Thanks for the Wind Farms

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

ANTONISH wrote: 22 Jan 2022, 5:21pmIf I recall correctly the original link (Sellinge to Les Attaques) was meant to be a reciprocal arrangement to allow for the different periods of peak demand between the two countries.
Different timing of peak demand is a good reason for interconnects.

Different timing of supply from intermittent renewable sources is another.

Resilience after failure of a source is another.

Jonathan

PS: Sellindge IFA originally 160 MW. Now 2 GW. And now another 1 GW on IFA-2.

Image
roubaixtuesday
Posts: 5814
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by roubaixtuesday »

Jdsk wrote: 22 Jan 2022, 5:36pm
ANTONISH wrote: 22 Jan 2022, 5:21pmIf I recall correctly the original link (Sellinge to Les Attaques) was meant to be a reciprocal arrangement to allow for the different periods of peak demand between the two countries.
Different timing of peak demand is a good reason for interconnects.

Different timing of supply from intermittent renewable sources is another.

Resilience after failure of a source is another.

Jonathan

PS: Sellindge IFA originally 160 MW. Now 2 GW. And now another 1 GW on IFA-2.

Image
Nice graphic, can I ask the source?

Also, I thought a UK Iceland connector was in the works?
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

It's from Wikipedia, and I think that it needs updating:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_super_grid

I'd heard about an interconnect from Iceland using geothermal energy. But I can't find anything recent on it. There's a mention in that article. And another map!

Jonathan

Image
rjb
Posts: 7199
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 10:25am
Location: Somerset (originally 60/70's Plymouth)

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by rjb »

Iceland interconnect is still in the pipeline. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelink#: ... he%20world.
At the last count:- Peugeot 531 pro, Dawes Discovery Tandem, Dawes Kingpin X3, Raleigh 20 stowaway, 1965 Moulton deluxe, Falcon K2 MTB dropped bar tourer, Rudge Bi frame folder, Longstaff trike conversion on a Giant XTC 840 :D
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

Thanks.

And nice wording. : - )

0.8 to 1.2 GW

Jonathan
ANTONISH
Posts: 2967
Joined: 26 Mar 2009, 9:49am

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by ANTONISH »

Jdsk wrote: 24 Jan 2022, 11:09am It's from Wikipedia, and I think that it needs updating:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_super_grid

I'd heard about an interconnect from Iceland using geothermal energy. But I can't find anything recent on it. There's a mention in that article. And another map!

Jonathan

Image
That's a lovely picture - all we need is political stability
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

Screenshot 2022-04-10 at 10.14.13.png
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ll-reveals

Pretty clear.

But in the light (!) of this week's announcements the split by party affiliation might be even more important:

"Ministers backed nuclear power but shunned new onshore wind plants as the main means for protecting the UK against future energy crises. But the new poll indicates Tory voters’ backing for wind turbines almost matches that of Labour and Lib Dem supporters – suggesting the move against onshore wind, a result of backbench Conservative pressure, runs counter to the views of the party’s own voters.

"In the Opinium poll, 79% of Tory voters said they were strongly or somewhat in favour of windfarms being installed in the UK, compared with 83% of Labour voters and 88% of Lib Dems. Two-thirds of all voters said they would be happy for a windfarm to be built near them."


Jonathan
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by thirdcrank »

NIMBYs rule. OK?
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

I read that as the opposite... most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. And that the government has got that wrong.

Jonathan

PS: IIRC there's some research showing that acceptability of local generation goes up dramatically if there's some perception of local benefit.
gbnz
Posts: 2554
Joined: 13 Sep 2008, 10:38am

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by gbnz »

Jdsk wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:22am I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
axel_knutt
Posts: 2879
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by axel_knutt »

gbnz wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 1:01pm
Jdsk wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:22am I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
People's idea of an eyesore changes over time. some bridges and viaducts etc are protected when they were once campaigned against. I was rather disappointed to see the golf balls disappear from Fylingdales.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

axel_knutt wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 2:49pm
gbnz wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 1:01pm
Jdsk wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:22am I most people would be happy for a wind farm to be built near them. t.
+ 1. No issues with any of our local wind farms, even those erected on primary stretches of fell sandstone moorland, look perfectly ok. Whilst establishing them on superb parts of the local landscape would be a mistake, increasing the number locally could easily be done, without an adverse landscape impact.
People's idea of an eyesore changes over time. some bridges and viaducts etc are protected when they were once campaigned against. I was rather disappointed to see the golf balls disappear from Fylingdales.
Agreed. A lot of it is unfamiliarity rather than anything deeper.

We had the cooling towers at Didcot. On some walks and rides I can feel their absence.

Jonathan
Ben@Forest
Posts: 3647
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Ben@Forest »

Jdsk wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:16am "Ministers backed nuclear power but shunned new onshore wind plants as the main means for protecting the UK against future energy crises. But the new poll indicates Tory voters’ backing for wind turbines almost matches that of Labour and Lib Dem supporters – suggesting the move against onshore wind, a result of backbench Conservative pressure, runs counter to the views of the party’s own voters.

"In the Opinium poll, 79% of Tory voters said they were strongly or somewhat in favour of windfarms being installed in the UK, compared with 83% of Labour voters and 88% of Lib Dems. Two-thirds of all voters said they would be happy for a windfarm to be built near them."
Sounds to me like the usual 'happy till it is actually proposed". We have had two proposals for wind turbines here, both for four of 20m (hub height). Though the view from our house is not ''spectacular" it is of uninterrupted countryside and then a range of hills in the far distance, it certainly will not be improved with wind turbines.

There were a slew of objections to the first, including from both a civil and a military airfield, from organisations ranging from the CPRE to the British Horse Society and a lot of local residents - the site is really quite close to housing. It was rejected. It's been put in again by the same landowner and the decision is still pending. Frankly l think if most people lived here and saw the proposals they'd object - whatever fine words they'd say to a pollster.
Carlton green
Posts: 3645
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Carlton green »

An interesting thread, wind power has come a long way since the thread was started.

My preference is small scale nuclear ( small modular reactors) built in large numbers across the country, but it ain’t going to happen ‘cause that would require investment, public support and long term planning, etc. Wind Turbines, I’m fine with them but they take a bit of getting used to. We have some stand along ones locally and I’d be happy to see more; they aren’t massive, they aren’t near to housing and they blend in with the local environment. There are also some solar farms too, and again I’ve no particular problem with them other than wondering whether good agricultural land could be better used for food production.

Energy storage is the issue and I see no solution to it in either the the near or the mid future. Yes, there are ways of storing electricity and potential energy but nothing has really scaled up and various schemes have come and gone over the years. Current U.K. nuclear doesn’t load follow, it can’t, but how much of that is due to reactor type and how much is due to it being Steam Turbine plant I’m not sure.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Jdsk
Posts: 24630
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Thanks for the Wind Farms

Post by Jdsk »

Carlton green wrote: 10 Apr 2022, 10:18pmEnergy storage is the issue and I see no solution to it in either the the near or the mid future. Yes, there are ways of storing electricity and potential energy but nothing has really scaled up and various schemes have come and gone over the years.
There are many available and working storage technologies. We haven't seen most of them at massive scale because we haven't faced up to switching off fossil fuels so that there hasn't been the economic incentive. Yet. The relevant question is whether they can scale up when we finally do. I don't see the technological barriers.

Jonathan
Post Reply