I'm guessing Q4 is the one quarter where renewables don't cut it?
I don't think the states will provide more oil or gas.Burning £10 notes is cheaper than gas at the moment
Having said that the price per therm has plummeted lately in the UK on the spot market.
The US and Canada can supply far more from shale it just takes time to ramp up.
I predict gas prices will plummet when Putin croaks!
Norway, Sweden and Denmark have masses of hydro power so not a fair example at all. Hydro not mentioned in the table.
They are already ramping up and we are taking as much gas as our network can handle. We are exporting it to Europe but our pipelines are at max capacity or we could do more. Pembroke and our other terminals are maxed out.I don't think the states will provide more oil or gas.
The companies are under constant attack to drive them out of business.
Not really, its when the report was written....I'm guessing Q4 is the one quarter where renewables don't cut it?
Unfortunately we use energy all year round....
Norway and Sweden have hydro power - (Norway a lot, Sweden not quite so much, but still significant) But Denmark doesn't.Norway, Sweden and Denmark have masses of hydro power so not a fair example at all. Hydro not mentioned in the table.
Have you read about how the windfarms haven't started their fixed price contracts so they are making a fortune out of high prices.
100 % for for 40 % sounds like normal business practice .I am actually a big fan of hydrogen power.
I would be all in favour of wind power IF we could store it.
Hydrogen seems the perfect solution but the efficiency is awful. You say even if only 40% effective which I suspect is about right. Sadly the wind companies will not get paid only 40%. They can't afford to build windfarms if they aren't getting top whack for the electric.
Which basically means we are paying 100% for only 40% of the leccy!
Not if the swivel eyes , Greta and her pals get their way .Burning £10 notes is cheaper than gas at the moment
Having said that the price per therm has plummeted lately in the UK on the spot market.
The US and Canada can supply far more from shale it just takes time to ramp up.
I predict gas prices will plummet when Putin croaks!
Wind is cheap till it stops for a day or a week, then it is Expensive, and is it cheap long term.
Know a Co that put up a middling size unit, blades lasted 5 years before the leading edge was eroded enough to cut the output I think I was told 15% and that was 10 years ago.
All these ideas have +- points but the world has had 100+ years honing them, to try and push the change in 10/15 years seems to me a route to Kayos
They trialled a vertical turbine at the old Burry Port power station in the 80s. They never really caught on.Read about a 20 mtr diameter merry go round wind turbine turbine 6 or so months ago , it's about 4 mtrs tall , sites on a hill , towers or tall buildings, even in the slightest of baby breath breezes they still generate reasonably well .
Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines Promise Higher Efficiency - ASME
When arranged properly vertical-axis turbines have the potential to outshine horizontal turbines.www.asme.org
I think there was a myth that they wouldn’t that has been well and truly debunked - I seem to recall it was a comment by an academic on the subject that was taken completely out of context and got plastered all over social media. He was making a point about badly sited/planned wind projects that may never save the energy expended in manufacture and build but that if they are planned properly they easily exceed this many times over (the end bit was left out and it was latched onto by the baying masses)Be interesting to see the 'cradle to grave' financial cost and environmental impact of one of the big windmills, including decommissioning and correct disposal of the parts.
And even more interesting to see if they actually ever pay for themselves, in both respects.
Steel embodied energy is about 5000Kwh/ ton. Concrete is about 250/tonI think there was a myth that they wouldn’t that has been well and truly debunked - I seem to recall it was a comment by an academic on the subject that was taken completely out of context and got plastered all over social media. He was making a point about badly sited/planned wind projects that may never save the energy expended in manufacture and build but that if they are planned properly they easily exceed this many times over (the end bit was left out and it was latched onto by the baying masses)
General consensus seems to be that they become carbon “neutral” after anything from 6 months to a couple of years and are financially paid back over a similar period (maybe slightly longer for financial payback depending which one you use). There are loads of studies out there about this, if you search “life cycle analysis”.
The blades are fibreglass or carbon fibre mix. Usually hand laid up.Steel embodied energy is about 5000Kwh/ ton. Concrete is about 250/ton
(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy)
So, our little turbine spits out just under 10,000kWh/year.
Even if you said none of the steel was recyclable (clearly it is) there can't more than a few years of total embodied energy to pay back.