Whitelee Windfarm’s 10th Anniversary & How Professionals Polish A Turd!

Hinkley Point C – Will It? – Won’t It?

Will Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant ever despatch electricity to the National Grid?

Andrew Newby’s willing to bet it won’t!

Colin Megson’s willing to bet it will!

2 old men of dubious sense who are likely to be dead before the bet ‘matures’

Still, we’ll be leaving it up to our facebook friends to make sure the bet is honoured in all eventualities through these facebook pages:

THE ABOMINATION THAT IS WHITELEE WINDFARM !

Scottish Power still publicise that Whitelee Windfarm has an “…average capacity factor of 27%...” – But this is the reality of metered generation:

WHITELEE WINDFARM OUTPUT

 The trendline, as of Nov 17, is down at about 15% and STILL trending downwards. That’s not capable of generating enough electricity to power “…*298,837 homes per year…”, it’s only generating enough to power 166,021 homes per year.
--------------------//--------------------

Wind farms were paid more than £100 million in 2017 to switch off their turbines. Astonishingly, windfarms receive on average 40 per cent more when switched off than when they are generating electricity.The National Grid pay the windfarms, but it is added to electricity bills of consumers.

--------------------//--------------------

Scottish Power are, today, quoting a generating ‘capability’ for Whitelee Windfarm which is 80% in excess of metered reality !!!

--------------------//-------------------- 

“…The topography of the area is of a relatively flat plateau with occasional hills rising above the flatter plateau landmass, all of which is overlain with deep peat, in some places reaching down past 8 meters………. No-one knows exactly when blanket bogs began to form but its accepted that it was somewhere between 6000 and 9000 years ago…” 

WHITELEE LANDSCAPE - BLANKET BOG 

IT'S FAIR TO SAY THE SITE OF WHITELEE WINDFARM WAS UNDEGRADED PEATLANDS ! 

--------------------//--------------------

“…Here we show that, whereas in 2010, most [undegraded peatlands] sites had potential to provide net carbon savings, by 2040 most sites will not reduce carbon emissions even with careful management. This is due to projected changes in the proportion of fossil fuels used to generate electricity.

 THE RESULTS SUGGEST FUTURE POLICY SHOULD AVOID CONSTRUCTING WIND FARMS ON UNDEGRADED PEATLANDS unless drainage of peat is minimal and:

THE VOLUME EXCAVATED IN FOUNDATIONS CAN BE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED COMPARED TO ENERGY OUTPUT…” 

Wind farms on undegraded peatlands are unlikely to reduce future carbon emissions 

--------------------//-------------------- 

This paper was published just 3 years after Whitelee commenced operation, following the excavation and muck-spreading of 850,000 m³ of undegraded peatland (ancient - 6,000 to 9,000 years old - blanket peat bog).

--------------------//--------------------

In addition, 2,500,000 tonne of stone was quarried for roads and turbine bases; 120,000 tonne of concrete was used; 2,250,000 non-native conifer trees [900 hectares] were removed; 300 hectares of spruce trees were removed.

--------------------//--------------------

The raison d'être for windfarms is to save greenhouse gas emissions. Was Whitelee worth it when its Capacity Factor was 27%? 
DOUBTFUL !!!

Now its Capacity Factor is 15% - WHAT’S THE POINT ?

WHAT IS THE POINT !!!! 

------------------------------//------------------------------

Whitelee would not pay back its Carbon Debt if it operated for 100 years!!!

But its lifespan may only be 20 years - 

25 years at the most.

How many more onshore windfarms are worsening our greenhouse gas emission, when we are paying through the nose for them to supposedly improve matters???

3,200 MW OF NUCLEAR POWER = 22,116 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND POWER.

3,200 MW Hinkley Point C [HPC] NPP [nuclear power plant] will operate at a capacity factor of 90% for its 60 year design life. It will generate 1513.7 million MWh of 24/7 electricity.

950 MW Moray East Offshore Windfarm [MEOW] will power up to 950,000 homes at 3,300 kWh p.a.. This gives a 1st year capacity factor of 37.67%. But the latest research paper shows an annual decline in turbine performance of 1.6% p.a., which reduces the 25 year average capacity factor to 31.25%

Over its 25 year lifespan of its 100 x 9.5 MW turbines, 1 MEOW will deliver 65.0 million MWh of intermittent electricity.

 It would take windfarms using a total of 970 x 9.5 MW turbines to deliver the same amount of electricity every year as HPC. That would occupy an area of 2,862 sq km, compared to the 0.08 sq km HPC site.

 But that's not the end of the story. To generate for 60 years, those 970 wind turbines would have to be decommissioned and replaced a 2nd time and be 10 years into their 3rd build before reaching the HPC total. That's a factor of X2.4.

 2.4 x 970 turbines = 2,328 x 9.5 MW wind turbines = 22,116 MW

@ £1,800 million/950 MW, the capital cost is £41,904 million.

------------------------------//------------------------------

HPC has been awarded a CfD rate of £92.50/MWh for 35 years and the commercial £42.00/MWh rate for 25 years. However, a fairer comparison requires the use of a £57.50/MWh CfD rate for 35 years. Note: the 35:60 ratio for NPPs is lower [more disadvantageous] than the 15:25 ratio for windfarms.

MEOW has been awarded a CfD rate of £57.50/MWh for 15 years and the commercial £42.00/MWh rate for 10 years.

Spending £41,904 million in Overnight Costs on Offshore Windfarms, for a ‘Profit’ of £3,247.47 million equates to:

A Compound Interest Rate just over 0.3% p.a. - [Three Tenths of 1%]

Spending £18,000 million in Overnight Costs on a NPP, for a ‘Profit’ of £43,223.85 seems a far better investment bet.

Applying the £92.50/MWh for 35 years takes the ‘Profit’ up to £74,129.13 million - an even better investment bet for the children and grandchildren of investors too.

...SO MANY OFFSHORE WIND TURBINES YOU CAN'T GET ANY SHIPPING IN AND OUT OF THE UK!

No Nuclear; OK!

Paul Howarth at Argonne National Laboratory.

DECC 2050 CALCULATOR

You need 85% of the UK landmass for Biomass Energy!

You need to ring the UK 3 times in Tidal/Wave Power Systems!

You need so many Offshore Wind Turbines you can’t get any shipping in and out of the United Kingdom!

OK, fine: Start Ramping Up the Nukes; let’s see what happens.

The killer thing that changes the whole game is the electrification of the Transport Sector.

Our 80 GW Grid has to go up to [a] 320 GW Grid.

The answer is: A Third – A Third – A Third

It’s a third Renewables; that’s 100 GW. We currently have around about 5 [GW] AND THAT’S INTERMITTENT!

We need 100 GW of Fossil Fuels with Sequestration. SEQUESTRATION IS AN UNPROVEN TECHNOLOGY!

We therefore need at least 100 GW OF NUCLEAR!!

...How many organisations can stomach, on their balance sheets, construction of Nuclear Power Plants over billions of £s? But we have to find a solution to this…

…..But it could be bright for the UK. We can get to the first tranche of 16 GW; we can go up to 32 [GW]; we may even get higher, up to 75 [GW]. We could be looking at going back to Generation IV systems.

WE COULD BE LOOKING AT SMALL MODULAR REACTORS!!

We could have saved Bill-Payers £31 billion from the cost of HPC !

We could have saved Bill-Payers £31 billion from the cost of HPC !

EXTRA, EXTRA – READ ALL ABOUT IT !!

Copied this leaked 'newsflash' from the webpage of 'Frank A Kenuce Energy Investments':

------------------------------//------------------------------

Rumours abound around the corridors of the BEIS.

Greg Clark asked – How come Moray East Offshore Windfarm (MEOW), which will only generate electricity for a third of the time, will be built miles out at sea, has to wait for calm seas to get repairs done and only lasts for 25 years, can manage to sell their electricity for £57.50/MWh for the first 15 years?

Whereas, Hinkley Point C (HPC) generates 90% of the time, is being built in a very pleasant part of the Country, has a complete infrastructure for O & M (Operation & Maintenance), carries on generating for 60 years, but still ‘needs’ paying  £92.50/MWh for its first 35 years!

------------------------------//------------------------------

Of course, he’ll never tell us the answers he got back, because the Coalition Government’s negotiator – the Tory appointed Ed Davey, had every drop of blood squeezed out of him by pro-negotiator Vincent De Rivaz.

Davey, caught between a rock and a hard place and in need of progression towards meeting mandatory carbon targets, knew HPC would give him 7% of low-carbon electricity needs at one fell swoop. So it was £92.50/MWh or walk-away nothing; nothing was not an option!

------------------------------//------------------------------

But it’s said that the coincidence of HPC costing £18,000 million and MEOW £1,800 million made him demand some cost and earnings figures for 10x MEOWs, compared to HPC  - with HPC getting the £57.50/MWh CfD rate, instead of £92.50.

It had been pointed out to him wind turbine generation degrades by about 1.6% p.a.. 
‘Powering 950,000 homes’ [from MEOW’s website], drops to 758,000 homes after 15 years and down to 645,000 homes by the end of its 25 year lifespan. Earnings in the 25th year are almost down to 50% of the earnings in the 1st year.

------------------------------//------------------------------

To keep it simple, he just wanted the main cost factors – CAPITAL, 'O & M' and 'DECOMMISSIONING' – deducting from the earnings. The O & M [+ Fuel]figure for nuclear is lower than offshore wind, which is understandable considering the 'calm-seas' access issue. However, HPC has a massive decommissioning/waste handling/storage cost, whereas offshore wind decommissioning cost is only a small % of of capital cost.

------------------------------//------------------------------

HPC Earnings:

At £57.50/MWh for 35 years, £50,773 million.

At (today’s) £42.00/MWh for 25 years, £26,490 million.

Total: £77,263 million.

HPC Costs:
Capital: £18,000 million

O & M [+ Fuel] @ £16.14/MWh: £24,442 million.

Decommissioning/ Waste Handling and Storage £7,300 million.

Total: £49,742 million.

HPC 'Earnings – Costs': £27,521 million.

---------------//---------------

10 x MEOW Earnings:

At £57.50/MWh for 15 years: £24,211 million.

At (today’s) £42.00/MWh for 10 years: £9,940 million.

Total: £34,151 million.

10 x MEOW Costs:
Capital: £18,000 million.

O & M: @ £19.78/MWh: £12,854 million.

Decommissioning at £200,000/MW: £1,900 million.
Total: £32,754 million

10 x MEOW 'Earnings – Costs': £1,397 million.
------------------------------//------------------------------

For Greg: REALITY BECKONS

At a CfD rate of £57.50/MWh, HPC’s 'Earnings – Costs' is 19.7X as much as the figure for the same amount of money invested in offshore wind.

At £92.50/MWh instead of £57.50/MWh for 35 years, the poor old bill-payers, will be forking out £76,028 million'!! 'Donating’ a top up to HPC's 'JACKPOT' of:

HPC 'Earnings – Costs': £76,028 -£45,123 million = +£30,905 million.

---------------//---------------

£31 Billion, Give or Take!!!

BEST TO KEEP SCHTUM, EH GREG !!!

24/7 electricity or intermittent electricity at 2.25X the Cost - A Real Head-Scratcher!

Ever year, a single 220 MW Rolls-Royce Small Modular Reactor [SMR] will supply 24/7, low-carbon electricity to 410,431 UK homes from an 0.08 sq km site.

Small Modular Reactors - once in a lifetime opportunity for the UK

Every year, the 215 wind turbines of the 539 MW Whitelee Onshore Wind Farm will deliver intermittent electricity to 298,837 UK homes from a 78 sq km site on ancient peat bog.

The capacity of Whitelee would have to increase by 37.3% to supply the same number of homes as a 220 MW SMR. That would take the number of turbines up to 295, with a rating of 740 MW on a site expanded to 107 sq km.

Best Estimate of SMR Overnight Cost to Compare to the Overnight Cost of Onshore Wind Farms:

NNL - Page 51 Adjusted Overnight Cost - Mature Design

£5,000/kWe is 'Best Fit' for a Rolls-Royce SMR.

--------------------//--------------------

• A 220 MW SMR should cost £1.1 billion.
• Whitelee Onshore Wind Farm costs £600 million, but increasing capacity by 37.3% would take that up to £824 million.

--------------------//--------------------

However, that's not the end of the story:

---------------------//---------------------

• The SMR will deliver 24/7, low-carbon electricity for 60 years.
• Whitelee will deliver low-carbon electricity for only 20 years. 
• A 2nd wind farm would have to be built - that's 40 years. 
• A 3rd would have to be built before the same amount of electricity was delivered as the single SMR.

--------------------//---------------------

• A single 220 MW SMR delivers as much 24/7 electricity as the intermittent electricity delivered by 3 x 295 wind turbines - that's 885 wind turbines - with an installed capacity of 2,220 MW

--------------------//--------------------

• Equivalent Onshore Wind Farms would 3 x £824 million = £2.472 billion.

---------------------//--------------------

• An Onshore Wind Farms cost 2.25X more to build than a single SMR.
• An Onshore Wind Farm installation, of 295 wind turbines, occupies 1,338X more area.