We aren’t in on the grift, that’s why: Sometimes the balance for this “cheap Green energy” is so ridiculously out of whack, even a governor raping his own citizens’ tax credits isn’t enough payola to keep turbines going up. Shouldn’t that be telling someone something? You’d think. Why are we the only ones who see the obvious?
Every wind turbine in Alberta should be torn down! What an eye sore the landscape has become.
I’ll be glad when we see an end to this utility scale wind and solar nonsense. If people want them for off-grid power that’s up to them but they add nothing but higher consumer costs and unreliability to the grid. It will probably take a few more years to put a stake in the heart of the renewable energy vampire but, fortunately, the lifespan of wind and solar equipment is only 10-15 years. Then we can return to the tried and true baseload and peak/backup power system.
The parasites will, of course, come up with a new form of subsidy farming scheme. Hydrogen? Not so fast:
“That meant 8.8 GW of dedicated hydrogen power plants, alongside 15 GW of natural gas-powered ones that ought to switch to hydrogen by 2035 at the latest, in total representing about one-third of the German peak power demand of 2023. Climate-friendly power at the press of a button….
Existing power plants can’t run on “pure” hydrogen because the “burners would simply melt”, he explained. Addressing this would require retrofitting the plants with ceramics, which would make them look like the nose of a spaceship folded inwards – a process that can be done but is costly, the BDI chief said.
“If these turbines are only supposed to run when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing, then they will be extremely expensive,” he added. “I’m not even talking about the cost of hydrogen, which we don’t have, but only the investment costs of these new gas turbines and their new peripherals.”
https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/news/germanys-dream-of-building-a-fleet-of-hydrogen-fired-power-plants-is-faltering/
In addition to enhancing the thermal side of those systems, it would be necessary to beef up and rebuild the hydrogen gas storage and piping to be able to handle the hydrogen gas. Hydrogen gas is permeable through steel and produces embrittlement leading to catastrophic failures. High purity pressurized hydrogen gas has enough energy to ignite on its own if it releases to the atmosphere.
On the other hand once a plant goes kaboom it does so quite cleanly /s
It’s usually a good idea to keep away from anything involving pressurized hydrogen gas (Including automobiles)
true. neutrons was it? coming out of the fuel into the steel pipes making them brittle and replacement necessary.
growing pains.
good news we know so bloody much more now about nuke generators. a Cdn design consists of safety dampening measures relying on gravity to drop some sort of suitable substance onto the fuel rods. somebody google that.
basically newer designs rely far more on reliable and quick failsafe default modes.
40 years ago on a temp electrician’s assistant job l found out in specific circumstances l cd lay live 120V wires in the palm of my hand unaffected and even wrap my fingers lightly closed and jiggle them to show again l was unaffected by the voltage.
l learned it on top of a 15′ ladder outside a private home Grimsby Ont late 80s (tq Harvey l found out later everything you said was spot on) the tradesman exhorting me to use my fingers an an improvised voltmeter whilst he determined which wires were coming from that lite fixture into the box inside the building.
we were talking thru the closed window. me the assistant naturally doing the uncomfortable grunt werk.
bone dry skin in the winter air. l had to tap my fingertips on my tongue get some conductivity.
its a great party trick just do it before drinking.
It’s the gas itself. The hydrogen molecules are small enough to permeate through dense metals and embrittle them. To clarify this doesn’t involve neutrons.
There are other processes involving neutrons and radiation that can deteriorate materials
For me it goes back to the same argument – why are we substituting a system that has worked very well for decades (natgas) for one that has far more mechanical and design issues (Hydrogen)? Natural gas is already considered a clean energy source by most of the world so I’m not buying the climate change argument. I predict that Hydrogen power plants will be yet another expensive, dead end path. Stick to hydro, natgas and nuclear if CO2 is the biggest concern.
precisely.
aka CO2 greenhouse gas H2O greenhouse gas.
pick one. or both. NOT NEITHER
they will find whatever is needed to make sure that any excess money they get will not NOT be returned to the taxpayer but sent to who ever will give them the best campaign donations. IT IS ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY
You’d have to possess a heart of stone not to laugh at these states’ self-created problems. Good, Democrat-run bastions, they are.
Maybe Ørsted will go under, too!
l recollect an engineering cockup TV series about failed airports, bridges, a pedestrian overpass walkway impassible it was curved and very slippery. or that building in England acts like a sun ray light focusing ‘furnace’, burning car paint and blinding pedestrians.
anyway this ep was about the big windfarm in the sea off Denmark or whatever. the anchors were crumbling in the salt water and a remedy was demonstrated.
cant remember if the subject ‘is this mode of power generation economic’? came up.
If I don’t take the free money somebody else will.. We call this growth.. I call it makework..
A good book about engineering faux pas was “To Engineer is human”. Discusses many engineering mistakes often involving overlooked details