[kublikhan]

Perhaps that contaminated recycled steel coming out of China is behind some of this failure?

I heard it was a rush for "bigger is better". The wind is harsher on these taller turbines, both on the blades and on the turbine/tower. Manufactures are rushing out these new bigger models without proper QA.

* A recent report says production issues may be to blame for the mysterious increase in failures.
* Turbines are growing larger as quality control plans get smaller.

Multiple turbines that are taller than 750 feet are collapsing across the world, with the tallest—784 feet in stature—falling in Germany in September 2021. To put it in perspective, those turbines are taller than both the Space Needle in Seattle and the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. Turbines are falling for the three largest players in the industry: General Electric, Vestas, and Siemens Gamesa. Why? “It takes time to stabilize production and quality on these new products,” Larry Culp, GE CEO, said last October on an earning call, according to Bloomberg. “Rapid innovation strains manufacturing and the broader supply chain.”

The push to produce bigger wind-grabbing turbines has sped production of the growing apparatuses. Bloomberg reports that Siemens has endured quality control issues on a new design, Vestas has seen project delays and quality challenges, and GE has seen an uptick in warranty costs and repairs. And this all comes along with uncertain supply chain issues and fluctuating material pricing.

Giant Wind Turbines Keep Mysteriously Falling Over. This Shouldn't Be Happening.

“It takes time to stabilize production and quality on these new products.” Really now? That's your excuse? Lame. Take your time and test it before you sell it. I used to work in QA and would be ashamed to let defects like this into the final product.

[theluckycountry]

World’s Electric Grids Incapable Of Supporting Renewable Energy Goals

Electricity grid capacity available in the world isn't keeping pace with the rapid growth of "clean energy" technologies, possibly putting governments' climate goals at risk, according to a recent report by the International Energy Agency (IEA)...

While investments in renewable energy such as solar and wind power, electric vehicles (EV), and heat pumps have been “increasing rapidly”—almost doubling since 2010—the investment in power grids has remained “static” at around $300 billion annually, it said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/worlds ... als-agency

Grid collapse is already happening in many nations, it starts as brownouts, then load shedding. Eventually you end up with scheduled blackouts, sometimes for days, sometimes weeks. The US is already into this death spiral and nothing can stop it. To stop it you need to spend a lot on infrastructure and that is something the US hasn't done for 50 years. I.E. The 1970 US peak in oil production.

Pakistan https://www.dawn.com/news/1762936
South Africa https://subscriber.politicopro.com/arti ... s-00122222
India https://www.reuters.com/world/india/why ... 022-05-19/
Madagascar https://www.voanews.com/a/madagascar-go ... 97006.html
USA https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2022/07/18/power/

A massive blackout left more than 44 million people without electricity in Argentina and Uruguay on Sunday after an unexplained failure in the neighboring countries' interconnected power grid. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/south-ame ... -the-dark/

It's the new normal. It's Peakoil, the point in time when it becomes too expensive, in energy terms, to carry on the 20th century experiment. It was all predicted, decades ago. $20 oil built our world, $80~$100 will see it crumble.

[theluckycountry]

Until green energy proves it can both produce net energy and pay for its own maintenance and replacement costs without the vast subsidy of cheap fossil fuel energy I remain unconvinced.

World's Largest Offshore Wind Farm-Developer Abandons Two Major US Projects As Renewable Bust Erupts

The blame is cast primarily on interest rates and supply issues but these are effecting many corporate models and they aren't rolling over. Manufacturers of air conditioners and computers and ice cars are not abandoning their businesses.

Orsted A/S announced, "US offshore wind projects have experienced further negative developments from adverse impacts relating to supply chains.
Also
Last week, Siemens Energy in Germany crashed after the company warned its wind turbine business is grappling with quality issues and offshore ramp-up challenges. In the solar industry, SolarEdge Technologies shares plunged about two weeks ago after it warned about sliding European demand.
The renewable energy bubble is in meltdown.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/world ... wable-bust

And so it is.

[Newfie]

I remain very dubious about the EU farms that were let under the reverse auction method. I expect to see them fail for lack of capitalization and inability to meet contracted $/kw commitments. They may end up being bankrupt and then nationalized turned over to other operators at much higher reimbursement rates.

Reverse auction promising output from yet to be developed turbines and never before achieved price points is a dumb business move, by both parties.

[theluckycountry]

'Renewable Massacre': SolarEdge Melts Down After Weak Guidance

The renewable energy industry is in full collapse mode this week. First, Orsted A/S, the world's largest offshore wind farm developer, abandoned two major US projects due to supply chain and interest rate impacts, and now solar stocks are being clubbed like a baby seal in US premarket trading on Thursday after solar equipment-makers SolarEdge and Sunrun reported dismal guidance amid waning demand.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/renew ... k-guidance

Waning Demand? Cheap subsidized home solar and commercial solar is one of the bright spots in all this. But you need money up front in many cases. Perhaps that's it. People and companies are so tapped out on debt (not savings any more) that they can't even invest in something that will save them money over the coming two decades. Two decades, then it all has to be rebuilt, from Oil.

[yellowcanoe]

Reverse auction promising output from yet to be developed turbines and never before achieved price points is a dumb business move, by both parties.

Not as dumb as the high feed in tariffs that Ontario offered under its now defunct Green Energy program. Micro solar tariffs started at 80.2 cents per KWh which was at least 10 times higher than what the power sold for. The government was also extremely slow at reducing tariffs as it became apparent that wind/solar could be installed at lower cost than originally envisioned. Ontarians are stuck paying for these expensive contracts well into the future.

[theluckycountry]

After U.S. Withdrawal, Orsted Pulls Out Of Norway Wind Bidding

Danish offshore wind developer Orsted has officially withdrawn from a consortium set to bid on Norwegian offshore wind projects just days after pulling out of two U.S. offshore wind projects, Reuters reports, citing one of the consortium partners.

Renewable energy stocks have significantly underperformed their fossil fuel peers and the broader market in the current year, with the selloff accelerating recently due to high interest rates and despite the IRA.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News ... dding.html

[Shaved Monkey]

Less than a fortnight ago, Ørsted reported heavy losses for the last financial quarter after cancelling two big windfarms off the New Jersey coast because of escalating costs.
The company blamed high inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain bottlenecks for the decision to scrap its plans for the Ocean Wind I and II offshore schemes. It has also pulled out of a consortium that was due to bid for offshore wind projects in Norway.
The construction of multibillion-pound offshore windfarms has become significantly more costly in recent months because the price of materials has spiralled in line with rising inflation. This has been compounded by higher financing costs due to the recent hike in interest rates.

The global cost pressures have wiped billions from the market value of major offshore wind developers and cast doubt on the future of big projects. This has raised concern over government clean energy targets and whether climate goals can be achieved.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... biztoc.com

[theluckycountry]

If they worked, financially, they would be working.

No problems with coal though.

China permits two new coal power plants per week in 2022 https://energyandcleanair.org/publicati ... k-in-2022/

March 2023 China is building six times more new coal plants than other countries https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02/11604419 ... report-fin

[Carnot]

Lucky, I have been reading your posts and the interface with others, in particular Kublikhan, who might require an eye test.

I spend a lot of my expensive time analysing processes, and because of the quest to decarbonise I do much as you do an assess unreliables ( sorry renewables). I am in near complete agreement with your assessment of unreliables. PV only works when the sun shines and Wind depends on the vagaries of the weather. Both require a back-up fo some sort to provide constant power, which in my opinion should the due to PV or Wind Energy provider. That will put them out of business overnight, and is the only way of obtaining a levelised cost of dispatchable energy.

The cretins that have devised the current fad in auctions without any back up borne by the unreliable owner should be castigated for their ineptitude, because any with the minimum of common sense can see it.

Large wind turbines are difficult beast. They are really aircraft; aircraft in an extremely harsh environment, especially offshore. As they get larger all sorts of issues, which to an aricraft designer come into play. The was obviously missed by the likes of Orsted, Siemens and GE, none of whom are know for their prowess in aircraft construction. The are a number of weak points.

Speed control fo the rotor can be accomplished by stall or pitch control. The rated output of a wind turbine is governed by the wind speed. Once the designed power output is achieved the turbine rotor speed is approximately constant (governed) by either stall control or pitch control. Roughly speaking that means the stronger the wind blows, the rotor speed remains constant as does the power output. So once the rotor has reached optimum speed any increase in wind speed does not produce more power.

Power increase with the square of the rotor diameter. Weight increase to the cube of the rotor diameter, meaning the rotor and nacelle weight increase rapidly with size.

A 5 MW turbine will have rotor diameter of about 126 metres and a 20 MW 252. The rotor mass will be of the order of around 122 mt and 720 mt respectively. You do not have to be a genius to work out that the 3 blade hub will have a tremendous load hanging from each attachment. The stress forces on a wind turbine are of the order of 100 times that of a passenger aeroplane - these include gravitational, gyroscopic, bending, accelerating/ decelerating, as well as forces due to air turbulence and wind gradients. The pitch change and the gearbox bearing are all under extreme loads, especially when at rest? If you have not heard of brinelling and false brinelling now is the time to read up.

Brinelling results in indentations in the bearing races due to gravitational and other stress loads, particularly when stationary. False brinelling is the result of corrosion products causing a build up of debris in the raceway. The pitch change is very prone to brinelling, as it moves only in a short arc and can only be lubricated by boundary lubrication resulting in contact metal to metal contact.If the pitch change mechanism fails then this can result in an overs-peed and multiple failures. Blades, gearbox ,mast.
Apart from supplying torque to the gearbox the rotor also creates a thrust parallel to and against the wind, placing a strong bending moment on the mast.

A wind turbine has 3 main constraints

1 Rotor Mass
2 Durability
3 Performance

If you want more power you need to go bigger and the mass increases cubically
If you want more durability you need to build stronger adding more weight
If you add more weight you increase the gyroscopic forces

This will put a limit on wind turbines. My guess is that 5 MW will be about the max "reliable" limit and will still require huge costs of maintenance. The other issue with wind turbine is leading edge blade erosion. Ice, salt, rain and dust all have a huge impact on the blade leading edge and can induce significant vibrations and stress loads.

The other killer is dirty air. Dirty meaning turbulent air. Air entering the rotor need to to perpendicular to the rotor. Turbulent air adds additional stress loads . Spacing between turbines is crucial. A turbine need to be spaced at lead 10 rotor diameters from the one in from and 4-5 diameters from the side. The typical power delivery of a wind turbine, taking into account the spacing is about 2-2.5 W per square metre. So a large area is required.

[theluckycountry]

Lucky... I spend a lot of my expensive time analysing processes, and because of the quest to decarbonise I do much as you do an assess unreliables ( sorry renewables). I am in near complete agreement with your assessment of unreliables.

A detailed and informative post, thanks Carnot. I haven't delved at all into the mechanics behind wind power generation so it was good to have a synopsis of the critical issues from you. I have a fairly broad background science wise so the concepts of, Power increase with the square of the rotor diameter, come naturally to me, though I hadn't though of them in this context. Typically only in that of reflecting telescope mirror sizing. The effects on bearings are interesting too, I have never heard of that. Brinelling results in indentations in the bearing races due to gravitational and other stress loads, particularly when stationary. Makes me want to move my motorcycles more often lol. What am I laughing for? I will! But more for the tires sake.

Motorcycle bearings are not the same though, they don't run all day every day under extreme loading. As for the variableness of wind, my only experience with that is the vane on my weather station, which I know from experience is always flicking back and forth. I don't believe those huge turbines could hope to keep up with those variations, they would always be out of sync, always correcting and over-correcting, or more likely, ignoring changes until they crossed a certain threshold, though you know doubt have knowledge of this.

It's clear to me that all corporations are pathological liars now, even to their basic financials which are steeped in manipulated accounting practices. Nothing they say can be taken at face value so when one make assurances about how great a wind farm will be for "the people" I just shake my head. As for government proclamations about all this? Forget it.

There is certainly a lot of technology dependent on more technology in these generators and I wonder if many of them would have been built at all had not government gotten involved and funded a lot of it on and off the book. (off the book where politicians accept bribes to push things through) Like those tragic Abrams tanks the government of the US ordered from Chrysler simply to help out the struggling corporation. They looked good until the Gulf war too, but a gas-turbine in a desert environment proved to be a nightmare maintenance wise.

https://www.allpar.com/threads/xm-1-and ... ks.227812/
The first Chrysler bail-out; the M-1 tank https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+firs ... -a04696991

On a July afternoon ten years ago, Lt.Colonel George Mohrmann sat at his desk on Capital Hill awaiting a phone call. As head of the Army's congressional liason office, he was ready to deliver a stack of sealed letters to members of Congress announcing the winning contractor in the multi-billion dollar competition to build the Army's M-1 tank.

The two competing contractors, Chrysler and General Motors, offered a clear choice. Chrysler had built its tank around a radically different and unproven tank engine, the turbine; GM had used a more conventional diesel engine. The two tanks had undergone months of head-to-head trials at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. GM had won.

The Army, it seemed, was not going to risk adding the M-1 to its growing list of overly sophisticated weapons that cost too much and don't work. "We were sitting there poised to deliver [the envelopes],' Mohrmann recalls. "The decision to select GM had been made. We were just waiting for the Secretary of Defense to be briefed.'

The call, however, was surprising. The Pentagon told Mohrmann not to deliver the letters. The next day, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld ordered a whole new round of competition. A week later, Rumsfeld turned the M-1 tank program upside down. He mandated that the tank be redesigned to incorporate the turbine engine. Four months later the award--which promised to generate $20 billion in sales--went to Chrysler, and the Army was on its way to getting a weapon suited more for a paved interstate than a battlefield.

I wonder what bribe Donald Rumsfeld took for this one? bribes come in many forms.

Donald Rumsfeld was an American politician and businessman who had a net worth of $200 million at the time of his death in June 2021 When not in the public sector, Donald Rumsfeld earned a fortune in the private sector. He served as the CEO and Chairman of a company called G. D. Searle & Company, championing its turnaround before being sold to Monsanto. He served as Chairman and CEO of General Instrument Corporation from 1990 to 1993. From 1997 until being sworn in as Secretary of Defense in 2001, he served as...

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/riche ... net-worth/

Plus whatever was hidden in Cayman accounts...
Look forward to more of your posts Carnot.

[theluckycountry]

Floating Wind Farms Set Sail for a Greener Future
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy ... uture.html

What could possibly go wrong with this dreamscape?

Most offshore wind turbines are constructed on fixed structures, meaning that they must be developed in shallow waters where the seabed is accessible. The wind is stronger on the ocean than on land, allowing wind turbines to generate more power, and making the sea an attractive location to establish wind energy projects. Following years of research and development aimed at creating alternative structures that allow wind turbines to be situated in a wider range of locations, researchers have developed the technology needed to establish floating wind farms.

Floating offshore wind projects consist of turbines situated on floating rather than fixed structures that are anchored to the seabed. The floating nature of the bases means that these turbines can be placed in deeper waters, where the wind power potential is higher.

No mention about storms or how the electricity gets from floating platform to the shore where it's used. Perhaps they will build floating factories and housing estates beside them? That would be neat! Like Kevin Kosner's Water World.





Unfortunately for all it's cost the Movie was a flop. Which just goes to show that simply because something is feasible doesn't mean it will prove a good idea.

[AdamB]

It's the new normal. It's Peakoil, the point in time when it becomes too expensive, in energy terms, to carry on the 20th century experiment.

You don't even know what peak oil is. Stop giving others who flunked out of high school a bad name. Heck, stop giving NAZIS a bad name.

Peak oil is the theorized point in time when the maximum rate of global oil production will occur, after which oil production will begin an irreversible decline.

[theluckycountry]

Why has this thread gone so quiet of late? Because it's like a biofuel thread, a corn ethanol thread. There really should be a Wall of Shame for all the posters who fanboi raved over these scams. But no, they just move over to the Next Techno Dream and start vomiting up Media spin there.

Sweden’s largest wind farm faces bankruptcy
https://www.arctictoday.com/swedens-lar ... ankruptcy/
U.S. offshore wind sector 'fundamentally broken' - BP exec
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-01/
Collapse of projects shows again that wind power is not affordable
https://nypost.com/2023/11/02/opinion/c ... ffordable/

[mousepad]

Sweden’s largest wind farm faces bankruptcy
https://www.arctictoday.com/swedens-lar ... ankruptcy/
U.S. offshore wind sector 'fundamentally broken' - BP exec
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-01/
Collapse of projects shows again that wind power is not affordable
https://nypost.com/2023/11/02/opinion/c ... ffordable/

That is impossible. We have it courtesy kub's papers clearly showing us that wind power is dirt cheap. Even the mother lode of all papers, lazard, agrees. Dirt cheap!
And we have kub;s own analysis showing us any paper that dares to differ, is funded by anti-renewable interests and therefore cannot be trusted. Trust we can only in left wing libtard university papers.

[kublikhan]

That is impossible. We have it courtesy kub's papers clearly showing us that wind power is dirt cheap. Even the mother lode of all papers, lazard, agrees. Dirt cheap!
And we have kub;s own analysis showing us any paper that dares to differ, is funded by anti-renewable interests and therefore cannot be trusted. Trust we can only in left wing libtard university papers.

Is the only contribution you have to make trolling? This is what bored teenagers do who live in their basement. Why don't you act your age?

[mousepad]

That is impossible. We have it courtesy kub's papers clearly showing us that wind power is dirt cheap. Even the mother lode of all papers, lazard, agrees. Dirt cheap!
And we have kub;s own analysis showing us any paper that dares to differ, is funded by anti-renewable interests and therefore cannot be trusted. Trust we can only in left wing libtard university papers.

Is the only contribution you have to make trolling? This is what bored teenagers do who live in their basement. Why don't you act your age?

what are you talking about? I just lectured lucky on how wrong he is. I'm on your side, don't ya notice?

[kublikhan]

what are you talking about? I just lectured lucky on how wrong he is.

Saying Lucky is wrong is like saying the sky is blue. Lucky likes to snag any bad news item for any technology he hates and proclaim this as proof that tech is dead globally. All the while ignoring the big picture. Take offshore wind for example. Lucky links to articles that point out problems in the US offshore wind market, which has for sometime now been a very minor player in the offshore game. Then he takes this as 'proof' that offshore is dead in the entire world. When in reality 99% of the offshore market is in Europe and Asia. Not that he is aware of this. According to Lucky logic, if a single bad news item appears for a tech he hates, it is proof his deluded theories are correct.

Compared with onshore wind, the supply chain for offshore wind turbines is more concentrated, due to the fact that more than 99% of total global offshore wind installation is presently located in Europe and the APAC region[Asia–Pacific].

Global Wind Report 2023

He is completely oblivious to the fact that offshore wind is actually growing. Finding a single bankruptcy is all the confirmation he needs that offshore was all a big scam.

Offshore wind additions are set to hit a new high in 2024.

BNEF expects 18.3GW of offshore wind to achieve commercial operation in 2024, much of it in mainland China, Taiwan, the Netherlands and France. This is a rise from 10.7GW in 2023. Build is on track for 10-fold cumulative growth to 2040, the first time BNEF has extended its offshore wind forecast to this horizon.

1H 2024 Offshore Wind Market Outlook

But you can't expect Lucky to know things like this. His 'research' consists of making up BS. He can't even get basic facts about his own country correct. Do you remember his proclamations that they don't use Chinese Solar PV panels in Australia?

So whatever lame attempts at solar PV generation they try in the future will have to made out of cheap Chine$e panels. We reject those here in Australia

More BS. Australia has a higher percentage of Chinese panels than the US does.

Chinese companies now dominate the global market and supply more than 90% of solar modules sold in Australia.

Australia should develop solar PV sector to avoid dependence on China, report finds

Or how the fanboys are not adding in all of the numbers for EV sales in Australia and only the NRMA has the 'real' data? and since NRMA data showed a decline for a month that means Australia hit his beloved 'peakEV'? Except NRMA data shows EV sales in Australia up year to date.

Statistics, you have to be careful. The NRMA is an automotive body and includes the data the fanboi media omit

September 06, 2024 - EV sales were up by 5.6 per cent once figures from the EVC – which now reports sale figures for EV leader Tesla and Volvo offshoot Polestar – were added. All in all there are now 60,159 new EVs on the road so far in 2024.

The EV sector reflects the automotive market at large, which saw sales down 10.6 per cent compared to August last year but a year-to-date total up by 5.3 per cent.

Electric vehicle sales hold ground as drivers flock to hybrids

[theluckycountry]

That is impossible. We have it courtesy kub's papers clearly showing us that wind power is dirt cheap. Even the mother lode of all papers, lazard, agrees. Dirt cheap!

Yes, you're right as usual, the thing that I don't understand though is why we we even need it?
Let me explain myself.

The U.S. is the world leader in biofuel production—generating 47 percent of global output over the last decade. The ten-fold expansion in ethanol production in the U.S. from 2002 to 2019 has been driven by the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)... roughly 40 percent of all corn is now used to make ethanol.

Why do we even need wind power and mobile ipads? Why don't we just run everything on truly renewable ethanol? It's burning only produces co2 and water, no pollution! It's a no-brainer. I'm sure kub has better papers to tell the truth of the matter, all I can come up with is conspiracy junk like this from the National Academy of Sciences. What we need is Blurb from Ethanol corporations to set us straight.

Despite the promise that the RFS would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, a new study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) today finds that expansion of U.S. corn cultivation has come at eye-popping environmental costs... the researchers found that nationwide annual fertilizer use surged by 3 to 8 percent and water pollutants rose by 3 to 5 percent. The sheer extent of domestic land use change, however, generated greenhouse gas emissions that are, at best, equivalent to those caused by gasoline use—and likely at least 24 percent higher.

https://civileats.com/2022/02/14/how-co ... te-change/

[theluckycountry]

And for that matter
Where the Hell is my Flying Car!
I have been waiting 40 years for one, come on Elon, get it together.