STOP PRESS ! The account below has now been updated by this paragraph however we have left the detail unchanged to give an account of the 'problems' which have only been resolved by the arrival of, in our opinion, a white knight firm to 'save the day!'
It now appears that the 'damaged' uneconomic, wind turbines have been bought by an energy generating company who are going to recable them enabling the turbines to become energy contributors to the GRID. We would be interested to receive the purchase figures, terms and conditions and an outline of the business plan. It may well be that it is more profitable to buy a broken formerly uneconomic turbine at a set price rather than to build a new turbine as a scratch project even taking the grants available into consideration .. we don't know.. it would be interesting to find out.
We in no way suggest that this was the motivation behind the purchase as we simply don't know. We have noticed the turbine blades are not turning, this in our opinion probably means that the actual turbines will require 'fixing' as we believe they must be kept rotating even when there is no wind to avoid damage.
The turbines were without doubt an embarassing 'flag' hi lighting the shortcomings and potential pitfalls of such a project. Better to rub out the failure and convert it to a success story.. we have no idea what the motivation was. If we were proposing a similar project we would certainly find it a nuisance to have a failed project shining like a lighthouse for all to see and poke fun at!
As reported on local BBC Look North TV news January 2006. Apparently the ground breaking Blyth offshore wind farm hasn’t worked for around 9 months. The program detailed the problem - the cable carrying power to shore was not laid in a trench under the seabed, but left lying on the seabed unprotected. Movement of the cable (tidal currents probably or possibly mermaid interference) has resulted in its failure.
Local people who were interviewed seemed unaware of the situation. It is normal for wind farms to stand idle for long periods so no one noticed they had been shutdown!
essentialspark.com comment – We find it difficult to reconcile the £ 4 million wasted on this ‘ flagship’ project, the first of its type in the U.K. and suggest there needs to be an EEC enquiry into how a project, part funded by them, didn’t consider obvious potential problems with the cable carrying the power ashore not being buried under the sea bed but left to the mercy of the tides et al. Basic costings and economics must surely have pointed to the lack of commercial viability, cable buried or not?
It is now rumoured that to repair the turbines is no longer economic – anyone for a second hand wind turbine – buyer collects – may have difficulty fitting into the rear of a Volvo Estate already full of useless toy roof mounted ‘PR’ publicity wind turbines!
Suggest all of the proposed investment into ‘ghost turbines’ should be put into sterling engine technology research and development and geothermal steam turbine power station technology. Alternatively the entire proposed investment in offshore ‘ghost’ turbines could be put on an each way bet on any horse at Newmarket. This, in our opinion, is likely to provide a statistically more reliable potential return. If our horse comes in then we just buy our electricity from another country and leave it to them to deal with the environmental fallout. If it loses then we can point to the Blyth project and the lessons learnt. Arguably it may well have cost less had everyone involved with it merely been given paid leave to go on holiday or stay in bed
Writing on the Wall?
The Times Letters
July 18 2003
From Dr John Etherington
Sir, Offshore wind power costs about £1.25 million per MW to install. Even assuming that wind turbines operate for 40 per cent of the time, it would earn only £56,064 per year if the current wholesale price of fossil-fuel electricity, £16/MWh, were to be charged. Thus it would take 22 years to pay off capital alone.
Wind electricity is only economic because the Renewables Obligation and the Climate Change Levy — the Government’s two "subsidies" — increase its price to nearly £50/MWh, about three times the wholesale price of fossil-fuel electricity.
The customer will find this increment on the bill, as has happened in Denmark, where domestic electricity is nearly twice the UK price, and yet Danish carbon dioxide emission has still increased compared with the pre-wind-power years.
Neither have the Danes escaped the problems which the unpredictability of wind will bring to the UK. In January this year, the head of information for the West Denmark transmission authority compared the operation of the Danish electricity network to driving a giant articulated truck with no steering, brakes or other controls.
Yours faithfully,
JOHN ETHERINGTON,
Parc-y-Bont, Llanhowell, Solva, Haverfordwest,
Pembrokeshire SA62 6XX.
July 16.
The Times Letters - 22nd July 2003
From Mr Jim Allan
Sir, Dr John Etherington (letter, July 18) was correct, in simple payback terms, when he pointed out that, on the basis of the current wholesale price of electricity, it would take 22 years to pay off the capital cost of offshore wind turbine.
However, if we assume that the cost of servicing the capital expenditure is something like 4.5 per cent, then the annual interest charge £56,250. This is exactly equal to the value of the electricity from a 1MW turbine.
So the revenue from selling the electricity will only pay for the interest charges on the capital, and after 20 yers the capital still has to be paid for.
The final problem, however, that the turbines only have 20-year lifespan, and they then have to be dismantled and sent to the scrapyard
Yours faithfully
JIM ALLEN
