I've seen some pretty sensational headlines concerning the U.K.'s new wind power plan, and I wanted to try and clear up some of the fog. One headline every home in the U.K. COULD be powered by wind in 2020, another says half of the U.K.'s power will come from wind by 2020. This certainly sounds like good news...but which is it? Or is it neither?
Here's what it is: Gordon Brown's business secretary, John Hutton, announced that the Brown government is planning on opening 100% of the UK's coastline to wind development (excepting where it would interfere with shipping or fishing).
That statement, followed by a long series of "if"s, gets you to 33 gigawatts of wind by 2020. Those IFs include:
- If the plan survives political attack and
- If the plan dodges lawsuits from property owners and fishermen and
- If wind developers choose to develop the open area and
- If wind developers can put distribution lines in place (without lawsuits) and
- If development begins immediately and
- If the opened lands are developed to capacity and
- If they can do it all by 2020 THEN
the U.K. will have 33 gigawatts of wind power online by 2020. During peak output, these turbines would be able to power every home in the U.K.. Which is another way of saying, just under half of the U.K.'s power consumption.
I hope I didn't make that more confusing...and I also hope I didn't dash anyone's dreams. But let's be realistic...2020 is pretty soon, and 33 gigawatts of capacity is a LOT to add to any system. Undoubtedly, this plan will take the U.K. to a new level of renewable energy and it is extremely exciting. We'll keep a close eye on it as it progresses. Congratulations to the British!!
Hits: 9305
Comments (14)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Gaags, December 12, 2007
One would think you mean congratulations to the British ;)
-
- +0
-
-
written by teamonkey, December 12, 2007
"Congratulations to the English!!"
And the Welsh and Scots too, no doubt! ;)
And the Welsh and Scots too, no doubt! ;)
-
- +0
-
-
written by Elgen, December 12, 2007
Sounds like a plan, but I reckon they'll end up with protests against it for all kinds of silly reasons, like the good 'ole "They look ugly" excuse.
Hopefully the british will get it done though.
Hopefully the british will get it done though.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dave, December 12, 2007
according to a comment at this page:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...22277.ece
The electricity consumption of domestic sector in 2005 was 116,811GWh -- equivalent to 29% of power supplied in 2005, not half as stated in the article. Proposed new off-shore wind farm capacity, 33GW, produces 115,632GWh. And that wind production estimate is optimistic (assuming a 40% instead of a 35% load factor). Wind is more likely to produce around 100,000 GWh.
So as long as they work to increase conservation and energy efficiency in the residential sector, they'll meet it no problem. :) Here in the US, we only hear about the offshore wind farms in Denmark, so I was surprised that the UK is probably going to pass Denmark in capacity sometime next year.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...22277.ece
The electricity consumption of domestic sector in 2005 was 116,811GWh -- equivalent to 29% of power supplied in 2005, not half as stated in the article. Proposed new off-shore wind farm capacity, 33GW, produces 115,632GWh. And that wind production estimate is optimistic (assuming a 40% instead of a 35% load factor). Wind is more likely to produce around 100,000 GWh.
So as long as they work to increase conservation and energy efficiency in the residential sector, they'll meet it no problem. :) Here in the US, we only hear about the offshore wind farms in Denmark, so I was surprised that the UK is probably going to pass Denmark in capacity sometime next year.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dave, December 12, 2007
Sorry, here's the link I meant earlier:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol/news/environment/
article3022277.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol/news/environment/
article3022277.ece
-
- +0
-
-
written by Space, December 12, 2007
http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/E...edmap.html
Most of the UK wind is in northern ireland, scotland and wales!
So why congratulate only the english ??
Most of the UK wind is in northern ireland, scotland and wales!
So why congratulate only the english ??
-
- +0
-
-
written by Magnulus, December 12, 2007
This is pretty damn awesome!
I mean, I'm just a Norwegian studying in Scotland, and as such, we won't see the benefits of this unless we decide to stay here, but it's pretty exciting if this actually happens. As it is, most/ all of the power in our household comes from coal - which is a dirty, sinful thing in our opinion - and having that be replaced by WIND power is pretty cool.
If this actually ends up happening, I can only hope that it would have an effect on the way Norway uses ITS coastline. I mean, we have a HUGE bloody coastline when compared to the area of land we have at our disposal, and spicing that up with some wind turbines would be amazing.
How about wave energy, though? I know Norway has some wave "plants" around the place. Are these more or less effective than wind turbines? Would it be feasible/ logical/ non-insane to try to design a combined machine that harnessed wind about the water and waves below it? An UNeducated guess from me tells me that you could build it so it would be cheaper than creating separate structures for them, and it would be more space effective than separate structures...
Again, though, I don't know.
Completely off-topic: Do you read the comments to the articles, Hank?
I mean, I'm just a Norwegian studying in Scotland, and as such, we won't see the benefits of this unless we decide to stay here, but it's pretty exciting if this actually happens. As it is, most/ all of the power in our household comes from coal - which is a dirty, sinful thing in our opinion - and having that be replaced by WIND power is pretty cool.
If this actually ends up happening, I can only hope that it would have an effect on the way Norway uses ITS coastline. I mean, we have a HUGE bloody coastline when compared to the area of land we have at our disposal, and spicing that up with some wind turbines would be amazing.
How about wave energy, though? I know Norway has some wave "plants" around the place. Are these more or less effective than wind turbines? Would it be feasible/ logical/ non-insane to try to design a combined machine that harnessed wind about the water and waves below it? An UNeducated guess from me tells me that you could build it so it would be cheaper than creating separate structures for them, and it would be more space effective than separate structures...
Again, though, I don't know.
Completely off-topic: Do you read the comments to the articles, Hank?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Hank, December 12, 2007
Yes, I read the comments. Sorry to the Welsh and the Scots!!! I'm one of those stupid Americans you keep hearing about...
As for the 50% figure, I thought it was optimistic too, but the figure I'd heard quoted for UK energy use was 75 gigawatts...so I let it slide as 44% is pretty close to 50%...That 75 gigawatt number came from one of the linked articles, I think the BBC one.
As for the 50% figure, I thought it was optimistic too, but the figure I'd heard quoted for UK energy use was 75 gigawatts...so I let it slide as 44% is pretty close to 50%...That 75 gigawatt number came from one of the linked articles, I think the BBC one.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Elgen, December 12, 2007
I seem to have read somewhere that wave "plants" are extremely exposed to rough weather, which atleast makes some sense to me. I mean, the wave height and kinetic power of one wave differs vastly from the the other one, and a power plant made to handle the big ones might not get any effect from the lesser waves, while a power plant made to get the most effect out of the smaller waves might get crushed during a storm. I think that's some of the issues scientists and engineers will have to worry about before we can efficiently use waves as a power source, but the whole idea is quite fascinating, considering the wast amounts of untapped power within the seas of the world.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Magnulus, December 12, 2007
Heheh, first of all; thanks for answering, Hank. I was just curious as I hadn't seen you answer anything yet, though I may just have been not paying attention. I'm quite good at that.
You may be a stupid American, Hank (though I personally would disagree) but you're a stupid American who packs a punch! ^_^
For Elgen: Thanks a lot for that. For some reason, I was labouring under the misapprehension that wave plants worked on underwater currents, which would be another example of how spectacularly off-target my brain can be sometimes. ARE there undercurrent plants, by the way? (Maybe I should just do some research on my own instead of making you do it! ^_^)
You may be a stupid American, Hank (though I personally would disagree) but you're a stupid American who packs a punch! ^_^
For Elgen: Thanks a lot for that. For some reason, I was labouring under the misapprehension that wave plants worked on underwater currents, which would be another example of how spectacularly off-target my brain can be sometimes. ARE there undercurrent plants, by the way? (Maybe I should just do some research on my own instead of making you do it! ^_^)
-
- +0
-
-
written by Elgen, December 12, 2007
Hm, I have no idea, but there probably are. The problem with the whole structure remains somewhat the same though, seeing that the rough sea gives quite a punch during a storm, which there seemingly are becoming more of due to global warming. When the wind can make roofs fly off to god knows where, just imagine what happens when you add a couple of hundred kilos of water to that speed...
I reckon you might also have a problem with the tide, seeing that we get quite a difference in sea level through the different times of day. Ah, hell knows, I'm no expert, and there are probably solutions to most of these problems. I mean, you probably could make it happen, but I don't think it would be cost efficient.
I reckon you might also have a problem with the tide, seeing that we get quite a difference in sea level through the different times of day. Ah, hell knows, I'm no expert, and there are probably solutions to most of these problems. I mean, you probably could make it happen, but I don't think it would be cost efficient.
-
- +0
-
-
written by tracy ho, December 13, 2007
Good idea, so global warming can be reduces to save world,
All the best
Tracy ho
wisdomgettingloaded
All the best
Tracy ho
wisdomgettingloaded
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
DEC 12
"In Portugal allready exists a wave plant with 2 Mw . Try PELAMIS in y..."
View all Comments