Wind power, or the lack of it.

Man on Channel 4 news just said wind produced about 4% today, a smaller proportion than we would normally produce that way.

Still wondering where the OP's 3% ceiling came from.

'Katie 59: We need or decide which is more important human needs or environmental needs'

er - nope, we can't do that! Isn't it obvious, by now, that human needs rely on the environment. I think we'll all be wiped out anyway, as it's far too late to solve matters - yet still there's no political will to do enough - or even start to take things seriously.

There's just the usual feet dragging - to be followed by the inevitable 'too little, too late' I'm sure.

Every house should have solar panels

Not every house has suitable roofs pointing in the right direction.

Every house that has suitable roofs pointed in the right direction should have solar panels

I did not say 3% was a ceiling. I just quoted the amount of wind being generated at the time I started the thread. This figure is entirely compatible with the figure quoted by the Channel 4 commentator (4%) at a different time of day.

In different weather conditions when the winds are much stronger, wind can supply 50-60% of our electricity demand.

This is the problem with wind, we are dependent on it, rather than it being under our control.

I quote from the OP: it is currently only capable of providing us with 3% of the power we need

Well it looks to me as though you said the maximum it could provide was 3%. Maybe we just need more wind turbines.

volver

I quote from the OP: it is currently only capable of providing us with 3% of the power we need

Well it looks to me as though you said the maximum it could provide was 3%. Maybe we just need more wind turbines.

You took your quote out of a whole sentence that I read the OP saying in freezing cold weather like now, which is invariably accompanied by still windless conditions, it is currently only capable of providing us with 3% of the power we need meaning currently in these still, windless conditions.

Renewables is not just wind.Scotland made 5 times more electricity than we used last year .We even had a tory here telling us that we were fuel rich but didn't need it as the population was low ..so we needed to let England take it over !!!
Pillaging from the colonies springs to mind ......again

Today the UK grid actually benefitted from 2% wind, 4% solar and 4% Hydro so calm weather means the massive wind energy that could be generated has to be replaced.
As we have abandoned our coal that leaves Gas or Nuclear to fill the gap, over its lifespan Nuclear emits far less CO2 so is the logical choice, but logic has nothing to do with politics which is the reason we are in this mess now.

Rosie51

volver

I quote from the OP: it is currently only capable of providing us with 3% of the power we need

Well it looks to me as though you said the maximum it could provide was 3%. Maybe we just need more wind turbines.

You took your quote out of a whole sentence that I read the OP saying in freezing cold weather like now, which is invariably accompanied by still windless conditions, it is currently only capable of providing us with 3% of the power we need meaning currently in these still, windless conditions.

Then I got the wrong end of the stick. Apologies.

It is not the first time you have misinterpreted what I have said *volver'. Almost always when other people have understood what I was saying quite clearly. Unconscious bias?

If we could somehow harness the undercurrents on gransnet we would have lots of cheap energy

Perhaps.

Maybe just jumping to the conclusion that you're on your hobby horse again. "Wind power baaad."

I won't be apologising again in the future, not after that response.

Co-incidentally, there was an article about a breakthrough in nuclear fusion just last night.

twitter.com/guardian/status/1602414703967408137?s=61&t=2wjudPiqIs1H-yQyFxItRg

And re. solar panels - when I pass buildings with a big amount of roofing, e.g. schools and shopping centres, I always think it’s a wasted opportunity for solar panels and small turbines.

My son has a battery to store the excess that he generates because he says it isn’t worth selling it to the grid.

Why can’t that happen when the wind is blowing?

I suppose that we never generate more than we need at the moment?

I walk on the Downs and look out to sea - I can see hundreds of wind turbines busily doing their thing.

Love them. Gentle giants without an ounce of pollution between them.

Same in my “home” village. First in the U.K. to have on-shore wind turbines who have been quietly producing electricity without an ounce of pollution for donkeys years.

Just think how many tons of carbon they have saved the earth.

Recently stayed in a holiday cottage with one of those heat exchangers. Very efficient underfloor heating was provided, plus a charging point for the car.

energy is being provided by 10% wind power right now, it is not an insignificant amount

grannydarkhair

Co-incidentally, there was an article about a breakthrough in nuclear fusion just last night.

twitter.com/guardian/status/1602414703967408137?s=61&t=2wjudPiqIs1H-yQyFxItRg

And re. solar panels - when I pass buildings with a big amount of roofing, e.g. schools and shopping centres, I always think it’s a wasted opportunity for solar panels and small turbines.

The full Guardian article was rather less enthusiastic.
www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/12/breakthrough-in-nuclear-fusion-could-mean-near-limitless-energy.

Solar Panels on supermarkets and shopping centers is a no brainer and I’m sure many have them, when it’s sunny in summer is exactly when the need power for refrigeration and air conditioning, so they can use the power directly, making bid savings.

“My son has a battery to store the excess that he generates because he says it isn’t worth selling it to the grid.

Why can’t that happen when the wind is blowing?”

Battery storage is being installed on solar farms to level out the peaks in output day by day, wind turbines don’t usually have peaks in output they generate day and night if the wind is blowing.
Long term storage of electricity is not currently practical it’s much cheaper to store or extract the fuel, in our case only gas, other nations store coal and oil as well.

TBH I also think that he has a private vendetta against what he sees as profiteering on the part of the energy giants.

Whitewavemark2 What about all the emissions produced in manufacturing and installing the wind turbines? Every form of energy generation involes emissions somewhere in the process and continuing emissions from the work needed to repair and maintain them.

Once wind turbines have been running for a period, I am not sure how long, then the quantity of emissions per unit of electricity starts to fall below the amount needed for an equivalent hydrocarbon produced unit of electricity, but let us not kid ourselves that wind - or wave or sun - generated power is entirely emission free.

The problem with storing electricity in large batteries is the danger of explosions. this is why there is not much of it.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9775467/UKs-battery-farms-spark-fears-explosions.html www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950423021001686

Not emission free it takes less than a year to generate the energy taken to produce them. Nuclear is even faster, just 2 months to generate construction energy.

Lithium used in storage batteries can cause fires if damaged or misused, probably less risk than gas which we know can cause massive explosions.

Yes I think most people understand that almost every human activity generates carbon or depletes the earths resources somehow.

The point being what is the least damage we can cause atm technology allowing.

Buying less stuff would go a long way.

volver

I don't disagree 25Avalon

Except about the nuclear. Let's just forget the nuclear, can we?

No sorry.
I'd like to see the change to a T.S reactor.
It's a very interesting topic.

Yes, not sorry.

It is a very interesting topic. But unless the laws of physics have changed and I missed it, it's always going to be "no" to nuclear fission.