God forbid they use the millions to upgrade the infrastructure and invest in industrial sized battery banks to improve the system, nah just turn the turbines on and off.
Hate the way the story is delivered though, people will go away with the usual “subsidies for wind” “paying to have windmills that aren’t generating” and ignoring all of the benefit the rest of the time, and ignoring that the cost to use gas instead was much higher…
? It costs like zero money to physically “turn off” a turbine, they just rotate the vanes and put on brakes I thought?
I think they just mean they had to rely on conventional power for that amount when wind was insufficient, even though at other periods there was excessive generation.
Texas here: my governor insists that these are a problem on nearly all fronts, even blaming our near-total power failure two years ago on them (certainly not on the State failing to properly winterize our inexplicably private infrastructure).
Maddening. Refreshing to hear they work quite well.
Gr3yFir3 says
God forbid they use the millions to upgrade the infrastructure and invest in industrial sized battery banks to improve the system, nah just turn the turbines on and off.
jayfeather31 says
That’s the first I’ve ever heard of this kind of problem. Well, the more you know.
InternetPeon says
This is what we call a good problem – overabundant wind energy.
Compare this to the cost of a single oil spill.
RuaidhriM says
Why would it cost anything (much) to disconnect a turbine? Is the south pre-paying for power it can’t receive or something?
Northwindlowlander says
Hate the way the story is delivered though, people will go away with the usual “subsidies for wind” “paying to have windmills that aren’t generating” and ignoring all of the benefit the rest of the time, and ignoring that the cost to use gas instead was much higher…
Y8ser says
Why shut them off just let the excess go into the ground. Seems like terrible engineering.
defusted says
Causing too much cancer? /s
midnightwomble says
Here is a novel idea. Upgrade the cables now instead of in several years. I know its a radical thought but hey someone has to say it
MackTO says
Or… They could sell it. Ffs figure it out
MackTO says
Time to turn off the coal and gas plants. They’re no longer needed
narvuntien says
Sounds like the financial incentive required to build more storage. Get on that Britain.
fahrvergnugget says
? It costs like zero money to physically “turn off” a turbine, they just rotate the vanes and put on brakes I thought?
I think they just mean they had to rely on conventional power for that amount when wind was insufficient, even though at other periods there was excessive generation.
Fortyplusfour says
Texas here: my governor insists that these are a problem on nearly all fronts, even blaming our near-total power failure two years ago on them (certainly not on the State failing to properly winterize our inexplicably private infrastructure).
Maddening. Refreshing to hear they work quite well.
Final_Alps says
I would just like to point out that Denmark has proportionally WAY more wind and does not have this problem.
They are also about to set in motion further quintupling of wind capacity way beyond daily needs of the country.
Still no issue with the grid.
It’s as if it wasn’t the wind’s problem. But something else.
It’s as of Sky news wanted to beat the same drum they always beat.
(Also for those mentioning storage and PTX – like hydrogen – both are a big part of Denmark’s plans)
Man_Bear_Beaver says
Lower the rates so people use more power, if I knew power was free between 9pm and 5am I’d start growing weed with expensive lights.