Wind power: for or against the wind?

Renewable energies except solar electric or thermal (seeforums dedicated below): wind turbines, energy from the sea, hydraulic and hydroelectricity, biomass, biogas, deep geothermal energy ...
User avatar
nonoLeRobot
Master Kyot'Home
Master Kyot'Home
posts: 790
Registration: 19/01/05, 23:55
Location: Beaune 21 / Paris
x 13




by nonoLeRobot » 07/02/11, 20:53

The link no longer works, but here is another article showing the staggering cost of this project in relation to performance ...

http://www.marianne2.fr/600-eoliennes-1 ... 02363.html

600 wind turbines, 10 billion euros ... for nothing?

The call for projects for a large project of 600 wind turbines launched by Sarkozy last week made the blogger SuperNO react. The latter deciphers what is hidden behind the promise of all green suggested by this announcement, and points the finger at the deception of the figures put forward by Sarkozy.

After having confided to his farmer friends that "ecology is starting to do well", which must be the basis of his thinking, Sarkozy has just bounced the other way by announcing, with a force which we had the habit since watching TV instead of being in it, he wanted to start a gigantic project: 600 offshore wind turbines.

Expected cost: 10 billion euros. Huge. 2 Kerviels. Almost a year of tax package, more than 2 years of wealth tax ... 3 times the plunder of Ben Ali ... But 17 times less than the tax advantages granted annually to French companies. Or even about 1000 times less than the torrent of blur that we all gave to safeguard the banking system after the 2008 crash.

In short, for a cause which should be given priority, the sum is not so important.

Everyone knows my skepticism about wind energy, the production of which remains in France infinitesimal (1.5% of the total according to the latest news). However, my ears stand up to the announcement of the figures announced: 600 wind turbines with a unit power of 5 megawatts.

I do not know if anyone took the trouble to make an energy assessment of these devices, and in particular the monstrous amounts of energy necessary for their implantation at sea.

As for the 150 European jobs that would be generated by 000, I suspect the author of these remarks to abuse the booze and cannabis together: unless we talk about construction and implantation, which will certainly occupy a For a while, these vehicles, like modern automobile factories, industrial pig farms, or hard-discount mini-markets, operate with staff almost reduced to nothing.

Especially since if it is like building the EPR in Flamanville, a good part of the jobs will in fact be filled by neo-slaves from the Eastern countries, "Bolkestein workers", for the greatest happiness their employers (Bouygues in the lead) and their shareholders.

But enough of bashing, let's come back to the numbers. Without mixing them, unlike many journalists, who blithely confuse watts and watts / hours, mega and tera…

An offshore wind turbine therefore has a respectable power of 5MW. 600 wind turbines, 3000 MW. An EPR reactor given for 1600 MW, we can therefore hastily deduce from it, and it was also the culmination of the “elements of language” distributed to journalists who took them up with an absence of critical sense which commands respect and incompetence: "These wind turbines produce as much as 2 EPR nuclear reactors".

However, there was something to be said. First of all on the subject of EPR, the conditional should be used, since none of these devices is still in operation. The 2 reactors under construction by Areva, in Flamanville and in Finland, are several years behind schedule and a budget exploded.

Note also that without the uranium looted by the same Areva in Niger, which has given us some diplomatic setbacks, these infernal machines would not turn.

Next, note that the waste produced by nuclear power plants can have a lifespan of several million years, for a few decades of production. Total aberration. Not to mention the dismantling of the power stations, which is also completely undervalued.

Finally, let us note, and this is perhaps the most serious, that French nuclear power is in the hands of a mafia ready to do anything to achieve its ends, and whose methods show about as much transparency as the my grandmother's panties.

That said, an EPR reactor would be a little more powerful than current reactors, and above all would have an availability rate of around 91%, much higher than the current generation. According to official figures, to be taken with a grain of salt, therefore, an EPR would produce around 12 TWh per year.

However, a wind turbine has much less availability. Even if the winds are stronger and more regular at sea, a 5MW wind turbine produces only 15GWh per year. Whereas if it was constantly running at full power, it would produce 500 * 24 * 365/1000 = 44. A third of its nominal power, therefore.

600 offshore wind turbines should therefore produce around 9 TWh. It is therefore not the equivalent of 2 EPR reactors, but 3 times less! That is to say that even once the second tranche of 600 wind turbines will be built, it will only be one and a half EPR.

Financially, it is even more astonishing. While one might think that a nuclear power plant is an extraordinarily complex thing and therefore overpriced, while a wind turbine would rather be a fairly simple thing and therefore inexpensive, it is in fact exactly the opposite. Even with budget overruns, an EPR reactor should cost around 5 billion euros. 2 times less than the 600 wind turbines which nevertheless provide only 2/3 of the power… That puts the TWh wind power at 3 times the TWh nuclear power… Well, the calculation is certainly biased, since a nuclear power plant has much higher operating costs, requires fuel to be stolen, poses unacceptable risks to the population, and its dismantling is so complicated that no one can assess it. While a wind turbine turns on its own.

To put the importance of these wind turbines into perspective, it should be recalled that in 2009, France produced 518.8 TWh. The wind turbines already installed provide only 1.5% of the total. Peanuts. As for the 58 nuclear reactors, many of which are aging, they produce 390 TWh, three-quarters of the total. The rest is distributed mainly between dams and gas power plants.

These 600 wind turbines will in principle be functional in 2015. They will therefore produce 9 TWh, 1.7% of the total. These 1.7% will obviously be largely eaten by the inevitable increase in consumption, an inevitable companion of "growth". The time to build 600 more will be even worse. Especially when the electric car starts to drill, even if it isn't until 2020.

But let's admit, as Bigard's bat would say. Let us assume that we succeed in building thousands of offshore wind turbines, to produce 400 TWh and replace existing nuclear power plants. This would require about 27000, or maybe 450 billion euros. A straw.

The problem is that it wouldn't even be enough. Even doubling the number again would not solve the problem. Imagine a gigantic high pressure over France, dead calm, and all these wind turbines would produce almost nothing. What do we do ? On the other hand, in periods of strong wind, they would undoubtedly produce too much. What to do then?

The complicated solution consists in having gas plants in reserve which would take over in times of dead calm. Except that these plants emit megatonnes of CO2, and that it would require considerable quantities, almost as much as the power of wind turbines… As long as there is gas…

There is no simple solution. But it seems to me that the first measure to take, before even thinking about anything, is to steer the economy towards decay, which would first of all lead to a decrease in energy needs. It's strange, nobody talks about that one ...

(...)
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 20/02/11, 17:34

nonoLeRobot wrote:The link no longer works, but here is another article showing the staggering cost of this project in relation to performance ...


Despite the gigantism of the device and its low yield, the overall cost is not that huge, let alone in the face of nuclear power ... whose real cost is, I recall, almost impossible to calculate.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 21/02/11, 02:14

Very nice nonoLeRobot analysis of wind and nuclear fairly objective, forgetting that men are not infallible in perpetuity and therefore sooner or later, in France a nuclear reactor will go up like in Chernobyl, definitively sinking the economy of France by making an entire region of France prohibited from any agricultural or residential activity for many centuries !!!

He forgets that wind power can be supplemented by summer solar thermal with underground storage to heat the winter which would in perpetuity eliminate any centralized heating energy, whether nuclear, wind or CO2 for a price of a few boilers per house .
http://www.dlsc.ca/DLSC_Brochure_f.pdf
He forgets that the sun can cultivate algae recycling CO2 to end up in petroleum, efficient with certainty, if one devotes a part of the research credits on nuclear power.
http://www.physorg.com/news139058872.html
http://www.physorg.com/news157272282.html
http://www.physorg.com/news185521814.html
0 x
User avatar
quartz
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 640
Registration: 20/01/07, 14:38
Location: Parisian region




by quartz » 11/05/11, 22:54

Good evening everyone,

I just discovered a website, the concept seems relevant to me.
I'm afraid to make a duplicate, but just in case.

Good night
0 x
Every minute that passes is an opportunity to change the course of your life.
YouTube page, Dailymotion page, Picasa album, personal Pages, Viktor Schauberger
Leo Maximus
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2183
Registration: 07/11/06, 13:18
x 124




by Leo Maximus » 12/05/11, 10:01

600 wind turbines => 10 billion euros! that's 16,7 million euros per wind turbine : Shock: .

The Bouin wind farm in Vendée has been operating for several years. It cost a total of 22 million euros for 8 wind turbines. Its cost per wind turbine is 2,75 million euros, it's 6 times cheaper.

Are AREVA in control of this project? : Cheesy:

:?:

The Bouin wind farm last August:

Image

http://www.nopole.com/eoliennes-bouin-v ... eolien.htm
http://www.thewindpower.net/champ-eolien-1.php
0 x
Micheldu13
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 5
Registration: 27/10/11, 17:24




by Micheldu13 » 03/11/11, 18:09

Hello!
I am for 100%!
Besides, I have a wind turbine in my garden and I am super happy!
with new technologies, they are practically noisier: 35 decibels at 25kms ...

it is quite expensive to invest but it pays for itself very slowly.

as for those who say that it spoils the landscape, I think it has its charm ...
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554




by moinsdewatt » 05/11/11, 20:09

The largest offshore wind farm in the world is British

The November 1er, the Walney 2 offshore wind farm consisting of 51 turbines and based in the Irish Sea injected its first kilowatt hours (kWh) of renewable energy into the UK's national grid.
While Walney 1 Park became fully operational in May 2011, Walney 2's will also be fully operational by the end of 2011, making the complex the largest offshore wind power complex in the world, with a total capacity of 367,2 MW renewable energy.

[....]

This honorary title will, however, soon be lost in 2012, with the completion of the Greater Gabbard (500MW) and London Array (630MW) wind farms, still located in the UK.

The two wind farms are each composed of 51 turbines delivered by Siemens Wind Power, with a unit capacity of 3,6 MW, or globally 102 units x 3,6 MW.

Image

The Walney Soffshores wind farms are located about 15 km from the coast of the island of "Walney" (north-west of England) and cover an area of ​​approximately 73 km2. However, as the offshore wind complex remains quite far from the coast, the visual impacts remain relatively low.


The Irish Sea is renowned for its difficult access and climatic conditions. Indeed, the difference between high tide and low tide is about 8 meters. The wind speed is estimated at an average of 9,3 m / s at a rate of 80 meters.
.................
Image


http://www.enerzine.com/3/12909+le-plus ... ique+.html
0 x
User avatar
caracole
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 251
Registration: 31/03/07, 22:05
Location: Castellon (Spain)




by caracole » 04/02/12, 23:39

I am for (I have one) but if you want to see better ...
for example a 230Kw wind turbine for 69.000 € expensive or not expensive?

http://www.mywindpowersystem.com/

Image
0 x
Windows is a human operating system by the computer.
Linux is the opposite ...
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 06/02/12, 11:35

I wanted to find a site that gives direct production from a wind farm, but I only found that:
http://www.globometer.com/energie-eolien.php
0 x
Man is by nature a political animal (Aristotle)
User avatar
caracole
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 251
Registration: 31/03/07, 22:05
Location: Castellon (Spain)




by caracole » 06/02/12, 16:12

Interesting on the site, but these are not actual values, they are judiciously calculated from algorithm and statistics.
0 x
Windows is a human operating system by the computer.

Linux is the opposite ...

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "hydraulic, wind, geothermal, marine energy, biogas ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 157 guests