Showing posts with label wind turbines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wind turbines. Show all posts

2015/01/21

Levelised Cost Of Energy


 Costs by generation type:




Wind vs Time


PV vs time



Coal and gas vs time


It seems that coal and gas are rising with time whilst renewable are falling.
From these figures it appears that wind is now generating at a cost similar to coal and gas without carbon capture and storage.

Data from World Energy Perspective  Cost of Energy Technologies
Published by World Energy Council in 2013

The only data on wind turbine build and running cost I have found is here
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/balloo_wood_wind_turbine







 

2014/01/12

UK National grid - Rate of Change of Power

One of the many (usually spurious) reasons people give for not installing wind power is that the grid will have to run warm start and spinning reserve (see http://climateandstuff.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/national-grids-reserves.html ) to cover the sudden loss of wind power.
This power generation is expensive.

The website http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ connects to a download of national grid status at 5 minute intervals.

I have analysed the data - calculating the slope of power over 3 adjacent data points (15 minute interval) for each available data point. If any of the three data points is zero then no data is plotted.

There are some oddities these have been plotted but the point is allowed off scale to keep valid data to be on a sensible scale:

The plot colour indicates a different vertical scale. (scales have been corrected)


15 days of service

Over 2 days this looks like:
2 days of service

It looks as if wind can vary by as much as 15MW / minute
But this compares with demand which can vary by 170MW/minute

Closing in on a few hours shows:
6 hours - Coal replaces Nuclear

It is interesting to note that at 17 hours 10 minutes it appears as if wind is used for balancing - all fast reaction generators and wind show a drop.

It is also significant that there is little impact of wind variation showing on the fast reactor generators.

Finally Wind output shown over the same few hours:
Wind power output added








2013/12/18

Update on fast start Combine Cycle Gas Turbines (base load suitable for wind backup)

Latest from GE

FlexEfficiency* 50 Combined Cycle Power Plant

"GE's new FlexEfficiency* 50 Combined Cycle Power Plant is an innovative total plant design that defines a new standard for high efficiency and operational flexibility. The FlexEfficiency 50 uses an integrated approach to reduce fuel costs, create additional revenue sources, improve dispatch capability and reduce carbon emissions compared to prior technologies. With new gas turbine, steam turbine, and generator components—along with digital control capabilities, power island integration, and a turnkey plant design—the new 510 MW block-size plant features an expected baseload efficiency of more than 61 percent."
http://www.ge-energy.com/products_and_services/products/gas_turbines_heavy_duty/flexefficiency_50_combined_cycle_power_plant.jsp




60% efficiency down to 87 percent load
Greater than 50 MW/minute while maintaining emissions guarantees
40 percent turndown within emissions guarantees
One button push start in under 30 minutes
Total Plant Design
  • High start reliability with simplified digital controls
  • Plant-level flexibility and maintainability
  • Two-year construction schedule
Leading Baseload Efficiency
  • More than 61 percent baseload efficiency
  • Integrated Solar Combined Cycle (ISCC) greater than 70 percent baseload efficiency
Low Life-Cycle Costs
  • Designed for twice the starts and hours capability compared to current GE technologies
original posting: http://climateandstuff.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/efficiency-of-power-plant-operating.html

2013/11/27

French Nuclear Plants Have Problems

French electricity imports rise as cold spell dampens nuclear outputLondon (Platts)--26Nov2013/811 am EST/1311 GMT French net power imports slumped early Tuesday after EDF suffered an unplanned outage at its 900 MW Fessenheim 2 nuclear power reactor and demand rose on colder weather, the latest data from grid operator RTE showed.

The Fessenheim 2 reactor was taken off the grid at 04:00 local time Tuesday (0300 GMT), and no restart date was given.

The outage follows capacity limitations at several other EDF reactors, including the 900 MW Chinon 1 and Gravelines 2 reactors.

Lower temperatures increased French power demand by 2.3 GW on the day to 75.0 GW at 08:45 Tuesday and national power imports climbed from 500 MW Monday to almost 3 GW Tuesday


 
 
2013-12-14 And still the French purchase our power:

And its not just during peak demand. There seems to be something amiss with the French grid. The interconnector power must be more expensive then home grown electricity. So why do they not bring their reserves on line??
Back to normal?


The Interconnector is now fixed and UK is again buying 2GW from the French!


The wind generation is now at least 6GW (windy!) and possibly as high as 9GW (some generation is not recorded on grid (used locally)

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

So UK was supplying up to 2GW to the French power grid. Another example of a complex system working.
However it is surprising that the French do not increase the output of their cheap(???) nuclear stations instead of buying from the UK. Perhaps they are having real problems with their system?

2013/10/30

The UK Storm of 28th October and the National Grid

The storm of 2013-10-28 managed to isolate a UK nuclear station from the National Grid leading to headlines such as:

Dungeness nuclear power station shuts down following hurricane-strength winds

St Jude’s UK storm forces the Dungeness B reactor in Kent to shut down for up to a week

The isolation from the grid means that essential systems controlling the reactor only have diesel generator backup and so for safety the reactor is shut down.
 
Just How is the loss of 1GW handled by the grid - the two plots that follow use data generated every 5 minutes (the dotted curves use the scale on the right of the plots all vertical scales are in MW):
 
 
 
Note that the bulk of the transient is compensated by pumped storage during the 1st 5 minutes (actually responds within 12 seconds) Hydro and coal and gas (CCGT) are also ramped up and pumped storage is reduced.  However at this time in the morning demand is rapidly increasing and coal and gas output cannot provide further rapid increase an so pumped supply is again increased,
 


 The plot shows data at 5 minute intervals so the immediacy of the Pumped storage is not visible.
 
 
It is also worth noting that the rarely used OCGT (inefficient gas) is brought online in case it is needed (only 50MW is utilised - past OCGT has provided up to 400MW).
 
So this aging reactor of approximately 1GW switching off is handled adequately by the system. In particular the instant response pumped storage.
 
The proposed Nuclear plant at Hinkley Point C will use 2 * 1.6GW reactors Losing one of these will equire spinning reserve (as provided by pumped storage and spinning turbines of other thermal stations)
 
Pumped storage:
 Each of Dinorwig's six generating units can produce 288MW of electricity, offering a combined station output of 1728MW.
Ffestiniog's four 90MW units have a combined generating capacity of 360MW.
 
I.e. a total of around 2GW. This will handle one of Hinkley's reactors but not both.
 

2013/06/28

Bird Deaths by Wind Turbines

Since I've been banned from commenting on WUWT here is my response to
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/28/imagine-the-outrage-from-environmentalists-if-it-had-been-an-oil-derrick/

All bird deaths obviously should be avoided but consider your personal footprint in these deaths:

From Forbes

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/05/04/scientist-pitches-proposal-to-curb-bird-deaths-a-tax-on-cats/

Berthold referred to a study published earlier this year in Nature Communications which found that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.4–3.7 billion birds (as well as 6.9–20.7 billion mammals) annually: that works out to 40 birds killed per cat every year. Many of those birds represented the end of their species: as many as 33 species of birds are thought to have been eradicated by cats. However, it’s worth noting that stray cats, as opposed to pets, cause most of the damage.

 From Sibley Guides

Figures are believed to be US only

http://www.sibleyguides.com/conservation/causes-of-bird-mortality/
Window strikes – estimated to kill 97 to 976 million birds/year

Here's one that didn't make it. Window on our house facing west.

Communication towers – estimates of bird kills are impossible to make because of the lack of data, but totals could easily be over 5 million birds/year, and possibly as many as 50 million.
Electrocutions kill tens of thousands of birds per year. This occurs mainly when large birds such as raptors make contact between a live electrical wire and a ground such as a pole. The relatively small number of birds affected belies the significance of this threat, since species such as Golden Eagle are more susceptible.
Cars may kill 60 million birds per year.
Wind turbines may kill 33,000 birds per year, and, as in the case of electrocutions, these birds tend to be large and scarce (e.g. raptors)
Pesticides may kill 72 million birds per year or possibly many more.
Oil spills kill hundreds of thousands of birds a year or more
Oil and wastewater pits may kill up to 2 million birds per year.
Lead poisoning – kills unknown numbers of birds each year, but Bellrose (many years ago) estimated that about 4% of the waterfowl population dies annually due to lead poisoning, and the California Condor recovery team stated that lead poisoning was the primary cause of the condor population decline over the last 50 years
Hunting - as a point of reference the carefully-managed annual waterfowl hunt kills about 15 million birds a year in North America. This, of course, is balanced by extensive and well-funded management and conservation efforts so hunting is not a threat to the population of any North American bird,
Domestic and Feral Cats – may kill 500 million birds per year or more. 

From a famous twitcher





2013/06/19

Energy costs

UK fuel costs

Note electricity prices well behind raw fuel costs.
 
 GERMAN electricity price at auction


Note pronounced dip in price during peak solar output

FRENCH electricity price


Note no real solar dip and cost is greater than Gemany despite being nearly all nuclear

2013-06-23
Interesting UK Grid and wind:


Wind is currently producing the same energy as coal. Also note the depressed peaks in daily use as wind begins to generate (however it is olso necessary to allow for the fact the wind increased at the weekend=low use).
Note also the grid safely handled an increase from about 500MW to 5GW without incident
The graphics are from the site
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/



2013/01/05

Windmills - just no good? or more untruths in the press

The statements are mainly led by this document

http://www.ref.org.uk/attachments/article/280/ref.hughes.19.12.12.pdf

worthy of note is this blasting of prof hughes
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/468709/imperial-college-supp-evidence-to-eec-wind.pdf

Nuclear and coal are often cited as always available
For example DRAX in uk is mentioned in bishops hill

But figures for recent availability (excludes time not required and not producing) come out at approx. 80%

Some plots using data from REFs own database


Each Turbine with approx 10 years record load factor plotted against year

A linear curve fit to Turbines output gives change in load factor per year

Note that the first graph shows all turbines load factor reducing until 2011 when a large recovery occurs. Is part of the loss caused by a reducing wind speed profile which then improves in 2011?

The second plot does show a general loss in efficiency over 10 years but nearer 7% total not the 15% suggested by Hughes document.

The REF site admits that 2010 was a low wind year:
"Overall, it is clear that the load factor for 2010 was low in comparison with preceding years, indicating that winds in this year, and particularly in the winter 2009-2010, were themselves relatively low."

There are 2 plots on the REF site:

http://www.ref.org.uk/publications/217-low-wind-power-output-2010
http://www.ref.org.uk/publications/229-renewables-output-in-2010



Note offset zero! If you ignore 2010 (low wind) the load factor looks pretty flat for the remaining 6 years








Offshore and onshore data combined?
Both plots from the owner of the daming report of Hughes show a different outcome to the reports conclusion.

2013-05-31
Diseases/disturbances reported by opponents:
http://tobacco.health.usyd.edu.au/assets/pdfs/publications/WindfarmDiseases.pdf
Well worth a read if you are looking for reasons to oppose the construction!

2012/10/25

GWPF, Lies, Damn Lies

WUWT-
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/25/an-ill-wind-blows-from-wind-turbiines/

An ill wind blows from wind turbiines


Posted on October 25, 2012 by Anthony Watts

Newsbytes from the GWPF, Lies, Damn Lies And Green Statistics

Almost all predictions about the expansion and cost of German wind turbines and solar panels have turned out to be wrong – at least by a factor of two, sometimes by a factor of five. –Daniel Wentzel, Die Welt, 20 October 2012

==========================

A simple calculation:
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=gm&v=81


electricity consumption 545×10^9 kWh

subsidy cost 20×10^9

20/545=3.7 eurocents per kWh

========================

Where it gets distorted:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-15/german-renewables-surcharge-rises-47-percent-opening-government-rift
The four grid companies set the fee paid through power bills at 5.28 euro cents (6.8 cents) a kilowatt-hour in 2013, up 47 percent from 3.59 cents now. Economy Minister Philipp Roesler wants to lower a federal electricity tax to help counter the increase, he told reporters today in Berlin. Environment Minister Peter Altmaier wants to offer consumers free advice on saving energy instead.
...
Total Subsidy

The total subsidy next year will amount to about 20.36 billion euros, which is paid for by consumers through their power bills. The fee increase will raise the bill of the average German household with 3,500 kilowatt-hours of consumption by 59 euros a year. That impact was inflated by exemptions for big industrial users and leftover costs from the previous year, the operators said.
...
While Altmaier says the country needs to take time to discuss changes to the clean-energy subsidy law, Roesler supports new legislation as quickly as possible, he said today, citing a proposal for a new model his party put forward last month.

Alarming Signal
The new surcharge is an “alarming signal,” Roesler told reporters. Altmaier’s proposal to draw up a bill after a round of stakeholder talks ends in May 2013 doesn’t reflect the urgent action needed, Roesler said. “We must act now,” he said.

Instead of blaming renewables, Roesler should cancel unnecessary exemptions for industrial consumers including banks and slaughterhouses, Juergen Trittin, co-leader of the opposition Green Party, said today in a statement. Such a move would reduce subsidy costs by 4 billion euros and push down the fee by 1 euro cent, he said.

The debate over power prices is short-sighted because Germany will save 570 billion euros by 2050 if it scraps nuclear plants, said the Renewable Energy Research Association, a group of clean-energy research institutes.

“The investments made now, at the beginning, will pay off within a foreseeable time frame and have a positive economic impact,” the group said on Oct. 10.

To contact the reporter on this story: Stefan Nicola in Berlin at snicola2@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Reed Landberg at landberg@bloomberg.net

==============================

So even at the rate inflated by giving a free pass to some industries will cost 59euros a year and it seems as if the nuclear industry is also subsidised

Lots of stuff al mussed up to produce a GWPF headline that cannot be supported.



2012/08/17

The Reliabilty of Nuclear stations compared to Wind Power

Warm seawater forces Conn. nuclear plant shutdown
By Stephen Singer on August 13, 2012
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Connecticut's nuclear power plant shut one of two units on Sunday because seawater used to cool down the plant is too warm.
Unit 2 of Millstone Power Station has occasionally shut for maintenance or other issues, but in its 37-year history it has never gone down due to excessively warm water, spokesman Ken Holt said on Monday.
Water from Long Island Sound is used to cool key components of the plant and is discharged back into the sound. The water cannot be warmer than 75 degrees and following the hottest July on record has been averaging 1.7 degrees above the limit, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said.
The federal agency issued an "emergency license amendment" last week, allowing Millstone, a subsidiary of Dominion Resources Inc., to use an average temperature of several readings.
"It wasn't enough to prevent us from shutting down," Holt said.
================================

River temperature forces nuclear plant to 50 percent power


Not even TVA can beat the heat.
On Wednesday, the utility had to bring a third reactor at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant down to 50 percent power to avoid environmental sanctions because the water in the Tennessee River — where the plant's cooling water is discharged — already was at 90 degrees.
"When the river's ambient temperature reaches 90 degrees, we can't add any heat to it," said TVA's nuclear spokesman Ray Golden.
Similar problems last summer forced the Tennessee Valley Authority to spent $50 million for replacement power, according to Golden. The extra expense translated to something between 50 cents and $1 on most electric bills several months later, officials have said.
To avoid similar heat problems this year, TVA in October began construction on a seventh cooling tower at Browns Ferry, which is near Athens, Ala., and officials expected the $80 million super tower to be complete in June or July.
But weather stormed that plan, too.
"It was delayed because of the impact of the tornadoes, and some spring storms and some heavy rains," Golden said. "It's probably about 98 percent complete, and we hope it will be in service in the next one to two months."

=================================
August 24, 2010 By
90 Degree River Shuts Down Southern Nuclear Plant
Blue Living Ideas

       As a result of the record high temperatures engulfing the South (and much of the planet) the Tennessee Valley Authority has had to shut down its largest nuclear power plant for the 40th day since  July 8th, the TimesFreePress reports. The Tennessee River in Alabama is just much too hot.

================================
Water shortages hit US power supply
As the United States' extended heat wave and drought threaten to raise global food prices, energy production is also feeling the pressure. Across the nation, power plants are becoming overheated and shutting down or running at lower capacity; drilling operations struggle to get the water they need, and crops that would become biofuel are withering.
While analysts say the US should survive this year without major blackouts, more frequent droughts and increased population size will continue to strain power generation in the future.
Power plants are a hidden casualty of droughts, says Barbara Carney of the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in Morgantown, West Virginia, because they are completely dependent on water for cooling and make up about half the water usage in the US. That makes them vulnerable in a heat wave. If water levels in the rivers that cool them drop too low, the power plant – already overworked from the heat – won't be able to draw in enough water. In addition, if the cooling water discharged from a plant raises already-hot river temperatures above certain thresholds, environmental regulations require the plant to shut down.
At least four nuclear plants had to shut down in July for these reasons. Nationwide, nuclear generation is at its lowest in a decade, with the plants operating at only 93 per cent of capacity.
Nuclear is the thirstiest power source. According to NETL, the average nuclear plant that generates 12.2 million megawatt hours of electricity requires far more water to cool its turbines than other power plants. Nuclear plants need 2725 litres of water per megawatt hour for cooling. Coal or natural gas plants need, on average, only 1890 and 719 litres respectively to produce the same amount of energy.
==============================
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/health/20iht-nuke.1.5788480.html?pagewanted=all
Officials at Électricité de France have been preparing for a possible rerun of a ferocious heat wave that struck during 2003, the hottest summer on record in France, when temperatures of some rivers rose sharply and a number of reactors had to curtail output or shut down altogether.
The French company operates 58 reactors - the majority on ecologically sensitive rivers like the Loire.
During the extreme heat of 2003 in France, 17 nuclear reactors operated at reduced capacity or were turned off. Électricité de France was forced to buy power from neighboring countries on the open market, where demand drove the price of a megawatt hour as high as €1,000, or $1,350. Average prices in France during summer months ordinarily are about €95 per megawatt hour.
The heat wave cost Électricité de France an extra €300 million. The state-owned company "swallowed it as a one-off cost of doing business in extreme circumstances," Philippe Huet, an executive vice president at Électricité de France, said.
===============================

So Just like wind, nuclear has to shut down when needed most.

OK so how about wind requiring all that backup running continuously in case the wind drops?

Well, one scram on a nuclear plant will require the generation of 500MW to 1GW of instantly available power (spinning reserve) - you cannot  allow supply interruption (May 2008 outage National Grid).
Wind does not fail instantly everywhere so a gradual decrease in power has to be compensated by conventional. In general, most stations running under warm start conditions will be producing the required power when needed. There is probably no need for spinning reserve as wind backup - the met office seem reasonably accurate predicting a few hours ahead).

lets look at UK National Grid data for a few days:
10th August to 17th Agust 2012 data



Note that the peak delivered is 15GW greater than the lowest delivered. The National Grid may not like this normal situation but the certainly find no difficulty providing the power.

It would therefore seem obvious that at least 15GW of solar and wind could be accomodated. (solar of course would remove some of the daily peak).

From an earlier post here:
National grids reserves
From wiki
There is generally about 1.5 GW of so called spinning reserve
NG pays to have up to 8.5 GW of additional capacity available to start immediately but not running, referred to as warming or hot standby, that is ready to be used at short notice which could take half an hour to 2 hours to bring on line
A similar amount of power stations (8–10 GW by capacity) are operable from a cold start in about 12 hours for coal burning stations, and 2 hours for gas fired stations


Short term and instantaneous load and generation response mechanisms

The national grid is organized, and power stations distributed, in such a way as to cope with sudden, unforeseen and dramatic changes in either load or generation. It is designed to cope with the simultaneous or nearly simultaneous failure of 2 × 660 MW sets
Spinning Reserve National Grid pays to keep a number of large power station generators partly loaded.
Pumped Storage Pumped storage as in Dinorwig Power Station is also used in addition to spinning reserve to keep the system in balance.

Frequency Service For large perturbations, which can exceed the capability of spinning reserve, NG (National Grid plc) who operate the national grid and control the operations of power stations (but does not own them) has a number of partners who are known as NG Frequency Service, National Grid Reserve Service or reserve service participants. These are large power users such as steel works, cold stores, etc. who are happy to enter into a contract to be paid to be automatically disconnected from power supplies whenever grid frequency starts to fall.
Standing Reserve Operating closely with NG Frequency Response is the National Grid Reserve Service now called STOR or Short Term Operating Reserve.[9] NG Standing Reserve participants are small diesel engine owners, and Open Cycle gas turbine generator owners, who are paid to start up and connect to the grid within 20 minutes from the time Frequency Response customers are called to disconnect. These participants must be reliable and able to stay on and run for an hour or so, with a repetition rate of 20 hours.

National Grid has about 500 MW of diesel generators on contract, and 150 MW of gas turbines with about 2,000 MW of disconnect-able load.[9]

Sources of intermittency on the UK National Grid The largest source of intermittency on the UK National Grid is the power stations; in fact, the single largest source is Sizewell B nuclear power station. Whenever Sizewell B is operating the entire 1.3 GW output is liable to stop at any time without warning. Its capacity is 2.16% of the national grid maximum demand, making it the single largest power source and therefore the largest source of intermittency. Despite this issue, NG readily copes with it using the methods outlined above including the use of diesel engines. An industry-wide rate of unplanned scrams (shutdowns) of 0.6 per 7000 hours critical means that such a shut-down without warning is expected to happen about once every year and a half.[11] However, no matter how low the rate of unplanned scrams, this is largely irrelevant - what matters is the fact that it can and does happen, and measures have to be in place to deal with it.

In 2008 both Sizewell and Longannet power stations both stopped unexpectedly within minutes of each other, in fact causing widespread power failures, as substations were tripped off using prearranged under-frequency relays.[12]

Reports of May 2008 outage
National grid https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/ofgem-publications/41426/nationalgrid-systemeventsof27mayfordswg16july.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20100206093023/http://nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/E19B4740-C056-4795-A567-91725ECF799B/32165/PublicFrequencyDeviationReport.pdf


So what about all those rare earth magnets required in wind turbines and of course there is all that noise from gears being tortured? And wont they make the network more unreliable?

Well not all turbines are created equal

Take a look at:


ENERCON WECs produce clean energy without neodymium
29.04. 2011

ENERCON wind energy converters (WECs) generate electricity in an environmentally friendly way without the use of the controversial element, neodymium. The gearless WEC design on which all WEC types – from the E-33/330 kW to the E-126/7.5 MW – are based includes a separately excited annular generator. The magnetic fields required by the generator to produce electricity are created electrically. By design, and unlike the majority of competing products, ENERCON WECs do without permanent magnets whose production requires neodymium.

Neodymium has made the headlines recently because its extraction partly involves significant environmental damage. China, where neodymium-containing rocks are quarried in mines, is the main supplier of this so-called rare earth element. According to investigations by Germany’s NDR TV station, separation of neodymium from mined rocks results in toxic waste products (Menschen und Schlagzeilen and Panorama television magazines aired on 27 and 28 April). In addition, radioactive uranium and thorium are released by the mining process. These substances find their way into the ground water, heavily contaminating plant and animal life. They are seen as harmful to humans. According to the reports, part of the locals at the neodymium production sites in Baotou in northern China are already seriously ill.

ENERCON feels that these environmental and health aspects support its choice of WEC design. “We are a high-tech company that sets great store by environmental protection,” says ENERCON Managing Director Hans-Dieter Kettwig. “Our choice to rely on separately excited generators was the right one, not only from a technological but also from an environmental point of view.” According to Kettwig, renewable energies need to be viewed in their entirety in order to offer a convincing alternative. Producing clean energy is one thing; however, sustainability in production is just as important.
Helps the network recover:
Staying connected when grid problems occurMost transmission networks and ever more distribution grids require wind energy converters to remain connected to the grid in the event of grid short circuits. Like conventional power plants, wind turbines are not allowed to suddenly disconnect from the grid during voltage dips or overvoltage caused by grid problems. ENERCON wind turbines with the optional ENERCON UVRT feature have this capacity. No matter what type of short circuit occurs, ENERCON wind turbines can ‘ride through’ faults for several seconds, even if they were operating at rated power before the fault. This is also possible if the wind turbine voltage completely breaks down as a result of a power system failure. These outstanding power plant properties have been certified by independent institutes during actual grid fault testing. Flexible setting options offer maximum performance according to the respective grid operator’s specifications or to the project’s framework conditions.
Depending on the selected parameters, the wind turbine can feed in either mainly active or reactive power to maintain grid voltage. If necessary, voltage-dependent reactive current can even be supplied to the grid; this current can be maximum rated current as stipulated by the latest German grid code. If desired or required, fault ride-through is also possible without power feed-in. The ENERCON wind turbine remains in operation during the fault. After the grid problem has been resolved and grid voltage has been restored, the wind turbine can immediately resume power feed-in. Thus the ENERCON Undervoltage Ride-Through feature facilitates adaptable settings in order to meet grid standards (e. g. of the German
Association of Energy and Water Industries) and to maximise the amount of installable wind farm power.






2012/05/20

Wind and the price of electricity in UK

From a post at wuwt  (EU violates Aarhus Convention in ‘20% renewable energy by 2020’ program) :

Mark Duchamp, Executive Director of EPAW, points that Mr. Swords initiated his recourse one and a half years ago, as it was already obvious that the European Commission was imposing an enormously costly and ineffective policy to EU Members States without properly investigating the pros and cons. “It is high time that Brussels be held accountable for the hundreds of billions that have been squandered without a reality check on policy effectiveness” says Mark. “To spend so much money, a positive has to be proven. – It hasn’t.”
He [Pat Swords] continues: “Electricity costs are soaring to implement these dysfunctional policies, which have by-passed proper and legally-required technical, economic and environmental assessments. Not only is the landscape being scarred as thousands of wind farms are being installed, but people in the vicinity are suffering health impacts from low frequency noise, while birdlife and other wildlife is also adversely impacted. It is long overdue that a STOP was put to this type of illegal and dysfunctional policy development and project planning.”

So just how has windpower affected the UK electricity prices. Presumably if Swords is correct then the price of electricity will have increased at a greater rate than the fuel used to generate it. With words like "soaring" used these differences must be substantial.

Looking at data from http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/statistics/source/prices/qep213.xls you get this graph.



Interesting! Less of a soaring price than gas or coal
So is this just another distortion from the watts crowd?

If windpower were a driving factor then perhaps the energy cost will appear as a bigger budget item in the countries with higher windpower generation.
So let's have a look at germany:
compared to UK
compared to Denmark

So with UK having the lowest penetration of windpower of the three it also has the biggest Utilities cost (this of course includes a number of utilities not just electricity.


How about Cradle to grave costs. Here is the build / working breakdown of costs over 20 years:
Project: Single wind turbine (800kw)
Location: Balloo Wood, Bangor, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
Turbine: 800kw Enercon E48
Dimensions: 56m hub height, 24m blade length, 80m overall height
NGR: 350760E 379503N (lat 54.6411N, long 5.6656W)
Status: Operational


build £        889,650.00 install
planning etc £        434,583.00 install
maintenance0.0055perkwh
maintenance/year for delivered 280kwh £             562.49 per year
routine expenses £         30,000.00 per year
rating1000kwh
load factor28%
deliverd energy280kwh
Balancing Cost £               0.014 per kWh
Short term Reserve £               0.007 per kWh
total install cost= £     1,324,233.00
install cost/delivered kwh £           4,729.40
conventional backup costs/year £         51,544.08 per 280 kWh/year
running cost/year £         82,106.57 per 280 kWh/year
over n years25
total install over 25 yrs £     1,324,233.00
running cost over 25 yrs £     2,052,664.13
total cost over 25 yrs £     3,376,897.13
decomissioning cost (guess=.5*build) £        444,825.00
total cradle to grave cost £     3,821,722.13
energy generated over 25 yrs61362000kWh
cost per kwh over 25 yrs £               0.062 per kWh


most data from
http://silverford.com/blog/?p=1689/
This seems a reasonable figure but the decommissioning costs are pure guess work. The life time of most wind turbines is believed to be 25 years. The warranty period is 12years for this turbine.

A closer look at Germany/france:
For example:

Germany 2012 Note price Note Double peak

Germany 2012 Note price note single peak at peak volume

 PV electricity produced in Germany
check PV produced on Germany on daily basis from 2010


How about nuclear??




2011/05/21

Enercon Wind turbines and wind speed

False statements are often made about wind turbines (very narrow range of speed over which power is produced; large turbines shut down at lower wind speeds; rare earths costing the earth.)

From the Enercon brochure:

ENERCON storm control
ENERCON wind turbines run with a special storm control feature.
Storm control enables reduced wind turbine operation in the event of
extremely high wind speeds, and prevents typical shutdowns which
cause considerable yield losses.


 

Power curve without ENERCON storm control
Illustration 1 shows that the wind turbine stops at a defined cutout wind speed V3. The reason is that a specified maximum wind speed has been exceeded. In wind turbines without storm control, this occurs, for example, at a wind speed of 25 m/s within a 20-second mean. The wind turbine only starts up again when the average wind speed drops below the cut-out wind speed or an even lower restart speed (V4 in the illustration; so-called strong wind hysteresis). In gusty wind conditions there may be a longer delay, which means that considerable yield losses are incurred.
Power curve with ENERCON storm control
The power curve diagram showing operation with ENERCON storm control (illustration 2) demonstrates clearly that the wind turbine does not shut down automatically when a certain wind speed Vstorm is exceeded, but merely reduces power output by slowing down the rotational speed. This is achieved by slightly pitching the rotor blades out of the wind. Once the wind speed drops, the blades turn back into the wind and the turbine immediately resumes operation at full power. This prevents yield-reducing shutdown and start-up procedures.



Data for a 7.5MW wind turbine Enercon E126




As can be seen from the plot and data useful power is available from 4 to 25 m/s


Enercon Control systems being electronic can synchronise to grid quickly and can even help the grid ride out a system fault.

NO Rare earths are required for the generator

NO gears are required for the main shaft of the generator







Staying connected when grid problems occur
Most transmission networks and ever more distribution grids require wind energy converters to remain connected to the grid in the event of grid short circuits. Like conventional power plants, wind turbines are not allowed to suddenly disconnect from the grid during voltage dips or overvoltage caused by grid problems. ENERCON wind turbines with the optional ENERCON UVRT feature have this capacity. No matter what type of short circuit occurs, ENERCON wind turbines can ‘ride through’ faults for several seconds, even if they were operating at rated power before the fault. This is also possible if the wind turbine voltage completely breaks down as a result of a power system failure. These outstanding power plant properties have been certified by independent institutes during actual grid fault testing. Flexible setting options offer maximum performance according to the respective grid operator’s specifications or to the project’s framework conditions.
Depending on the selected parameters, the wind turbine can feed in either mainly active or reactive power to maintain grid voltage. If necessary, voltage-dependent reactive current can even be supplied to the grid; this current can be maximum rated current as stipulated by the latest German grid code. If desired or required, fault ride-through is also possible without power feed-in. The ENERCON wind turbine remains in operation during the fault. After the grid problem has been resolved and grid voltage has been restored, the wind turbine can immediately resume power feed-in. Thus the ENERCON Undervoltage Ride-Through feature facilitates adaptable settings in order to meet grid standards (e. g. of the German
Association of Energy and Water Industries) and to maximise the amount of installable wind farm power.

ENERCON news



ENERCON WECs produce clean energy without neodymium

29.04. 2011

ENERCON wind energy converters (WECs) generate electricity in an environmentally friendly way without the use of the controversial element, neodymium. The gearless WEC design on which all WEC types – from the E-33/330 kW to the E-126/7.5 MW – are based includes a separately excited annular generator. The magnetic fields required by the generator to produce electricity are created electrically. By design, and unlike the majority of competing products, ENERCON WECs do without permanent magnets whose production requires neodymium.

Neodymium has made the headlines recently because its extraction partly involves significant environmental damage. China, where neodymium-containing rocks are quarried in mines, is the main supplier of this so-called rare earth element. According to investigations by Germany’s NDR TV station, separation of neodymium from mined rocks results in toxic waste products (Menschen und Schlagzeilen and Panorama television magazines aired on 27 and 28 April). In addition, radioactive uranium and thorium are released by the mining process. These substances find their way into the ground water, heavily contaminating plant and animal life. They are seen as harmful to humans. According to the reports, part of the locals at the neodymium production sites in Baotou in northern China are already seriously ill.

ENERCON feels that these environmental and health aspects support its choice of WEC design. “We are a high-tech company that sets great store by environmental protection,” says ENERCON Managing Director Hans-Dieter Kettwig. “Our choice to rely on separately excited generators was the right one, not only from a technological but also from an environmental point of view.” According to Kettwig, renewable energies need to be viewed in their entirety in order to offer a convincing alternative. Producing clean energy is one thing; however, sustainability in production is just as important.