Wind energy in France and Germany: key figures

[Christophe]

Sorry christophe but me I prefer to base myself on the regulations (see the appendix to the document. You will see that it is 2400 hours that you have an interest in doing today. And Janco with his thing that ten years (no comment), gives 2000h, which corresponds to the conditions of purchase of the old regulations.

Two things call out to me:

a) According to you it is therefore the regulations (purely VIRTUAL) which therefore defines the PHYSICAL performance of a wind turbine? It's the world upside down ... say so! Without laughing I see what you mean (a project <2400h will not be done) but all the same ... well it proves one thing: the regulations hold the world of wind power by the balls ... speaking of regulations where is it: halt of the purchase of wind energy by EDF ?

b) Is it ten years old? Yes and so? The wind turbines have undoubtedly gained a few points in yields ... it does not change much in the orders of magnitude ...

Why not. But their ranges go from simple to double ... it's a bit much wide.

Well in Offshore it does not surprise me that it doubles ... and after what it's annoying? You take either the average or the 2 extremes ...

For the 3rd time: it will not change NOTHING TO ORDERS OF SIZE.

ps: between Rulian and me we found the perpetual movement: a discussion around wind turbines!

[Rulian]

wind power will never do mass production to power an entire country? Its development is at the expense of other more sustainable and profitable solutions: brief econological.

Now you think what you want ... if you don't want to understand that I can't help it. Obviously wind power is better than nothing but it is surely not THE BEST ... far from it.

We agree that it's not worth the reduction in consumption. But in terms of production of electricity, if you have better solutions to develop than wind, I would like you to give them to me (there is hydroelectric, but it is already saturated in France).

From an ethical point of view, I think wind power "works" better than other solutions because it brings a lot of money to few people: in short, it remains in the "system" of centralization of energy ...

I agree that the energy system has fundamental, technical and political problems. But if you wait for France to become the wonderful country-of-bisounours-where-there-are-no-bad-capitalists-and-ugly-nucleocrats to act in the energy mutation, well you risk to wait a long time. It is not a very constructive attitude. The system is crooked, of course, but you have to deal with it and get what you can from it. If a perfect world awaits you to act, you will have nothing and you will lose everything. The system offers me nuke or wind, well I take the wind, it does not prevent me from being critical on the system.

[Christophe]

if you have better solutions to develop than wind, I would like you to give them to me (there is hydroelectric, but it is already saturated in France).

1 example given in the last post here that you missed (post crossed): https://www.econologie.com/forums/l-eolien-e ... 71-10.html

[Rulian]

a) So it is the regulations (purely VIRTUAL) that therefore define the PHYSICAL performance of a wind turbine? It's the world upside down ... say so!

It does not define its physical performance, but that means that we are not trying to get the most energy from each machine. The physical limits in terms of annual production are often not reached since we stop before. It's completely stupid, I agree, but that's how it is. I just wanted to give a little more valuable info to find out what we're talking about. I never said that the law was well made.

For the 3rd time: it will not change NOTHING TO ORDERS OF SIZE.

Let's say that I don't think that returns of 20%, 30% or 40% are strictly speaking of the same order of magnitude.

[Christophe]

but that means that we don't try to get the most energy from each machine.

Error in judgment or slip of the tongue? It's the maximum profitability and financial profit you meant I think ... if it were energy we wouldn't do wind power like we wouldn't do photovoltaics.

The physical limits in terms of annual production are often not reached since we stop before. It's completely stupid, I agree, but that's how it is. I just wanted to give a little more valuable info to find out what we're talking about. I never said that the law was well made.

Well we will agree at least on one point in this discussion ...

For the 3rd time: it will not change NOTHING TO ORDERS OF SIZE.

Let's say that I don't think that returns of 20%, 30% or 40% are strictly speaking of the same order of magnitude.

Sorry if it doesn't change anything: multiply 1 by 2 and compare it to 100 ...

[Rulian]

I think DESERTEC is a great idea. But putting all these beautiful people in agreement on a potential issue as highly strategic as that, I can assure you that it is not for tomorrow. It is very beautiful technically and I am completely for it, but it is politically impracticable. Let's not be naive! So in the meantime, as I am not an ambassador in Algeria, well I prefer the things that work, there, now and right away.

[Rulian]

Sorry if it doesn't change anything: multiply 1 by 2 and compare it to 100 ...

There you talk to me about 1% or 2%. But we were rather on 20% to 40%.

You should revise your percentages

[Christophe]

Ah glad to hear you say it. Yes for desertec there are other problems ... The transport of energy also ... (I can't see a 500GW cable passing gibraltar to power Europe, for the world don't even talk about it) .. .. on the other hand we could always transform these energy into something more transportable (by H2 please !!). As projects of recovery of ocean thermal energy have thought about it ...

For politics, however, there would be an easy and quick solution: Algeria again French!

In the rest of the world there is no shortage of deserts ... for example in Texas ... there would be plenty to fuel American energy independence.

In the meantime we are all glued to our pc ... nuclear ...

[Christophe]

There you talk to me about 1% or 2%. But we were rather on 20% to 40%.

You should revise your percentages

But what are you saying? Jte talks about the wind potential compared to the "rest" of the needs 5% in Germany does that mean anything to you?

Whether there is 20 or 40% load factor it will not change this result ...

Don't take me for a year more than I am please ...

[Woodcutter]

Since you are not talking about the same thing, the discussion may get bogged down a bit ...