Wind Turbines

[Deleted member 174758]

Manchester? Clear weather?

I'll have you know that we get up to three bright sunny days every year - a short summer, I'll grant you.

You wouldn't have seen that far when the country was littered with chimneys spewing smoke and pollution.

Indeed. Even as recently as the mid 1970s you wouldn't have seen all the way across Manchester from Blackstone Edge on a clear day the way you now can

 

[IT Minion]

@diy_fun_uk I have the feeling that you have never been up close to one of these large wind turbines. Up on Scout Moor there are 26 wind turbines which are 60 metres tall to the hub with an 80 metre diamete blade sweep (so 100 metres to the tip at the top of the circle). They are easily visible from parts of south Manchester 25 miles away in clear weather

60m Pah, tiny!

Schapps had a point, the largest turbines these days are huge. >90m to the hub and over 200m to the tip at the top of its arc. But there are still plenty of middling sized units suitable for onshore installation. They don't have to be 14MW monsters to save people money.

 

[Justin Passing]

For new schemes the income is determined by the fixed price contract for difference contracts with the government, if the cost isn't lower than the CFD strike price the implication is the wind turbine operators are just losing money giving piles of money to the government for fun when the market price is higher and won't even cover their costs if the market price is lower.

CFD used to subsidise wind schemes but they've been paying money back for a while now and will do for the forseeable unless prices drop.

David

Who sells the energy?
If they sell it, then yes they would have to pay money (to whom exactly?).

If they are paid the same CfD price regardless of the market price, there's no element of "below cost" is there? They just get what they expected to get.
They're losing out on what they could have got, sure. Since half of Hornsea2 is now French owned, one has to wonder how long the contracts are for... when they'll want to renegotiate.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

60m Pah, tiny!

They don't need to be any higher - Scout Moor is already 1500+ feet above sea level at its's peak. Installing bigger turbines wouldn't be all that beneficial as the area faces west and gets strong winds in from the Atlantic. That in turn, combined with the topography, and geology, makes erection and maintenance problematic

 

[wobs]

60m Pah, tiny!

Schapps had a point, the largest turbines these days are huge. >90m to the hub and over 200m to the tip at the top of its arc. But there are still plenty of middling sized units suitable for onshore installation. They don't have to be 14MW monsters to save people money.

125m to the tip is about the biggest you can install onshore in the UK (last time I looked into it). This means a 2 or 3MW turbine is what you tend to see with the largest onshore turbines.

Offshore, as you say, you can get far bigger.

 

[hllns]

Who sells the energy?
If they sell it, then yes they would have to pay money (to whom exactly?).

UK Treasury

If they are paid the same CfD price regardless of the market price, there's no element of "below cost" is there? They just get what they expected to get.
They're losing out on what they could have got, sure. Since half of Hornsea2 is now French owned, one has to wonder how long the contracts are for... when they'll want to renegotiate.

That was kind of my point, there's sometimes a bit of disbelief that wind power is getting cheaper and a bit of good PR or the like but the CFD contract auctions have been seeing lower bids.
The Strike Price is realistically cost plus some margin unless they plan to cover any losses with profit when the contract runs out (which is one hell of a gamble). It's hard nosed business rather than PR.

David.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

@diy_fun_uk I have the feeling that you have never been up close to one of these large wind turbines. Up on Scout Moor there are 26 wind turbines which are 60 metres tall to the hub with an 80 metre diamete blade sweep (so 100 metres to the tip at the top of the circle). They are easily visible from parts of south Manchester 25 miles away in clear weather

What relevance is that to my post? I've actually been quite close to them (not sure what type) as I live close to a demonstrator site. The thing could be 400 metres tall with a 250 metre blade span and be inefficient as f***. My point was simply as per my post, nowt to do with whether I've seen one up close. That has no bearing on how efficient the thing is.

 

[Justin Passing]

UK Treasury


That was kind of my point, there's sometimes a bit of disbelief that wind power is getting cheaper and a bit of good PR or the like but the CFD contract auctions have been seeing lower bids.
The Strike Price is realistically cost plus some margin unless they plan to cover any losses with profit when the contract runs out (which is one hell of a gamble). It's hard nosed business rather than PR.

David.

No, it can't be both. Hornsea Inc don't get paid the going electricity price so there's nothing to hand over. Do you have a link to what you mean?
You said they wouldn't be covering costs.... Leccy prices rising doesn't mean that.

Hornsea 3 strike price is DOUBLE+ the H2 price. I doubt costs have doubled so they're doing OK.

It looks cheap at the moment but if prices go as some predict:

it won't be quite so rosy.

I'd bet those turn out to be over optimistic.

 

[Justin Passing]

THis is out of date so there will be bigger , probably:

SIemens have some , onshore in Spain, 167m

 

[Justin Passing]

At end of contract it might well make sense to install larger turbines.

I read somewhere - so don't know if it compares, that turbine efficiency drops every year - to something like 60% after 10 or 15 years.

It must be a continuopus industry, maintaining and repairing these things.

WE made the Hornsea ones, under license, in Hull.
Wish we had a giga-factory churning the things out and developing new ones for export..

 

[JohnD]

No, it can't be both. Hornsea Inc don't get paid the going electricity price so there's nothing to hand over. Do you have a link to what you mean?
You said they wouldn't be covering costs.... Leccy prices rising doesn't mean that.

Hornsea 3 strike price is DOUBLE+ the H2 price. I doubt costs have doubled so they're doing OK.

It looks cheap at the moment but if prices go as some predict:
View attachment 287299

it won't be quite so rosy.

I'd bet those turn out to be over optimistic.

What is your graph intended to convey?

 

[IT Minion]

No, it can't be both. Hornsea Inc don't get paid the going electricity price so there's nothing to hand over. Do you have a link to what you mean?
You said they wouldn't be covering costs.... Leccy prices rising doesn't mean that.

Hornsea 3 strike price is DOUBLE+ the H2 price. I doubt costs have doubled so they're doing OK.

It looks cheap at the moment but if prices go as some predict:
View attachment 287299

it won't be quite so rosy.

I'd bet those turn out to be over optimistic.

They do get paid the going rate, then they hand back the difference later. I believe quarterly


When Hornsea phase 3 is built in 2025 they'll be selling their power at the market rates then returning any above £37.50 to the government. If power is less than that then the government will top them up every quarter.

 

[Justin Passing]

P15 of the ACER document you already have:

 

[Justin Passing]

They do get paid the going rate, then they hand back the difference later. I believe quarterly


When Hornsea phase 3 is built in 2025 they'll be selling their power at the market rates then returning any above £37.50 to the government. If power is less than that then the government will top them up every quarter.

So the individual owners of the "fields" go into the market to sell their power. Sounds bonkers.

Do you have alink for how that works?

Googling Hornsea 3 the current figure I see is 164.96£/MWh. Maybe that's set to change?

 

[Justin Passing]

The graph appears to show prices going down, forecast to go down some more, and level off.

I didn't draw the graph, it's the one in the reference you gave.

Now that you've managed to read it, why are you questioning me? It means what it says.

I don't suppose they'll go back to pre war level though.