World's Largest Offshore Wind Farm Has Grand Opening Today
source: http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/100923_thanet.grid-6x2.jpg
-
-
- EthicalVegan
- added this
http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/100923_thane...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39324391/ns/us_news-environment/Whopper of a wind farm opens off Britain
World's largest offshore project has 100 turbines — so far
Image: Wind turbines in Thames estuary
Stefan Wermuth / Reuters
Photo: A boat powering through the Thames estuary on Thursday provides perspective of just how big the wind turbines there are.
msnbc.com staff and news service reports
updated 9/23/2010 11:59:42 AM ET
LONDON — The world's largest offshore wind farm had its grand opening Thursday — and its location on the estuary of the Thames River makes it a showcase for Britain's push to move beyond fossil fuels.
So far, 100 wind turbines have been planted in waters up to 80 feet deep across the estuary in southern England. The idea is to produce enough electricity, 300 megawatts, to power the equivalent of 200,000 homes.
Each turbine is nearly as tall as a 40-story building and the blades are at least 65 feet above the water for clearance with vessels. No turbine is closer than 1,600 feet to another and the entire "farm" covers an area of 22 square miles.
Up to 341 turbines will be installed over the next four years.
With Thursday's opening, which tops a 91-turbine farm off Denmark, Britain now has more offshore wind capacity than the rest of the world combined.
"We are in a unique position to become a world leader in this industry," British Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne said in a statement before he attended the grand opening. "We are an island nation and I firmly believe we should be harnessing our wind, wave and tidal resources to the maximum."
Britain now gets three percent of its electricity from renewables but aims to get 15 percent by 2020. As part of that, the government this year awarded licenses to wind farm developers in a program that could deliver up to 32 gigawatts of generation capacity and require investment of more than $117 billion.
Critics of the $1.4 billion wind farm include some nearby residents who object to the sight of the giant towers, some visible from shore. The farm starts about seven miles from shore.
Environmental groups tend to back wind power as long as projects are not in areas of significant bird flight paths.
The new wind farm met that standard. It's an "important stride forward," said Craig Bennett of the British chapter of Friends of the Earth.
But the group also wants Britain to guarantee funding of at least $3 billion a year for the recently created and government-funded Green Investment Bank, which aims to boost private-sector spending on low-carbon technology.
"I know that there is still more to do to bring forward the large sums of investment we want to see in low-carbon energy in the U.K.," Huhne said, "and we as government are committed to playing our part."
One embarrassment to the government is that only 20 percent of the investment in the new wind farm has gone to British firms. The farm is owned and operated by Swedish energy company Vattenfall, and the largest chunk of expenditure has been to Denmark's Vestas for the wind turbines.
Global interest
The promised vast expansion of Britain's offshore wind resources is proving to be a powerful lure for companies not normally associated with renewables but keen to generate eco-friendly and reliable sources of revenue.
Engineers, consultants and oil rig makers around the world are setting up new divisions and partnerships in order to get a foothold in the market, which offers secure returns to those building and running the turbines.
"It's attractive for a lot of companies that are looking for contracts," said Ian Simm, chief executive of green fund firm Impax Asset Management, which has holdings in companies such as Vestas.
"The fundamental point that makes it attractive is scale and government commitment, and the fact that industrial companies can learn the facts of success in one offshore environment and be able to transfer the majority, if not all, of those skills to other countries," he said.
However, clearer statements from the government on renewables incentives are still needed to support wind farm developers and really kick-start the market, according to Sarwjit Sambhi, managing director of power generation at Centrica, which has won the rights to develop up to 4.2 gigawatts of offshore windpower in the Irish Sea.
"There is a general theme across this in that we haven't passed the tipping point yet where the industry is confident enough that there is a long-term pipeline of projects."
Britain's potential
The Offshore Valuation Group, made up of government and industry organizations, estimates if Britain were to develop just 29 percent of its potential offshore resource, this could deliver 169 gigawatts of capacity by 2050 and turn Britain into a net exporter of electricity.
This would involve installing 7.2 gigawatts a year — roughly equivalent to 1,000 7.5 megawatt turbines — with fixed offshore wind accounting for 5.4 gigawatts of the average annual build rate needed.
The supply chain needed for this would have annual revenues of nearly $100 billion in 2050 and employ around 145,000 people directly, according to the Offshore Valuation report.
As a result shipbuilders and companies that specialize in making oil rigs are also entering the wind market.
SeaEnergy Executive Chairman Steve Remp, who has worked in the offshore oil and gas market for 30 years, expects the market for equipment vessels to take off at the beginning of 2012.
"I foresee a sizeable industry evolving that calls on the engineering expertise in working offshore in deep water," he said.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
-
- groups:
- Community, Green, Current Tonight, Earth and Science, 13 more
-
- tags:
- Climate Change, Electricity, Wind Turbines, wind farms, 7 more
-
-
Mobius2012
-
That pic looks bogus
- 2 years ago
-
Mobius2012
-
-
EthicalVegan
-
Mobius2012:
To which picture (photo?) are you referring?
- 2 years ago
-
EthicalVegan
-
-
sunshine1649
-
free wind to the first 100 people
- 2 years ago
-
sunshine1649
-
-
EmperorThan
-
I know a lot of wind farms are killing hundreds of birds on their annual migration routes but I still support them. Mostly because they're fucking mesmerizing to look at...
Go to the very middle of Kansas and you'll see a massive wind farm to the north of the highway. All of the blades spinning at the same speed as far as the eye can see!
- 2 years ago
-
EmperorThan
-
-
treewolf39
-
EmperorThan:
Lots of things kill millions of birds. PCBs are my favorite. Get them while they are still in the egg. Oh yea and mountain top removal for coal energy must have an incredibly negative effect on bird nesting. Just saying.
- 2 years ago
-
treewolf39
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
treewolf39:
Also once they blow the top of the mountains off, no way to capture the wind that used to blow across the ridge. Two, two anti-environmenttal impacts in one.
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
bailey78
-
They have put a nice wind farm up in the next county over from where i live. I beleive that most of the power is going to San Antonio. They may not be the prettiest things in the world but they sure do the job they were designed to do.
- 2 years ago
-
bailey78
-
-
Shizon81
-
Go Britain!
- 2 years ago
-
Shizon81
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
- This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
sexualsoybean
-
MrMxyzptlk:
While you are definitely right about the initial costs being higher, i think its a bit short sighted to condemn the "green energy" movement as just boning the poor. Strides like this are whats going to make renewable energy cheap in the long run. Would you rather keep using fossil fuels up until the point a gallon of gas is $40.00? What will low income families do then?
- 2 years ago
-
sexualsoybean
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
sexualsoybean: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
treewolf39
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Cost more in energy bill and less in medical bills. Quality of life will improve with wind energy.
- 2 years ago
-
treewolf39
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
treewolf39: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
treewolf39
-
MrMxyzptlk:
The most efficient path is never going to cross the table; just like the single payer health care system. I know there are imperfections, but in the long run wind energy can be improved upon. I do not see mountain top removal getting any more environmentally friendly. Coal is the poisonous energy elephant that needs to be replaced. I totally agree that solar is probably our best hope, unless our pollution and environmental tampering goes astray. Geo-engineering is an experiment that may fail horribly.
- 2 years ago
-
treewolf39
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
treewolf39: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
treewolf39
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Every type of energy production has huge costs to get them up and running. Some like coal and nuclear do not count all costs when pushing their technology.
- 2 years ago
-
treewolf39
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
treewolf39: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
treewolf39
-
MrMxyzptlk:
And here is the difference that I see. Health costs and lost life due to coal poison is not being weighed in the total costs of production. 29 at one mine this year and the safety violations go on and on. If they were forced to treat the workers right, than the costs would exceed wind costs. All of those dams you refer to are now needing replacement or major refurbishing. They will not be built for the same money as in the 50s. Anyway, I'm not going to change your mind so thanks for the dialog.
- 2 years ago
-
treewolf39
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Better to be poor than dead of toxic waste, rampant Methycillin-resistant bacteria, and climate-change induced weather - storms, drought, flooding...
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Why aare there so many actively working windmills then? If they are not usable, I can't tell. If they are not making a profit, why aren't the businesses who make and use them out of business? Your logic is unsound .... AGAIN
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
MrMxyzptlk:
And once they are built, that leaves only maintenance. Does it not cost alot to blow tops off of mountains, or build a nuclear plant?
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
EvilDoer
-
good for Britain! the sight of those props is better than seeing an oil drilling rig out there.
- 2 years ago
-
EvilDoer
-
-
bailey78
-
EvilDoer:
Unless your payheck comes from working on a offshore platform.
- 2 years ago
-
bailey78
-
-
AnantaEphemera [removed]
- This comment was removed by its owner.
-
AnantaEphemera [removed]
-
-
bailey78
-
AnantaEphemera:
Would you rather see poor animals caught in an oil slick?
- 2 years ago
-
bailey78
-
-
sexualsoybean
-
can the solar panel double as a frying pan for the caught animals?
- 2 years ago
-
sexualsoybean
-
-
bailey78
-
sexualsoybean:
Yes but one must use a nonstick spray when doing so.
- 2 years ago
-
bailey78
-
-
existentialist
-

-
This is my idea for an ultimate renewable energy apparatus.The biomass net is to catch, for fuel, the animals that get whacked by the blades, an unfortunate yet inevitable side effect of the turbines.
- 2 years ago
-
existentialist
-
-
sunshine1649
-
existentialist:
nice mspaint drawing there (excellent idea too)
- 2 years ago
-
sunshine1649
-
-
existentialist
-
sunshine1649:
Thanks. MS paint rocks!
- 2 years ago
-
existentialist
-
-
sexualsoybean
-
"Critics of the $1.4 billion wind farm include some nearby residents who object to the sight of the giant towers, some visible from shore. The farm starts about seven miles from shore."
Oh, heaven forbid you see a couple of windmills outside your 100 million dollar summer beach home
- 2 years ago
-
sexualsoybean
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
sexualsoybean:
You think they would rather see an oil slick?
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
bailey78
-
onemalefla:
To era is human to really foul things up you need a computer. Or in this case a malfunctioning governor. Not sure how that happen what i have come to understand about these wind turbines is the they have an internal governor that stops them from turning that fast.
- 2 years ago
-
bailey78
-
-
NiceN
-
This pint betta be made from power off the wind farm, you prized plum.
- 2 years ago
-
NiceN
-
-
s_peak
-
Yes! Keep up the good work ya limey bastards!
- 2 years ago
-
s_peak
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
onemalefla: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Onemalefla was saying at least it wouldn't "spew" oil everywhere you moron. I'm sure as the industry progresses, advances will be made in the engineering and fabrication of windmills. It can't cost more than cleaning up an oil spill and paying off the families of dead oil rig workers, maybe long term medical care of the cleanup workers exposed to the toxic Corexit that BP used to try to make the amount of oil "spewed" less obvious.
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
Jennifer_Guinn: This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
MrMxyzptlk [removed]
-
-
Jennifer_Guinn
-
MrMxyzptlk:
Oops, let that slip out by accident. Sorry. But you must have alot of negative comments to have had to consult with the "mods" over it. I just can't see how you could be right all the time and all these other people wrong. At least you can spell though. Have a nice day.
- 2 years ago
-
Jennifer_Guinn
