Posted on 10/20/2017 1:59:35 PM PDT by Twotone
It consisted of eleven turbines, each with a capacity of 0.45 MW, giving a total export capacity for the wind farm of 5 MW. The hub height of each turbine was 37.5 m and blade height 17 m, small by today’s standards. Because of its date of construction, it would have been all but totally reliant on conventional energy for its manufacture and installation. The original stated project cost was £7.16 million in 1991, which is equivalent to approximately £10 million today.[2]
During its lifetime, it delivered 243 GWh to the Danish electricity grid. This means that the actual amount of electricity generated was 22% of that which would have been generated if it had delivered 5 MW all the time for 25 years. In technical terms, it had a load factor of 0.22. From the same source we see the initial expectation was that 3506 houses would be powered annually, with a saving of 7085 tonnes of carbon dioxide per annum.[3] There was no clear indication of Vindeby’s expected lifetime. Since the average household’s annual use of energy in Denmark[4] is 5000 kWh, we can calculate that the windfarm’s anticipated energy output was 438 GWh over its 25-year lifetime. The actual total of 243 GWh was therefore only 55% of that expectation.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegwpf.com ...
And yet, it will be replaced by another wind farm.
Is the Global Warming Policy Forum as leftist as it sounds? If so, how did this damning document end up on their site?
The costing is a lie anyway, like everything coming from the gangreen. It did not include the interconnexion cost (which is astronomical for any offshore installation), not the maintenance cost, not the intermittancy cost, not the distmantling cost...
no, they are not leftist. They are fiscally conservative, climate skeptics and energy realists.
Great picture.
Provenance?
FAIL. Losers. Money gone with the wind...
Jimmy Carter tried to push this and we all know what an idiot he is!
I visited with a 90 y/o patient today. She was ranting about Trump bringing the coal industry back to life. She said what is coal good for, there are better alternatives. I asked her what those were; of course, she didn’t know. Then she said, the sun! Why not use the roof for solar energy? I asked if she had $50,000 for solar panels. She was visibly stunned. LOL! She’s a hoot, but typically democrat clueless.
Coinciding with this was the fact the first wind farm with floating windmills was commissioned very recently offshore Scotland called Hywind and partially owned by the Norwegian Oil Company, Statoil.
In Europe and China there are many offshore windmills but only 4 have been installed in the US. California is waiting on the floating windmills.
General Electric makes offshore windmills at their factory in France.
Here we have the wind corridor for wind generation which is low population density and republican so offshore has not been needed here as it has been in Europe
It was and is a racket.
The "investors" that took advantage of the eco stupity quickly reached the transmission saturation for a low number of turbines, and still got paid for "power generation" for turbines still in the packing crates.
I called up our County Agent and asked him where I can get the wind seed to start a wind farm.
How much fossil-fuel energy did it actually keep from being generated?
You are also clueless. The US produces significant amounts of renewable energy from windmills mostly in Republican states
Texas produces the most windpower and where in the last couple of weeks 3 coal plants were shut down. But Iowa, OK and Kansas produce a higher percentage.
The western plains, from Mexico to Canada, is the wind corridor.
The republicans in the eastern part of the state were backed by the Kock Brothers and were trying to shut down the wind industry in Kansas.
The republicans in the western part of the state who are farmers went to war with the Kock Brothers and won, so Kansas has exploded as a wind state are trying to install their first gigawatt.
I recall that during the California black-out crisis under Grey Davis, 1 MWh of electricity was going for about $109.
243 GWh is 243,000 MWh, multiply by $109, we get $26.5 million, convert into pounds is something like ₤10 mil.
So it cost ₤10Bn to generate a total of ₤10 mil worth of electricity.
Yes....that is the key and it’s priceless no matter what the cost to liberals who have their collective heads stuck somewhere....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.