Archive for wind

We weren’t blinkered in the CEGB. We were well aware that wind energy CAN be credited with firm capacity [see Swift-Hook, D. T., 1987   “Firm power from the wind” Wind Energy Conversion, Ed. J. M. Galt, (MEP : London) p. 33] and that the cost of off-setting the variability of wind is modest, see attached by David Milborrow.
We had started well before the 1980s. I got together with Stephen Salter on wave power back in 1974, [see for example Swift-Hook, D. T., Count, B. C.,  Glendenning, I. and Salter, S.) 1975   “Characteristics of a rocking wave power device” Nature, Vol. 254, p. 504. Brian Count subsequently became Chairman of the London Electricity Board, by the way].  At the same time, we contributed to Chris Cockerell [of hovercraft fame] in developing his wave power  raft, which also did not succeed.
Garry Hammond’s 1978 paper in Physics in Technology [which I was editing around that time] looked pretty sick just a couple of years later. Not his fault but the Government’s. They had wrapped up the Severn Barrage and all Wave Power research but had increased the total funding considerably, mainly on wind.
The ¼MW machine at Carmarthen Bay was built by James Howden of Glasgow who pulled out of wind power 2 or 3 years later when they secured the contract for a large borer to bore the English half of the Channel Tunnel.  [It’s tough trying to pick winners.]
And it’s tricky trying to say what would have happened if we had put more money in than was enough to support just one large megawatt-sized machine. The Americans put in enough to build a dozen or more of them, their 2-bladed Mod series, very much the type which we ourselves would have built if money had been forth-coming, and that whole part of the US programme failed i.e failed to get anything into commercial production.
Their big success was to pour money into subsidies designed to  encourage commercial wind farms  -  the Californian wind rush  -  but most of that money landed up in the pockets of Danish manufacturers. It did not stimulate US manufacturing industry at all. Its fair to say that the US ceded the lead to the Danes with full Government support.
Even being wise after the event is not easy!
Prof Donald T Swift-Hook, Visiting Professor, Kingston University,
MA, MSc, PhD, CEng, FIET, CSci, FEI, CPhys, FInstP, CMath, FIMA, MInstD,
Bourne Place, Horsell Common Road, WOKING, Surrey  GU21 4XX,  UK
Tel:   0(044)8448 123 902; Mob: 0(044)7921 153 902; Fax:  0(044)8448 123 903

We weren’t blinkered in the CEGB. We were well aware that wind energy CAN be credited with firm capacity [see Swift-Hook, D. T., 1987   “Firm power from the wind” Wind Energy Conversion, Ed. J. M. Galt, (MEP : London) p. 33] and that the cost of off-setting the variability of wind is modest, see attached by David Milborrow. Read More→

Popularity: 3% [?]

“Wind energy is not controversial apart from its effects on wealthy land owners”

A claveton responded:

“I’m not sure in what respect it’s not controversial. It’s not ‘the’ answer to anything, except as very much a small part of something. The on-shore wind companies are now having to diversify because, they say, all the possible wind sites are taken. It’s true that not all those wind sites are built, it’s true that a huge number are in Scotland and it’s probable that a lot more will be built. But ‘a lot more’ won’t get us to 2010 targets, let alone 2020 targets (and even HMG recognised that – which is why offshore wind was given such hefty incentives and why industry now feels that the on-shore incentives lack sparkle). The issue is, isn’t it, what’s going to get us there, given that on-shore (or off-shore) wind isn’t.
(I note the optimism that we still have the engineering capacities we had in WW2 – and that  we could “in a matter of years” build factories. We don’t have that time. Who would do it? And why haven’t they done so already?)”

Read More→

Popularity: 2% [?]

Categories : Wind, Wind Energy
Comments (0)
2009/8/13 Gross, Robert J K

Dear Colleague

The UK Energy Research Centre Technology and Policy Assessment theme (www.ukerc.ac.uk)  is hosting a workshop for stakeholders from across the energy arena to help define its priority research areas for the next 5 years. We very much hope that you will be able to attend and contribute. The workshop will take place on the 1st  October, from 11.00 to 4.30 at Imperial College.

The TPA has produced high profile evidence based assessments on topics ranging from the ‘rebound effect’ to the impacts of intermittent/variable generation on electricity systems. Each of these topics was selected in consultation with key stakeholders and users. A process the TPA team is seeking to replicate as UKERC enters its second phase of work.

More details can be found on the attached invitation. If you would like to attend please email Philip.heptonstall@imperial.ac.uk

Many thanks.

Robert Gross

TPA Director

Popularity: 1% [?]

This note will shortly go out to press and other invitees re the presentation at House of Commons – please read and comment.

 

Wiki is at: http://claverton.wikispaces.com/European+supergrid

 SEE LATEST ARTICLE ON THIS SUBJECT AT 

 http://www.claverton-energy.com/why-do-we-need-the-supergrid-what-is-its-scope-and-what-will-it-achieve.html

A significant number of Claverton Energy Group members acknowledge Britain could have energy security and a fully sustainable clean supply of affordable electricity within 30 years (15 years with a crash program) by embracing the European Supergrid (akin to the UK national grid but on a larger scale, linking up Europe, Scandinavia, Iceland, Central Europe, the Ukraine, and north Africa). However, the group is worried that UK energy companies acting without government instruction will be unable and even reluctant to implement it. The 320 strong independent group of energy experts, including a number who wish to remain anonymous because of their positions within the big 6 energy companies, is calling on the government to intervene now to avoid an unregulated energy industry making the kinds of mistakes that were made by an unregulated banking industry.
Read More→

Popularity: 13% [?]

This article has been commented on by members of the Claverton Energy Group. Please feel free to add your comments providing they are fact based. Please insert relevant references where you know them. please use itallics for your edits.’

“Europe’s green energy vision puts UK in dark”

Source: Copyright 2009, Times (UK) Date: April 30, 2009 Byline: Robin Pagnamenta, Original URL

Discussion / development page for Times article on Supergrid

This article has been commented on by members of the Claverton Energy Group. Please feel free to add your comments providing they are fact based. Read More→

Popularity: 13% [?]