The reasons for building wind farms anywhere are a) to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and b) to reduce our dependence on imported hydrocarbon fuels.
Avoidance of carbon dioxide emissions.
The amount of CO2 saved by wind generated power depends on assumptions about the mix of fuels wind replaces. The DTI uses a figure of 0.43 tonne of CO2/MWh. For a 1MW generator with a load factor of 30%, (a generous figure for this part of England) the number of megawatt hours produced per year would be 0.3 x 365 x 24 = 2,628 MWh/year.
Thus the annual CO2 saving for each MW of installed wind generation would be 2,628 x 0.43 = 1130 tonnes/year. Total emissions from the UK from the burning of fossil fuels are calculated at 587 million tonnes CO2/year, representing 2.2% of global output (United Nations for year 2004).
Latest government figures state that our average electricity demand is around 46 gigawatts or 46,000 MW. If wind replaces 10% of this by 2010, it will need to replace 4,600 MW. This would save 4600 x 1130 = 5,198,000 tonnes of CO2 or about 0.9% of UK emissions.
To generate 4600 MW would require 2300 two megawatt turbines constantly running at full load, or 7667 turbines running at 30% load factor. The turbines proposed for Harrington are to be 126 meters to the blade tips and a “wingspan” of 80 meters and therefore have to be spaced considerable distances apart. I believe this is true for most of the other 19 proposals for wind farms within about 10 miles of the Harrington site, because of the low wind speeds in this part of the country. When you consider the amount of land required for the number of turbines required it becomes obvious that the whole notion of electricity generation from the wind, at least in central England is unsustainable. The visual impact on our green and pleasant land would be awful!
It is interesting to read the comments of the recent chairman of the board of Nuon
While the mechanisms of a single European market are well understood and widely adopted in the agricultural sector, policymakers find it difficult to apply the same concept of making optimal use of each country’s natural resources when it comes to fuel mixes. Europe is still dragging its feet on adopting a single energy market for renewables, in which wind energy would be developed where it makes sense instead of seeing wind farms receiving substantial national subsidies in countries where they run for barely a fifth of the year. Ludo van Halderen in 2008.
Nonetheless if government forces this policy through, the House of Lords Economic Affairs committee estimates “the cost of electricity generation and transmission would increase by £6.8 billion, or 38%. This translates into an £80 annual fuel bill increase for the average household.” (Report published 25th November 2008)
All the above would be necessary to achieve just 0.9% saving in UK output of carbon dioxide. The effect on the planet would be zero.
Reduction of imported hydrocarbon fuels.
Because of the intermittent nature of wind generation, it is unlikely that, in this country we will be able to shut down any existing thermal generators beyond those we have to for exceeding their design life. In fact because of an impending major short fall in generating capacity, we will have to build more thermal stations as fast as possible, and possibly keep open some older coal fired stations beyond what the EU would have us do.
Because our island grid must be constantly balanced between generation and use entirely from within UK generator capacity, (apart from a small capacity interconnector with France) and because wind power is unreliable, thermal stations must always be available at short notice as back up. The new thermal stations are likely to be gas fired turbine units because these are relatively quick to build, and emit less CO2 than oil or coal and can be brought up from “spinning reserve” to full power relatively quickly. These will of course increasingly use imported gas. Furthermore if you replace these with wind farms, the gain in CO2 reduction will be even less.
All this will mean virtually no saving in imported fuel. There may be no perfect generation technology available right now. However building nuclear stations would offer the reliable despatchable power our country needs and with virtually no emissions, and reduce imported fuels. This ticks all the boxes. So why build turbines as well?
