Net Zero Watch brands new windfarm subsidy ‘obscene’
By Paul Homewood
The logic of floating wind farms is that they can operate in much deeper waters, thus accessing stronger winds. The corollary is therefore that they should provide cheaper power.
Net Zero Watch brands new windfarm subsidy ‘obscene’
Green Volt project could be handed annual half billion pound subsidy
Net Zero Watch has revealed the astonishing scale of subsidies likely to be received by a windfarm planned for Scottish waters. The Green Volt floating offshore windfarm could hand its backers around £500 million pounds per year in subsidies. The project received official approval from Marine Scotland last week.
Because it is a floating windfarm, it is eligible for a much higher level of subsidies than fixed-bottom or onshore windfarms. At the launch of the most recent subsidy auction, the Government announced that it had raised the maximum price for floating windfarms to around £240 per megawatt hour [1], around four times current market prices. If the whole windfarm is subsidised at this level, consumers will probably have to pay more than £500 million per year in subsidy [2].
Net Zero Watch director Andrew Montford said:
At a time when families are already struggling, this is obscene. It is clear that the Government has completely lost control, and the renewables industry is simply writing themselves blank cheques whenever they like.
Notes for editors
[1] In 2024 prices. Contracts for Difference are awarded in 2012 prices and then uplifted for inflation. The price announced for offshore capacity was £176/MWh, equivalent to £243 in current pries.
[2] Subsidy at this level would require Greenvolt to be successful in several consecutive CfD auctions.
[3] Based on the capacity factor achieved by the extant Hywind floating windfarm
[4] Approximate average since start of February.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Will this madness ever stop???
Over the weekend, Rolls Royce announced that large chunks of manufacturing for their SMR’s will be offshored as the ‘Government’ can’t make up its mind about unequivocally backing this proven energy technology. But they’re pretty damn quick to suggest ‘investing’ £££billions on floating windmills and the like.
If only there was any chance that the upcoming general election might bring about a change!
We’re doomed on our steady path to a third world status…..
The Govt (DESNZ) is run by energy incompetent people, who rely on advice & guidance of incompetent activists, quangos and benefitting parties – until someone gets in charge, who has worked in energy / electrical engineering, we will continue to get the same globalist narrative nonsense, at our cost of course
How does the power get from a floating wind farm to land? And presumably the turbines are anchored to the sea floor or they could end up anywhere.It’s crazy, and all to solve a probl
Yes they are loosely anchored and the power is transferred via sub sea cables
Lets see how we can f*ck up the country even more, lets invest billions to achieve Net Zero, Floating windfarms, Carbon (dioxide) capture, Hydrogen production from electrolysers, SMRs just give Rolls Royce the order, nuclear fusion is always just a few years away. Modernise the Grid to get the power from the North Sea to where it is needed. Ban the use of natural gas (Methane), Ban the use of all fossil fuels, no ICE transport, no flying, no meat.
Welcome to a future resembling the 14th century.
They promote green energy schemes that are disasters, then they promote green energy schemes that are much worse, then they promote green energy schemes that are even much worse, then they promote green energy schemes that are even much much worse, and these harmful promotions are more frequent and each can cause power grids that are much more likely to totally fail.
At some stage you get to the point where the power grid will certainly fail leaving just the questions of for how long, how many times a year and how many people will die because of it?
Points to note regarding wind turbine capacity factors and how operators can game the system.
It is easy to produce high capacity factor figures from any wind turbine – you simply use a generator under rated to the potential of the blades. Thus putting a 1MW generator on blades capable of producing 2MW will produce an artificially high capacity factor but, obviously, reduces TOTAL output.
There are various reasons for doing this/why it was done in the past. Firstly as in the Hywind example producing an impressively high C/F impresses politicians/investors. The total output reduction is conveniently explained away by greater reliability and fluffed up “averages”. In turn this makes it more likely to get new sites and styles authorised and at higher CfD prices.
Secondly CfDs are only paid on generation – under-powered turbines will cut in/generate at lower wind speeds giving the appearance of being more “efficient”. (The original Good Energy turbines at Delabole were re-powered on the basis of intentional original under specification ) The cut off speed is not affected thus it is possible, in some sites, to achieve more subsidy paid output than occasional higher output that a larger generator would produce.
These wind farm promoters are far brighter than the politicians/civil servants they con/seduce/bribe (delete as appropriate).
Wind CF’s are poor, far less than coal, gas or nuclear – wind turbine CF’s are a product of turbine design/quality of manufacture & installation/maintenance requirements and site characteristics such as surroundings/installation wakes/localised weather/seasonal aspects etc
A good theoretical wind turbine CF is around 30%, in reality, it’s usually a lot less
These wind farm promoters are far brighter than the politicians/civil servants they con/seduce/bribe
To be fair, the bar for that is not set very high.
The politicians, the civil servants, often get their share of the spoils and know when to sell their share before a project goes bankrupt. Their shares may not be easily traced through the shell companies, relatives and friends. Many politicians seem to gain wealth while in office, more than their salaries.
Ray S: the same thought occurred to me about the potential for “playing tunes” with apparent capacity factors. It was triggered a while back when I read on a manufacturer’s website – might have been Siemens – that they could supply a more powerful generator with the same blades and nacelle as the standard model.
It’s the reverse of your scenario. Used surreptitiously in a high-wind location it would give greater output than the standard machine.
If you read the plans for the Sixth Carbon Budget by the CCC, they assume that floating offshore wind will be used to power offshore electrolysers with a hydrogen pipeline to shore for the green hydrogen to be used in balancing the grid. Their idea was that higher capacity factors for the wind would mean less intermittent operation of the electrolysers.
First the seawater must be desalinated and purified before it can be fed to the electrolysers. The operation will be intermittent anyway, reducing the efficiency of electrolysis. The pipeline will be a maintenance nightmare since replacement of corroded sections will not be as simple as for an onshore above ground line where inspection is easy and purging ahead of work much more feasible.
The Dutch government bailed out the PosHYdon project which is only on a pilot scale. It is to take power from the Hollandse Kust Zuid windfarm off Scheveningen and feed gas into the supply from an offshore platform at a low concentration. Evidently there were major teething problems, because the extra step of testing the configuration onshore was inserted, and is just about to start. Watch this space:
https://poshydon.com/en/home-en/news/
With all the extra kit to be paid for and the very low round trip efficiency to produce power ashore you are looking at probably 4-5 times the cost of the input power. That is therefore of the order of £1,000/MWh. They really do like to find ways to spend your money on their toys.
Floating or not, wind farms are to power, what the square wheel was to mobility – this legalised rinsing of consumers in the name of ‘save boiling planet’ is an utter nonsense scam of epic proportions
One has to presume that this high price includes the cost of a grid connection to consumers and the provision of backup. Let’s face it, no politician or civil servant would be stupid enogh to pay such a high price for an unreliable supply of electricity that cannot be supplied to consumers when they demand it. Would they?
Simple QUESTION: THe Cables are flexible, right? HOW LONG makes them, so what is the life expectancy of flexing cables of such dimensions? Problems on land with moving large cables – seen often enough.