British Bird Boppers Benched - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 04:31:37 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--See below link to article about the recent outbreak of sobriety, not to mention arithmetic, in the UK, and a resounding victory for Don Quixote. No more onshore Wind Farms other than those already in process will be built. The clamor for the giant bird bopping monstrosities that only produce 25% of their rated power, and draw a 100% subsidy on all power produced courtesy of rate payers, is finally dying away, in the wake of ever increasing electricity bills.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2225544/Good-riddance-wind-farms--dangerous-delusions-age.html\"The only way the industry managed to fool politicians into accepting this crazy deal was by subterfuge — referring to turbines only in terms of their ‘capacity’ (i.e. what they could produce if the wind was blowing at optimum speeds 24 hours of every day). The truth is that their average actual output is barely a quarter of that figure. Yet it was on this deception that the industry managed to fool pretty well everyone that windfarms could make a contribution to Britain’s energy needs four times larger than reality — and thus was ‘the great wind scam’ launched on its way."--Next on the chopping block will be the offshore bird boppers."It’s not just that the thousands of offshore turbines that the Government still wants built will not only produce amounts of electricity scarcely less pitiful than those onshore. Because they are so much more expensive to build, they attract subsidies not at 100 per cent but at 200 per cent."“For neither good nor evil can last for ever; and so it follows that as evil has lasted a long time, good must now be close at hand.” from Don QuixoteMiguel de Cervantes Saavedra 1547 - 1616Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 04:40:10 pm
content: What did I say about the Daily Mail? Oh, I forgot... it was positive though. Yeah, they're a really great newspaper. Reliable too. That was it. /sOK, I am really getting fed up with this "inefficiency" claim. First, the capacity isn't the average power it'll provide. If you have a car with a 200HP engine, is it continuously producing 200HP? Of course not! In the same way that a 1GW coal plant is rarely producing 1GW. But the capacity is thereifandwhenit is needed.The nature of wind power is discontinuous, so it should be understood that we need sufficient back-up in case of low wind. This can be done in numerous ways, from least to most preferable (a combination of systems is required):a) supplementing it with traditional power (coal, nuclear, gas...)b) buying energy from other countries (and selling it to them when they need it) -- already done, infrastructure exists between UK and Europec) more wind turbines in different places (likely to be windysomewhere)d) solar power supplements (not really good enough in the UK at the moment, at least not with current tech)I can only assume that the "bird bopping" comment relates to the fact that they may kill birds. I suppose it's plausible, but in the same way that a jet engine would do. Bird strikes on flying aircraft are quite rare, and I would suspect that on wind turbines, it would be similar. I do not have a source for this information, but I would be interested in a genuine scientific study (NOT in a tabloid newspaper.) If you find an interesting report, I just found out I have ATHENS support at uni, which means I can get pretty much any report/journal for free in electronic form.

author: Prizmatic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 05:10:35 pm
content: Interesting statement.. Given it follows on the heels of Hitachi purchasing Horizon Nuclear Power, making them a keystone for implementing our nuclear development plans.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 05:52:33 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--In response to the Daily Mail article stating that "Energy Minister John Hayes has announced no more wind farms are allowed to be built in the UK", Tom66 attacked the accuracy of the Newspaper, without, mind you, ever stating that the article was inaccurate.--In response to the statement in the article that "The only way the industry managed to fool politicians into accepting this crazy deal was by subterfuge — referring to turbines only in terms of their ‘capacity’ "--Tom 66 stated that "OK, I am really getting fed up with this "inefficiency" claim. First, the capacity isn't the average power it'll provide. If you have a car with a 200HP engine, is it continuously producing 200HP? Of course not! In the same way that a 1GW coal plant is rarely producing 1GW. But the capacity is there if and when it is needed."--Which of course does not at all address the "subterfuge" statement in any way. Also a 200hp engine or 1 1GW coal plant can indeed provide rated capactiy when needed. But not so Wind Power, is can on do so when the wind cooperates and not "when needed". Nice try, but no cigar.--Finally Tom66 stated "I can only assume that the "bird bopping" comment relates to the fact that they may kill birds. I suppose it's plausible, but in the same way that a jet engine would do. Bird strikes on flying aircraft are quite rare, and I would suspect that on wind turbines, ... I do not have a source for this information ...--The assumption that "the "bird bopping" comment relates to the fact that they may kill birds." is indeed correct and, wins an honorary Deerstalker Hat and Calabash Pipe for this amazing feat of successful sleuthing. I should add that I, as well, do not have a source for the contention that windmills only kill as many birds as jet engines, uh make that flying aircraft."Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise."Thomas Gray 1716 - 1771Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 06:00:36 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 31, 2012, 05:52:33 pmI addressed this point in the second paragraph, please re-read it.Quote from: SgtRock on October 31, 2012, 05:52:33 pmHmm, where do I collect my prize?Yeah, my bad on flying aircraft != jets -- although the majority probably is due to jet aircraft.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 06:27:19 pm
content: Dear Tom66:--You stated "I addressed this point in the second paragraph, please re-read it."--Begging your pardon, Sir, but I do not believe you did. The question was why did the Wind Power companies sell their product to the UK government on the basis of capacity, rather than the more truthful "actual average power output" which you so accurately delineated in your second paragraph, leaving aside for the moment the the "when needed" problem. The reason they did this was so the press could quote it to pull the wool over the eyes of rate payers.--And with regard to Bird Bopping, see the below link, to an article from the Washington Post.http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/wind-farms-under-fire-for-bird-kills/2011/08/25/gIQAP0bVlJ_story.html"Windmills kill nearly half a million birds a year, according to a Fish and Wildlife estimate. The American Bird Conservancy projected that the number could more than double in 20 years if the administration realizes its goal for wind power." [In just the US]“Before turning to those moral and mental aspects of the matter which present the greatest difficulties, let the inquirer begin by mastering more elementary problems.."Sherlock Holmes 1887 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 06:44:45 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 31, 2012, 06:27:19 pmThe question is -- did they? We would not know unless the government released internal correspondence. And they are unlikely to do so. Now, it is more than possible (if not quite likely) that they lied to the public. I'm not going to argue against that, companies will do almost anything to make a buck.Quote from: SgtRock on October 31, 2012, 06:27:19 pmInteresting article. I am in favour of wind turbines over solar power for now, but do wish there was a better (sustainable) alternative. I do not know for certain, but can a number be put on the number of birds perhaps killed by increasing climate change? It may turn out more die out due to greater pollution, warming planet, etc. But it is a good point.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 07:32:42 pm
content: There are a few hundred birds killed each year in the US by wind farms. I'm not linking to it because I don't have time to look right now, but I do recall it being several hundred. I really don't know how common it is but if you look on youtube you can find videos of people actually filming bird strikes, so it must be common enough for that. Some of it of course comes down to chance - there are videos of train derailments as they are happening and there are thousands of russian car accident videos but then everyone is driving around with cameras on their dash. And there are lots of train spotters who hang out next to tracks just to film trains. How many people hang out at wind farms? No idea. But the number of live windmill bird kills on youtube is definitely nonzero.I think it's just gonna happen. How many birds end up in radiators? I've hit at least three myself in my life.What I really don't understand is why there is no talk of putting solar closets in homes. Why aren't there government programs to help retrofit homes with solar home and water heating? These are technologies that work TODAY and are much more affordable than windmills. You can put solar home and water heating in your home for just a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. It may not offset the electricity and gas completely but it will put a dent in your power bill.Oh, wait...

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 07:42:24 pm
content: I missed this gem when quickly scanning over the article:QuoteSo, let's take a lower bound estimate of total birds killed is the sum of all these categories = 622 million (inclusive of maximum wind farm deaths.)Wind farm deaths = 500,000, possibly 1,000,000, or 0.08%. Or 0.16% if it doubles.It's hardly a significant cause.

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 08:01:00 pm
content: Not sure if this was posted before:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9559656/Germanys-wind-power-chaos-should-be-a-warning-to-the-UK.htmlQuote.... So yeah... they CAN produce lots of power, but it's so fluctuating that it's almost not worth the costs, you always have to keep very inefficient turbine and fast acting power stations to push power when wind goes down.imho the bird killing is seriously inflated... there were studies that showed birds were capable of adapting and going around them...

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 11:01:30 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Tom66 makes a good point "So, let's take a lower bound estimate of total birds killed is the sum of all these categories = 622 million (inclusive of maximum wind farm deaths. Wind farm deaths = 500,000, possibly 1,000,000, or 0.08%. Or 0.16% if it doubles. It's hardly a significant cause. So, let's take a lower bound estimate of total birds killed is the sum of all these categories = 622 million (inclusive of maximum wind farm deaths. Wind farm deaths = 500,000, possibly 1,000,000, or 0.08%. Or 0.16% if it doubles. It's hardly a significant cause."--My point was to establish that they probably kill many more than aircraft. I still cannot find a source for the numbers of birds killed by aircraft and airports. If someone has a source for that figure I would like to see it. Also I wanted to point out the cognitive dissonance of the government with regard to suing or stopping company projects based on animal deaths. The environmentalists aided by the EPA and other government agencies are forever trying to put the quietus to projects based on this sort of thing. Case in point with link below."In the US, birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which dates back to 1918. Over the past two decades, the federal government has brought hundreds of cases against energy companies for killing wild birds in the operation of their businesses. For example, in July 2009, the Oregon based electric utility PacifiCorp paid $1.4 million in fines for killing 232 eagles in Wyoming over a period of two years. The birds were electrocuted by poorly-designed power lines."http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/wind-power-green-and-deadly--And obviously the claim that they kill only a few hundred per year would appear to be a misreading of the the claim that each one kills a few hundred per year, on average.--So indeed, Tom66 wins the point. I just wish the Environmentalists would use his logic and common sense in their other arguments. For instance the drowning Polar Bears hoax, which lead the EPA to declare CO2 a pollutant.--And to Mariush: Your facts appear to be correct. Thanks for the good post.Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people."William Claude Dukenfield, W. C. Fields 1880 1946Best RegardsClear Ether

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 12:29:50 am
content: A bit unrelated ... as in it's not about birds but about the stress German wind power puts on the other countries and the grid network:http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-25/windmills-overload-east-europe-s-grid-risking-blackout-energyQuote... more in the article.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 12:38:09 am
content: I don't understand this. Every modern wind generator has a disconnect switch. Too much power? Turn off the generators until the power is just right. Seems like a major design ****-up if it allows the grid to be saturated with power (which will cause line frequency to rise beyond the rated max 50.2 Hz.)

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 04:08:24 am
content: I can't believe I'm having to point this out in an electronics forum, but... well...W=EIIf a grid is becoming "overloaded" it's because they have generation capacityand demandthat outstrips the ability of their WIRES to deliver the power to its destination. It's not like windmills are suddenly driving everyone's electricity taps to 480V.It doesn't surprise me the Czech republic is having a hard time with capacity. From what I have seen of there, Ukraine and Russia and Moldova it's amazing half the towns haven't burned to the ground from all the illegal taps.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 05:44:02 pm
content: The big wind turbines are frequency controlled, the problem with the wind speed is the control only works over a limited wind speed band. The other problem is the higher the wind speed the more the blades bend, to much and they clash with the support tower. So when the wind speed gets over a certain limit I think its something like 22 mile per hour the blades are feathered to low a wind speed and the turbines cant get enough speed to sync with the grid. I dont know how all the units work but the ecotricity unit shown on another post has about three sets of winding's for various wind speed bands the actual speed is controlled by the blade pitch. There are two ecotricity units about 7 miles from me, I built a wind turbine for my fathers house (1KW) that runs over a far wider speed range than those two units one of which can bee seen from where my fathers turbine is sited so I can see both at the same time I know approximately the times of day these units are called for and on many ocasions my fathers unit is running and those big ones are not due to high or low wind conditions. Having also visited the wind turbine many times and some other wind farms in the area I can state that I have not seen any dead birds near them except on the dual carriageway that runs past one of them and they are due to the traffic.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 06:00:28 pm
content: Interesting. I wonder if designing them to work at (in addition) higher speeds would cost more than it's worth.

author: LaurenceW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 08:56:22 pm
content: I should point out that I hail from the same side of The Pond as tom66, and we Limies have learned from many years of experience to regard some of of our popular press (and we know the the Daily Mail is popular, because they keep telling us so) as more driven by sales and telling their readers what they want to hear than um, facts. That is a sweeping generalisation, but characterises a great amount of the press' reporting of energy; certainly here in the UK and maybe elsewhere.Look, every kWhr of electricity that any renewable resource pumps into the grid is one kWhr of non-renewable resource less burned for the same end result.And if, in ten years' time, all the nay-sayers are right about wind power, well, we can just take the turbines down and return the land to it's original beauty (and in time, its inhabitants to regular blackouts). But that's for another thread.Of course, all of this,all of this,is just a massive and convenient distraction to the screaming truth that nobody really wants to think about. The UK's power consumption continues to rise (odd recessionary effects aside), while we continue to pull the breakers out for the last time of our ageing nuclear power stations and inefficient coal plants. Allof this is happening faster than anybody is prepared to rebuild capacity.Narrow arguments about whether "wind is/is not the answer" only display the populace's ignorance, I am afraid. Aided and abetted by commercial newspapers. Windmills (where they weren't) are easier to see and complain about that massive power shortages in the coming years.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2012, 11:46:31 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Apparently the UK Government is walking back the statement by Energy Minister John Hayes. They confiscated his speech, but not before he had released a copy to the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail as LaurenceW will tell you is one of those publications which is concerned with sales, and this possibly because of the profit motive, which is always suspect.--Please see at the bottom of this post a link to a later article, this one from the Guardian. Now, I do not know if the Guardian is concerned with sales and profitability or not, perhaps they have a Trust."The UK's power consumption continues to rise (odd recessionary effects aside), while we continue to pull the breakers out for the last time of our ageing nuclear power stations and inefficient coal plants. All of this is happening faster than anybody is prepared to rebuild capacity."--In my limited Yank view all of this is not just "happening", it is a direct result of short sighted Government policy, and one not undertaken at the behest of those dreaded commercial newspapers."Narrow arguments about whether "wind is/is not the answer" only display the populace's ignorance, I am afraid. Aided and abetted by commercial newspapers. Windmills (where they weren't) are easier to see and complain about that massive power shortages in the coming years."--Apparently the real problem is the ignorant populace being allowed to vote, the free press, and other outdated neanderthal principles of British law.--See below the latest on the John Hayes walkback from an article in the Guardian.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/31/coalition-wind-farm-dispute-renewables--I often do not agree with the Guardian, but I see no reason to impugn it, since the solution to speech you do not like is more speech. And the Guardian article makes no charge that the previous article in a "for profit" publication was in any way inaccurate at the time of its publication.--Finally, my quibble with Wind Power in the UK, or anywhere else for that matter, is: "Does it perform at or near the levels promised when it was sold to the public? Repeatedly stating the Capacity rather than actual Power Output, and forgetting to count the cost of running power lines, tend to arouse my suspicions in this regard."I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. "Margaret Thatcher 1925 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: baljemmett
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 12:23:36 am
content: Quote from: SgtRock on November 01, 2012, 11:46:31 pmIndeed so, although they've dicked around with the ownership a bit in recent years. The usual suspects havea synopsis that may be illuminating; in particular note that it doesn't turn a profit.

author: M0BSW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 05:30:18 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 31, 2012, 04:31:37 pmI listened on our local radio and learned something I found amusing our government here in the UK want these windmills and lots of them horrible looking things, what I found interesting is if the wind is strong they turn them off, as they can't handle it, surely you would think the more power produced, what a crazy situation, it further went on to say in the interview, that our government is warming to nuclear power. god help us we are only a small island , so if one went wrong that's it, we are zombies as once of the panel said.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 06:31:05 pm
content: This is what happens when a generator doesn't turn off (and lock rotor) due to excessive wind:Everything has a limit.

author: M0BSW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 10:15:51 pm
content: WHOOPS

author: bilko
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 10:38:55 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on October 31, 2012, 04:40:10 pmIn the case of a car or a coal fired power station, demand can be met 'if needed'How is demand met when needed with a wind farm ?Hardly the same thing at all,the figures are more akin to the audiofoolery 2000W amplifier running from a 6w wallwart.I have no axe to grind either way, but when the government choose to believe BS figures at the tax payers expense, then that is another matter.If it is so good, remove the subsidies and allow new applications from the private sector.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2012, 11:24:28 pm
content: Similar tactics are used in the solar industry -- solar panels and systems with power ratings.I would be in favour of reducing, or eliminating subsidies, if it were not for one thing -- it's pretty urgent that we move on. Keep burning fuel at our rate to run an ever increasing society and we'll either run out of it or ruin the climate more. I addressed some other points about handling the occasional low output from a wind turbine. You can supplement it with traditional coal/nuclear/gas, buy energy from other countries or use other wind farms. Either way it still reduces pollution.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2012, 12:33:48 am
content: Subsidies pick favorites. Would you really be so willing to give up subsidies on alternatives if you were forced to pay at the pump and in your heating bill what that energy actually cost? Take away the deficit spending on wars and send that cost directly to the gas pump. Take away the deficit spending on exploration and send that cost straight to the pump. Take away the transport subsidies, the fuel tax exemption for farmers and airlines and rail transport and send those costs straight to the shopper. How many subsidies would you be willing to throw toward alternative exploration when it cost twenty bucks for a pound of steak, ten bucks for a hamburger at mcd's, twice as much to heat your home in the winter and 200 bucks to fill up your car?