[News] Wind energy - number one source of energy for first time

[Giraffe]

Marvellous to see this, albeit so frustrating that this wasn't done many moons ago when it was obvious this was the way to go.

Wind is main source of UK electricity for first time

Wind power overtakes gas for the first time in the UK during first three months of year.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Wind turbines have generated more electricity than gas for the first time in the UK.
In the first three months of this year a third of the country's electricity came from wind farms, research from Imperial College London have shown."

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Certainly seems to be the case on a local level...

[Humour] - Flatulent neighbours.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-calls-police-neighbour-hell-29941158 'Riley would fart and burp so loudly and persistently it could be heard through their adjoining wall.' This has cheered me up and made my day, after Mondays disaster :lolol:

www.northstandchat.com

 

[Brok]

I still firmly believe that we should do more to exploit the tides.
Trillions of tons of water moving up and down every day must produce one hell of a lot of power, shirley?

 

[Stat Brother]

Are we now going to sell 'wind' to large mainland European businesses so they can then sell it back to us for an exorbitant profit to their shareholders, while they refuse to reinvent another penny in wind?

 

[KZNSeagull]

It is great news. This, however, is not.

Renewable energy projects worth billions stuck on hold

Major UK renewable energy projects being delayed by more than 10 years as grid reaches capacity.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[beorhthelm]

good to get recognition that we're doing so much on wind power.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It's great. Let's scale it up. Our whole island should be surrounded in turbines, we have this extraordinary resource.

 

[Hove Lagoonery]

Marvellous to see this, albeit so frustrating that this wasn't done many moons ago

It's because many moons ago, wind was far from being the cheapest way to generate electricity.

 

[Daddies_Sauce]

I still firmly believe that we should do more to exploit the tides.
Trillions of tons of water moving up and down every day must produce one hell of a lot of power, shirley?

There was a report suggesting underwater turbines attached between the pylons of off-shore wind farms . The only guaranteed generation(?), the wind does not always blow, the sun does not always shine, but the tide goes in and out twice per day.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It's because many moons ago, wind was far from being the cheapest way to generate electricity.

But it was known that all of these technologies would decrease in price as they were scaled up.

Again, it's an example of power companies making short term decisions to benefit shareholders this year, rather than investing in what we all need to the future

 

[jakarta]

If all the West goes this way then Putin's premier asset is f***ed. The murdering thugs in the Middle East ditto. Which will be nice.

 

[Brok]

There was a report suggesting underwater turbines attached between the pylons of off-shore wind farms . The only guaranteed generation(?), the wind does not always blow, the sun does not always shine, but the tide goes in and out twice per day.

Exactly that.
And all we do is put poxy little propellers under water. Useless.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

If all the West goes this way then Putin's premier asset is f***ed. The murdering thugs in the Middle East ditto. Which will be nice.

And they are going this way in part because of him. Energy supply is something you can't leave to the chance whim of a dictator.

Of course, wind is far from predictable, but as a part of a balanced portfolio you can manage the peaks and troughs

 

[beorhthelm]

But it was known that all of these technologies would decrease in price as they were scaled up.

Again, it's an example of power companies making short term decisions to benefit shareholders this year, rather than investing in what we all need to the future

same power companies building wind are at fault for not building wind? no, they are long term investors, building out infrastucture on 10-20 year horizons and the shareholders know that. primary obstacle for any new infrastructure is planning. see article, even when they get planning for a turbine farm, they dont get the planning for the interconnetions - because that costs more, and more difficult to gain planning. with Rampion, after deployuing the turbines they had to dig miles of underground cables over the Downs, the usual suspects complained about that and delayed.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

same power companies building wind are at fault for not building wind? no, they are long term investors, building out infrastucture on 10-20 year horizons and the shareholders know that. primary obstacle for any new infrastructure is planning. see article, even when they get planning for a turbine farm, they dont get the planning for the interconnetions - because that costs more, and more difficult to gain planning. with Rampion, after deployuing the turbines they had to dig miles of underground cables over the Downs, the usual suspects complained about that and delayed.

Not going far or fast enough being the point. Oh and do you need extra infrastructure and planning for offshore wind? Thanks mate. Would never have guessed.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

If all the West goes this way then Putin's premier asset is f***ed. The murdering thugs in the Middle East ditto. Which will be nice.

For Putin; to a degree. However renewables such as wind cannot provide 100% of our power needs so the grid needs gas fired capacity at times to balance the system. Putin also has other markets in the Far East to supply.
The murderous thugs in the Middle East sell crude oil which is a different market.

 

[Bold Seagull]

same power companies building wind are at fault for not building wind? no, they are long term investors, building out infrastucture on 10-20 year horizons and the shareholders know that. primary obstacle for any new infrastructure is planning. see article, even when they get planning for a turbine farm, they dont get the planning for the interconnetions - because that costs more, and more difficult to gain planning. with Rampion, after deployuing the turbines they had to dig miles of underground cables over the Downs, the usual suspects complained about that and delayed.

Aren't most of these funded from the CfD auctions? Over it's 20 year lifetime Rampion will recieve over £2bn in subsidies. You make it sound like the energy companies are morally motivated long term investors, not the tax payers. The UK tax payer is paying for these scheme to be attractive for energy companies to undertake them.

 

[MJsGhost]

The murderous thugs in the Middle East sell crude oil which is a different market.

If I recall correctly, about 50% of crude oil ends up as fuel for cars, so although there's a big extra step (replacing petrol & diesel vehicles with EVs), being able to power vehicles with electricity from renewables will still take a big chunk out of their market (albeit in the long term)

 

[nicko31]

Loads of new onshore wind going in, still need to get on with more onshore wind. In Germany onshore wind is everywhere.

We're spoilt for tidal energy, the British Isles has one of the world's biggest tidal ranges.

If we get serious we won't just be energy self sufficient, we can be a net exporter.

 

[beorhthelm]

Aren't most of these funded from the CfD auctions? Over it's 20 year lifetime Rampion will recieve over £2bn in subsidies. You make it sound like the energy companies are morally motivated long term investors, not the tax payers. The UK tax payer is paying for these scheme to be attractive for energy companies to undertake them.

i wouldnt highlight the subsidies, probably none get built without them. point was the companies are motivated for long term returns, not short term. there is some moral & policy direction though, if they were just out for money they'd still be burning coal.