[Fultonius]

As with so much, this link has handy numbers about the potential for UK onshore windpower https://www.withouthotair.com/c4/page_32.shtml

Bit short on time, so just a couple of quick things. Withouthotair was a great resource in its day but totally outdated by the pace of change.

China has installed the most wind turbines and nuclear power of any country globally.

China’s total electricity generation capacity surged by 13.9% to 2.92 TW. Thermal power grew by 4.1% to 1.39 GW. Wind jumped almost 21%, a record 75.9 GW, to 441.3 GW. BloombergNEF estimated that China accounted for 60% of new wind and 58% of newly installed solar power capacity in the world in 2023

.

Stone - the beauty of tidal is that, at any one time you have a steady output if you have around 6 sites spread around the UK. Yes, neeps/springs, but tidal is so variable (in flow velocity) anyway that a lot of the time you will be running above rated power, so it it does make a lot of difference. Also, just over install...

And this:
https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-biggest-smelter-to-launch-massive-wind-and-solar-tender-says-nuclear-too-costly/

Agree with Pete on the system being not optimised towards the correct outcome - also see AI paperclip theory.

The problem with humanity, as evidenced by this thread, is our endless ability to discuss the *best* option, while Rome burns waiting for any fucking option to get built...

Just bloody get on with it already!


Wave sounds good in theory. I was quite involved for a while at uni and other things, but it's just incredibly difficult to actually build and run as you basically need to shove equipment in very hostile environments (the best sites are the worst sites for access / install / maintenance) I predict fusion or end of huminty come first.

[Fultonius]

Just noticed a typo I think in my copy paste, surely china thermal is TW, not GW?

[Moo]

You’ve hit the nail on the head there Fultonius. The perfect solution is just to get on with building as many imperfect solutions as we can as quickly as we can.

In the end some will become redundant but as long as they’re moving us away from fossil fuels in the meantime then they’re doing their job.

[stone]

Fultonius, I'm interested that you're a fan of tidal. My understanding was that putting systems around the UK (and mixing tidal flow with barrages etc) dealt with the intra-day variability but did nothing for the spring-neap issue. So basically tidal gave you lots of power every second week. That's a very tough thing to integrate with everything else.

The bits of Withouthotair that I thought most useful were those about geographic potential. Stuff like how much energy is actually in the tidal flow around the UK or in the wind blowing over it etc before we try to invent a technology to extract it. That is timeless isn't it?

I'm totally behind building anything now that displaces fossil fuels though.

Whilst we do that, we also need to be getting on with stuff that actually gets us to zero-C too though.

[Bradders]

You’ve hit the nail on the head there Fultonius. The perfect solution is just to get on with building as many imperfect solutions as we can as quickly as we can.

In the end some will become redundant but as long as they’re moving us away from fossil fuels in the meantime then they’re doing their job.

100% this

It needs both. Ultimately the population is composed only of individuals, the other entities are legal fictions, controlled by individuals. Change must come from them, because it can’t come from anywhere else.

And this.

Been reading the thread with interest. I'm kind of surprised by Pete's position that it's all a bit pointless what we do, as it ignores the potential for compounding. Yes in isolation each little act has no effect, but they build over time and compound into something far greater.

I also have to believe it requires both top down and bottom up action, and those things are not mutually exclusive. As a for instance, my firm is about to move buildings, going from a massive, old, inefficient, sprawling place into a brand new office which is supposedly highly energy efficient. That change could be considered top down (massive corporation consolidating its office presence), or bottom up (employees of massive corporation looking for cost effective sustainable solutions that help us meet net zero). The new building is going to be more difficult for people to drive to (very limited on site parking) which is a top down decision around sustainable travel, but any benefit in people using more sustainable / active commuting options will require bottom up decision making from each individual (i.e. choosing to use the park and ride, train, cycle, etc. instead of belligerently driving to the nearest car park and hoping for the best).

[stone]

One way to look at this is in terms of a global carbon budget. If we burn all the fossil fuels on Earth we could get 8oC warming and v tough consequences. Burn less and it is less tough. Assuming we eventually transition away from fossil fuels (before we have to anyway because they are used up) anything that leaves more fuel in the ground is good. So banning private jets today has big advantages over banning them in ten years time or whatever. Likewise with windturbines.

[Fultonius]

Vaclav Smil is essential reading to understand this issue. ....... 'it's essential that we build onshore windfarms in the UK in the effort halt global warming'

I'm intrigued by this. UK average current (2022 electricity demand is 36GW. The installed capacity of onshore wind as of 2023 was around 12GW.

Now, installed capacity only gives and average of about 30-40% of that, and electricity demand will go up as we heat our homes, fuel our industry and charge our EVs with it, but don't get how that's not a useful contribution?

It's easy just to say "go offshore" but we have a massive ship supply issue ATM, which doesn't so much affect onshore.

Also, for grid stability see California:

https://twitter.com/mzjacobson/status/1769493892955844807   running on 100% renewables for periods up around 4 hours per day and their grid ism essentially (i.e. very minimally, giving very little stability support), not interconnected to other US grids.

@Stone, I'll look a bit more into tidal before replying - bit out of touch these days on that.

[spidermonkey09]

I'm on the mailing list for the project out of general interest and got an update yesterday. Sounds like an application will be made in a year or so following a period of consultation, which will doubtless be very negative and dominated by the local campign groups. Might become a test of the Government's professed anti-NIMBY approach?

We are writing to provide you with an update on the proposed Calderdale Wind Farm, as we continue to make progress towards our goal of developing a significant renewable energy source at Walshaw Moor.
 
Following extensive environmental and technical assessments, the project is now forecast to generate in excess of 100MW of clean energy. Given this estimated capacity, the project will qualify as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), should the Government’s recently announced planning reforms to promote onshore wind proceed as anticipated.
 
As a result, a decision has been taken to focus work on the preparation of a Development Consent Order (DCO) application for an NSIP under the Planning Act 2008, for determination by the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero.
 
Within the NSIP process there are clear expectations around community consultation that need to be met as an application for a DCO is prepared.
 
Whilst we are not engaging with local communities at this time, our current programme is to undertake a non-statutory consultation about the emerging proposals for Calderdale Wind Farm in Spring 2025. Feedback received during the non-statutory consultation period will be used to inform the preparation of the DCO application ahead of a further round of statutory consultation, also currently scheduled to take place in 2025.
 
In addition to supporting the UK’s Net Zero objectives, the Calderdale Wind Farm will also include significant biodiversity enhancement measures. These will focus on habitat creation and restoration, further strengthening our commitment to environmental sustainability at Walshaw Moor. 
 
We continue to believe this project presents a unique opportunity to deliver both renewable energy benefits and meaningful ecological improvements to the region.
 
We will keep you informed as the project progresses and provide further updates when more information become available.

[wasbeen]

I completely agree with you, Fultonius. The best approach is to start building as many imperfect solutions as we can, as quickly as possible.

My motivation, however, is less about altruism. We’re at a pivotal moment where the most affordable solutions for power generation and transportation are increasingly "green". Legacy technologies are increasingly propped up by subsidies and tariffs, which isn’t sustainable.

Solar energy stands out as one of the most equitable global power sources; nearly every country has the potential to be self-sufficient in this regard. This transition could not only reduce our dependence on foreign energy but also help mitigate geopolitical tensions.

That said, I foresee significant challenges ahead, particularly regarding the growing demand for energy storage. There are promising strategies we can explore, such as high-voltage interconnects, demand management through agile energy tariffs, and utilizing surplus renewable energy to produce hydrogen. However, we might find ourselves shifting from an oil age to one dominated by lithium and copper, potentially giving rise to new cartels and global tensions.

[spidermonkey09]

Energy storage is also a flashpoint. Literally down the road from the proposed windfarm site. There are loads of signs saying 'No to BESS' as you drive into Widdop from the Lancs side.
 
https://www.burnleyexpress.net/business/residents-air-concerns-over-plans-to-build-battery-energy-storage-system-bess-on-land-near-briercliffe-in-burnley-4809224

[Paul B]

I'm on the mailing list for the project out of general interest and got an update yesterday. Sounds like an application will be made in a year or so following a period of consultation, which will doubtless be very negative and dominated by the local campign groups. Might become a test of the Government's professed anti-NIMBY approach?

It's in my backyard and I have some concerns, does that make me a NIMBY? The site proposed is in the middle of a SSSI whereas others (for instance on the other side of the Long Causeway) aren't:
https://magic.defra.gov.uk/magicmap.aspx
(click on land-based designations, stat. etc. if you're unfamiliar with MAGIC maps).

There's also a planning application going in to upsize a turbine I can see from my kitchen window, and they visited to get permission to put noise monitoring equipment on my land which was fine by me, as is their proposal.

[Will Hunt]

You're a Currently Unsure in My Back Yard.

[Paul B]

Here are the comms. for anyone that's interested:

We are writing to provide you with an update on the proposed Calderdale Wind Farm, as we continue to make progress towards our goal of developing a significant renewable energy source at Walshaw Moor.
 
Following extensive environmental and technical assessments, the project is now forecast to generate in excess of 100MW of clean energy. Given this estimated capacity, the project will qualify as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), should the Government’s recently announced planning reforms to promote onshore wind proceed as anticipated.
 
As a result, a decision has been taken to focus work on the preparation of a Development Consent Order (DCO) application for an NSIP under the Planning Act 2008, for determination by the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero.
 
Within the NSIP process there are clear expectations around community consultation that need to be met as an application for a DCO is prepared.
 
Whilst we are not engaging with local communities at this time, our current programme is to undertake a non-statutory consultation about the emerging proposals for Calderdale Wind Farm in Spring 2025. Feedback received during the non-statutory consultation period will be used to inform the preparation of the DCO application ahead of a further round of statutory consultation, also currently scheduled to take place in 2025.
 
In addition to supporting the UK’s Net Zero objectives, the Calderdale Wind Farm will also include significant biodiversity enhancement measures. These will focus on habitat creation and restoration, further strengthening our commitment to environmental sustainability at Walshaw Moor. 
 
We continue to believe this project presents a unique opportunity to deliver both renewable energy benefits and meaningful ecological improvements to the region.
 
We will keep you informed as the project progresses and provide further updates when more information become available.

[Johnny Brown]

I've been doing an annual job at South Stack as part of the Morlais experimental tidal energy project since 2020. After completion of the substation etc over a year ago I was expecting to see turbines in the water this year. Nowt, website now 'hoping for 2026'. Word on the ground is they've been struggling to get contractors to bid. Really frustrating to see it moving so slowly.

[spidermonkey09]

What Will said! I'm sure there are plenty of legitimate concerns - my point more generally is that any sizeable infrastructure project will almost by definition have concerns which can't be addressed. Is there any local support for the project(s) you're aware of? Also, out of interest, what are they? I've found it particularly hard in this case to cut through the noise, which is why I started the thread in the first place.

I though I'd added the comms Paul quotes in my post, apologies if that isn't showing up.

[Bonjoy]

The bulk of local sentiment I have seen has been against the project.
The listed objections of the Stop Calderdale Windfarm campaign are here:
https://www.stopcalderdalewindfarm.co.uk/our-objections

A good source for following developments (with a heavy anti bias)is  this FB group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/calderwindfarm/

Like you say it's very hard to cut through the noise.

[stone]

Might it make sense to pay anyone an ongoing bribe/compensation if they have a windfarm etc within earshot/line_of_sight?

I'm genuinely ignorant as to whether it would seriously harm the habitat as opponents claim. I'm put in mind of how MOD shooting ranges etc become wildlife havens. My impression is that farming and "estate management" are the real villains when it comes to biodiversity destruction and anything that gets in the way of those activities leads to wildlife restoration.

[Fultonius]

I have had a cursory glance at the objections set out in the StopCalderdale site. A lot of the usual emotive froth, so let's break some down.

Peat

Building wind turbines on significant depth of peat bog is not a good idea - it prolongs the C02 payback, can change the habitat somewhat, and is just a right old pain in the ass as it needs excavated. However, we're talking metres of depth before it's significant. From what I can see the peat depth at Walshaw Moor is hovering around the 40cm mark, just enough to be considered "blanket bog", but not the 4m+ swamps we've had to battle with on some sites. But, it's an SSSI and SAC so, while the "peat bog impact" in national terms is quite low, I suspect that this might be a challenge to development.

Caveat: I'm an engineer working on old sites, Environmental Impact Assessments and development are things I'm aware of by osmosis rather than from doing significant work on them...

Ground Nesting Birds

Well....building the wind farm will scupper the grouse shooting and peat burning, so I think the habitats are going to change significantly....   But the SSSI and SAC do mention some specials (plover, lapwing, dunlin) that are noted in the NatureScot guidance as "needing assessment", so again, there would have to be a lot of mitigation to get this through.

Noise There are strict rules on this - in real terms, a non-issue.

What always annoys me about these "stopSOMETHINGnow" type websites is how much utter nonsense they spew, which I don't think helps the reasonable arguments against (which there clearly are some valid ones for in this case).

E.g. how can:

Walshaw Moor is the Jewel in the Crown of Calderdale’s wildlife sites

be true at the same time as:

this included making a written submission to the Public Inquiry which formed part of the legal action. Natural England also decided to prosecute the Estate on no less than 43 grounds of alleged unconsented damage to European and national protected sites. The sheer number of alleged breaches (track construction across moors including converting a stream to a track, drainage of peat bog, installing grouse butts, damage to habitats from vehicle use), together with the Estate’s previous conviction and lack of a voluntary offer to restore or mitigate the damage, demonstrate the seriousness of the situation.

Link

Wind farm development, by dint of the fact that they are the best resourced sites, ends up being on windswept, upland landscapes typically owned by the self same landowners that have, for decades, caused a lot of ongoing damage to ecosystems. This seems to then make it even more politicised, adding to the sentiment and therefore the froth!

I would suspect that if it were a bit of land that no-one ever used, and wasn't in someone's backyard, the "save the plovers, save the bog" line of attack would be 10x less. I don't have the EIA knowledge to really argue the case either way. In a dispassionate assessment by genuine experts without vested interest, would the negative impacts be enough to prevent this one going ahead? Maybe. Can they be mitigated? Possibly.  Should they be? Not sure...

On the other hand, I totally get the anger which must be felt by what must feel like a major loss of local amenity, for a large bit of profit for the (probably already wealthy) landowner. Would the situation feel different if it were community owned?


@Stone: there is a minimum level of local development funding that must be spent per year per wind turbine. Usually £5k, installed MW per year, so for this one that would be: 302MW * 5k = £1.51M. 

[Paul B]

I'm pretty similar Fultonius, and given the hoops I had to jump through to deliver a scheme with legally enforceable drivers adjacent to a SSSI blanket bog, part of a SPA and SAC I just can't see why that location is what's being proposed. I'm pretty happy with wind farms in 'my backyard' but the areas closer to me would actually seem more suitable than where's being proposed. From what I understand they're pretty big too?

I've just come back from a loop around the Long Causeway which has some turbines and I find them pretty mesmerising.

Word on the ground is they've been struggling to get contractors to bid. Really frustrating to see it moving so slowly.

If that's truly the case then the risk allocations in the contract must be making it entirely unappealing. Clients can be pretty unreasonable at times with risks they try and push onto others (that neither party can actually control). I'm pretty amazed/horrified seeing the way construction costs have gone and I've seen the barriers this causes first hand recently in South Australia where this is a huge problem.

[Johnny Brown]

Interesting. My impression was more that there wasn’t really anyone in a position ready to build commercially sized tidal turbines, but I may be wrong.

[Paul B]

TBF I didn't think of that (also, I wouldn't know) and was more focused on the crap that results in big numbers on tender returns I've seen (or alternatively a decision against bidding).

[teestub]

I'm pretty similar Fultonius, and given the hoops I had to jump through to deliver a scheme with legally enforceable drivers adjacent to a SSSI blanket bog, part of a SPA and SAC I just can't see why that location is what's being proposed. I'm pretty happy with wind farms in 'my backyard' but the areas closer to me would actually seem more suitable than where's being proposed. From what I understand they're pretty big too?

If this SSSI designation is for the peat moorland that’s in a poor state from the draining for grouse, then they may actually be able to have a design that includes using peat arising from the excavations to block drainage ditches etc. and increase the overall quality of the peat habitat.

https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/files/2017-10/Guidance-Peatland-Action-installing-peat-dams-A1268162.pdf

[stone]

@Stone: there is a minimum level of local development funding that must be spent per year per wind turbine. Usually £5k, installed MW per year, so for this one that would be: 302MW * 5k = £1.51M.

Thanks, I had no idea. I'd imagine though that the money would be more effective in stifling NIMYism if it was instead actual cash payments direct to everyone living within sight or earshot.

[remus]

Interesting. My impression was more that there wasn’t really anyone in a position ready to build commercially sized tidal turbines, but I may be wrong.

That was my understanding too. Im not very up to speed, but last I heard making them reliable enough for large scale is hard.

[Paul B]

If this SSSI designation is for the peat moorland that’s in a poor state from the draining for grouse, then they may actually be able to have a design that includes using peat arising from the excavations to block drainage ditches etc. and increase the overall quality of the peat habitat.

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical but if that was the intention, surely they'd be explicitly making a point of it in their communications?