"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Tim W wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
You have to love all that diversity ('the wind is always blowing
somewhere'), in the equinoctial windiness of March, today the metered
wind output (23MW) dipped below 1% of 'metered capacity' and looks to
stay that way all day.

It's nice to know that that capacity that 'could supply up to (insert
own bull**** value here) millions of homes' (in themselves not where the
largest consumption of electricity takes place) is in fact barely
capable of driving 10,000 electric kettles to make a morning cuppa.


Or about 4 electric locomotives of decent power output.

(http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm)


It is, in fact, to put it in perspective, about 1/50th of the nice
nuclear energy currently being imported from France..


You can always rely on windmills to ....completely fail to deliver,
randomly.



Not too sure what you are on about.

Wind power doesn't work when it isn't windy? We knew that.

So it needs to be mixed with other sources? We knew that too.

German Wind farms produced about 7% of the energy consumed in Germany in
2009. That is a heck of a significant delivery.

I bet you will find that they produced no significant carbon reduction in
so doing.

And that figure is not in fact in any case correct.




Still puzzled.

I thought you said something about wind power failing to deliver electricity
but I am not sure what.
Now you say German Wind power hasn't produced a 'carbon reduction' . Not
sure what that means.
Also that the German Govt's own figures for electricity consumption and
generation are wrong.

Actually:
Wind farms can produce substantial amounts of electricity and do so in
Germany.
Wind farms do not release CO2 into the atmosphere for every kWh produced so
if the alternative is combustion of fossil fuels they represent a big saving
in carbon emmissions. Its incontrovertible. Try to fudge it how you will.

Tim W