Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

What's the contribution to the costs of wind energy due to having to have somebody do the rounds to maintain a relatively diffuse power generation system? I mean the cost of having to reach each turbine, and more so when it's out at sea and parts replacement must be horribly expensive.

Feb 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterMaurizio Morabito

GG:

No I don't have the book. I have used a calculator given by the Danish Wind Energy Association, but that has now been removed from public access. The wind industry in general and manufacturers have clearly been embarassed by what has got out into the public domain and now keep all their dirty linen and dirty secrets well hidden.

Feb 3, 2012 at 6:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

t would be illuminating to see the equivalent test reports for the main UK turbine types!

Apart from the above, my first Google search reveals that there a lot of people mentioning self consumption, but not a lot of hard engineering data. One item I read claimed that the manufacturers were rather coy about revealing how much electricity these Huhne toys require to feed themselves.

regards

P

Feb 3, 2012 at 5:25 PM | Grumpy Grandad

Thanks for the link - quite illuminating!

Feb 3, 2012 at 5:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterRKS

@Feb 3, 2012 at 4:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Hi,

I am getting interested in this subject!

Here is a (non) technical reference, which states a little more about self consumption:-

http://www.aweo.org/windconsumption.html

and here is a really good reference which sets out a TEST METHOD for establishing the efficiency of wind turbines. The book is Wind turbines: fundamentals, technologies, application, economics
By Erich Hau.

You probably already have it !

It can be sampled on line at this URL (sorry for the length):-

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Z4bhObd65IAC&pg=PA499&lpg=PA499&dq=wind+turbine+self+consumption+figure&source=bl&ots=RMiwDRtREa&sig=uqF0VMXbbygNQ7nZXyz6Wqf54ls&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UhIsT4u1KYPtsgbA-OySDQ&ved=0CFMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=wind%20turbine%20self%20consumption%20figure&f=false

There is a test report of a Enercon 2.3mW turbine

It would be illuminating to see the equivalent test reports for the main UK turbine types!

Apart from the above, my first Google search reveals that there a lot of people mentioning self consumption, but not a lot of hard engineering data. One item I read claimed that the manufacturers were rather coy about revealing how much electricity these Huhne toys require to feed themselves.

regards

P

Feb 3, 2012 at 5:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterGrumpy Grandad

Grumpy Grandad

We have been discussing this over at the Chris Huhne thread. I have information. Perhaps we ought to have a discussion topic on wind turbine data.

Feb 3, 2012 at 4:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

I'm baffled by the proceedings over Huhne. The police must know if he received points on his licence for that particular offence!

Feb 3, 2012 at 3:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

WRT the cold, have the Germans turned their nuclear power back on yet?

Feb 3, 2012 at 3:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9058488/Chris-Huhne-and-ex-wife-Vicky-Pryce-charged-with-perverting-course-of-justice.html

Feb 3, 2012 at 10:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterMike Jackson

Huhne is going to be charged according to SKY.

Feb 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM | Unregistered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

Skiphil

Thanks for drawing our attention to Steve Mcintyre's long comment which was in reply to Richard Betts comment. Richard had asked of Steve:

Is this picture an accurate one? Are you “a gratuitous troublemaker” or are you just trying to help, albeit in a way which some find uncomfortable?

Indeed what would “success” look like for you at the end of the AR5 process? A Fifth Assessment Report which is as scientifically robust as possible, so that governments can make informed decisions on climate policy, whatever the outcome of those decisions might be, or do you (as some appear to think) have a particular objective to influence these decisions in a particular direction?

I hope these are not impertinent questions. I didn’t really intend to get into such issues, especially not in one of my first contributions to your blog since I only commented to clear up a couple of misunderstandings and answer some specific questions, but your comment and Richard Drake’s has sparked these off in my mind.

Steve then gives a fairly long comment in reply at 2:36 am on Feb 2 http://climateaudit.org/2012/01/31/geoffrey-boulton-and-ipcc-secrecy/#comments after which it is fascinating to see how quickly Richard changes the subject (I would have thought that Steve's lengthy reply deserved a more considered response). This is how Richard responded:

Steve,

Thanks for that. I’ll look forward to reading the full essay if/when you find time to do it!

Talking of mines, ...

I would have been fascinated to hear more of Richard's reaction to what Steve had already imparted. Did Steve only re-inforce the image of hime that Richard had described, or did he do anything at all to allay the fears? In other words, did Richard's view of Steve change in any respect?

One part of Steve's reply was pretty illuminating to me about the thoughts he possibly harbours but does not allow himself to reveal:

Some of my original engagement arose from my astonishment at outright dishonesty that I encountered early on and by the lack of self-policing of such conduct within the field. This was long before Climategate. As a matter of decorum, I’ve established blog policies that do not allow readers or myself to make accusations of dishonesty or “fraud”, but I don’t say everything that I think.

Feb 3, 2012 at 9:21 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>