of energy etc.

Edit - withdrawn after you fixed your post.

Finishing with the Rake? That's certainly an interesting approach. You maniac!!! 😉

I'm definitely up for it though. I'll see if I can build up the Intense this week. Sick of riding my bloody hardtail round there. 🙁

I like wind turbines, but I don't believe they are the green fix that people (politicians) seem to think they are. They have their place, that is on suitable sites, probably offshore, but there are many other types of energy provision that can be utilised, and more successfully!

In this country we need to stop subsidising wind farms, and promote initiatives such as energy-from-waste and biomass, particularly in the application of district heating. Ground- and air-source heat pumps should also be promoted, and most significantly, fundamental changes to the design of new housing and offices (i.e. passive building designs).

And of course carbon capture and storage on thermal plants and industry...

kWh is KiloWatts Per 1 Hour.

No, it isn't.

KWh is the amount of energy is generated (or used). KW/h is the rate of change of power generation; eg, it a power station was generating 5KW, and an hour later it was generating 15KW, it'd have ramped up at a rate of 10KW/h.

KWh is the amount of energy is generated (or used). KW/h is the rate of change of power generation; eg, it a power station was generating 5KW, and an hour later it was generating 15KW, it'd have ramped up at a rate of 10KW/h.

(edit removed, nor can I)

that wind energy currently contributes to the secure production capacity of the system, by providing 8% of its installed capacity.

I'd read that as Germany is getting 8% of its electrical energy from wind turbines, which sounds about right.

Yes they never/rarely prduce the maximum capacity, but look at coal/gas/nuclear they don't run 100% all the time either and quite often get power companies downrating a coal fired power station towards the end of its life so that they can say it's not economicaly viable to refurbish thus it gets knocked down, otherwise they'd have to sell it to a competitor as you can't decomision a viable power station under anti-competitiveness legislation (i.e. in simple terms buy one, then decomission it to push up the price of the rest of the 'lecy, which your competitior isnt getting as he sold you the station).

For those who believe that wind turbines have a lousy carbon footprint try this:

For a big wind turbine:

260 tonnes of steel: 390 tonnes of CO2
850m3 concrete: 48t CO2
Transport of material sot site: 1.3t

Producing the energy that the wind turbine produces over 30years with fossil fuels would result in the realease of 8000t of CO2.

That looks pretty good to me. The windmill is carbon neutral in under two years and will produce clean energy for many more.

Finishing with the Rake? That's certainly an interesting approach. You maniac!!!

You get a 20 mile warm up.

The solution is obvious. We need to detonate nuclear bombs to create the famous "500mph wind" that'll get the fellas really spinning.

The benefits wil.....ah....no, no. Not my best work.

love 'em.. anyone not loving them deserves a slow and painful labotomy..

EDIT: preceded by a thorough rogering with a rusty pike..

My mate is vigorously campaingning against 2 being put on the downs by Lambourne, the ultimate NIMBY.

They play a major role in electricity generating in Denmark and Germany.

I'd read that as Germany is getting 8% of its electrical energy from wind turbines, which sounds about right.

Sorry, you read it wrong. It's 8% of the installed capacity of the WTs.
So, for example a 100kW WT delivering 8kW. This is low, the production ratio is normally 13-26%, although sometimes nothing.
The WT farm by afan consumed energy over the cold snap due to the heating systems to stop them freezing (so I'm informed). WTs also have energy supplies to start them (or did) and require massive infrastructure installations.

Good googling.

Lol! We all know this stuff, it's very basic Physics or engineering.

kWh is kW (power) used per hour (time).

No.

kW/h is kilowatts per hour i.e. power DIVIDED by time. kWh is kilowatt hours meaning power MULTIPLIED by time.

All the difference in the world.

A 60W bulb uses 60W all the time it's on. You can leave it on for a year if you like, it's a 60W bulb. Leave it on or one hour it'll use 60Wh.

Have not herd that phrase since I was at school. Internet hard man at work!
If you have nothing to contribute; **** off.

If you can't construct a n argument without insults and swearing please go away.

that bridge torm posted is pretty 🙂

require massive infrastructure installations

As do most renewable project, no? Apart from local generation...