Wind Turbines

they are helpful, please?
Truss mentioned a windfall tax on electricity generated by wind as it's cheaper to produce than using gas. I've heard no more since. If this has happened more wind should result in the support debt being paid of more quickly. We finish up paying that off anyway.

Sunak's idea may mostly /only apply to petro companies. Basic idea is reduce the tax burden by investing. For every £100 Invested £95 comes off the tax bill. This is similar to what he was talking about before becoming PM for all corporate taxation. However reports say that wind companies are asking for the same deal. Me too fashion. His original idea ?? I've no idea what has happened to that. Done? Kicked into touch?
 
Looking at nationalgrind live at 9pm last night we were paying £58.48 per mwh. renew and nuke and other providing most of it ~3gwh via fossil,

At 8.30am £234.50 per mwh, :eek: fossil still ~3gwh

Must be a heft off peak discount or what ?????
 
electricity generated by wind as it's cheaper to produce than using gas.

That's extreme left-wing conspiracy nonsense. Gas powered electricity only becomes more expensive when it is used as a short-term back-up measure after plants have been switched off.

 
I find them quite hypnotic to watch, but especially when standing underneath them

but other markers of civilisation, pylons, factories, commercial greenhouses etc are ok?
Spoken by someone who presumably doesn't live in an area of the Pennines where these monstrosities are a huge blot on the landscape. But hey, if Coronation Power, or any of the other firms based in the south of England or abroad can make money from them, what does it matter? (Oh, and we'll forget about the broken promises which were made about local employment, zero impact on the natural environment and lower energy costs - none of which were ever delivered)

As to commercial greenhouses, I suggest you look into our climate and topogrraphy around here.... Whilst the pylons exist, they are relatively small in comparison to the turbines, which you'd know if you walked the hills in this area regularly, as I do. So just how have our communities benefitted?
 
That's extreme left-wing conspiracy nonsense. Gas powered electricity only becomes more expensive when it is used as a short-term back-up measure after plants have been switched off.


After WHAT plants have been switched off? Do explain.
What are these plants which are switched off so that we can use gas?

Anyone who believes that youtuber jerk, is a jerk. He puts a lot of non-facts together so he can make an idiot of hmself saying they aren't true.
Classic Fake News.
 
That's extreme left-wing conspiracy nonsense. Gas powered electricity only becomes more expensive when it is used as a short-term back-up measure after plants have been switched off.

Andy, Laurence Fox: are you for real?
 
"Projects awarded CfDs are paid a fixed price for electricity and when the wholesale price exceeds this ‘strike price’ they pay back the difference."

This seems to me very much like a 100% tax on excess profits.

E.g.

You said you would sell it for a pound

The market price goes up to £1.50

You pay the entire extra 50p to the government.
 
In related news,

"Offshore windfarm operators will sell power for as little as £37.35 per megawatt hour, 5.8% below the lowest bid in the most recent auction in 2019.

The “contracts for difference” guarantee wind-power companies fixed prices to sell electricity for the following 15 years. If the market price falls below the contract price, the government subsidises the difference. If the market is higher, the companies pay money back to the government.

Since wholesale energy prices began to rocket last year, windfarms have begun paying back money to the government.

The easing of an effective moratorium on new onshore windfarms – which was imposed in 2015 – meant onshore wind and solar energy were both included in an auction for the first time in seven years. Onshore wind is now about 45% of the price secured in the auction in 2015"



The price is index-linked.
 
That's extreme left-wing conspiracy nonsense. Gas powered electricity only becomes more expensive when it is used as a short-term back-up measure after plants have been switched off.
Right wing too All your doing is swapping one conspiracy theory for another. Truth will be somewhere in between the extremes.

It is a fact that global average temperature is increasing and has been for a long time,

Cost as far as the pubic is concerned. Including the conversion costs needed to get where we seem to be heading possibly more expensive even with cheaper electricity.

Wind. Based on a recent low we need ~33 times more than we current have to be secure but an even lower one may crop up. Or rather a lot of storage.

Seems we need 10 nuke stations but no mention of size.

Tidal isn't constant. It produces pulses and actual tidal range and heights vary throughout the year. A bit of a run down
 
When Wind Turbines have finished their CfD period, or before they formally start it, they sell at the market rates. So then they can make significant profits.

The oldest wind farms aren't on CfD, and are making a significant profit.
 
The oldest wind farms aren't on CfD, and are making a significant profit.

Like almost all the other generators, you mean?

Can you tell me how much electricity these profitable windfarms are delivering?
 
In related news,

"Offshore windfarm operators will sell power for as little as £37.35 per megawatt hour,

The new Hinkley nuke is £92.50 MWh

Index linked.

If it ever gets built.
 
Don't worry the gov always does the right thing. History demonstrates that clearly.
 
"Projects awarded CfDs are paid a fixed price for electricity and when the wholesale price exceeds this ‘strike price’ they pay back the difference."

This seems to me very much like a 100% tax on excess profits.

E.g.

You said you would sell it for a pound

The market price goes up to £1.50

You pay the entire extra 50p to the government.
That's what I was on about. Reminder - £37.35 per megawatt hour is 3.735 pence per kWh.
Even the nuke strike rate is only a third of the (subsidised) energy cap price we're paying.
So most of what we're paying to heat our houses and cook, goes to the exchequer.
Any fault in that logic, please?
When the CfD contract ends, the plant is foreign owned so we pay market rate - which is based on the most expensive price out there. The exchequer does not make, out of that.

Even the strike rates don't reflect what it costs to produce.
If you look at proposals for turbines around the USA the figures aren't bound up in all the Cfd shenanegins.
You pay X for your windmill, Y a year to maintan it and its capacity is theoretically XX MW, and you can run at YY% . Simple sums, to get what your energy is actually costing per unit, and a payback period figure, which is not long.

All of which says WE should own the installations so what the energy costs is the bulding costs, spread out over the period of operation, (or repayments on the loan for building it if you like) , plus the the plant maintenance costs.
That model is the one which local people think of when someone suggests putting onshore turbines in their nice location, while they hope to benefit ftom the "free" energy. Their aspirations couldn't be further from the truth. It'll be some foreigner making money out of their nice environments, at no benefit to them.

DIdn't Truss /Kwarteng propose a de-linking of energy prices somehow? Can't remember what they called it so I can't find it.
 
Back
Top