The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Wind turbines’ CO2 savings and abatement cost > Comments

Wind turbines’ CO2 savings and abatement cost : Comments

By Peter Lang, published 4/5/2015

Wind turbines are less effective and CO2 abatement cost is higher than commonly assumed .

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Aidan,

You are completely wrong. I pay for power in SA, and I know what I'm talking about.
Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 5 May 2015 10:31:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The alleged abatement of CO2 by wind turbines is based on false assumption, that if the turbines generate power, coal fired generators burn less coal. That is not true. The amount of coal burned does not fluctuate with short term fluctuations of consumption.(day or night, wind or no wind, peak or off peak). Therefore wind power does not replace coal power, but is in addition of it. That means that wind turbines don't abate any CO2 at all.
Hermit
Posted by hermit, Tuesday, 5 May 2015 3:56:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
hermit, the only circumstances under which what you say is true are if the wind power is replacing something other than coal (such as natural gas) in which case there is still CO2 abated; just not from coal.

When output from a coal fired power station decreases, so does the amount of coal going into it, because less energy is going out through the turbines, so less needs to be put in to compensate. Peter's main point AIUI is that the power station efficiency also falls (so the reduction in coal burned is less than what you would expect if coal input were directly proportional to electricity output). But it is still substantial, and we're more likely to be able to switch it off completely.

___________________________________________________________________________________

ttbn, the extra wind power reduced wholesale prices, but that doesn't mean the retailers all passed the saving on to consumers. And AIUI retailers now charge even more interstate.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Tally, you're not the first to come up with that idea. However running a water line to the hot spots is much more difficult than it sounds. But the related technology of underground coal gasification has been tried in Queensland quite recently.
Posted by Aidan, Tuesday, 5 May 2015 4:40:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If the government were really serious about regaining Australia’s natural energy cost advantage, then it should proceed by scrapping the RET and all subsidisation of renewable energy generation, especially inefficient, unreliable wind turbine and solar power.
Posted by Raycom, Wednesday, 6 May 2015 12:21:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aidan,"When output from a coal fired power station decreases, so does the amount of coal going into it," This is not true. That is the false assumption based on theoretical assumption that coal input matches the power output. That is not how it works in reality.Cooling down and subsequent heating up takes couple of days. It cannot mach short term variation. The coal input is steady. The variations are handled at the turbines end, not at the furnaces.
Posted by hermit, Wednesday, 6 May 2015 1:07:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is feasible to reduce coal consumption when demand is low, all that is necessary is to slow the feed rate of the coal.
The boilers will remain at steam producing temperature with reduced fires and when demand increases steaming can be increased well before there is any starving at the turbines.

I have never been a boiler attendant at a power station but I've had a lot of experience with oil fired and moving grate boilers in factories and the management keep a keen eye on fuel consumption and an ear on the safety valves and excessive blowing off will be noted.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 6 May 2015 3:57:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy