Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[DavrossT]

did anyone see waterboy last night on e4

 

 

so FUNNY!!!!

 

[sheepshagger]

Considering most major projects up here cost 50%+ of costs down the road transmission costs are indeed negligable AT

[shetlandpeat]

There is a DC link to France, which has always been reliable, it first used a Mercury, three phase rectifier, but nowadays Mosfets are more efficient, mind , I did like the magnetron, had a Flash Gordon feel to it....

 

The power is converted to 260,000 volts DC for the transmission.

 

The formula for voltage drop is Vd=KIL/CSA where Vd stands for voltage drop, K stands for the resistivity factor of the material [i think copper is around 7 and aluminum 11], I is the current in Amperes, L is the round trip length of conductor, CSA is cross-sectional area of the conductor in circular mils

 

You will also have to take into consideration the temp, being that the cable will travel under a large volume of water, there will be, for the most a low ambient temp, which can either cut costs or increase capacity.

 

Sub-sea transmission of electricity has bin going on for decades, for instance, there are sub sea cable running from the beach at Sound, there are telegraph cables running from the south coast all around the world.

 

So, even though the costs could vary, VD wont (VD = Volt Drop) really.

 

That is y you transmit at higher voltages, less power. The higher the tension, the lower the loss, so it can be compensated by an increase in voltage..

[Spinner72]

Maybe VE could cut a deal wi dis fellow to buy up a few..

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090707/ap_on_bi_ge/us_pickens_wind_energy

[MuckleJoannie]

Study pinpoints UK wind hotspots

 

The most comprehensive report of its kind has identified the UK's best locations for households to install micro-wind turbines, say its authors.

 

The Energy Saving Trust (EST) said some households could generate in excess of £2,800 worth of electricity a year.

 

However, it also concluded that other locations would actually lose money if a small-scale turbine was installed.

 

The EST is advising homeowners to visit its website, which will show whether a turbine will help them cut their bills.

 

The performance of domestic turbines have come under the spotlight in recent years, with critics saying the devices failed to generate the amount of electricity outlined by manufacturers.

 

"Because the turbines are seen as a new, emerging technology, there has been very little proper monitoring and performance assessment," explained author Simon Green, the EST's head of business development.

 

"Our study was not tested in the lab, or based on computer modelling, but on real homes in order to independently assess their performance."

 

'Location, location, location'

 

The two-year study involved 57 locations, ranging from south-west England to the Orkney Islands, and tested a range of turbines that fell within two categories: building-mounted and free standing pole-mounted.

 

BEST PERFORMING SITE

 

Location: Orkney Islands

Turbine: 6kW pole-mounted

Profile: Rural, flat, open space

Average wind speed: 5.75m/s

Annual generation: 22,000kWh

Payback period: less than 10 yrs

 

"Building-mounted turbines were generally smaller ones with a 50cm diameter, which were fitted to roofs on a bracket similar to TV aerials," Mr Green told BBC News.

 

"The others - pole-mounted turbines - were generally larger, with bigger power outputs, and were remotely mounted in a field or at the end of a garden."

 

At the sites, the researchers recorded wind speed and measured the net generation of electricity every five minutes.

 

The team could then work out, over the course of a whole year, exactly how much electricity was produced and the overall performance of the wind turbine.

 

Mr Green said the study's findings revealed that there were a complex range of factors that influenced the effectiveness of a wind turbine's performance.

 

"The fundamental conclusion is location, location, location," he said.

 

"It is critically important that wind turbines are located in an area with sufficient wind resources.

 

"We believe that a minimum average wind speed needs to be at least five metres per second (18km/h; 11mph)."

 

Highs and lows

 

In the 57-site field study, the remote island of North Ronaldsay in the Orkneys generated the most electricity over the course of a year.

 

WORST PERFORMING SITE

 

Location: Dagenham, Essex

Turbine: 1kW building-mounted

Profile: Urban, heavily developed

Average wind speed: 2.37m/s

Annual generation: 0kWh

Payback period: never

(Source: Energy Saving Trust)

The site's 6kW pole-mounted turbine generated almost 22,000 kilowatt hours (kWh), which equated to a £2,860 saving if electricity cost £0.13/kWh.

 

The report noted: "This location is in essence an offshore wind turbine mounted on land and represents an almost perfect site.

 

"There are no obstructions around the turbine, and it is mounted in very clean air."

 

Data showed that the island's average wind speed was 5.75m/s.

 

However, not all sites delivered such favourable results, Mr Green explained.

 

"The study's findings show that a lot of the turbines had been installed in areas that did not achieve the minimum average wind speed," he observed.

 

The worst performing site, a 1kW turbine attached to a house in Dagenham, Essex, actually consumed more energy than it generated.

 

"The recorded wind speed was 2.37m/s," the report noted.

 

"This site represents an example of an installation in an urban area with a poor wind resource, as well as a poorly-installed turbine."

 

Based on the findings, the report estimated there was potential for more than 450,000 micro-turbines to be installed on properties across the UK.

 

These devices, the trust calculated, would generate almost 3,500 gigawatt hours of electricity each year, enough to power about 870,000 homes.

 

Homeowners who are interested in finding out whether their home is located in a suitable area are being advised to visit the trust's website.

 

"Customers can type in their postcode, and the website will give a much more accurate estimate of the average wind speed in their area," Mr Green explained.

 

"But we should also stress that any customer who is thinking of installing this kit should use a Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) approved equipment and installer."

 

The EST plans to follow up this study with similar assessments of other renewable energy technologies, including photovoltaic panels, micro-CHP and heat pumps.

 

[Guest sweetpea]

information book is ludicrously large no person will ever read cover to cover. The whole viking lot should be renamed pirates as they are robbing shetland and its folk of their wealth and beautiful scenery. I do not live near any proposed turbines, but feel there is not enough of impact studies on peoples quality of life been assessed. dont waste anymore money however looking at it as it is a non starter.

[Biffo]

Build it!!

[unlinkedstudent]

Build it!!

 

DON'T BUILD IT!

[Njugle]

This is great! A new level to the debate that we can all understand.

[unlinkedstudent]

This is great! A new level to the debate that we can all understand.

 

Aww shucks cheers Mod - I aim to please!!!

[OriginalUsername]

So there isn't enough assessment, but magically, at the same time, the assessment that has been published is far too much to read? What about the non-technical summary? Is that too much as well? I found it quite palatable.

 

There will be another assessment published soon concerning the impact on public health if that is your area of interest. It should also be palatable, but if the non-technical summary was too much to read, I don't imagine you'd read this either?

 

And pirates?! Wonderful. This is really the level that this debate has reached. Name-calling.

 

You might disagree with the "how," but the Viking lot are only trying to secure a future for Shetland in the best way that they see possible.

 

I'm sick of the ridiculous accusations that are flung at Viking Energy and all of those who support the proposal (here I'm speaking generally, not directing this at you sweetpea).

 

If anything, people are far more afraid to voice their support for the project than they are to speak against it (as Billy Fox claims). I know this because every time I say that I am in favour, I am attacked. And it is not just my views that are attacked, it is also my personal attributes. Indeed, just yesterday I had someone tell me that everyone who supports the Viking Energy project... well, apparently we (and our families!) engage in a number of odd (and possibly illegal) sexual acts. How that logic works, I'm not entirely sure, but there you go.

 

I want those in favour to be able to say so and not be afraid that their entire families will be attacked because of this. Fair enough, plenty of folk keep the debate about the project and don't let things get personal, but I have encountered too many examples of personal attacks to believe that this is the majority tactic.

 

Here on Shetlink, the debate is generally ok - or at least, it doesn't descend too often in to personal attacks - but in the general public I've encountered some horrific attacks against myself and others that I know who have voiced support.

 

I am not ashamed to say, I am in favour of Viking Energy. I truely believe that, if it goes ahead, it will be the best thing ever to happen to Shetland and I will be even more proud to consider myself a Shetlander because of it.

 

And no, I am not a pirate. I am not money hungry. I am not misinformed. I don't engage in sexual acts with animals. Etcetera.

 

I am an educated, proud Shetlander who believes 100% in this project and I refuse to be intimidated because of that. I really hope that more people can stand up and say this too.

[paulb]

maybe viking then was not the right name. guess what it means.

[Michael]

I have to say I agree with you OriginalUsername.

[OriginalUsername]

Glad to hear it Michael.

 

Just an example of what I'm talking about. Posted on the Viking Energy support Facebook page:

 

"Cruelty to children is forbidden by law, cruelty to animals is forbidden by law, cruelty to birds is forbidden by law, so why to hell is cruelty to Shetlanders permitted purely to satisfy the financial greed of Viking Energy?

Viking Energy is a parasite, nothing more, nothing less. Intent on stripping the scenic beauty of Shetland for financial gain. May they rot in hell."

 

There is NO need for this.

 

I don't think I deserve to rot in hell for a difference of opinion!

[unlinkedstudent]

But those in favour of the windfarm are not alone in perhaps feeling villified for their beliefs. I felt like I was under personal attack for speaking out against the windfarm.

 

Perhaps as the windfarm is such an emotive issue that it brings out strong feelings on both sides?