Wind turbines

[Harley]

Does anyone know if the wind turbines that B&Q are advertising would be any good on the French electrics.  Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I seriously know NOTHING about electrics.  Thanks all[:)]

[Nick Trollope]

Yes. In a word.

But at £1500, it would take a fair while to recoup it's cost;

1Kw max @12.5m/s wind speed = 30MPH = quite windy, perhaps 10% of the time.

1KwH of electricity is (say) 7p (average, in France) = 21,500 hours x 10 (%) = 215,000 hours = about 600 years....

Surely that can't be right. Where has my maths gone wrong? If it takes this long to save the planet, then we really are buggered.

[Gluestick]

As always, Nick, very droll and also very amusing! [:D]

All the alternative and "Green" energy sources I have looked at seem to have the same problem; the payback cycle, and, of course, the reality that before they can payback, the capital plant probably needs total replacement.

There was a bloke interviewed on TV earlier this week (last week?) who has his house covered with solar arrays and a whacking great wind turbine in the garden. He actually sells electricity back to his supplier and claimed that in the last year his total charge for electricity was circa £7.

I dread to think what his capital cost was though: solar cell arrays aren't cheap.

Obviously, this would be far more effective in say the South of France, but his roof looked really horrible.

 

[Dog]

Let's hope the B&Q wind turbines get popular and the price drops.

Did you realise the Uk government is selling off all of the UK nuclear technologies and know how. Just as the technologies have been developed for small localized nuclear stations that are much more efficient.

[Dick Smith]

So you mean that the UK government is going to sell all the technology and also the intellectual rights, and the right to use it themselves?

I don't think so.

I can't find any references to this story at all - where did the info come from?

[Simmy]

'215,000 hours = about 600 years'

 

Are you sure?

[Gluestick]

Since Nick is a highly qualified electronic engineer, well versed in demanding maths, I think he was possibly taking poetic license and meaning, too long!

 

 

[Simon]

I think Nick is right, I suspect you will be looking at 3 figures if you want payback, also who wants such an ugly thing on the roof!

Simon

[chris pp]

I'm not sure that anyone is doing their research very well here, and there are multiple options, plus it depends on what you mean by "pay back", if it's personal, you may be correct, but the price of electricity is only going one way in the future, in line with other fuels, and that's UP.

This may interest some people, I don't know, but if it, and many other, albeit small, projects work there may be some longer term hope for the future, more and more people are living "of grid".

http://www.savingthedodo.com 

Chris

[Simon]

It just seems to me that £1500 is a lot of cash to fork out if payback is likely to be over centuries.  Given the 1kw needs a wind speed of 28mph, and as Nick says is circa £0.09/kw then I think it is a lot for an ugly bit of modern art on top of your house.

I have heard that PV panels are a better option, any one any experience of these?

Regards

Simon

[darnsarf]

I'm no electrical engineer (or mathematician!) but sure the calculations are assuming that the turbine will produce nothing if the wind blows at less than 28mph. There is an output curve at play which would mean that even at 20mph wind, the turbine will still be producing something (though rather less than 500W I'd guess). So it's not really accurate to use the 10% figure to work out how long the payback would be (if that is what has been done). If, for example, 10% of the time were indeed at speeds >28mph and a further 30% of the time at 20-28mph, then the payback period would be much reduced surely?

[Simon]

Don't call me Shirley...

Yes that must be the case, it would be useful to know how much power these devices actually produce over a year or two so that a reasonable estimate can be known.

Simon

[The Builder.]

Don't want to add to the woes, but don't forget the db rating. Cheap ones are noisy as hell and neighbours hate them.

[darnsarf]

I think the Meteo may provide an idea of average windspeeds but I do know it varies hugely by altitude, region of France and coastal proximity. Clifftop, coastal brittany seems the best bet. On the plains in S. France, maybe solar is a better bet. I have a small wind turbine on my boat that seems to produce about 150 watts all the time it's working.

There's some info here http://www.energyenv.co.uk/D400WindTurbine.asp which suggests that it produces on average 20% of a typical home's annual consumption (obviously more if you are position in a high wind area).

I agree they are not pretty and about as ugly as a satellite dish but maybe do something a little more useful, Shirley.

Some designs are certainly noisy, others less so

 

 

 

[Gluestick]

[quote user="chris pp"]

 it depends on what you mean by "pay back", Chris

[/quote]

Simply, the total capital cost, plus the maintenance cost, plus any repairs necessary, divided by the actual current and forward cost of the user's average electricity.

To "Pay Back", means that once the total costs, as above, have been equalled by the current and expected normal spend, thereafter, it is free. Also, one could past the zero cost point, justify offsetting the savings then made, against the earlier sunks project costs. However, this then becomes rather chancy, unless one has a very clear empirical model of service and maintenance costs, time to failure and time at which plant is beyond economical repair.

Also, one has to compute into the sums the cost of capital on a DCF (Discounted Cash Flow) basis.

This uses as a benchmark, the value of the front capital cost in terms of notional lost investment or capital growth lost. One also has to take into account the replacement cost, in the future, as no such equipment has an endless lifecycle.

Without such calculations, vendor's (often wild) claims of savings are valueless, in real terms.

Most people when considering "Green" energy technologies, simply consider how many years they probably have left and and how much their energy bills will be and therefore can they theefore see any real financial advantage.

Obviously, from an environmental aspect, there are other notional savings in terms of carbon emission etc, other environmental pollution and so on. However, these are "Soft" or "Green" values as against "Hard" or actual values.

Interesting concept, the Dodo project, Chris.

 

[Chancer]

Ah but after doing the DCF calculation what about the "net present value" one to confuse things further?

[Nick Trollope]

[quote user="Simmy"]

'215,000 hours = about 600 years'

 

Are you sure?

[/quote]

Of course it isn't, it is about 25 years (I forgot to divide by 24) - but I did ask the questions about my maths.

Nonetheless, my original point is valid; as an cost-saving device, then this generator is a liability. But, noone buys any "green" equipment based on cost-saving alone, they buy it because they think that they are doing some good.

Wind power (on a large scale), good, wave power (on any scale) waste of time, depite having beaucoup green credentials, nuclear (green issues aside), good, oil/gas/coal/rubiish burning, bad. etc etc.

I, like the French government, believe that nuclear is the ultimate green fuel, why do we waste our time with other generation methods? If we could all have our own household nuclear generator, would we? Some of us would.

More people are killed by wasps than nuclear power stations and more pollution is caused by cows. Sorry to hijack this thread, but discuss.

 

[Nick Trollope]

SET THE BLEEDIN "DELETE" PARAMETER TO SOMETHING OTHER THAN ZERO!!!

[chris pp]

Just to say that I'm not totally convinced about wind power in its present form, deaths to birds and bats are fairly high, although there is some development of horizontal wind generators that can have grills fitted to prevent them entering the blades.

Wasps may kill a few people a year NOW, but we are really not at all sure how many people will die in the future as a result of nuclear waste, leaks or accidents, definitely a big NO NO for me, energy efficiency and reduced usage make sense, like turning of shop lights at night.

Chris

[Deimos]

The way I look at things is, how much can I afford (capital) and then how can I best spend that money.  The answer to that question will to a large extent depend on a wide range of factors.  For example, many still think one of the best ways to "be green" is to spend money (capital) on insulation, double glazing, etc.  "Pay backs" for such things can often be a lot better (shorter) than for other possibilities.

Secondly, it is worth looking at what financial assistance the various government bodies can give you.  I'm pretty sure ADEME and the like will not offer anything against some DIY thing purchased from a UK store and DIY fitted.  Also, check what planning permission you might need.  I don't know about wind generators, but I know for a micro-hydro installation (something I have investigated in some depth), one of the required technical studies includes a noise estimate report (one of the reports that jets submitted to the Marie, DDE, etc.).  Somebody mentioned noise earlier in this thread.

How long do you expect spares to be available from B & Q.  Will you fork out £1500, then next year need a replacement <<whatever>>, only to find they no longer stock that "out-of-date" model.

Another consideration is the cost of the control unit to interface with EDF (do B & Q sell that ?).  Presumably you will be wanting to sell any excess electricity you generate back to EDF (they are obliged to buy it from you) so you will need some sort of control unit.  Even if you do not sell your electricity back to EDF, you will need something to switch between EDF supply and home grown (e.g. when your demands exceed what your generator is supplying at that moment in time).  Is the B & Q model NF marked and approved by EDF ?

I am all in favour of renewable resource use, energy efficiency, etc.  However, there is more to it that seeing something for sale in B & Q and giving it "a go".  If you've got £1500 to spare for energy efficiency - think carefully about how to best spend it both for yourselves and for the environment.

Ian

[Brilec]

I would have thought that a solar hot water system would actually save more than the 1Kw that this wind turbine produces, and thay actually do work.

Add to that replacing all your lamp bulbs with low energy type, and you didn't need the wind turbine anyway. But buy them in the Uk 'cos thay are much cheaper there.

[darnsarf]

I think there is no hard and fast rule for all on this. I don't live permanently in france (sadly) but the idea of a mchine whirring away flogging leccie back to the EDF whilst I'm not there is quite appealling (at least making my time there energy neutralish). There is also the issue of reliance of supply (some wind permitting). Industrial action, demand for electricity outpacing supply, inevitable price increases etc will make DIY solutions more interesting.

The B & Q units are made by a reputable manufacturer and the mechanics are not terribly complex. So, it shoud be possible to replace the parts in the future - albeit probably not from B & Q.  Incidentally, I think the B & Q price includes home inspection and installation (though presumably not in france!). So it should be much cheaper without this service. Maybe best to buy direct or, even better, establish whether there is a distributor in france who can get/confirm the EDF compliance. The unit to sell back to the grid is an extra with most units, and quite an expensive one too.

[Gluestick]

[quote user="J.R."]Ah but after doing the DCF calculation what about the "net present value" one to confuse things further?[/quote]

Yes and of course, using state-of-the-art financial engineering and EIS (Executive Information Systems) financial extrapolation or spin [;-)] we could, finally, "prove" wind turbines are either free; or cost £1 million/year!

 

[Chancer]

Gluestick - made me laugh!!!

Of course eco friendly power is not anything new, my grandfather built a windmill on his land in Cornwall after a water diviner had "detected" an underground source which turned out not to be there.

He then made an inertia pump which was located in a sump under the village stream, it worked on the principal of a see-saw with a large bucket of water pumping a cupfull up the hill every second, it was still working last time I visited after 40 odd years.

He also generated electric using a vintage stationary engine (now in local museum) running on T.V.O. and stored by WW2 submarine batteries, and recuperated all the rain water to augment the inertia pump and the handpump in the village square.

He only finally chose to get connected to mains water and electric in the early 80's when the remaining batterys would no longer hold a charge and my step-grandmother was terminally ill.

I recently met a retired doctor who was the ex-proprietor of my village chateau (Chateau Potez was built by Henri Potez the father of french aviation).

When I asked the doctor if it had been really expensive to heat he said no as he had used electric heating across the whole of the chateau but that he paid nothing for the electricity as it was still generated by the water turbine (his words) installed before WW1 to power the aircraft factory.

Will the B&Q badged R.P.C. wind turbines last as long? - I bet when they appear in Brico-Depot (owned by same group) they will be less than half the price like most other things.

[Harley]

Oh me gawd! Now I am confused[:P]