Debunking the myths around renewable energy

[GLASGOWOODS]

I'm sure renewables are the future of UK energy. However im equally sure that wind turbines aren't the answer and ten years from now we will laugh at the thought we even considered them.

 

And cry at the amount constructed and lying derelict.

[Jmack]

And cry at the amount constructed and lying derelict.

 

They seem a good idea at first, but on later inspection they we realised they were no good. Tidal and wave energy is a better option.

[GLASGOWOODS]

They seem a good idea at first, but on later inspection they we realised they were no good. Tidal and wave energy is a better option.

 

The USA seems to be a turbine graveyard.Over 14,000 wind farms abandoned.

[Jmack]

The USA seems to be a turbine graveyard.Over 14,000 wind farms abandoned.

 

Exactly let's learn from other nations.

[tzijlstra]

Ahhh good, some discussion! Finally, was wondering where all the nay-sayers were. (Missing a few posts out here, might revisit them tomorrow, don't want to spend all night replying)

 

A general note: a lot of hatred for wind farms, some right, some wrong, I am not talking exclusively about wind farms, so actually, it seems most of the negative replies re wind farms are from people who agree that we need to think long and hard about our energy-future, which is good to see.

 

Not doing to well in Germany is it,

http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2013/10/11/germanys-renewable-energy-subsidies-could-threaten-economic-growth/

 

You can read this negatively or very positively. Forbes chose to do it neutrally, which makes me wonder if you actually read the article. Germany are making a decision about their energy independence by investing now, possibly at the expense of growth, but you call the number of times the Germans got it massively wrong in their economy in the past few decades.

 

Cheaper for who in the future? All I read is a few large snouts making millions out of us mugs.

 

One big power company has just pulled out of investing 5 billion in the construction of turbines somewhere off the West coast of Scotland.

 

I live near hundreds of those monster turbines.They never seem to turn??

 

Cheaper for you and me, or have your energy bills been static?

 

The 5 billion investment was discussed in another thread and in replies to your post. You might think they never turn, but the 6% energy they generate for this country isn't coming from 'abandoned wind farms'

 

So why not include the references?

 

And why are you using online blogs as a reference, thats moronic - anyone can write a blog containing whatever they want.

 

Did you see me mention the fact that these are blogs by energy consultants? As well as figures by the DECC, I could beat you to death with references and statistics, I do it for a living, it doesn't help the readability of a forum post so I won't. If you don't believe me, have a dig on google yourselves, it doesn't take much.

 

The USA seems to be a turbine graveyard.Over 14,000 wind farms abandoned.

 

The problem with dishing out subsidy is that you need to have A: The right subsidy form and B: have some checks in place. There are instances of failing wind farms in the US (although 14,000 wind farms seems far fetched, I think you are confusing individual turbines with farms, I'd like a legit source for your claim.) but these instances are rare in Europe, which is where you live.

[Jmack]

Surely geo-thermal, bio-mass, solar tidal and wave power are the best options when it comes to renewables and then we can have nuclear energy to be a constant source of power.

[tzijlstra]

I am not sure they are 'best-options' but they are certainly worth consideration, for some reason (I am not sure why) geo-thermal isn't picking up at all. Solar is great for small localised solutions (I am genuinely considering solar panels for the house), tidal and wave are still in very premature stages to rely on. Hydro is a great option but limited in scope due to the land-surface it takes up.

 

Bio-mass has enormous economic potential, but only if our whole system gears towards it, currently we import most bio-mass material from the US for some reason.

 

And yes, I agree, nuclear has to be part of the mix.

[GLASGOWOODS]

Ahhh good, some discussion! Finally, was wondering where all the nay-sayers were. (Missing a few posts out here, might revisit them tomorrow, don't want to spend all night replying)

 

A general note: a lot of hatred for wind farms, some right, some wrong, I am not talking exclusively about wind farms, so actually, it seems most of the negative replies re wind farms are from people who agree that we need to think long and hard about our energy-future, which is good to see.

 

 

 

You can read this negatively or very positively. Forbes chose to do it neutrally, which makes me wonder if you actually read the article. Germany are making a decision about their energy independence by investing now, possibly at the expense of growth, but you call the number of times the Germans got it massively wrong in their economy in the past few decades.

 

 

 

Cheaper for you and me, or have your energy bills been static?

 

The 5 billion investment was discussed in another thread and in replies to your post. You might think they never turn, but the 6% energy they generate for this country isn't coming from 'abandoned wind farms'

 

 

 

Did you see me mention the fact that these are blogs by energy consultants? As well as figures by the DECC, I could beat you to death with references and statistics, I do it for a living, it doesn't help the readability of a forum post so I won't. If you don't believe me, have a dig on google yourselves, it doesn't take much.

 

 

 

The problem with dishing out subsidy is that you need to have A: The right subsidy form and B: have some checks in place. There are instances of failing wind farms in the US (although 14,000 wind farms seems far fetched, I think you are confusing individual turbines with farms, I'd like a legit source for your claim.) but these instances are rare in Europe, which is where you live.

 

Sorry yes! 14,000 turbines abandoned when subsidies were withdrawn.

I must learn to post links..Haha! But there is a wealth of info out there.Just google "abandoned wind turbines usa"

[SevenRivers]

I'm sure renewables are the future of UK energy. However im equally sure that wind turbines aren't the answer and ten years from now we will laugh at the thought we even considered them.

 

I agree. I'm not convinced wind turbines are an efficient way of either saving CO2 emissions or economically cost effective.

 

---------- Post added 15-12-2013 at 22:34 ----------

 

Sorry yes! 14,000 turbines abandoned when subsidies were withdrawn.

I must learn to post links..Haha! But there is a wealth of info out there.Just google "abandoned wind turbines usa"

 

Exactly, the only way for companies to make money from wind turbines is to take a public subsidy for them, so they're a drain on the economy. When the subsidies are withdrawn, the power companies won't subsidise it from their own balance sheets.

[retep]

I am not sure they are 'best-options' but they are certainly worth consideration, for some reason (I am not sure why) geo-thermal isn't picking up at all. Solar is great for small localised solutions (I am genuinely considering solar panels for the house), tidal and wave are still in very premature stages to rely on. Hydro is a great option but limited in scope due to the land-surface it takes up.

 

Bio-mass has enormous economic potential, but only if our whole system gears towards it, currently we import most bio-mass material from the US for some reason.

 

And yes, I agree, nuclear has to be part of the mix.

 

And there lies one problem, the other being cost which wipes out the economic potential and back to subsidies.