A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay, and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

If I can summon a combination of energy and nosiness I may drop in and ask
them about it.


Cheers


Dave R


--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 30/08/2017 13:49, David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay, and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

If I can summon a combination of energy and nosiness I may drop in and ask
them about it.

A few years ago a mate of mine with an electrical business, wishing to
diversify almost got into bed with a Chinese wind turbine manufacturer.
Luckily he saw the quality of the products and pulled out. Shortly
afterwards the Chinese company supplied the turbine for a business that
I drive past quite often and have a tenuous link with. It lasted until
the first strong wind and has stood broken for several years now.
Bill

Bill Wright expressed precisely :
A few years ago a mate of mine with an electrical business, wishing to
diversify almost got into bed with a Chinese wind turbine manufacturer.
Luckily he saw the quality of the products and pulled out. Shortly afterwards
the Chinese company supplied the turbine for a business that I drive past
quite often and have a tenuous link with. It lasted until the first strong
wind and has stood broken for several years now.

There are around 3 or 4 privately owned local ones, all are turning
regularly, apart from the smallest/ oldest one which hasn't moved for a
few years now.

David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

Were these perhaps the notorious "Windsave" turbines that in many cases
consumed more electricity that they generated?

https://goo.gl/images/7epd9x

How small is "small"?

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Tim Streater wrote :
According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.

As will a 'large' one, if ever they do..

Chris Hogg wrote:

Tim+ wrote:

Were these perhaps the notorious "Windsave" turbines that in many cases
consumed more electricity that they generated?

https://goo.gl/images/7epd9x

How small is "small"?

I remember them being sold through B&Q.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=b%26q+encraft+turbine

On 30/08/2017 14:11, Bill Wright wrote:
On 30/08/2017 13:49, David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so
much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay, and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair
(possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.



Quite a few large windfarms in the UK have been operating reliably for
25 to 30 years but they are mostly with Danish built turbines.

On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 15:51:21 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Tim Streater wrote :
According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.

As will a 'large' one, if ever they do..

The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

Many boats seem to have wind turbines these days, one supposes to keep
batteries charged up while moored etc. I'd imagine these have to stand a lot
more windd and weather than land based ones, so maybe the best plan is too
get some of those instead!
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"David" wrote in message
...
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay, and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

If I can summon a combination of energy and nosiness I may drop in and ask
them about it.


Cheers


Dave R


--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 30/08/2017 15:05, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , David
wrote:

A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their
own vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

[snip]

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay,
and also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.


And probably never in an urban environment

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

harry brought next idea :
The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

So if the location is so obviously daft to you, why did the supposed
experts not notice when they did a potential site survey? The answer is
that it didn't really matter, all that mattered was a sale.

Brian Gaff used his keyboard to write :
Many boats seem to have wind turbines these days, one supposes to keep
batteries charged up while moored etc. I'd imagine these have to stand a lot
more windd and weather than land based ones, so maybe the best plan is too
get some of those instead!

If you mean the narrow boats and similar, they don't need to have a
vast output to keep a battery topped up.

On 30/08/2017 13:49, David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay, and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

If I can summon a combination of energy and nosiness I may drop in and ask
them about it.

They can always borrow the missing part from the one that David Cameron
had fitted to his house a few years ago (until he realised that it
wouldn't even power his phone charger, and removed it).

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:55:03 +0100, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Brian Gaff used his keyboard to write :
Many boats seem to have wind turbines these days, one supposes to keep
batteries charged up while moored etc. I'd imagine these have to stand
a lot more windd and weather than land based ones, so maybe the best
plan is too get some of those instead!

If you mean the narrow boats and similar, they don't need to have a vast
output to keep a battery topped up.

By "small" I am talking in relative terms.

I would guess the mast was between 30' and 60' tall.
[Going from "looks a lot taller than the average house".]

The turbine is/was in proportion.

Cheers


Dave R



--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:04:21 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their
own vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

Were these perhaps the notorious "Windsave" turbines that in many cases
consumed more electricity that they generated?

https://goo.gl/images/7epd9x

How small is "small"?

Tim

Ugh!
I remember them.

Order of magnitude larger.

Just small in comparison to a couple of others round here and tiny
compared to the offshore ones.

Suffolk being mainly flat, they seem to be in a good rural location with
no obvious obstructions to free flowing wind.
[{cough} a bit like myself, perhaps{cough}]

Cheers


Dave r


--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:52:10 +0100, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

harry brought next idea :
The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

So if the location is so obviously daft to you, why did the supposed
experts not notice when they did a potential site survey? The answer is
that it didn't really matter, all that mattered was a sale.

Around here there are a lot of wind turbines, singles and pairs,
generally much smaller than the those on the big commercial wind
farms, and a large number only rated at around 5-6kW. See for example
http://tinyurl.com/y6w4ffjk and http://tinyurl.com/zvabks7. These are
installed by local landowners, presumably seduced by the green
arguments to reduce CO2 and keen to 'do their bit'.

Is this sarcasm, or have you not noticed the huge subsidies they get?
According to a local farmer's planning application a moderate size
turbine would halve his five figure electricity bill, while only
generating a fraction of his usage, even on a good day.



I have seen data
for one such turbine, and the capacity factor is pretty poor at 14%. I
assume that a salesman has just made a presentation to the landowner
and said something along the lines of 'this is what we normally
install in your situation' without any assessment of the wind
characteristics in the immediate location, and the landowner has just
gone along with it.


--

Roger Hayter

On 31/08/17 14:26, Roger Hayter wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:52:10 +0100, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

harry brought next idea :
The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

So if the location is so obviously daft to you, why did the supposed
experts not notice when they did a potential site survey? The answer is
that it didn't really matter, all that mattered was a sale.

Around here there are a lot of wind turbines, singles and pairs,
generally much smaller than the those on the big commercial wind
farms, and a large number only rated at around 5-6kW. See for example
http://tinyurl.com/y6w4ffjk and http://tinyurl.com/zvabks7. These are
installed by local landowners, presumably seduced by the green
arguments to reduce CO2 and keen to 'do their bit'.

Is this sarcasm, or have you not noticed the huge subsidies they get?
According to a local farmer's planning application a moderate size
turbine would halve his five figure electricity bill, while only
generating a fraction of his usage, even on a good day.


UKIP successfully stopped a turbine plamning application here by
claiming that it was too *small*.

If you get permission to plant one, you have to show that it will do
more good than harm - i.e. generate more electricity.

The landowner was reluctant, as the larger turbine returned less in FITS
on his investment.



--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

ۥ Confucius

Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 14:26:45 +0100, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

Chris Hogg wrote:

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:52:10 +0100, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

harry brought next idea :
The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

So if the location is so obviously daft to you, why did the supposed
experts not notice when they did a potential site survey? The answer is
that it didn't really matter, all that mattered was a sale.

Around here there are a lot of wind turbines, singles and pairs,
generally much smaller than the those on the big commercial wind
farms, and a large number only rated at around 5-6kW. See for example
http://tinyurl.com/y6w4ffjk and http://tinyurl.com/zvabks7. These are
installed by local landowners, presumably seduced by the green
arguments to reduce CO2 and keen to 'do their bit'.

Is this sarcasm, or have you not noticed the huge subsidies they get?

No, I hadn't given subsidies a thought.

According to a local farmer's planning application a moderate size
turbine would halve his five figure electricity bill, while only
generating a fraction of his usage, even on a good day.

Do you have a link either to general info on farming subsidies for
wind generators, or else to the specific example you quote?

It is impossible to link to it but if you are *really* interested go to:

http://www.powys.gov.uk/en/planning-...-applications/


and go to the search page. Look for reference number P/2014/1163 or
address Byrhedyn. Go to this application then on to the link "View
Submitted Plans and Associated Documents". Then go to the third page
of submitted documents and open 3210031 (Design and access statement)
and there you will find a very poor viewer and a link to download the
document. Within this 60 page document (which must have cost the
applicant a lot) you will find the financial rationale. I don't vouch
for its accuracy. But it sounds pretty good if you happen to own a
hill.




--

Roger Hayter

Chris Hogg wrote:

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:38:58 +0100, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:
It is impossible to link to it but if you are *really* interested go to:

http://www.powys.gov.uk/en/planning-...-view-and-comm
ent-on-planning-applications/


and go to the search page. Look for reference number P/2014/1163 or
address Byrhedyn. Go to this application then on to the link "View
Submitted Plans and Associated Documents". Then go to the third page
of submitted documents and open 3210031 (Design and access statement)
and there you will find a very poor viewer and a link to download the
document. Within this 60 page document (which must have cost the
applicant a lot) you will find the financial rationale. I don't vouch
for its accuracy. But it sounds pretty good if you happen to own a
hill.

Hmm...couldn't find anything about subsidies other than reference to
FIT payments (presumably similar to those that Harry gets, pro rata
for the amount of electricity generated), an estimate of the savings
in heating oil and CO2 emission that would arise from using the
electricity generated (savings which could also be made by someone
with e.g. solar roof panels), and that the turbine would pay for
itself in 7-9 years from those payments and savings. Perhaps I missed
it; it wasn't the sort of document designed to hold your interest!

What's in a name, aren't FIT payments a generous subsidy?




I couldn't find mention of the generator capacity, which surprised me,
only it's physical size. Perhaps size is all that planners worry
about, in terms of visual impact. I did see that the applicants were
expecting 400000kWh of electricity per annum, which amounts to an
average power of 45.7kW, or about 200kW capacity, assuming a capacity
factor of 25%.

I suspect 25% is way optimistic. It was in the (prevailing) lee of
quite a low hill.




I also see planning permission was refused. So there is some sense in
the Powys planning department and they're not totally subservient to
the demands for green energy.

Virtually every hilltop in Powys is covered with windmills, and you can
see them from almost everywhere. The valley (and walking route) the
turbine in question was to overshadow was one of very few that you can't
see any nearby ones from. We have none of the protection the national
parks have, despite having some of the most unspoilt upland countryside.
The Powys worms are beginning to turn, especially since they now want to
build a huge 400kV transmission line across rural Montgomeryshire,
rather than simply feather the turbines and hand over the paycheques,
which seems more sensible to me.




--

Roger Hayter

On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 19:52:12 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
harry brought next idea :
The site is everything.
You see them in some daft places.

So if the location is so obviously daft to you, why did the supposed
experts not notice when they did a potential site survey? The answer is
that it didn't really matter, all that mattered was a sale.

They are clearly more interested in selling wind turbines than pointing out the disadvantages of a site.

I have seen solar panels in stupid sites too. I can see one from my house.

On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 19:28:31 UTC+1, alan_m wrote:
On 30/08/2017 15:05, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , David
wrote:

A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their
own vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

[snip]

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay,
and also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.


And probably never in an urban environment

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

This was one I was thinking of. An obviously stupid place.
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...e-wind-4971270

On 30/08/2017 16:14, Ash Burton wrote:
On 30/08/2017 14:11, Bill Wright wrote:
On 30/08/2017 13:49, David wrote:
A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their own
vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

I thought this was a good thing because they were always spinning when
some of the bigger ones on local farms were in wind shadow (one is so
much
in wind shadow that I can't see it generating much at all).

Anyway, for the last few months one has not been spinning and the other
had the turbine removed (I assume it didn't just fall off). No sign of
repair or replacement.

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay,
and
also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair
(possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.



Quite a few large windfarms in the UK have been operating reliably for
25 to 30 years but they are mostly with Danish built turbines.

I reckon on a well maintained wind farm about 10% are down at any one
time and up to 30% on the ones that are not well maintained. I pass
three very regularly and it is very unusual for all of them to be going!

By comparison on the Nissan site at Sunderland most times all 9/10 are
going (although they did have one on fire once closing the A19).

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

harry wrote:

On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 19:28:31 UTC+1, alan_m wrote:
On 30/08/2017 15:05, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , David
wrote:

A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their
own vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

[snip]

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay,
and also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.


And probably never in an urban environment

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

This was one I was thinking of. An obviously stupid place.
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...ddersfield-civ
ic-centre-wind-4971270

The Welsh government paid for 40,000 GBP for one at a new Aberystwyth
office a few years ago. They took it down after a couple of years when
it had produced a total of about a hundred units since commissioning.
At least they had discovered a very well wind-shielded spot on their
site.

--

Roger Hayter

On 30 Aug 2017 12:49:15 GMT, David wrote:

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

Small turbines seem to have a life expectancy one month longer than
that of the company that manufactured them. (which in turn is often
no more than 12 months).

On 01/09/17 12:13, Peter Parry wrote:
On 30 Aug 2017 12:49:15 GMT, David wrote:

I also assume that it is not financially attractive to repair (possibly no
grants, possibly manufacturer gone bust or ceased support).

This doesn't seem to bode well for larger wind farms if this is an
indication of the long term reliability.

Small turbines seem to have a life expectancy one month longer than
that of the company that manufactured them. (which in turn is often
no more than 12 months).

ITYM one month more than the company that sold them to you - with the
same proviso.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/...ns-or-sinners/

is a hilarious read.

Unless you are of the green persuasion of course.


--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".

harry Wrote in message:
On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 19:28:31 UTC+1, alan_m wrote:
On 30/08/2017 15:05, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , David
wrote:

A smallholding near us has a farm shop, nursery, grows much of their
own vegetables.
All nice and green.

They also have a pair of small wind turbines near to the buildings (at
least, I assume that they are part of the business).

[snip]

I assume from this that the installation has not recouped the outlay,
and also not covered the manufacturing carbon debt.

According to a couple of rellies who participate in this sort of scam,
a "small" turbine will take quite a long time to recover its outlay.


And probably never in an urban environment

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

This was one I was thinking of. An obviously stupid place.
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...e-wind-4971270



"The six-kilowatt windmills cost £101,000 to buy and install in 2006.

In 2008 the turbines brought £2,078 into council coffers, but cost
£6,431 to maintain and repair.

However, the Kirklees spokesman said last night that the new
turbines would make a profit.

He said: ?It?s anticipated that having two new turbines, free of
charge, at a site which helps to generate higher levels of energy
will mean we easily cover servicing costs and will be left with
an annual surplus of up to £4,000."

So £100k at what return for 21 years vs. 11 years of sub 4k
"earnings" at best, plus another 10 years? at approx 4k
"earnings" at best....

No wonder the amusingly named "Proven Energy" have agreed to
remove the 2 old, & supply & erect 2 new with warranty - the
sight of one working & one bust on top of the council buildings
for years must rank as one of the crappiest adverts for the whole
idea.

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 16:54:47 +0100 (GMT+01:00), jim k wrote:


No wonder the amusingly named "Proven Energy" have agreed to
remove the 2 old, & supply & erect 2 new with warranty - the
sight of one working & one bust on top of the council buildings
for years must rank as one of the crappiest adverts for the whole
idea.
6 JUL 2011


"25 October 2011
UK's small wind turbine manufacturer, Proven Energy Ltd, has been sold
to Kingspan Renewables Ltd.
Proven Energy folded last month following the identification of a
defect in its flagship P35-2 small wind turbine and the inability to
obtain necessary additional funding."