scrubbedexpat099

Of course many people object as they can contribute to CO2 emissions.

WEBlue

Wind turbines? I thought they reduced CO2 emissions?

scrubbedexpat099

Some can, some do not, like everything else it depends.

Pulaski

Please would you care to explain under what circumstances collecting wind energy creates CO2 emissions?

scrubbedexpat099

Collecting?

I would be hard pushed.

There is a lot of embedded energy in their production, transportation and erection.

In Scotland the biggest CO2 factor is the release of CO2 from peat bogs caused by the construction of roads to the sites.

Bob

Aye, it's all up front costs, that everyone forgets about. Bit more visible when it's water power and damning up a village I suppose.

Pulaski

Harnessing?
OK, that makes sense, in the short term at least. I would hope there is a medium- long term benefit, but the manufacture of the turbine, gearbox, and generator should be compared with the CO2 produced by building other forms of power generation, not compared to doing nothing (not building and generation capacity).

GeoffM

The same was said of those solar panels you put on your roof. The outlay compared to saved money on electricity bills also didn't make it worth it, unless you had a government subsidy.

Also the first generation electric cars: their batteries have all sorts of nasty stuff inside, with questionable sourcing/production methods, resulting in them being more polluting than petrol cars apparently.

scrubbedexpat099

This was long term comparison. I remember reading a report that suggested a Hummer was Greener than a Prius.

But the Scottish cases with the released CO2 from Peat it is not even close.

With wind you do of course still need the fossil generation capacity, wind is unpredictable.

I think I mentioned this some where else but I know somebody who obtained a wind system basically for free through DOLA I think grants. The economics are still iffy as the annual maintenance agreement is similar to the price of buying the equivalent electricity.

PV where I am makes more sense, similar cost per KW but much less maintenance. But you need the subsidies still.

WEBlue

Absolutely! Whatever intial CO2 produced in the building of it (or eventual dismantling, at the end of the turbine's life) should be compared with that produced in building a conventional (i.e. non-renewable) electric generating facility. I would hazard a guess that such a comparison would show that CO2 produced in wind turbine usage is offset far quicker than with the conventional facilities. Otherwise why switch to renewables?

jeffreyhy

When they cause to fossil-fueled generators, designed to operate near full rating, to back down to levels at which they become quite inefficient. Particularly if they have to stop generating overnight but they boiler has to be kept fired so it will be ready to go again the next morning.

Not unlike an automobile that operates most efficiently at 50-60 miles per hour, but when you're in stop-and-go traffic or idling at the ATM or fast-food drive through burning fuel but going nowhere.

Regards, JEff

scrubbedexpat099

I subscribe to this magazine which is much more small scale focussed but has some interesting general articles as well.

WEBlue

So the problem is that using wind turbines along WITH conventional fossil fuel generators causes the fossil fuel generators to become even MORE inefficient and emit more CO2?

So isn't the solution to eventually shut down the old-style fossil fuel generators and move into more complete renewable-energy generation of power? And isn't that what this country is supposed to be doing?...long-term, that is?

jeffreyhy

Can't be done without significant amounts of affordable energy storage devices. Electric supply must match electric demand instantaneously. Fossil-fuel generators are fully controlable, it can be moved up or down at will as needed. Renewable generation cannot, you're at the mercy of the energy source.

Long-term, possibly. But here we're talking about today, are we not?

Regards, JEff

Pulaski

But we need to get from 70+% fossil 20-30 years ago (the balance being nuclear and hydro) to something more sustainable and we can't do that overnight, it has to be phased over many years. So while in the short term there may be some dysfunctionality (excess CO2 production) we are making the transition to a mix of energy sources that produce less CO2.