The new onshore models have rotors 170 meters long | Siemens Gamesa
It’s a bloodbath in the wind industry.
Despite the wind being free, collecting it appears to cost a fortune. Siemens Energy lost a third of its stock price on Friday. Just like that, seven billion dollars in market value disappeared.
Only a month ago they were expecting to break even, as the Wall Street Journal reports, the executives appear to have been blindsided by the rapidly escalating maintenance costs. The problem is so bad, and perhaps fundamental, that shareholders in other turbine manufacturers are selling out. Vestas Wind fell 7% Friday.
Siemens Energy Share Price, Yahoo Finance
The promise was that wind turbines would keep getting cheaper as they got bigger and better. Instead, issues are appearing now even in new installations, and people are starting to wonder if they’ve made the turbines too big too fast. The bearings and blades are wearing out, and the costs to fix them are crippling.
Clean Energy’s Latest Problem Is Creaky Wind Turbines
Carol Ryan, Wall Street Journal
Shares in Siemens Energy plunged by a third after it said turbine components are degrading faster than expected
The news isn’t just a blow for the company’s shareholders, but for all investors and policy makers betting on the rapid rollout of renewable power.
The creaky components, which affect 15% to 30% of the installed onshore fleet, will be expensive to fix. Management thinks the cost could run upward of €1 billion, equivalent to $1.09 billion, effectively wiping out more than a third of the profit the company is expected to make doing maintenance on wind turbines it has already installed, according to Bernstein analyst Nicholas Green.
These are not words CEO’s ever want to use: ” it’s much worse than even what I have thought possible”:
Siemens Energy Shares Plunge
Michelle Fitzpatrick, Barrons
In a call with reporters, Siemens Gamesa CEO Jochen Eickholt said “the quality problems go well beyond what had been known hitherto”.
“The result of the current review will be much worse than even what I would have thought possible,” he added.
In the call with reporters, Siemens Energy CEO Christian Bruch called the developments “bitter” and “a huge setback”.
The company has seen just “a handful of failures” across a fleet of several thousand turbines, he said, but it now had to assess “what to expect over the next 20 years” and which preventative measures to take.
To put it mildly – It’s either the rotor, the bearings “or the design” — could it be worse? It could — Siemens has already built 132 GW of wind plants — mostly onshore — and these new unforeseen problems may affect as many as 15 to 30% of their turbines. The maintenance costs to meet the warrantees they have already made are substantial. On top of that Siemens has “an order backlog of 34 billion euros”. This could be a very big hole…
Factbox: What are the issues with Siemens Gamesa’s wind turbines?
By Nina Chestney and Christoph Steitz, Reuters
On Friday, Siemens Gamesa said that while rotor blades and bearings were partly to blame for the turbine problems, it could not be ruled out that design issues also played a role. It said the problems could affect as many as 15-30% of its turbine fleet.
The company said quality problems “go beyond what we were previously aware of, and they are directly linked to selected components and a few, but important, suppliers”.
It’s a perfect storm of rising supply costs and unexpected maintenance costs:
The company was already being hit with issues such as the rising costs of steel and other key raw materials when the news of its wind turbine failures went public.
Chief executive, Christian Bruch has told reporters “Even though it should be clear to everyone, I would like to emphasise again how bitter this is for all of us”.
h/t to J.J and NetZeroWatch
Just ask any sailboat owner!
1010
Yaba daba doo…Flintstones…meet our economic goals.
300
Or a sailplane owner
270
A hole in water into which money is thrown.
140
Sailing was compared to standing in a cold shower tearing up ten pound notes.
With wind turbines it seems that one dispences with the cold shower, although if the turbine isn’t working you will have to have a cold shower.
80
It looks like the makers are taking a bath.
30
The claimed “future” of wind power is off-shore turbines. Off-shore they can be much bigger than land-based turbines, even though miniscule in power output and extremely erratic and expensive compared to a power station.
It’s expensive enough for an on-shore turbine.
Just consider how much more expensive it is to build and service off-shore bird choppers.
And what about the marine life and birds harmed by these monsters?
681
And you have to wonder how many of the companies that will be building and operating these giant offshore wind turbines have any actual plans for their end-of-life decommissioning costs, or whether they’re just going to ‘sell’ new-build turbine farms to a new shell company before declaring bankruptcy, leaving derelict wind turbines as non-functioning eyesores, dropping components into the water as they decay.
540
We call that fish habitat or in lower latitudes ‘Reef’.
150
The wreck of the SS Yongala is a world class dive, a rich habitat where there would be featureless mud otherwise.
Pity we don’t sink more old ships but cleaning every skerrick of oil etc first makes it expensive.
This is a list of ships sunk in Iron Bottom Sound, Solomon Islands. It cleansed itself decades ago.
https://pacificwrecks.com/provinces/solomons_iron_bottom_sound.html
40
David,
I think the excreta is hitting the turbine – it appears that China doesn’t want to finance “Star of the South” . It should be called “Titanic”.
280
Old Goat,
The claimed cost of Star of the South is $8-10 billion and it’s claimed output is 2GW, so actually about 600MW of useless, random power.
Just imagine how many power stations and how many GW you could build for that amount of money.
311
For sales and marketing purposes only Installed Capacity must be mentioned.
sarc
80
https://www.starofthesouth.com.au/about-us
Old Goat
A little bit of Union Members’ Super Annuation Money in there.
60
The UK has some of the largest off shore wind farms in the world. Many are situated on the drowned Dogger land where our Neolithic ancestors roamed. There was a documentary about their maintenance which basically required helicopters landing on a very small platform.
Turbine blades have got insanely large with the consequent wear and tear on the rotor and bearings. There surely must be a practical limit to their size and I suspect we have reached it. Whilst winds are more consistent out to sea it is often feast or famine, so sometimes the numerous turbines won’t be turning at all and other times they will be braked in the teeth of ferocious storms. Seems an odd way to gather energy in the 21st century.
220
You just have to look at gridwatch templar to see how unreliable the wind generation in the UK has been over the past six weeks. http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
60
Back in the day, engineered structures were carefully designed and analysed for lifespan and maintenance costs.
For example, when investing in a coal, gas, nuclear or proper hydro (not Snowy Hydro 2) power station, bankers and investors would have accurate and realistic costings for the 50+ year life of the project.
Obviously this was never done with wind turbines with this company or others.
Wind power, being a “woke” “industry”, they thought they were protected from engineering realities and the vast amounts of money to be made from these most expensive of electricity sources.
Engineering, physical laws and reality always beats wokeness.
Get woke, go broke!
862
Back in the day…engineers were capable of making big mistakes and that is still true. Think of the $700 Million U.S. failure of Sleipner A platform. Design failure because of misuse of modeling software.
There are few materials that have a finite fatigue strength limit. Most just fatigue to zero. As turbines become ever larger in hopes that being really big will lead to profotability, the cyclic stresses that lead to fatigue failure become worse.
At the other end of the scale there are all sorts of “microwind power” players selling pure renewables hokum. It was true also in the 1970s “energy crisis”. Conartists banking on the gullible. Last year, when I explained to a number of people how one such local Wind Energy Machine idea had problems beginning at engineering 101 and continuing on upward in levels of sophistication, I was called an old fuddyduddy who didn’t like to see the world change. It was a lot like being referred to as a “50 year-old white guy who wouldn’t inspire anyone” (i.e. Oceangate CEO) except I am in my 70s and don’t figure to inspire anyone but just get a few people to exercize a bit of skepticism and judgment.
You know… from back in the day.
800
Back in the day when multi-millionaires were racing speed boats in the ocean off Queensland the limit for the boat was 7 races in a season. After this the boat was finished as the vessel might disintegrate at 100kph and the millionaire would be getting wet (at the least).
Their construction was similar to the blades for early off-shore wind turbines. The material has changed (I think) to hot cured epoxy resin. This adds more tensile strength but no more fatigue strength i.e. impacts like sudden wind variation alone will eventually cause failure. Then there is the problem of micro-cracking of the surface allowing salt water inside the laminate which also causes strength to degrade.
400
The design of the blades and resins/curing methods is quite a problem.
There are 4 primary strengths that are very important for most civil and mechanical engineering applications of epoxy: compressive strength, tensile strength, flexural strength, and bond strength.
The problem is that the blades have to have high tensile strength because of the load induced by the length of the blades. This means they are brittle due to the high degree of cross-linking. This contributes to weakening impact strength and fatigue properties.
Leading-edge erosion is a major cause of wind turbine blade wear. As the turbine rotor spins in the air, it hits dust, dirt, insects, hail, and more. That does not sound like much until you consider the blade tip could be spinning over 150 – 180 mph. Once the blade edge wears, water can invade, freeze, and eventually ruin the structure’s aerodynamics.
Reliability indices inference is to numerically determine the failure rates and Mean Time to Failures (MTTFs) of offshore wind turbines and their key items. One report of offshore wind turbine pointed out that the MTTF of the device is 595 h with a failure rate of 15 failures/turbine/year. Accordingly, they suggested the maintenance interval of the floating equipment be 24 days (more expense). However, the accumulated failure data of floating offshore wind turbines is still insufficient. Carroll et al. collected failure information of about 350 offshore wind turbines installed around Europe and reported that the failure rate of those wind turbines is 8.3 failures/turbine/year with an MTTF of 1055.42 h.
Operation and maintenance (O&M) activities typically (e.g. 25–30% of the total lifecycle costs for offshore wind farms).represent a big part of the total costs (e.g. 25–30% of the total lifecycle costs for offshore wind farms).
Re Siemens
The company will have to fix flaws in rotor blades and bearings, ranging from component failures to small cracks. In terms of the scope of the problem, Reuters noted today that Siemens Gamesa is having “problems affecting up to 15-30% of the more than 132 gigawatts worth of turbines worldwide.
290
So the MTTF is only 6.3 weeks? Would be interesting to know the yearly mtce costs for a single offshore wind turbine.
90
It is not unusual for equipment that operates continuously 24/7 to have scheduled “Prevntative” maintenance every month .
In some cases this may not require stopping the equipment if it is designed correctly.
Normally this should entail inspection, lubrication, testing, and replacement of any components that are known to have limited life or sacrificial wear parts.
The cost (labour , materials, and lost operation) is proven to be advantageous compared to an unplanned breakdown.
70
You should tell my boss that. I have but he doesn’t listen. The truck has no brakes, and the bearings blew on the fertilizer spreader, so the wheel fell off, on the road loaded with a tonne of fertilizer – again – after I’d been telling him for a month that the bearings need doing.
I need a new job. The guy will get me killed.
50
The engineers at ICI used to laugh at farmers who waited until a bearing or belt broke before fixing it.
Their policy was that there was period of time when a part needed replacing and it would be replaced as a part of planned maintenance.
This led to far fewer unexpected breakdowns, which could be serious in a plant producing 1200 tons of material in a day.
70
David. I don’t reckon it’s a mistake or lack of forethought: implied with your “they thought they were protected from engineering realities”. It’s always been a direct scam whereby they have always known it was a dud, and they have milked it for all they could. something like Bernie Madoff and his $50 Billion Ponzi Scheme….there was never a belief that he was ever actually gonna make a return for the little people. Never.
Classic is Snowy 2.0. I already told you here, and elsewhere, 2 years ago, it was a dud….AND where it would fail. I gave directions for anyone with a vehicle to visit Tantangara Dam…then to the not-well-known Gooandra core drill sampling sites, then across the plain and past Bullock’s Hill to the Ravine / Lob’s Hole escarpment falloff to the allege4d / purported Power Station. PLUS I wrote in about November last year that Clough were teetering. So if I, and the few I know on-site and thereabouts knew…then the only reason it continued was TO MILK IT. note that Paul Broad (then-CEO of Snowy) shot through when he saw the catastrophe looming. FFS.
Same with all manner of renewables big and small. They CANNOT succeed….except in the sense that the movers and shakers are able to successfully enrich themselves.
BTW: Next up: a nation-building Tunnel to Tassy, with tidal-operated Francis Turbines somehow attached!
290
Ah, Nation Building! Tuesday tomorrow, I wonder when Utopia will tackle Snowy 2?
30
Wind power, being a “woke” “industry”, they thought they were protected from engineering realities… bit like a submariner who can now go out in a beer can.
30
Oh dear, reality raises its ugly head.
410
Back to the drawing board for blackout Bowen.
470
By ALP tradition wouldn’t that have to be a whiteboard?
280
Correct..or at a pinch, a beer coaster.
300
These unexpected expenses on top of the world’s most expensive “large scale” electricity generating method won’t change Australian Government policy.
The Government (including the alternative Liberal faction of the Uniparty) is utterly committed to the destruction of the Australian grid and nothing will stop them.
Plus they are Leftist and post-modernist. Post-modernism teaches that there is no such thing as objective reality so if they say it is the cheapest of all electricity then it is. The fact that the more we get the more expensive electricity becomes merely represents reality which is of no relevance to the post-modernist.
731
Reality and the Laws of Physics will eventually stop them IMHO.
250
And the increasing cost of raw materials and the cost of finance.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/06/24/offshore-windfarms-threaten-to-pull-out-of-uneconomical-contracts/
You don’t build someone that would lose money (unless you are in Government).
201
So true Graeme No.3.The Qld government are boasting about progress of the cross river rail tunnel, when every extra rail passenger costs even more in losses.
120
The limits of physics and material science… coming to the fore. !
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of subsidy-grabbing scammers. 🙂
550
Wonder who sold a bunch of stock before the crash?
20
Hi Jo
Spelling correction in headline – “Siemans”
[Well spotted. Thanks! – Jo]
100
What wonderful news and I hope our energy minister and moron-in-chief Bowen will take note. Of course his plan is different and will avoid the pesky problems posed by such insignificant details such as taper bearings being subjected to similar stresses as those found in the biggest earth moving diggers but a hundred metres in the air. Or hundred metre long plastic blades that flex and whip every time they do a rotation. Meanwhile there is good old Liddell that spun it’s generators continuously for 60 years with only a routine oil and grease. Oh and it didn’t need thousands of kilometers of wire to join it’s four 500 MW generators together either.
Reality is coming and the sooner the better.
670
Don’t get your hopes up Lawrie. Bowen is an evangelist and by the time the grid finally collapses he will no longer be in government.
370
The disaster may come sooner with power prices escalating and people finding other costs of living forcing choices they don’t want to make. Heat or eat? Insure or not? Holiday or stay at home? This will compound and the next election is less than two years away. The Voice will fail and so will the Albanese government and with it the moron. The way things are going he will not be able to build very much in 2 years. Wind and solar investors must also be reading the European news and the shift back to coal and nuclear and would be thinking that those subsidies they rely on could disappear with a new government.
50
Moron-in-chief is putting it lightly – His ‘answer’ will be to install more of the monstrosities.
A couple of weeks ago, I drove past a farm of about 30-40 windmills, it was blowing 20 knots. About of a third of them weren’t even spinning.
It appears they want to wreck our power system and standard of living so badly, that we will beg them for their ‘great reset’…
270
“Reality is coming and the sooner the better.’
The trouble with that is us plebs will be impacted the most, all the carpetbaggers will be long gone by then.
20
How much longer before organizations walk away from unprofitable installations leaving massive, rusting, unmoving monuments strewn over the countryside as long-lasting symbols to greed, propaganda, hubris, political misappropriation and gullibility?
390
One word should be painted on each blade to remind future generations- MONUMENT TO STUPIDITY.
320
Only need to look to Californistan to see many examples of these grotesque monstrosities after premature failure or spontaneous conflagration.
180
Drive from LA to Las Vegas and pass by the lovely sight of dead or dying wind towers rusting and disintegrating by the hundreds. Somebody else’s problem once the company that built them found out they did not last very long.
130
It’s a mess isn’t it, a windmill boneyard.
00
“Siemens Energy’s Troubles: A Case Study in the Misallocation of Resources”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/06/25/siemens-energys-troubles-a-case-study-in-the-misallocation-of-resources/
90
We know that TOXIC W & S can’t even provide RELIABLE power to a small island, but our LW loonies think that we can somehow provide power to millions or even billions of people using these disasters?
But will the Bowen loony or Labor or greens even understand that we’re heading for a very dangerous and cost crippling period ahead WHEN China and Russia etc could start a war?
Power prices today are crippling for most Western countries’ voters and businesses, but will they quickly wake up and demand only BASE-LOAD RELIABLE power for our electricity grids?
It should be blatantly obvious to everyone but I still wouldn’t bet on it.
250
Guess who will be paying.
200
Skeptic commentators/analyst have been saying for years that UK wind power contract prices were impossibly low and that once the market was captured, they would ‘blackmail’ for more.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/06/24/offshore-windfarms-threaten-to-pull-out-of-uneconomical-contracts/
Meanwhile MSM energy reporters like Emily Gosden, mocked the idea.
https://muckrack.com/emilygosden
https://twitter.com/NetZeroWatch/status/1672920926894030849?cxt=HHwWgoCwjYautLcuAAAA
110
https://www.animierte-gifs.net/data/media/1309/animiertes-lachen-bild-0116.gif
60
We already have cost-effective, reliable means to generate all the power we need at low cost using coal, gas, nuclear and real hydro (not SH2).
Solar and wind power are extremely expensive and unreliable and use vast amounts of valuable land. They can only be made reliable with even more expensive battery storage, either electrochemical or hydro.. Even then, solar, wind and electrochemical batteries all have extremely short lives compared to power stations.
There is no need to change. Carbon dioxide emissions are not a problem and nuclear power is safer than wind in terms of deaths per unit of energy produced. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Even the world’s largest CO2 emitter, China, beloved by the Left for its Orwellian socialist policies, sees no need to restrict their emissions in any way. And the Left NEVER complain about China.
311
I watched the buiding and destuction of the of the vista by 63 wind turbines near Glen Innes. When completed 3 appeared to not be working.
My enquiries said as there was no subsidy to repair them so it was unecomomic to rehire the $6000 a hour plus, crane to repair them.
I assume they are still not working, meanwhile the local residents have had to put up with brown outs and current surges like never before, causing replaced computers etc. There is I am told 800t0nnes of concrete under each Turbine, I assume like in Germany they will be just left to rot on the ground when there life expires??
340
And they want us to believe that all of this activity is being done because they’re “Working” to Save the Environment.
Environmentalism is shown in its true light.
It’s now Envirodeformation.
Where America goes we follow and what we have to look forward to is that turbine field of 14,000 wind turbines that stopped working prematurely and then left to rot.
And even now, in recent posts here , any attempt to expose the basis for all this stupidity is sadly shot down.
CO2 is blamed for all this ugly mess and it can be shown scientifically that CO2 does NOT heat the atmosphere or cause Wobal Glorming™.
On this blog there’s enough scientific firepower to clearly define the thermodynamic activity in the atmosphere but….
Removal of the one and only justification for creation of renewables is at hand.
[The thermodynamic arguments are all discussed in 3,000 comments here and here. You are free to discuss on unthreaded threads. Please don’t take threads off topic. – Jo]
140
Safe to speculate that it’s a lot worse than they suggest with their numbers….it always is. 15 to 30 percent of turbines effected? More like a 100%.
A set and forget braking system? Really. Even the windmills of old needed some work. About the only zero maintenance device of any use that doesn’t would be called a hammer. But a hammer is what you’ll need to to fix them. A very big one.
181
Even my hammer needed maintenance. The head fell off the handle, so I had to get another hammer to nail it back on. Good thing I had a second hammer 🙂
40
Never forget that we’ve arrived at this point because we’ve listened to L W loonies for far too long.
Anthony Watts is still trying to educate these idiots about the difference between WEATHER and CLIMATE, but will they ever wake up?
Of course a heat wave in Texas can occur while very COLD conditions in parts of California show up to spoil their arguments.
And heatwaves in Texas are common and Anthony lists US heatwaves over the last 100 years and the worst heatwave was in the 1930s when co2 levels were 115 ppm less than 2023.
When will they start to THINK and WAKE UP?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/06/25/no-wapo-a-texas-heat-wave-has-nothing-to-do-with-global-climate-change/
200
A few weeks ago I was driving to Canberra and on the way past Lake George I stopped to look at the wind turbines on the eastern hills about 10 -15ks distant across the lake. I counted close to 100 of them. As far as I could see 12 of them were not turning due to missing blades or some other problem. 12 percent seems about right?
200
And the ‘Green electricity’ being generated by these windmills were supposed to used to provide power for the Sydney Water Desalination Plant, which, I understand is currently in ‘moth balls’. So, I wonder where all those ‘Green’ electrons are going now. Probably into the Grid and causing disruptions with intermittent supply and price increases I suppose.
140
Isn’t this where the ACT is getting some of its totally green electrons from, which are magically separated out from all the black electrons before crossing the state boundary?
20
Similar situation at the Crookwell “wind farm” near Goulburn NSW
10
I worry that the subsidies will increase to drag in more snake oil merchants. The taxpayers and consumers will have to pay more and the emperor will get progressively naked. Unfortunately, people businesses and homes will go and despair will set in before they are forced to stop.
The way out for them is there a la Sweden and “fossil fuel free” energy so the elites don’t lose face too much but the socialists running our country will have to be booted out probably to enable us to get there. Unless the nuclear reactors are state-owned of course.
140
The pigeons are coming home to roost.
But OUR Climate Change Minister, Chris Bowen,
will press on with his charade.
Maybe he’ll even become our “Minister for Truth.”
“If you repeat a lie LOUD enough and often enough
the people will start to believe you.”
140
Siemens were also angry about the UK’s Brexit vote and threatened to end further investment in Hull.
But the voters in the Hull area were very happy to leave the EU lunacy at the time. Very intelligent people.
BTW Eric Worrall provides a very good photo of a wind turbine providing a little more global warming.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/28/brexit-siemens-freezes-new-wind-power-projects/
100
I went to school at a time when they used to teach English, mathematics, science, history, spelling, that there were “only” two genders, love of country and respect for the law etc.. (Strange by today’s non-standards, but true.)
I remember when we had a class activity in 5th grade celebrating the invention of the steam engine, the first practical one by Thomas Newcomen in 1712, and the first high pressure steam engine by Richard Trevithick in 1800.
For the activity I converted my billy cart (US = soapbox car or gravity racer) into a model of the Stephenson’s Rocket locomotive (1829) and won a prize for it (we used to get “achievement” prizes not “participation” prizes).
We learned of the enormous benefits of the steam engine and the end of unreliable wind, animal and human power and drudgery which sparked the Industrial Revolution.
Now we are reverting back to a time before the Industrial Revolution and Scientific Revolution.
351
And nothing can be recycled! I’m betting they will be doing some midnight dumping of this crap in the Mariana Trench or some other deep dark place!
110
Yep. All predictable and predicted.
https://jackdevanney.substack.com/p/nuclear-and-windsolar?utm_campaign=post&fbclid=IwAR1vyxWMSEo25Ahwf19SWkEa6jp2yzM4yMC8UqOHDlVJ5Vg-FN_79Kpm7eU
80
This is what success looks like.
80
Just a reminder for those who haven’t seen it before, here is a discussion of the infeasiblity of powering the United States on unreliables. The calculations are simple and it’s a sure sign of malfeasance on the part of those pushing wind, solar and storage that they have never been done, or at least not publicised.
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/
120
A truer WEFerism will be hard to find!
50
“…quality problems “go beyond what we were previously aware of, and they are directly linked to selected components and a few, but important, suppliers”.
In my day (hat tip to Kevin T Kilty) the saying was “it is a poor workman who blames his tools.” Probably too subtle for today’s wokies.
It would appear “The Science”, that we the masses were told we had/have to follow, is finally catching up with the ones that have been running away from it as in those who told us we had/have to accept and follow it. Sweet irony.
150
Hang on Earl, you’re taking us back to the 1960s when the world was real.
We’ve all got to get used to living in the nettosphere.
101
So, are they using Chinese main bearings in these things, seems like it.
00
Look out, the Bowen donkey now wants to redesign global finance because the Climate Change CRISIS ( ?????) is the greatest threat to the future of our planet.
And how much more will this lunacy hurt the long suffering taxpayers from the OECD countries?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/06/25/aussie-canada-and-nz-climate-ministers-send-money/
110
Scrolling through the BBC for a laugh, a Mia Mottley popped up reciting the same words, demanding reparations from colonialists as it was a “struggle to afford expensive projects like renewable energy”.
Say what?! But it’s free – like the sun and the wind and the moon – yet the new P.M. of Barbados wants a reborn financial system and LOADS of free cash becaus it’s Green or something. So much for ‘independence’, she’s joined The Club.
30
So why would that be then? Increasing energy costs, in part caused by windmills?
Could be called “getting your own back” or maybe even “positive feedback”, which is rarely ever a good thing in engineering.
110
Anyway, they ALL have to be replaced after approx 20 years service. The future mega industry will be scrap.
80
Look, there’s no doubt coal generation infrastructure was subsidised by governments throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s. But look what fantastic value that gave this country. We got a cheap reliable energy grid and up until the1980’s it not only powered domestic supply but also a very significant heavy industry base. We’ve been subsidising and supporting wind now for at least 20 years. It’s promise was always debatable and it still is not delivering. So, it’s time to stop subsidising this fairy tale.
250
Hi Ross
I suspect that the process has been mislabeled.
Perhaps we need to understand that the government built power infrastructure because that was its job.
As such it was an investment in basic foundations of our nation and paid for by taxes but there was no profit flow anywhere.
“Sibsidisation” is used by the renewables promoters to divert attention away from the current gigantic corruption of electricity generation.
150
Ross, I am not sure there was subsidisation as we know it today.
Back then, power stations in Australia were state owned but didn’t need to be. They would have been able to easily survive in a free market.
Any “subsidy” was due to excess money spent due to the inefficiency of government plus the fact that the industry was massively over-manned and feather-bedded due to feral unions. That’s one of the reasons these poorly run enterprises were sold off to the private sector in the 80’s and 90’s.
91
It’s true that the unions were rorting the system back then and when our state government said it was going to fix that with the restructure I wasn’t too worried.
Then I saw the real agenda. Split the assets into production assets, distribution assets and marketing and immediately gold plate what could be via additional consumer charges.
Additionally, I doubt that any union is unhappy with the new order.
Every “investor” wins.
Tough luck if you own a home or run a business.
91
I wonder if this information will make it into the lamestream news bulletin’s ? My intuition says , not a chance .
130
The lunacy of TOXIC W & S on King island is on full display AGAIN this morning, but sometimes W is 35%-64%, S is 0 to 3% and Diesel is 54% to 80%.
So how do we generate enough electricity to service a population of 26 million using these TOXIC disasters? Anyone have any ideas?
And how long would Wind turbines last before very expensive repairs or RELACEMENT and then more TOXIC landfill burials?
https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/king-island
140
If Tas Hydro was honest it would simply say that energy from wind and solar is simply to help save in the cost of diesel fuel. Perhaps this is true?
80
Some years ago I had touch with the Engineer at the Falkland Islands – lost the link through computer crisis.
He was a very clued block – apart from being an Everton supporter due to his time in the UK becoming an engineer.
He fought the financial/bureaucrat types to get control of the wind farm being installed. They didn’t really know what they were doing so he got the control of the (3 I think) turbines and their yaw angle. This controls the output at a wind speed.
By having the control in the powerstation control desk the operators could control the wind output.
This meant that when a diesel genset (they had 8 of various output) was due to shutdown it could be run flat out so it “decarbonised” by being hot. So it was possibly to control the scheduling of equipment & maintenance.
The next effect was a uniform 30% of reduction in diesel usage (until the bureaucrats tried to save costs by buying cheaper, but poor quality fuel).
The saving was so obvious that other (island) colonies were keen to switch.
The Morale: is that uncontrolled and variably generations is poor practice.
30
Neville,
Very good link and one minute ago at that site I saw the wind go from 30% supply to their grid to 50% and back again and all with a WSW blowing at around 30 k.p.h and gusting to 48 k.p.h. Solar was 1%. The diesel generators are having to increase and decrease all the time to maintain the frequency and voltage. Imagine the thermal stress on the line from the two wind turbines to the sub station, continually heating and cooling with the change in power output. And then on a bad winter day some ice might form unevenly on the blades. Madness
90
The original post from Jo also prompted me to check in on the king Island gear, which I do periodically on a random basis when my memory is jogged of its existence.
Pretty much every time I do so the diesel is dong the hard yards, and if it isn’t then I only have to wait a few minutes before it is.
Disconnect the diesel and the whole thing would collapse irretrievable within minutes.
Disconnect all the other stuff and it would be fine.
What’s worse, (as said by commenters 35.1, 35.2) this other stuff will also most certainly shorten the service life of the diesel, and probably for a meager amount of fuel saved.
Classic lose – lose.
60
Spinning 12 tons of wind turbine blades at tip speeds of up to 300kmh???? What could possibly go wrong???….bwahaha….even someone with no idea about engineering would know that the bearings, unless they are made out of “adamantium” wouldn’t last a year. These engineering companies must be forced to pay to rid our pristine oceans and landscapes of these monstrosities.
110
For those who may not be aware of what the real problems are, a major issue is the gear box and bearings. Whilst blades and other parts are affected by strong winds, hail and lightning it is the gear box and bearings that probably are giving the manufacturers and owners the most warranty repairs. No one designing these things understands the forces that are brought to bear as the wind does not always blow horizontally in the direction of the blades. Those turbines using a planetary bearing system may have up to 24 bearings or more in the drive train and the forces on these bearing changes with the load on the blades.
High gusts and big wind changes cannot be designed against. When severe thunderstorms associated with a frontal system pass a location on the ground the wind veers 180 degrees instantly in the opposite direction and underneath the actual cell of a large thunderstorm the downbursts can reach well over 200 k.p.h. Regardless of whether the blades are feathered or not the force downwards is driving all blades towards the ground with resultant wearing and pitting of the gears with uneven lubrication and over heated oil.
It would be impossible for the blades to stay in balance after some period of time because of these forces and flying debris damaging or pitting them. Aircraft propellers are removed after 2000 hours for micro scans and rebalancing but this is never done with wind turbines. Some reports indicate very few get to ten years and most suffer gear box and bearing failures even by five years. This must be what is hitting Siemens, Vesta and GE as all are now reporting big losses. The bigger the turbines, the bigger the forces and the greater the problem. Off shore installations require large ships and cranes and calm weather to do repairs and Victoria will be a great place to watch this unfold.
200
There is another unspoken problem I just remembered that would apply to wind turbines. In large generators in power stations and very large motors when they are not operating, they have to be rotated at regular intervals to prevent blade sag. This causes false brinelling and helps to redistribute the lubricant and prevent shaft distortion, Very large generators have to be rotated slowly all the time.
A wind turbine often sits still and the weight of the blades would cause the types of problems mentioned and be an ongoing issue for the bearings. High ridges in open positions also cause lots of turbulence over them and are great places for lightning strikes.
30
The energy from one nuclear pellet in a reactor is compared in this link to oil, coal and gas.
The energy density of nuclear fuel is mind boggling and almost beyond belief. Just unbelievable but true.
https://whatisnuclear.com/energy-density.html
70
I wonder why the cost of steel keep rising…;-)
60
Strangely (who would have thought, eh?) boring old data collection can indicate so much.
For years, when I quoted the Capacity Factor for wind generation at just 30%, I was flamed for telling false facts, as there was no chance it could be that low., and that was the original reason I started that data collection, confident enough that I was in fact correct, but just my ‘saying it’ was only anecdotal, so I needed the facts, and now, the fact that I’m actually only an ‘amateur’ means that it’s STILL only anecdotal.
Then when it became pretty obvious that it was in fact true, the response was that this was old technology, and that the newer tech turbines were so much better and way more efficient, and that as newer ones came on line then, that CF would increase, and increase dramatically, and in very short time, and in fact, one quote was that it would be up around 42%, and probably higher than that within a year or two, as newer ones did come on line.
However, (and I actually have no idea why at the time I even included that second shorter term CF for the most recent 12 Months) with that wind generation data collection now approaching five years of daily data collection, what I have found is that there is indeed a gap between the full (almost) five year CF figure and the most recent 12 Month CF figure, and it’s a significant difference considering the Maths involved.
However, that difference shows that as newer turbines come on line that most recent 12 Month figure for CF is ….. LOWER than the long term CF figure, and the difference is 0.35%, and has been higher than half a percent, barely two weeks back now, and that is significant.
So, what is actually happening is that as newer turbines are coming on line, the overall CF is falling, the exact opposite of what we are being told, and it’s not just in recent times, but is now a trend dating back almost a year in fact.
Incidentally, for those who were saying that the newer turbines are more efficient and that the CF will be up over 42% inside a year, well those people are like most modern younger people, being blissfully unaware of the actual maths involved in that.
The most recent addition of new wind plants raised the total Nameplate from 9854MW to 10277MW, an addition of 423MW and that was 28 weeks back. So then, lets actually pretend that the newer wind plants actually DID operate at the quoted 45% quoted for newer plants. Then, that being so, the CF would only rise from the CF at the time of 30% to 30.6% after a full year. Maths is such a truth teller, eh!
One modern plant in question, when it came on line back in 2012, Macarthur Wind (at the time, with the usual spiel, the LARGEST Wind Plant in the Southern Hemisphere) was touted as the way of the future for wind generation. In the introductory spiel at OpenNEM, it’s still quoted at a CF of 35%. It has been in operation now for eleven years. It has never reached 30% CF for a year, let alone the quoted 35%. The average CF over it’s lifespan so far is 22.8%, and has only averaged 18% for the last three years.
Tony.
430
From my way-back “Don Quixote essay on intermittent wind power referencing Tony from Oz,(3)
Picture your typical wind farm. Towers more than 200 feet high supporting a turbine
housing, or nacelle, the size of a bus. (2) sweeping the sky, three rotor blades, 100
to 150 feet long, … say, listen to that thrumm!.
An Australian Study analyses the engineering in one of the large turbines in windy
Esperance, Western Australia, the kind of tower proliferating around the world. Its
electric power is generated in the nacelle behind the propeller. The generator can’t be
too large though, or it couldn’t be mounted off the ground so units most commonly in
use only generate about 3/4MW power output. A unit’s gear box is designed to hold
the turbine at one speed, to produce maximum power and operate in wind speeds
between 8/16 MPH. At speeds below 8 MPH the blades don’t turn, above 16 MPH
they are designed to lock down so they won’t be destroyed by high winds.
(3)Tony from Oz (The Limitations Of Renewable Power (Part 3)
You could say intermittency is a constant problem. In the UK, BBC weatherman,
Paul Hudson reported in 2011, that in three consecutive winters of intense cold, there
was little or no wind to generate electricity. (4) On the 21st December, 2010, coal and
gas generated 45,000 MW of electricity, compared to wind generated electricity of
20 MW. Not surprising, since prolonged cold weather is usually associated with the
calm conditions of high-pressure weather-systems…
110
And, as in the case of recently approved Robbins Island wind farm, you can add that during the months of bird migration some are also locked down. Lucky the endangered orange-bellied parrot only visits for 5 months of the year.
20
I have seen these wind installs from pre-planning through to construction. My part of the world I can drive in any direction and drive past a major wind installation within 30 minutes. Prior to planning they usually only install a bare minimum of “test” turbines. Sometimes only 1 and they are piddling little towers. They usually site them in the very windiest proposed location of the intended project. Hence, the over exaggerated CF’s. Contracts or payments for generated electricity should be based on the minimum quoted by the operator. They only get paid when that minimum MW figure is attained. Hence, a sort of De Bono solution. That figure then becomes the official production capacity of the install. Not the fairytale figures the politicians quote when they turn up for the photo shoot in their hardhats and hi-vis vests.
50
97% of everything written about the joy of wind power will turn out to be false. Not sure about the other 3%.
210
Well, some of that 3% could be the exhilaration of watching the Sail GP events as they travel the world. I’d imagine the exhilaration for the sailors and others associated is pretty palpable too. Flying kites is much beloved. Gliding is supposed to be an exhilarating experience.
And then of course there are the birds, millions and millions of them, that seem to often spend time lying back into the currents, looking like they’re having a good ol’ time.
10
If Siemens wants to be competitive, they need to move more of their operations to China. China is one of the few countries where coal is officially recognised as the fundamental energy source for industrial development.
The best way to understand the industrial might of China is that it produces 53% of the global steel production, equating to 1032Mt in 2021. Germany has become a bit player with steel production down to 40Mt, a tiny fraction off Chinese output.
De-industrialisation is a prerequisite of achieving NetZero as observed in Australia and UK with Germany and USA not far behind.
200
What led us to this is government guaranteed pay out. It will always lead to graft and attracts grifters like flies. Engineering gets over ruled by the bean counters and the greed of the grifters.
Solydra was nothing compared to this and the ongoing disaster at Ford. And this is probably just the tip of the iceberg.
The allure of “free stuff” corrupts at all levels, right down to the guy who wants to cash in on the subsidy on a new EV and his solar panels, even if he knows it’s not based on sound science or sound economics.
200
The money I spent on solar panels around 13 years ago has paid back handsomely. It made economic sense based on the government sanctioned theft on offer and the recognition that a weather dependent grid could never compete with distributed weather dependent electricity supply. There is no benefit of scale and cost of transmission goes up enormously with remote power generators. My forecast of ever rising retail electricity cost has been on the money.
South Australia already has unit cost of retail electricity above the cost of what any land owner could achieve making their own electricity using solar, battery and tiny diesel generator or fuel cell without any theft from grid connected consumers.
Panasonic has been selling residential fuel cells running on natural gas since 2009 that can achieve 95% overall energy efficiency when coupled with water heating. Currently these units are being used in countries where sunshine is not in good supply and the smallest is rated at 5kW. Smaller versions coupled with solar panels and battery would be well suited to Australia.
The electricity grid has been in a death spiral since the first weather dependent generator was permitted to connect. I cannot currently envisage any circumstances where new coal plants or nuclear power plants will be built in Australia.
111
I’m very much opposed to the idea of pushing residential people off the grid, which leaves a smaller group to do the heavy lifting of paying for the infrastructure, which it vital to industry and employment. But like yourself, I’ve caved in and put up solar to try and combat the enormous price hikes caused by adding RE to the grid. I’m now pumping out over 30KW/h on a fine day, even at winter solstice, most of which goes back out to the grid as I don’t have a battery. I realise that some poor pensioner will pay extra for my subsidised panels, but what else can we do ?. Due to the rapid rise in rooftop solar by people wanting to maintain electricity affordability, the energy companies will eventually push up connection fees and prices after dark to recover lost revenues and that will lead to people buying batteries, which is a very costly solution. But, we’ll have no choice aside from candles and kerosene lanterns. If you play out this scenario, wealthier people with sufficient savings will move off grid completely, using gas or diesel generator backup on a large solar/battery system. This will lead to cascading grid price rises to those that can’t escape until the grid dies as a viable entity.
112
I too can achieve 35 kWh from my solar on a good spring day. BUT, during winter and especially on cloudy days, the system struggles along, averaging only 10 kWh, and occasionally falling to only 5-6 kWh on really bad days.
10
Two decades ago electricity was cheap compared to alternatives and manufacturing flourished concerned only about workers wages. Successive very stupid governments bought the CO2-is-bad rubbish and put us on this unsustainable path. I have just been listening to the Foodbank CEO explaining the dire straights some otherwise successful people find themselves in, relying on charity to feed their families. Government’s first obligation is to look after their people not genuflect to the illogical ideas coming from the UN. Albo should shelve all his crazy feel good policies and concentrate on providing real relief to Australians, not subsidies and handouts but ongoing policies to make life easier. First order of business; sack Bowen and the multitude of environmental agencies. Seek advice from real scientists not pretend ones like Finkle and Flannery.
20
Rick, 13 yrs ago i suspect your installation would have benifited from a heathy goverment subsidy and possibly a generous Feed in Tarrif ?
..so yes, i can imaging it may have been a good option for you then.
However, those same economics are not applicable now, and whilst i understand the huge cost increase of electricty , and agree solar can reduce most bills, the initial capital cost is a huge barrier to many.
Also, you may well have to consider how much longer your installation will last before major maintenance or even replacement is necessary.
I too have a 13 yr old system, but it is hardly an asset now. An “Isolation Fault” started 2 years ago that frequently prevents any solar output without manual resetting of the system, and several solar experts have all stated that the only sure solution is a $8-10,000 total system replacement !
……hardly an attractive prospect for the max of 8kWh/day it has supplied at peak summer ! ( i have a compromised location with shade and space restrictions )
40
Absolutely. It was widely known in the engineering community, before all this climate nonsense kicked off, that solar cells and windmills are inefficient and have a finite life (~15yrs) and that their performance degrades with age. Even the ability to make a quick buck will not change the laws of physics or the overall negative economic affects.
50
Rick,
I would venture to say that the delivery charge has risen enormously as well as the price of the power . Building stability into a grid that has renewables only is insanely expensive to attempt and impossible to achieve without blackouts . I have a solar system , originally installed to defray power costs and are contemplating batteries . On a cost basis its not viable , but I don’t want to lose freezers and aircon in summer . If things continue along the current trajectory blackouts are in our future .
10
You’d do better to invest in a generator than a battery backup.
40
My fridge and freezer have been powered off-grid for 12 years now. The battery comprises some of the first large format lithium cells used in Australia. All the original equipment is still in operation. The inverter is not pure sine wave and has not caused and issues with the 30 year old fridge and 15 year old freezer. It does cause problems with electronic devices that do not handle harmonics.
The battery works over a narrow range most of the time and mostly recharges around 0.3C. It gets close to fully cycled less than once a year. It shuts down at 20% discharge and that occurred once this year in late May. Based on historical experience, May is the worst month for persistent cloud in Melbourne.
10
Another case of bad wind…
60
… It has bean that way for quite a while ! 😉
50
15 – 30% are problems in the foreseeable future.
85 – 70% may take a little longer.
Could this bankrupt a once great company?
70
The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer
and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot
according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday
from US Consulate at Bergen Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to
a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of
temperatures in the Arctic zone.
Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been
met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.
Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream
still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth
and stones, the report continued, while at many points
well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic,
while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before
ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal
fishing grounds.
Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea
will rise and make most coast cities uninhabitable.
I must apologize. I neglected to mention. This report
was from November 2, 1922, as reported and published
in The Washington Post 101 years ago. This must have
been caused by the Model T Ford’s emissions, or
possibly from horse and cattle flatulence. ToM
210
Babcock & Brown US Wind Turbines story, worth reading again …
https://stopthesethings.com/2017/03/13/born-lucky-stars-align-perfectly-for-pms-son-with-mammoth-bet-on-wind-power-outfit-infigen/
50
Interesting/ amusing quote from that article…
Now,.. did they mean “GWh” or GW ?…
And did they mean 33,000 , or just 33 ? ..considering the original target was 41 ( GWh or GW )?.
…i suspect in their ignorance the intended to have 33 GW capacity installed by 2020.
And failed spectacularly !
60
It would be interesting to know what the capacity of each “wind farm” here was claimed to have been when installed compared to the present output.
30
Dennis,
having followed all this now for more than 15 years, it was actually weird at the proposal stage when every (and how do I accentuate that word ….. EVERY) proposed wind plant was quoted as having a projected Capacity Factor of 38%. After about two years, that proposed CF percentage was dropped and never mentioned at all. My guess about that disappearance is that someone asked the pertinent question ….. Umm, hang on, do these things only operate at that pitifully low percentage of 38%?
Like I said, it was actually weird, because every single proposal quoted that 38% figure for the CF percentage. Evidently, it was from a very very dry scholastic piece coming in at around 480 pages in length that supposedly did all the Maths and equations and came up with 38% as definitive best case average for that CF. Years later, this paper, supposedly dating from the early 80s became know as ….. Modelling!!
Anyway, the actual figure of 38% disappeared for a while. It was replaced by a figure for ….. expected output in GWH. Then, when the calculation for working out CF became known, and it took a while because Maths is not the long suit (well, any suit really) of renewables ‘punters’, that was replaced by the obscure wording …..
(and the strike through facility is not available here at Joanne’s site so I had to put the word as used at each of the proposed websites ….. farm, and how I so roundly detest that word farm when it comes to wind generation.)
How they did that was to divide the total generated power from the proposed wind plant (calculated using that exact 38% CF figure) by the actual yearly power consumed by residences in that area, and that gives X number of homes.
That ‘phrase’ is still used to this day, and it rarely wavers from 38%.
Tony.
110
What’s worse is now the powerlines that need to be built to hook all these far flung wind installations up. Accompanying the wind installs there are these quasi government type organisations set up to sell not only wind power but also these powerlines. They have government supported spokespeople and like your ” number of home supplied” spin for the wind installs, they now proclaim that the proposed powerlines are needed ” to keep the lights on”. Sorry? The lights were on, perfectly and cheaper when they ran off coal. All the old powerlines work just splendidly. Besides, whose bright idea was it to site these wind installs far and wide rather than concentrating them in one area. In Victoria, they’re situated all over the place. Sometimes there might be only a dozen turbines. How is that for moronic planning?
50
Came by the Wellington “farm” last week. It is expanding, with stacks of new stuff by the road opposite the gaol.
It should be an interesting one to keep an eye on, because it appears to have minimal overhead costs, with a pre existing sub station across the road, and a 330 kv line which was completed in 2007 to the 500 kv Bayswater/Mt Piper line at Wollar, as well as the original 132 kv supply line.
THe Bodangora windmills are about 20 km up the road, too.
10
TonyfromOz.
The wind farm in Albany WA (in a very advantageous site) was claimed to be 41% efficiency. It was on the brass plaque when I visited in 2007.
I looked at Warwick Hughes site when home and he worked out that it was only 31-33% output.
40
That site employs somebody to collect and dispose of the large birds who get in the way of the turbine’s blades. A great piece of coastline, with its view now wrecked by these bird-destroyers.
30
Tony, when you look at the CSIRO GenCost and other similar documents used to steer the govt’s approach, you will note that the quoted CFs are much higher and bear no resemblance to reality. Apparently, the CF figures were derived from the EIA figures, which were wrong anyway for the U.S.
And worse still, the projections for the future claim even higher CFs!
20
This problem has been understood for years (see GWPF). You can’t help but laugh!
40
Every cent spend on wind power is two cents wasted.
Not only do they have a carbon dioxide debt of many years, they will likely never pay it off before the windmill fails. The nett result is a giant increase in carbon dioxide. But the saving grace is that it is only Chinese carbon dioxide, so no problem. It is only going to k*ll Chinese people, so that’s their problem. And they don’t believe it anyway.
And we Australians are paying for these monster windmills with Australian coal, so we are laughing. Or is that China?
Most importantly they are so big now that they make service obviously impossible. Where coal power plants like factories were completely serviceable as they were on the ground and with a near infinite lifespan.
But everyone buying windmills knows all this. The profits though are fantastic. And that’s how Fascism works. The rich get richer and the government controls the press so everyone thinks it is going well. Or is that the press controls the government? Either way China does very well with the useful idiots in Australia.
And can we make our own windmills? No. It’s a Climate Cargo Cult.
110
And as Tony points out, when we have paid hundreds of billions to replace all our free coal power stations we inherited with imported windmills of the same capacity, we will have 1/3rd of what we used to have. But we will have saved someone. Who exactly?
90
Plus do not forget we have to buy lots of Chinese batteries so that when the electricity runs out, we will have another two minutes of power.
80
Alas those (presently expensive) batteries are required if you wish your PV panels to be able to function in isolation mode (ie there is no grid power). Technology has changed a lot in the 11 years since my first panel saw the light of day.
Consider a home PV installation protection from the inflation of the price of grid supplied power.
00
But you are chasing your own tail. The price of grid supplied power is increasing to cover the cost of solar and the rebates which paid half the cost of the solar and the even larger payments to owners of wind towers who get paid double for power. The flight to solar and wind is by law increasing the cost of coal power with hidden rebates.
Soon it will increase the cost of everything as all major uses of electricity have to buy Australian Carbon Credits for 35% of their power. And that is reflected in the cost of transport, food, fertilizer, glass, steel, concrete and even sewage.
There is nothing wrong with batteries, but they generate nothing. More expense which was never necessary before. Like home generators. Even the government of South Australia has millions of backup diesel generators to they can keep taxing people while the rest of the state is in blackout.
40
TdeF while true, there is nothing I can do to eliminate the inflation in the price of grid supplied power. So from a strictly financial perspective, it is prudent for me to install PV panels which over their lifetime (more than 10 years) will save me more than they cost. I would have likely upgraded my PV system even without the associated renewable energy credits
I do not have batteries but I note that if you wish to (or must because there is none) have off grid power, a battery will be required.
And it is unlikely that us country folks will ever see an increase in the cost of our septic systems.
10
With a 30billion + Euro order backlog Siemens should just relax, they will make it up on volume.
What a great product. I bet they wish they had stuck to their knitting.
30
Interesting. Buy the dip? The world is so mad they won’t let this stop the roll out of these insane things. The contracts will continue to arrive for Siemens.
If it’s expected to hit 15 to 30 percent of the windmills, why not the rest? Are they the “good ones”?
20
‘a few but important suppliers’
Gives the game away. Chinese made crap.
40
Siemens have been caught bribing their way into contracts . More “Business as Usual” ?
40
I’m surprised that a company such as Siemens did not fully simulate the blades and hubs. Then build them then test them to destruction!
Its a bit like aircraft design and simulation combined with test to destruction has made aircraft so safe.
How could they get the raw data to feed into their simulations?
Instrument the pants off an installed turbine to find out its movements and stresses.
In an old aircraft hanger, a full size turbine blade could be stretched, bent and vibrated till failure.
The hub and bearings similarly.
It must be truly embarrassing for a former great engineering company to be caught out like this.
40
That is exactly what they do !……
……but in a purpose built new building .
https://www.iwes.fraunhofer.de/en/test-centers-and-measurements/qualification-of-composite-materials-and-components/Full_scale_blade_testing.html
20
Steve,
They can’t test as you have mentioned and whilst they do have ground test facilities they CANNOT simulate what really happens with turbulent air in the real world. During the passage of thunderstorms and cyclones the wind can be coming from different directions all at once including down as well. In a well developed thunderstorm the down burst can be coming from a great height at high speed and include hail. This sort of weather can never be produced in a hangar or test facility especially wind that veers violently in the opposite direction.
If these fools that build wind turbines knew more about storms they might not be producing them. If they would consult experts in aviation they might learn of how dangerous these downbursts are. In the late 1960s into the early 1970s there were 26 jet aircraft accidents in the USA caused by pilots approaching or taking off under thunderstorms over an airfield and flying into the ground. Even with the thrust levers to maximum power you cannot outclimb these down bursts, so large stationary wind turbines cannot avoid damage or destruction if such weather conditions pass over them.
50
I have to point out, coal is free. And we have hundreds of years of it. Then gas and fracking and shale.
So we are crippling our country while keeping our coal in the ground or swapping it for windmills.
And the question is why?
Because humans cannot change CO2. Warmer oceans means more CO2. It’s called vapour pressure.
And more CO2 is wonderful. More forests, more food. Unless you believe Al Gore and Tim Flannery. And what would they know?
80
Right now I would love +1.5C. Bring it on!
50
I have been warning about this for over a decade now- the cost of maintenance and replacement are not being factored into the push for wind and solar power. None of the wind turbines in operation today will be in operation 25 years from now- all of them will have to be replaced due to simple wear and tear. It is like having to take a coal-powered power plant or nuclear power plant and having to raze the entire structure and replace it every quarter of a century.
And technology advances won’t solve this sort of engineering problem.
40
I wonder about the windmills in the ocean. No doubt the sea air is playing havoc
30
Pierre Gosselin has you covered.
https://notrickszone.com/?s=Offshore+turbine+corrosion+
(Just a small ssmple of what’s put there.)
10
How do you tell who’s telling the truth?
The ones trying to silence other people are the ones lying.
Now, who are the ones responsible for a vast majority of censorship, silencing, sacking/firing and deplatforming people? It’s obviously the Left, not conservatives and fellow rational thinkers.
40
I hadn’t heard of this one:
“World’s largest hydro power plant to built on Queensland”
https://youtu.be/7ZE1xnUMeU8
I guess it will make Snowy Hydro 2 look like a sensible idea.
40
Sadly the premier of Queensland continues to be unimpressive. Clearly out of her depth when real answers are required, but great ability to obfuscate about “job guarantees”.
Apparently new dams can be built for pumped hydro but dams to enable increased agriculture are held up in red tape for years and then never get built.
The big issue about pumped hydro, the question thats never asked, is where does the power come from to pump the water back up hill. Wind farms cant do this and good old solar, by its very design can only operate for a few hours a day. No No No, pumped hydro is great, these giant batteries that consume 60% more power than they ever produce will be the way forward
40
Qld RE energy plans..
https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/96233
I dont know how this hasnt been picked up before,…..maybe because it is so unbelievable ?
Not the least significant detail….( amid many )
“1200 coal mine and power plant jobs to be lost” , …..but the new RE system will create over 100,000 new jobs. !
..just how can that possible lead to cheaper electricity ?🤔😳
40
Further info for just one of the pumped hydro projects…
So, $14+ bn “estimate” for 2GW of power from storage of unspecified (???) GWh capacity,.available sometime 10+ years from now. !
With no actual proposals or costings for the generation capacity to fill it. !🙄
…Where do these people learn their economics ?
40
Color me ever so surprised.”
00