Electricity from wind isn’t cheap and it never will be
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Cunningham
From the Telegraph:
The MPs who have forced Rishi Sunak into a U-turn on onshore wind power love to repeat the favourite slogan of the wind industry: “wind is cheap”. “Cheap, clean, secure,” says Sir Alok Sharma. “Cheap,” cheeps Ed Miliband.
It conceals the truth. Electricity from wind is not cheap and never will be. The latest auction of rights to build offshore wind farms failed to attract any bids, despite offering higher subsidised prices. That alone indicates that wind is not cheap or getting cheaper.
But the real reason for the lack of interest in the auction is that, for the first time, bidders are not free to walk away from their bids when it suits them. In the past, they could put in low offers, boast about them being cheap, then take the higher market price later. The Government has at last called their bluff, so they are having to admit that electricity prices need to be higher to make wind farms pay.
The cost of subsidising wind is vast. Then add the cost of getting the power from remote wind farms to where people live. And the cost of balancing the grid and backing wind up with gas plants for the times when the wind drops. And the cost of paying wind farms to reduce output on windy days when the grid can’t take it.
If wind power is so cheap, how come energy bills have risen in step with the amount of installed wind power? Says the energy expert John Constable: “We had a huge amount of wind… and it not only did absolutely nothing to protect against the recent gas crisis: it actually made it worse, because the UK’s security of supply now hangs by the single thread of gas, as the sole thermodynamically competent fuel in the system, coal being near absent and nuclear a small fraction.”
And yet the wind industry is complaining that today’s high electricity prices are not high enough, and without more subsidies they will stop building: “The race to the bottom on strike prices incentivised by the current auction process is at odds with the reality of project costs and investment needs, jeopardising deployment targets,” said RenewableUK recently. How does that square with claims it is cheap?
The wind industry’s capital costs were very high before the Ukraine crisis, and now, like everybody else’s, are shooting up still further: the cost of steel, concrete, carbon fibre, copper and all the other ingredients of a wind turbine have risen sharply. Operating costs are rising. Inevitably, the energy generated by wind is expensive.
And, as Constable suggests, wind itself is thermodynamically inferior. Consequently, it takes a huge machine – the building of which requires a lot of energy – to extract a small amount of electricity from randomly fluctuating, low-density wind, which bloweth as and when it listeth. By contrast, in a nuclear plant, it takes a small machine to produce a flood of energy from a dense, “thermodynamically competent” energy source, and on demand.
The man and woman in the street understand this intuitively. Politicians not at all. Here is a simple analogy to help them. Electricity, like coffee, is only any good if you can buy it when you feel like it. If I set up a chain of coffee shops and sell coffee no better than Costa’s, but I make hundreds of excess cups one morning and none at all the next, from a facility that towers hundreds of feet into the sky, ruins views, slaughters birdlife and requires government subsidies, I suspect the customer would prefer Costa. But in our benighted electricity market, you are forced to buy my coffee except on the days when I produce none, when you are allowed to go to Costa – which has put its prices up to compensate for my existence.
So, no, wind power is not cheap or secure. Nor is it clean. The mining of minerals and pouring of concrete that is required for a wind farm have a huge pollution impact and a massive carbon footprint. Voters know wind farms are a futile gesture and they will now punish the Tories accordingly.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/10/electricity-from-wind-isnt-cheap-and-it-never-will-be/
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
The problem is that it is not only those claiming to be “Tories”**. It is all three of Labour, Conservative and Liberal pursuing this madness and active hatred of the population all stemming from legislation (Climate Change Act) introduced by a Labour government. Why the Tories did not repeal it in the first general election victory afterwards and why it is even now still in place is disgraceful.
**A better word would be “TINO” = Tories in Name Only
>>punish the Tories
“Why the Tories did not repeal it in the first general election victory afterwards and why it is even now still in place is disgraceful.”
Sounds as though you haven’t been following British climate-related politics all that long. Labour introduced the Climate Change Act in 2008, but they were massively egged on to do so by the so-called Conservative opposition under David Cameron.
One of Cameron’s team, Greg Clark, even claimed that the Conservatives were responsible for the Climate Change Act being introduced at all, as described in this Daily Telegraph blog post by Gerald Warner from 2010:
https://web.archive.org/web/20100412145334/http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100033511/a-timely-reminder-from-polly-toynbees-greatest-fan-of-the-vichy-tories-record-on-agw-laws/
Extract from the blog post:
Just in case voters had forgotten the debt Britain owes to the Vichy Tories of the Cameronian Party for their contribution towards imposing the AGW superstition on the nation, Greg Clark, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (but better known for saying Conservatives should abandon the social principles of Winston Churchill in favour of those of Polly Toynbee) reminded the House of Commons yesterday of his party’s proud record:
“Had it not been for Conservative leadership on the environment during this Parliament, Britain would have no feed-in tariffs, no renewable heat incentive, no ban on new unabated coal, no roll-out of smart meters and no Climate Change Act 2008. On every measure, Labour first opposed us and then adopted our policy. So will the Secretary of State say, ‘Thank you’ to the Conservative Party for achieving more in opposition in five years than Labour’s 19 ministers did in 13 years of dithering in office?”
The Bill was passed with only five negative votes in the HoC. Do you seriously think that a Conservative/Liberal-Democrat coalition government was going to be able to repeal that barely a year later?
The last time we had a Conservative government was on 28/11/1990 when the Eurofascist Wets under Major & Co. backstabbed Margaret Thatcher.
Since then all we’ve had is Globalist Socialist puppets dedicated to the cause of Managed Decline.
Vote Reform!
I like the coffee analogy. I always find such simple references make explanation easier. Once when wind output was very low (like now) I tried to explain the capacity versus generation issue to some young people – they just didn’t get it. I gave the financial comparison of a car you’d love to buy costing £28,000 but you only had £750 available and they immediately understood. Desire stymied by reality made much more sense than GW or capacity factor!
Perhaps we need better marketing after all there’s money to be had in that.
what will make people get it is when we have a few blackouts or forced load disconnection rotas
Yet again Net Zero is comprehensively dismantled by hundreds of DT reader comments. How are the main three Parties so tone deaf to this level of public resistance?
What have they been told by WEF / UN and others that makes them all so committed to Net Zero?
They must’ve been exposed to the most brutal propaganda themselves, probably questioning the very survival of the human race itself. Either that or it’s money, money, money.
Anyone got any answers that are more than speculation??
Because facts don’t matter when the question is one of good vs. evil? As long as endorsing Net Zero signals one’s virtue to everyone else, the vast majority of public figures will support it, practicality be damned.
Correct, costs and practicality of Net Zero are not important to those who believe it is necessary to save the planet. Hence the need to destroy the false CAGW narrative.
Have a read of Andy West’ “Grip of Culture” for an in depth answer to your question. It’s a free download via GWPF. Heavy going in parts but ranks culture as the main driver, not money. https://www.thegwpf.org/publications/culture/
Cheers Max, I’ll have a crack a that.
Never mind whether it’s cheap or not: Like my “pet” Herons: it’s GONE ( with the wind) GONE, ZILCH power to speak of since after 20th August. No matter if it was given for FREE: There’s nothing in the wire pipeline. Like those advertised online best prices “no longer available”. Been raining here now since very early morning and clothes are wet = I AM COLD – where & How to dry. Not a breeze for even drying them or the firewood in the Dutch Barns – if y’all know what that is, the few Solar Panels are delivering SEVEN (7) times more power than wind this now – but as I said we have heavy cloud cover, lights ON in house and about to light the OIL rayburn again. Cannot light the Wood burner at the moment – Kindlers have drawn the damp! Chicken & Egg of Industry: when the lights go out, how do you start them up again, don’t you just wish those in authority ( in NOT control? ) would have paid attention and kept some RELIBALE equipment functional not just going for the cheapest ( Made in Tie-wun ). Maybe when I ge the ELectric Tractor charged up I can run the PTO Generator off it to power up the house and grain drier then? – about as logical as Western Government at the moment. Oh! Crikey my Cows,,, they;re needing milked URGENTLY But I’ve no power for that, did they come for my DIesel Generator as trade in for THAT tractor, t’other day? ( Hope not – who would want a diesel generator nowadays….. do they pay ULEZ charges for running ?)
My (late) grandfather was an engineer and RAF wing commander in WW2, who advised the USAF on armaments. He was well regarded in the USA, and awarded the Legion of Merit.
During a visit, he was tasked with evaluating a new bomber gun turret. After testing and landing, he was met by the top brass who asked him what he thought.
“Well, gentlemen,” he replied “there’s only one thing that needs doing to it.”
“Yeah, Al —what’s that?”
“Scrap it” he said, “and start over.”
A man deserving of a salute.
Wind power is expensive, but it is also intermittent and difficult to maintain,
The North Sea often has storm conditions (Trips on the Hull to Zebrugee ferry started out with a nice dinner but very few had the breakfast).
All it takes is one fierce storm with freezing rain and serious damage to the blades could occur, then what do we do.
Salt laden air is not conducive to the light alloys used in the manufacture and 400Volts DC really likes to flashover, if the ocean substation fails, it is a 6 month job to fix and the whole array is useless.
It is too big a risk to put all our eggs in one basket.
Wind driven electrical generation is a folly and should be stopped.
Its actually 400,000 Volts (typo)
Also in the DT is this article from SSE
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/09/09/britain-wind-power-developer-sse-onshore-offshore-farms/
who tell us that it wont be building anymore onshore wind farms itself and that England is a pointless place for them anyhow.
The wheels are seriously coming off this now but in the short term the risk now is prices will get forced up in CM to keep CCGTs in play or govt will have to intervene like it did with coal. Where will the incentive come for new build gas as no chance nuclear can make up any of the deficit for at least a decade.
Nich (as my brother of the same name preferred), there is too much face-saving to be done that MPs will find it hard to resile from their previous ignorance.
‘punish the Tories accordingly’ ……by voting for??????
ReformUK
Reclaim as Tice is a moron having seen him on GB News.
Anybody got a handle on who is going to pay for the decommissioning of all those windmills?
Do you really need all three guesses??
Wind is generating 6% of our electricity today….ONLY 6%
In other words, so unreliable that when we invest in a wind turbine farm, £ millions need to be invested in quick start & reliable gas turbines – currently generating 39% today – yes nearly HALF our needs.
So Wind is expensive as:
1. double the investment is needed when we pay for a wind turbine (a bit like buying an EV for local journeys but having to double up investment in a diesel for long journeys)
2. all the cabling from each wind turbine to the local high voltage switchgear where the power joins the GRID
3. new GRID pylons from the wind farms to the population centres
4. technical problems have been been reported by Siemens Gamesa on 15-30% of their onshore turbines….presumably similar issues offshore……so the technology is not sorted and the turbines will need to be switched off during rectification
5. life of wind turbines appears to be about 20 years unlike coal/oil/gas/nuclear fired power stations which is about 40 years….so double the investment is needed over 40 years
In summary, capital investment is 4 times over 40 years AND all the pylons & cabling across our country.
Incredibly expensive…..one idea to save a lot of money, keep using gas for home heating, do not switch to electricity (heat pumps & immersion heaters)….saves the need for a lot of wind turbines plus gas turbines plus more pylons & cabling across the UK
The accepted axiom of most political leaders is that CO2 is in control of Earth’s systems, especially the atmosphere (they think of this as ‘climate’.)
What the behind-the-curtain elites think may be different, but no less ugly and damaging.
Somehow the axiom needs to be replaced.
“wind is cheap”
Except when it’s not blowing.
Everywhere around the World has shown that wind is the most expensive ‘cheap energy’ around. Prices increase in line with wind on the grid.
Cummins – the sacked advisor and a leading culprit for why we have had such a disorganised Brexit – is calling for a new party to oppose the Uniparty. When discussing this on GB News the deputy leader of Ukip called for all the minor parties to amalgamate but has not had any success with this. Sadly everyone wants to have their moment in the spotlight and is unwilling to give up their party. There are also differences that prevent a single party forming. Then PR is also brought up as a solution but just take a look at the slow collapse of Germany’s economy thanks to the ecofascist Greens being required to form government due to PR.
They really need to do that or they will end up splitting the vote so that Lib/Lab/Con get back into power and the destruction of normal life and the economy continues.
>>minor parties to amalgamate
Both the Government and the renewables industry have been deliberately confusing the difference between energy and power in order to push the MSM/public to accept renewables.
We therefore read that the X GW wind farm can power Y million homes.
But wind power cannot POWER any homes. They may be able to produce sufficient ENERGY over a year for these claims but there is no way they can provide dispatchable POWER as claimed because of intermittency. As I write the 28 GW of installed wind power is generating just 2.7 GW.
They should not be allowed to get away with these false claims as any wind power requires a completely parallel system of backup to provide dispatchable (always available) power and this is why electricity from wind can never be cheap or cheaper than the gas generators providing the backup.
With reference to: “The wind industry’s capital costs .. are shooting up”, take note of: “like everybody else’s”.
It’s the same story for new CCGT, new nuclear, new peakers, and new coal fired generation (if allowed). Not just the “physical ingredients” like concrete and steel, but supply chain bottlenecks. If the big suppliers are busy, they will have a strong bargaining position to drive up prices.
The power market has to support the total cost of new generation, so expensive power is here to stay. And it’s not just because wind is a lot more expensive than a couple of years ago.
People who claim wind is the lowest cost form of generation, might still be able to repeat the claim in the context of other generating costs rising. So we should be careful about declaring victory on that particular point.
The GB capacity market has to respond, if there is to be any possibility of new entry. The cap will need to be adjusted to support the best new entrant, and this will be a visible change when it happens.
Higher capacity market prices will give a strong incentive to life-extend existing plant, wherever possible. So plant withdrawals should be much less likely unless they are mandatory, like the ban on coal fired generation, or because a nuclear safety case cannot be made.
Has there been enough attention given to the difficulty and delay in new grid connections? Could this be a factor in the absence of proposals to the AR5 offshore pot? If a developer is not confident that it can connect and commence export by the CfD longstop date, it would be reasonable for them not to submit a proposal. Be careful to take into account this possibility before drawing conclusions on price or CfD terms (both reasonable, but not necessarily the only potential reasons).
Returning to “thermodynamically competent” (I prefer “firm”) generating capacity, if there is difficulty in obtaining timely grid connection, this could prove to be a barrier to participation in the GB capacity market too. There are commissioning longstop deadlines in the capacity contracts.
It was pointed out that Keadby 2 CCGT cost just £350m for 840MW a couple of years ago. So even if that cost is doubled it will come in at under £1m/MW, while offshore wind has clearly gone back over £3m/MW: allowing for the differential capacity factor will make it seem very costly. But I agree that with the delays in the wind programme and the impending closures of nuclear coal and gas the next capacity market ceiling price will have to be somewhat higher than the £75/kW/year ceiling price that the last one cleared at in order to get some CCGT built in a hurry to plug the gaps.
There is a lot of scope to under-report Capex. A common one is to cite the main equipment supply costs, without forward hedging of inflation and currency transactions. This still excludes large budget items for owner’s costs.
A new 800MW CCGT will need a budget well in excess of £1bn today, if the main equipment suppliers don’t ask for more. They are not exactly short of work.
Comparing only Capex cost to wind isn’t really the best, as the variable and fixed operating costs are so different. I don’t expect the argument that wind is cheaper is quite as won as some may think. Time will tell.
Doing anything in a hurry is problematic, if it involves getting a new connection application. So many wannabes cluttering the connection and planning processes, and they all need to be treated without discrimination.
Which leads to a lot of uncertainty about which ones will make it to delivery, and therefore how to plan network Capex.
The market model tends to hide assumptions about unlimited access for new entrants. In practice, we have the limited capability of network operators to handle new applications, as well as to effectively plan and operate their own businesses. Another one in the eye for the privatisation model, now that the old CEGB assets are almost gone.
Here’s a mouseover map of the AR5 successful bids. The different technologies are highlighted by colour, while the size of the circles relates to the likely output from each project. Mouseover details include the name and company, planned start up timeframe, nominal capacity, likely output using realistic capacity factors (not the absurd assumptions made by DESNZ in setting the auction parameters), the strike price in 2012 money, and indexed to 2023.
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/N76ms/1/
Static version of the map
From 19:00 September 9th to 14:00 September 10th, electricity generation from wind turbine practically disappeared from the All Ireland grid and recorded 0 output AND additionally consumed power for 8 of those hours. You can download the statistics for 30 days from https://www.smartgriddashboard.com/#all/wind
Here for the record wind generation totally failed under normal weather conditions.