Politics

[Dimron]

2 hours ago, Casino said:

one reason they get turned off is cos they feed the grid and theres not enough grid capacity

or something

expert woman says its costing over a billion to pay for them to be off and will be rising massively to 9 billion pdq

As I understand things the grid is based on coal fired power stations not 100s of windfarms in the middle of the countryside so it all needs reconfiguring

[Casino]

52 minutes ago, Dimron said:

As I understand things the grid is based on coal fired power stations not 100s of windfarms in the middle of the countryside so it all needs reconfiguring

They are generally connected to the grid, so thats not an issue

Lack of storage is

[Dimron]

21 minutes ago, Casino said:

They are generally connected to the grid, so thats not an issue

Lack of storage is

But the really thick cables to distribute all of the energy from the off shore wind farms aren't there... that is why when I drive to the Lincs coast I see all the banners saying no pylons here. The big distribution stuff is now in the wrong place like the Trent Valley, it is now required elsewhere.

Unfortunately it isn't practical or efficient to store electricity... we can use some of the off-peak stuff to pump water up mountainsides such as at Dinorwig and store it as potential energy but that's it... generated electricity needs to be put into a grid to be tapped into by consumers almost immediately.

We probably have to turn the windmills off so we don't blow the fuses on some days.

[Spider]

Like casino says, the real problem is how to store energy when it’s generated and not used.

It’s a massive issue.

Wave energy would be ample for the nations needs if we could harness a way to store it efficiently.

Im no cynic, but imagine if research into this very issue was underfunded by the oil and gas lads.

 

[Dimron]

4 minutes ago, Spider said:

Like casino says, the real problem is how to store energy when it’s generated and not used.

It’s a massive issue.

Wave energy would be ample for the nations needs if we could harness a way to store it efficiently.

Im no cynic, but imagine if research into this very issue was underfunded by the oil and gas lads.

 

Electricity cannot be stored as with hydrocarbons like natural gases,,, electricity is about setting up the potential for electrons to move along conduits. We can chemically store "charge" (potential energy) in batteries but that's it. That is why we really need to upgrade the grid to distribute the current from all of these new generation sources which should include tidal/wave barriers. 

I believe we are getting an experimental (20 billion?) fusion generator not far from me in the near future at the site of the former West Burton coal fired  power station... it'd solve all our problems if we can get it to work... fuse two hydrogen atoms from the River Trent into Helium... E=mc2 and wallop! It'll make all these windfarms appear temporary make-dos.

[gonzo]

 

 

 

[Spider]

9 minutes ago, gonzo said:

 

 

 

There’s no need to worry.

According to Bolty all the top earners are leaving the country anyway son a reset is on the horizon.

The only way this won’t happen is if Bolty is talking shit.

But that’s unlikely. <cough>

[Casino]

If they want to go, let em go

And dont let em ever come back when their hips are fucked

me fucking off would be like me supporting city cos bolton are shit

[Sweep]

17 hours ago, Casino said:

one reason they get turned off is cos they feed the grid and theres not enough grid capacity

or something

expert woman says its costing over a billion to pay for them to be off and will be rising massively to 9 billion pdq

Theres a few reasons why they turn them off, I think they cut out once there is a consistent speed of around 30mph. In high speed, there is simply too much stress on the mechanicals, mainly the internal gearbox, the wear and tear at high speed will massively shorten the lifetime. 

As it stands, and the last presentation I saw, suggested that a turbine, if it never needs any (other than the usual) maintenance, will take around 8 years to pay for itself....doesn't sound too bad, until you realise that a turbine only has a projected working lifetime of around 20 years. So at best, it'll generate 12 years of "free" electricity   -  if it has a major failure though, or a couple of bad years (this last winter has been terrible for Turbines) then that dramatically eats into the "free" element of that time

Somedays they can generate up to about 30%/40% of our electricity, other days down closer to 2%  -  this winter, they've contributed less than 5% over the last 3 months (allegedly)

In short, they're a bit shit, and we're paying for them, all to meet this "net zero" aim, that nobody else (worth bothering about) seems interested in.

 

Still, we've paid for them now, so we may as well use them. Although, as pointed out, until we sort out some sort of storage (and we're a million miles away from that), we'll continue to have energy supply problems.......and that's where the constraint payments, that Casino refers to above come in. When they're switched off, we have to pay for them not being used, which isn't very good at all, as pointed out, it was almost £1B last year that was paid to the Wind Farm owners, for them to be switched off 🙂

Edited February 27, 2025 by Sweep

[jayjayoghani]

1 hour ago, Sweep said:

Theres a few reasons why they turn them off, I think they cut out once there is a consistent speed of around 30mph. In high speed, there is simply too much stress on the mechanicals, mainly the internal gearbox, the wear and tear at high speed will massively shorten the lifetime. 

As it stands, and the last presentation I saw, suggested that a turbine, if it never needs any (other than the usual) maintenance, will take around 8 years to pay for itself....doesn't sound too bad, until you realise that a turbine only has a projected working lifetime of around 20 years. So at best, it'll generate 13 years of "free" electricity   -  if it has a major failure though, or a couple of bad years (this last winter has been terrible for Turbines) then that dramatically eats into the "free" element of that time

Somedays they can generate up to about 30%/40% of our electricity, other days down closer to 2%  -  this winter, they've contributed less than 5% over the last 3 months (allegedly)

In short, they're a bit shit, and we're paying for them, all to meet this "net zero" aim, that nobody else (worth bothering about) seems interested in.

 

Still, we've paid for them now, so we may as well use them. Although, as pointed out, until we sort out some sort of storage (and we're a million miles away from that), we'll continue to have energy supply problems.......and that's where the constraint payments, that Casino refers to above come in. When they're switched off, we have to pay for them not being used, which isn't very good at all, as pointed out, it was almost £1B last year that was paid to the Wind Farm owners, for them to be switched off 🙂

Not an expert in wind farms and the base design but the bases will have a much longer lifespan and imagine they can be reused. 

[Sweep]

7 minutes ago, jayjayoghani said:

Not an expert in wind farms and the base design but the bases will have a much longer lifespan and imagine they can be reused. 

I'm no expert either, sadly, I have to hear about them, and I absorb bits here and there. Agreed, the bases will probably last for ever, there's shit loads of concrete poured into the ground to keep them in place (both on and off shore)  - so presumably they'll just only have to change the actual turbines (and no doubt they will get far more efficient over the coming years.

I'm not dead against them, it's just nuts that we've slung thousands of the things up, with, it seems, little or no thought in storage

What will be interesting is what they will do in certain places - they whacked of them up at the end of our village about 5 years ago (I can actually see one nicely spinning away in the distance, from my office window) - part of the planning, after much NIMBY protesting by the local yokels, was that after 25 years (the proposed working lifetime of this particular project) they'd be taken down, the concrete removed and all the land "made good" - if that sort of agreement is in place for our village, I'm sure it's also in place for lots of other locations.

......although, I think we all know there is no way on earth they'll want to "take them down" and not replace them in 20 years time, especially as most of the hard work (ground works) has already been done. Fortunately, I'll be 70, so I'll probably be dead by then anyway, so I won't have to put up with the NIMBYs again who will be back out in force 🙂

 

They (the Co-Op who own them) also committed to give £25K per year to the Parish Council whilst the turbines are in operation, and to be fair they have been donating the £25K per year, which has gone to local youth groups, creating a park, and funding a weekly "warm space" for the resident owd duffers, so that's pretty decent

[Traf]

1 hour ago, jayjayoghani said:

Not an expert in wind farms and the base design but the bases will have a much longer lifespan and imagine they can be reused. 

Your opinion is invalid if you're not an expert.

Experts only on WW.

[Casino]

3 hours ago, Sweep said:

 it was almost £1B last year that was paid to the Wind Farm owners, for them to be switched off 🙂

i do wonder who owns them

[royal white]

Lucky lad hey. 
 

 

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, Casino said:

i do wonder who owns them

I don't know, I do know "ours" here are owned by The Co-Op, and aren't a load of the offshore ones owned by foreign types? I think Orsted (Danish Government backed) own about 35% of them  -  so the good news is, if we have to switch them off, and not use them, we get to pay the likes of Denmark, Norway, China etc for the pleasure of it

[Sweep]

5 minutes ago, royal white said:

Lucky lad hey. 
 

 

I'd have thought that would happen to a "normal" person anyway....however, as an MP, he should have been made to serve the sentence

[royal white]

26 minutes ago, Sweep said:

I'd have thought that would happen to a "normal" person anyway....however, as an MP, he should have been made to serve the sentence

What’s the point in giving out a sentence then overturning it days later? What’s changed? 

[Sweep]

8 minutes ago, royal white said:

What’s the point in giving out a sentence then overturning it days later? What’s changed? 

I don't know, I'm not fully up on the full details of the case, but at a guess pressure from "above" probably - it always happens, and always will. Those in power often get away with things us mere mortals don't

[Cheese]

2 minutes ago, Sweep said:

I don't know, I'm not fully up on the full details of the case, but at a guess pressure from "above" probably - it always happens, and always will. Those in power often get away with things us mere mortals don't

He's an Independent. There won't have been any "pressure from above". There'll be a by-election, and he'll rightly get fucked off.

[athywhite1958]

47 minutes ago, Sweep said:

I'd have thought that would happen to a "normal" person anyway....however, as an MP, he should have been made to serve the sentence

Just hope he fucks up his suspended sentence, he will be breached with the prison term activated, hope his probation officer is a cunt

[Sweep]

9 minutes ago, Cheese said:

He's an Independent. There won't have been any "pressure from above". There'll be a by-election, and he'll rightly get fucked off.

Fair enough, I don't know much about it.

I did think that a 10 week prison sentence was quite extreme compared to other sentences that are doled out - but as Royal says, it's a bit strange it was changed to a suspended within a few days

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

31 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Fair enough, I don't know much about it.

I did think that a 10 week prison sentence was quite extreme compared to other sentences that are doled out - but as Royal says, it's a bit strange it was changed to a suspended within a few days

Nah, it's not

He appealed to a higher court, and because he'd been sentenced to a short-term custodial sentence, the appeal was fast-tracked as it would for anyone else in a similar position

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Nah, it's not

He appealed to a higher court, and because he'd been sentenced to a short-term custodial sentence, the appeal was fast-tracked as it would for anyone else in a similar position

Point I was making though is why has it been reduced? What’s changed? 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

Just now, royal white said:

Point I was making though is why has it been reduced? What’s changed? 

He'll have appealed to a more experienced judge arguing the judge who dealt with his case initially failed to take into account or place enough weight on certain evidence, or was too harsh in their sentencing

That kind of thing

[Cheese]

It's clearly because he's a former Labour MP, and Starmer obviously intervened personally - in between calls with Trump and Zelenskyy. Nothing to do with the perfectly normal appeal process that every ordinary person has a right to use.