£3bn wind farm off Hampshire coast a step closer (From Daily Echo)

Of course Friends of the Earth are backing it - this is the vision that they beleive in. That doesn;t make it any more sensible or practical. As always the the proponents say it will power "up to" 820,000 homes. And as always I'll ask the same question - how many homes will it guarantee to power on a given date and time in the future? and the answer is hardly any. So what are those 820,000 homes going to do during a cold still January anticyclone when the temperature is below zero for days on end and there is almost no wind? Shiver? Die? Welcome to to cold dark apocalyptic reality of the third world future that FoE shy away from describing in detail. Anyway perhaps Friends of the Earth will provide some calculations and post on here for me to analyse publicly. .

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Of course Friends of the Earth are backing it - this is the vision that they beleive in. That doesn;t make it any more sensible or practical. As always the the proponents say it will power "up to" 820,000 homes. And as always I'll ask the same question - how many homes will it guarantee to power on a given date and time in the future? and the answer is hardly any. So what are those 820,000 homes going to do during a cold still January anticyclone when the temperature is below zero for days on end and there is almost no wind? Shiver? Die? Welcome to to cold dark apocalyptic reality of the third world future that FoE shy away from describing in detail. Anyway perhaps Friends of the Earth will provide some calculations and post on here for me to analyse publicly. .

How stupid do you think we all are?

Of course these turbines will not supply all out needs during the worst weather spells, but they will, over time, cut ( I said only cut ) our needs on fossil fuel and that, surely, has got to be a plus.

No, no and thrice no. Once there,the beauty of looking across to the boats and IOW will forever be gone, Then that will be the start of a circle of these all round the UK.

Not the prettiest of sights, but far better than a polluting Biomass Plant, and as Andy of Locksheath has stated, we do not want a cold dark apocalyptic third world future.

Unproven technology not worth the money. The money should have been spent keeping the coal mines open: the coal's still there....

Why has it still not been started? Today we have a strong breeze blowing and no turbines to harvest the energy. This is such a shame. Just get on and make it happen.

Once again people talking against a Windfarm spouting lies.
Andy you have been told O a new invention where energy produced from Wind Turbines & Solar panels can be stored in Liquid Air so giving electricity 24-7.
As for a beautiful view?
How much longer will you have a house close to the sea/rivers with sea levels rapidly rising?
After a while you manage to look past the Turbines & it becomes as if they're not there so the view seems normal so what would you rather have a Dirty Coal power station on your doorstep or a wind turbine?

sburman wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
Of course Friends of the Earth are backing it - this is the vision that they beleive in. That doesn;t make it any more sensible or practical. As always the the proponents say it will power "up to" 820,000 homes. And as always I'll ask the same question - how many homes will it guarantee to power on a given date and time in the future? and the answer is hardly any. So what are those 820,000 homes going to do during a cold still January anticyclone when the temperature is below zero for days on end and there is almost no wind? Shiver? Die? Welcome to to cold dark apocalyptic reality of the third world future that FoE shy away from describing in detail. Anyway perhaps Friends of the Earth will provide some calculations and post on here for me to analyse publicly. .

How stupid do you think we all are?

Of course these turbines will not supply all out needs during the worst weather spells, but they will, over time, cut ( I said only cut ) our needs on fossil fuel and that, surely, has got to be a plus.

You personally are as clever (or as stupid) as your answer demonstrates, if that satisfies you. So tell me, if they cannot be relied on to deliver at a given time, then the grid must have equivalent backup from a reliable source to deliver at any given time, right? And if it has equivalent backup from a reliable source such a nuclear, then why do we need to despoil our coasts and kill wildlife with a more expensive less reliable alternative?

skin2000 wrote:
Not the prettiest of sights, but far better than a polluting Biomass Plant, and as Andy of Locksheath has stated, we do not want a cold dark apocalyptic third world future.

Yes, but because the wind turbines cannot be planned to deliver at a set point in time, you have to have thermal stations as backup. You must understand that thermal and nuclear power stations are necessary because of the size of our renewables sector The statement should be "as well as", not "instead of" biomass.

They don't have any problem with the ones off the East coast, and I don't suppose they will have with the proposed new ones. Wind farms are here to stay. Live with it.
The UK has according to official statistics the largest shallow water offshore wind resource in the world, and it is stupid and shortsighted not to use this "free" power. Nimbys make me sick.
Whatever amount of power wind farms produce will mean the less we have to buy from abroad, and the less we will be dependant on the whims of foreign suppliers.

loosehead wrote:
Once again people talking against a Windfarm spouting lies.
Andy you have been told O a new invention where energy produced from Wind Turbines & Solar panels can be stored in Liquid Air so giving electricity 24-7.
As for a beautiful view?
How much longer will you have a house close to the sea/rivers with sea levels rapidly rising?
After a while you manage to look past the Turbines & it becomes as if they're not there so the view seems normal so what would you rather have a Dirty Coal power station on your doorstep or a wind turbine?

So how much energy is required to "store" this in liquid air? Coal generation does not have to be dirty. Nuclear is even a better solution! Sea levels rapidly rising? You beleive too much what the doom mongerers spout. Denmark have the most wind turbines per capita than anyone and they have not decommissioned any traditional generation techniques. What about natural gas? Excellent, cost-effective generation fuel. Trouble is, too many people are conned into beleiving this world is doomed. Why? Because governments want us to think unless we pay, we will all perish. They love nothing more than sensation. Let's be sensible, let's be efficient but do not let lies determine investment. Listen to Andy from Locks Heath, he is educated and (excuse then pun) switched on to reality.

forest hump wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Once again people talking against a Windfarm spouting lies.
Andy you have been told O a new invention where energy produced from Wind Turbines & Solar panels can be stored in Liquid Air so giving electricity 24-7.
As for a beautiful view?
How much longer will you have a house close to the sea/rivers with sea levels rapidly rising?
After a while you manage to look past the Turbines & it becomes as if they're not there so the view seems normal so what would you rather have a Dirty Coal power station on your doorstep or a wind turbine?

So how much energy is required to "store" this in liquid air? Coal generation does not have to be dirty. Nuclear is even a better solution! Sea levels rapidly rising? You beleive too much what the doom mongerers spout. Denmark have the most wind turbines per capita than anyone and they have not decommissioned any traditional generation techniques. What about natural gas? Excellent, cost-effective generation fuel. Trouble is, too many people are conned into beleiving this world is doomed. Why? Because governments want us to think unless we pay, we will all perish. They love nothing more than sensation. Let's be sensible, let's be efficient but do not let lies determine investment. Listen to Andy from Locks Heath, he is educated and (excuse then pun) switched on to reality.

before you write this rubbish research Liquid air?
An Inventor ( British ) has developed a Liquid air powered car which has now been adapted by one company to store all waste heat from it's factory & then to use it to produce free energy.
The production of electricity by wind farms is said to be intermittent but put one of his inventions there & this energy can be used to create Liquid air which can then be used to generate Electricity when it's needed.
This isn't just capable with Wind but with Tidal,Wave & Solar energy & is totally GREEN & cheap as it would produce Electricity 24-7 so cutting the cost to the generating companies

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

skin2000 wrote:
Not the prettiest of sights, but far better than a polluting Biomass Plant, and as Andy of Locksheath has stated, we do not want a cold dark apocalyptic third world future.

Yes, but because the wind turbines cannot be planned to deliver at a set point in time, you have to have thermal stations as backup. You must understand that thermal and nuclear power stations are necessary because of the size of our renewables sector The statement should be "as well as", not "instead of" biomass.

So Andy you never looked into the Liquid Air invention then?
as if you had you know the above statement is now a lie?
Read about Liquid air & how it can be used in conjunction with Wind Turbines so no need for Thermal Generators if we build enough Wind,Wave,Tidal & Solar generators.
I backed you on Bio Mass but after seeing this invention I'm leaning to these power sources over Bio Mass

forest hump wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Once again people talking against a Windfarm spouting lies.
Andy you have been told O a new invention where energy produced from Wind Turbines & Solar panels can be stored in Liquid Air so giving electricity 24-7.
As for a beautiful view?
How much longer will you have a house close to the sea/rivers with sea levels rapidly rising?
After a while you manage to look past the Turbines & it becomes as if they're not there so the view seems normal so what would you rather have a Dirty Coal power station on your doorstep or a wind turbine?

So how much energy is required to "store" this in liquid air? Coal generation does not have to be dirty. Nuclear is even a better solution! Sea levels rapidly rising? You beleive too much what the doom mongerers spout. Denmark have the most wind turbines per capita than anyone and they have not decommissioned any traditional generation techniques. What about natural gas? Excellent, cost-effective generation fuel. Trouble is, too many people are conned into beleiving this world is doomed. Why? Because governments want us to think unless we pay, we will all perish. They love nothing more than sensation. Let's be sensible, let's be efficient but do not let lies determine investment. Listen to Andy from Locks Heath, he is educated and (excuse then pun) switched on to reality.

What about the poor islanders who's islands are disappearing under the rising sea?
What about Bangladesh which is becoming more & more flooded & land slipping away to the rising tides?
Here we have a solution to produce much cheaper fuel from these sources than was previously thought & you state Natural Gas?
Have you not just had your power bills rise?
Was not the reason we have to buy it from abroad?
Are coal is costly to get out of the ground & we have to find a place which can capture the carbon omitted from burning so making it even dearer .
As for Nuclear do you want Nuclear waste buried under your home? I don't & why should any one have this radioactive waste buried near them?
Exactly what waste does Wind,Wave,Tidal & Solar make?
Or even Methane extracted from Sewage?
We as humans produce & endless source of the above but do we use it NO there would be objections to the smell from the storage tanks.
We have become a country that wants it all on a plate but don't want to put up with it on our doorsteps

Plenty of gas in this country as in US. Nuclear waste can be disposed of sensibly. If you really beleive that liquid air is the answer, then why is it not being developed? Simple: because it is not easy or efficient. Otherwise, it would be snapped up and marketed. Energy technonolgy is one of the most important features in our lives today and there are many looking at ways of developing cleaner, more efficient derivatives. Do you not think if it was there it would not be developed? Get a grip and look at the real world.

I work in offshore wind farms as well as the oil and gas industry. I have in the past worked in coal, oil and nuclear power station. The latter all producing a by product when producing electricity. And all damaging to the environment and the health of all. Wind turbines are now becoming cost effective as the new generation of turbines can produce ample electricity even during days of minimal wind. It doesn't take a lot of wind to get these turbines moving and producing power. This is the future. A few yachties and a few complaining about a blighted view out to sea, which at 9 miles will not be visible most days of the year, are not enough of a reason not to build this farm.

saintinpattaya wrote:
I work in offshore wind farms as well as the oil and gas industry. I have in the past worked in coal, oil and nuclear power station. The latter all producing a by product when producing electricity. And all damaging to the environment and the health of all. Wind turbines are now becoming cost effective as the new generation of turbines can produce ample electricity even during days of minimal wind. It doesn't take a lot of wind to get these turbines moving and producing power. This is the future. A few yachties and a few complaining about a blighted view out to sea, which at 9 miles will not be visible most days of the year, are not enough of a reason not to build this farm.

if this is the future why are they building 23 new coal fired powerstations in germany? they've discovered the return on the windmills is a measly o.o84%.of their needs. they've abandoned windmills, they might be able to live on the electricity where you are with one computer to 300 people!
I don't care where they build them as long as I don't have to pay for them through a stealth tax on my gas and electricity bills, let them stand or fall unsubsidised on a level commercial playing field i don't think you'd see many!

I forgot I live in a third world country you patronising know all. Get your facts right before quoting numbers as I know mine. 100 GW of wind power can generate electricity over a year to meet the total consumption of 57 million households, equivalent to the power production of 39 nuclear power plants. This is now a reality in the European Union. 

As the inventor has just proven how efficient his Liquid Air Engine is & a company is trying out the storage use of the motor we have a choice we jump to it or we fall behind & use Victorian ideas to generate power.
As soon as Germany & most of the world see the merits in Liquid Air there will be many more windfarms & Solar panel arrays.
they'll build them whilst we're building Coal & Nuclear power stations with all the side waste from these plants.
Derek James research Liquid Air powered car then please come back & debate this option

loosehead wrote:
As the inventor has just proven how efficient his Liquid Air Engine is & a company is trying out the storage use of the motor we have a choice we jump to it or we fall behind & use Victorian ideas to generate power.
As soon as Germany & most of the world see the merits in Liquid Air there will be many more windfarms & Solar panel arrays.
they'll build them whilst we're building Coal & Nuclear power stations with all the side waste from these plants.
Derek James research Liquid Air powered car then please come back & debate this option

i will when i have time but we've seen many ideas like this that nothing comes of, there was a famous episode of tomorrow's world where an inventor could turn a glass of water into petrol, what happened to that? my guess is they get bought out or taken out by the big oil companies.Germany is arguably the most technologically advanced country in europe with greens excersing a strong influence in the government, if windmills were the answer i'm sure they would build them.

I am currently in Germany working on Bard wind farm and it is one of many being built now to add to those already there. Your views are pointless unless you can provide facts to back them.

derek james wrote:

loosehead wrote:
As the inventor has just proven how efficient his Liquid Air Engine is & a company is trying out the storage use of the motor we have a choice we jump to it or we fall behind & use Victorian ideas to generate power.
As soon as Germany & most of the world see the merits in Liquid Air there will be many more windfarms & Solar panel arrays.
they'll build them whilst we're building Coal & Nuclear power stations with all the side waste from these plants.
Derek James research Liquid Air powered car then please come back & debate this option

i will when i have time but we've seen many ideas like this that nothing comes of, there was a famous episode of tomorrow's world where an inventor could turn a glass of water into petrol, what happened to that? my guess is they get bought out or taken out by the big oil companies.Germany is arguably the most technologically advanced country in europe with greens excersing a strong influence in the government, if windmills were the answer i'm sure they would build them.

Well I doubt with countries desperate for new forms of energy that this inventions will fall on the wayside.
If we don't use it & develop it more other countries will & then sell it back to us

saintinpattaya wrote:
I am currently in Germany working on Bard wind farm and it is one of many being built now to add to those already there. Your views are pointless unless you can provide facts to back them.

i,ve got some facts for you (you got to Germany quick!) the german wind farms are designed for 30% load factor that is they hope to get 30% of installed capacity as against 85-90% for coal or gas in actual fact they are getting a return of 16.3% on wind which is pretty useless whichever side of the fence you're on.maybe these new windmills you are installing can beat that .these are cold hard facts

I choose to live in Thailand but I work globally. If you are going to cut and paste do so from an independant source. The figures ou are "quoting" are from German windfarms. We are now debating offshore wind farms which are exposed to 70-100% more wind. With new generation 5MW turbines being installed. Build more and more and supply more power and the price will come down, and help us all breathe a little easier, as well as creating a better enviroment for our childrens childrens children.

saintinpattaya wrote:
I choose to live in Thailand but I work globally. If you are going to cut and paste do so from an independant source. The figures ou are "quoting" are from German windfarms. We are now debating offshore wind farms which are exposed to 70-100% more wind. With new generation 5MW turbines being installed. Build more and more and supply more power and the price will come down, and help us all breathe a little easier, as well as creating a better enviroment for our childrens childrens children.

I lived in Pattaya (Nateekarn Park) forgive the spelling.
But I was shocked at the lack of Solar panel suppliers & with the amount of power cuts we had I would have had them installed & like Cambodia or the Kings projects I would have had Battery storage.
Could you please tell me some one to contact to get these supplied?
Also many people complain about True Vision but if they can get broadband can they not get BBC i Player or Itv player or Ch4,ch5 on the internet?
My wife wants to go back so could you please supply me with this information to help make up my mind?
Come On Pattaya Panthers RFC.
Jamesons for a pint?

To answer your question: why is no one using/upgrading to this technology if its so amazing?

Because the key word is "upgrade"

change = spending money.

Money spending === less profit

Less profit === no as big bonus for boardmembers(decisio
n makers) + worse returns on shares(shareowners).
..

no good returns on shares === less investment from potential shareholders

less investment === less profit, the cycle starts again

The top brass will never let you have anything for free if they can charge you and make a profit.

Renewable cheap energy!? Who, in the energy supply market would want that!?