“Turbinegeddon” — Siemens loses €4.5 billion because collecting free energy is not cheap

By Jo Nova

The end of the naive era of hope in Wind Power fairies

Remember how they said wind energy would keep getting cheaper? Only a year ago academics were still writing papers about the “Moore’s Law” miraculous future of wind power. Only we appear to have already hit the point where bigger is not better.  Two years ago the former head of Siemens bizarrely warned that “Wind power risks becoming too cheap” and Reuters, bizarrely, published it.

Meanwhile production costs are rising for the offshore variety too, and Siemens is scrambling to delay deliveries, so it can fix problems first…

The Washington Post, a big fan of the “Green transition”, puts in an admirable effort to make excuses for the bad luck of the wind industry — anything but admit that this failure may represent real mechanical limits to the collection of erratic, low density energy in the most hostile settings on Earth.

These machines are so fragile they cannot just sit under their own weight motionless, less they get permanent brinelling damage to the bearings. And tiny micro-oscillations can create False Brinelling.

Wind ‘Turbinegeddon’ Is a Troubling Climate Omen

by Chris Bryant, The Washington Post

…the Siemens Gamesa wind business moved too fast and has now discovered abnormal vibrations arising from blades and bearings which may have to be replaced.

While the affected models represent only 4% of its installed fleet, the direct costs of the fix are estimated at €1.6 billion. The company faces further unexpected expenses related to ramping up production of offshore turbines, as well as unfavorable tax effects. Bernstein Research analyst Nicholas Green has evocatively dubbed the moment Turbinegeddon.

Shares fell dramatically six weeks ago when the problems were first announced and after more information, and a long hard think — have not recovered at all.

Oh Woe is the Wind Industry

It’s so unfair that people don’t like bird-bashing giants and thumping infrasound. And who could have seen that spending trillions turning our electricity grid into a giant weather changing machine would make energy costs higher, thus piling wood on the inflationary fires that have come back to bite wind turbine manufacturers?

The wind industry should be flying high but instead is entrapped by a cornucopia of troubles. Projects are too often held up by red tape and nimbyism, while contracts signed years ago have become onerous due to material and logistics cost inflation. Chinese companies that dominate their home market are looking increasingly to expand overseas, pressuring pricing.

Imagine tying one arm behind your back while competing with a nation powered with cheap coal and slave labor?

h/t Colin

 

 

9.9 out of 10 based on 118 ratings

122 comments to “Turbinegeddon” — Siemens loses €4.5 billion because collecting free energy is not cheap

  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    Proving again the only enthusiastic customer for products that don’t, uh, actually work are governments, and that once that market is saturated;
    reality sets in. Big electric busses with cabinet officers on the board joined the bankruptcy party today. AS the failure curve is usually more or
    less geometric of industries; suppliers worrying about getting paid and other annoyances that arise after the first failure, expect more

    470

    • #
      Uber

      Who, what?

      30

    • #
      Ted1.

      Jo, you should put that to music.

      It might be time to start making the movie!

      Consider the future of farming in Oz:

      Land prices double in 3 years.
      Cow beef price down 30% year on year.
      Steer price down 40% year on year.
      The fundamentals are a long way out of whack.
      The new player on the block is carbon credits.
      You can’t eat carbon credits. They have to stay in the ground.
      Until the next bushfire.

      The only way to make money is to sell out. To super funds who don’t even know or care that farms are where the food comes from.

      By the way, those super funds are foreign super funds. Who might not take it too kindly if we don’t pay their dividends.

      110

      • #
        ozfred

        By the way, those super funds are foreign super funds. Who might not take it too kindly if we don’t pay their dividends.

        Perhaps they will be convinced to sell at a loss?
        Meanwhile the Australian economy has the stimulus of the extra funds.
        Enact an additional tax on dividends from agricultural corporations.
        Simultaneously enact a tax credit for Australian persons receiving income from dividends from agricultural corporations.

        13

        • #
          Ted1.

          Sell at a loss?

          Perhaps they might foreclose.

          With a nuclear powered army to back their claim.

          And our law on their side.

          30

    • #
      Saighdear

      Never mind the cost, show how little is being produced, relative to demand.( under 30GW in the UK)
      Demand is being met by only around FOUR (4) GW wind, and 1.5HW Solar at 8.30am ( now)…. hasn’t been much better all summer, just some odd spikes to disturb the power flow.

      10

      • #
        Hivemind

        Unfortunately, no amount of facts will change these people’s minds. Wind power is the most expensive of all ways to make electricity? I don’t care, the wind is free. Carbon dioxide doesn’t cause global warming? You can’t fool me, I believe in climate change. The Earth isn’t actually warming? No, I truly believe in the climate chant.

        It’s almost as if they have no minds.

        20

  • #
  • #

    Some detail on the Siemens crash:
    https://www.oedigital.com/news/507060-what-are-the-issues-with-siemens-gamesa-s-wind-turbines?utm_source=AOGDigital-ENews-2023-08-08&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=OEGDigital-ENews

    Technical problems are mostly onshore where they rushed new bigger blade models (which are small compared to the offshore giants). Offshore problems are mostly financial due to cost crisis.

    232

    • #
      Lawrie

      Tell me David, these PR quotes of so many wind turbines powering so may thousand homes sound impressive and no doubt fool politicians and Green voters but are they accurate? Does that mean that regardless of wind conditions those thousands of homes will have uninterrupted power or does it means that when the wind is blowing just right those homes will get power but otherwise their power will come from somewhere else?

      It has been suggested by others that these wind and solar carpetbaggers should have to guarantee a certain amount of power delivered 24/7. How they do that should be their problem whether they have to build back up coal or gas or build batteries. As a consumer I pay my electricity provider to provide power 24/7. Why not generators?

      150

      • #

        And if the Feral Gov’ment is using our Tax Dollars to pay for the 20 billion dollars or so (and maybe a lot more) of Transmission lines that are required, then these lines should be owned by the Guv’ment and by us as Taxpayers.

        So how does that work Mister (NOT Minister) Blackout Bowen? Please explain as Pauline Hansen keeps saying. Where is my Share Cerificate in those Transmission lines. Then there are those Batteries. Who pays for those? Please explain you Big Mistake Blackout Bowen. You economic/financial pygmy.

        160

        • #
          Rupert Ashford

          So you’re going to pay twice (actually thrice): First through your tax dollars for the infrastructure, then through more of your tax dollars for the subsidies, and then the exorbitant prices per kWh for the privilege of actually being provided some electricity.

          100

  • #

    Wind is free but the electricity generated costs more than coal, gas, nuclear and hydro generated electricity. Same with solar as although the sun is free the electricity costs more. The reasons why are varied but revolve around the cost of the equipment required to harness the wind and solar and their generating lifetimes. Along with the need for extensive transmission infrastructure and batteries for storage.

    This madness of wind and solar and batteries being able to replace a very reliable existing Electricity Grid where coal and gas fired electricity generating plants can provide electricity at low cost, when not having to support the ‘Unreliables’ (wind and solar), must stop before it crashes the Grid.

    520

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      “Calling Mr Fink… come in Mr Fink.”

      Our intellectual midgets, aka ‘the government’, have announced an announcement of a soon-to-be announcement of BlackRock’s $2b interest-generating investment in NZ’s ‘sustainable green’ electricity generation to, let me guess, save the planet?

      NZ$2 billion is small pesos for a banker like Larry Fink, aka Alladin Sane. And the midgets roared their traitorous approval… as HEAVY SNOW WARNINGS and black ice affect most of the South Island: Change? What change!

      290

    • #
      Uber

      It basically come downs to ‘energy density’. Fossil fuel energy is dense and readily accessible. You dig it up and set fire to it, and it gives a whole lot more back. Thermal coal is valued primarily on its energy density, which kind of says it all about what matters in power generation.
      On the other hand, wind and solar energy are very diffuse and unpredictable, and you don’t get return on your effort. Diffuse and unpredictable won’t feed 8 billion people, but I guess that’s the point for these clowns.
      As for nuclear, it’s really not as easy as people think. It’s a controlled atom bomb – that’s a pretty serious toy to play with, and I don’t believe Australian society has the mental capacity to do it safely any more. Not only do you have some horrific waste to deal with afterwards, but the fuel itself is really ordinary stuff and it’s very difficult to make.

      312

      • #
        Annie

        Agreed until your last paragraph.

        230

      • #
        Geoffrey Williams

        I do not believe that nuclear energy from a power station is a controlled atom bomb.
        Slight exaggeration . .

        90

      • #
        Skepticynic

        Agreed except your last paragraph is unnecessary because we have enough cheap and excellent coal and gas to last hundreds of years, until it’s made redundant by the next energy revolution which certainly isn’t “green energy”.
        Nuclear works but our 100% natural coal and gas is clean and cheaper.

        60

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Uber,
        And your hands-on experience with nuclear is?
        I hope it is more than a read of a Batman comic.
        Geoff S

        40

      • #
        BillW_1984

        Nuclear reactors on land are only enriched to 4%. US Navy reactors IIRC are about 30% and the US has never had a serious naval nuclear accident (unlike the Soviets).

        Bombs are enriched much more. 90% for U and 93% for Pu.

        10

      • #
        Uber

        It’s a nuclear reaction that is kept under control – what, not allowed to use analogies when you point to the things that don’t bolster the meme? Funny, I wonder why they use those heat rods if it’s all just happy to stay in its box.
        Ah, the percentages are different, what was I thinking. Well everything is ok then, we can whip this stuff up anywhere. What seems obvious here is that very few people understand risk management, which goes to my point that Australia simply doesn’t have the skills or the maturity of leadership that is necessary for a nuclear energy industry.
        What that has to do with American submarines is anyone’s guess. One thing we do know – Nucleophiles are very touchy about their pet energy source.

        20

    • #
      Mantaray

      Johnny. Regarding “the wind is free”, the following is a true anecdote from my childhood….

      Used to go to Sunday School in a hall next to an Anglican Church (C of E in those days) where the Minister was highly respected as a true man of God.

      One day when I asked my parents what happened to the dough collected in the coin plate which was passed around during the Church Service(no such donations in Sunday School), they replied that it helped pay Reverend Don, to which i replied “Really, isn’t the word of God free?” to which dad answered….

      “Yes it is Mantaray, but it’s like the water to our house; the water IS free but the pipes that get it to us are not

      Analogies analogies, eh what?

      70

  • #
    John Hultquist

    Projects are too often held up by red tape and nimbyism, ”

    It seems to me they are lucky. Otherwise, instead of €1.6 billion the cost would be €3.2 billion.
    He should be thankful for unanswered prayers.

    281

  • #
    David Maddison

    We keep getting told that the more bird choppers we.get, the cheaper electricity will become, even though the opposite is obviously true. The fact that some people actually believe wind power is cheap is a clear case of doublethink.

    doublethink
    /ˈdʌblθɪŋk/
    noun
    the acceptance of contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination.

    290

    • #
      Lawrie

      Doublethink or ignorance? Remember the Ministry of Truth spent years writing the new dictionary and reducing the number of words. They also left out educating the proles. Translated: If the populace were told the facts as we went along they would be in revolt. So many lies were told or the facts withheld that many people do believe that electricity got dearer because coal was subsidised or that it was dearer to run. Bottom line. The MSM is the problem and always has been. We know politicians lie but once upon a time the media called them out. No more. They are all batting for the same team and we are the opposition. Our only ally is reality and reality is starting to bite.

      340

      • #
        Ted1.

        Do not forget that the production that coal was forced to forego in favour of “renewables” was marginal cost product.

        30

    • #
      Tides of Mudgee

      Veering slightly off topic, but I was amused by hearing that Albo had assured an aboriginal elder that he would not back down on The Voice and wanted to show that he was a man of his word, and yet he has completely walked away from his promise to all of Australia that they would be $275 a year better off with their energy bills. Pfffft. ToM

      340

      • #

        Ah yes, but his ‘cop out’ is that Consumers will get this by 2025. LOL.

        That is a Federal Election year by which time the ‘porkie’ will be there for all to see (and pay for). With a bit of luck, the Grid will still be holding up (just).

        50

        • #
          wal1957

          Ah, but…will Eraring power station be mothballed in 2025?
          Last I heard was that the powers that be were having a rethink about this and the closure is likely to be delayed. But if they do close it down grab the popcorn and enjoy the ensuing blackouts and even larger price rises.

          150

          • #
            David Maddison

            Will they mothball it or destroy it?

            Immediate and urgent demolition of power stations is the normal way to do things in Australia.

            90

            • #

              By 2025 the writing will be on the wall and no more Coal fired Power Stations will be turned off. In fact, Australia will start building the new HELE Coal fired Power Stations. And then I woke up from my dream.

              So, Crash and Burn it may well burn, before the worm really does turn.

              Oh, that has a rhyme to it. I am a poet and I don’t know it.

              30

      • #
        Forrest Gardener

        The $275 thing was like the supermarkets putting the price of an item up and at the same time putting a “new low price” sticker on it, or putting the price up by 40% and then putting a “20% off” sticker on it.

        So the spinmaster’s claim will be that instead of an electricity bill going up by $775 it only went up by $500 thus saving consumers $275.

        You’ve always got to read the fine print with politicians. There was deliberately no promise that electricity bills would go down. It’s the same as “there will be no carbon tax”.

        150

  • #
    Bruce

    “Corporate Statism”.

    Siemens big foray into this was on their “home turf”, 1933-1945. BIG players in “Big Power”.Only suvived that fracas bexcuase their technical prowess at the time was REAL.

    Their “leaders” seem to not have learned much.

    170

  • #
    David Maddison

    The wind might be “free” but it costs an enormous amount to collect.

    Just ask any sailboat owner.

    And that is the reason commercial sailboats were abandoned as soon as practical sea-going steam or internal combustion engines were developed. (And similarly for land-based sources of power.)

    260

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      To be fair wind power is useful on farms for pumping water from bores into dams. As long as you don’t care when the water is pumped from the bore it works just fine.

      140

      • #
        Ted1.

        On the farm where I grew up there is a magnificent 21 ft Southern Cross windmill on a 45 ft stand, installed in 1946.

        When the wind blew it put 600 gph in the high tank at the house.

        I think it was January 1957 it didn’t turn for a fortnight, forcing us to install an ICE powered pumpjack

        In the ’60s we connected the mains power. In the ’80s a submersible pump.

        The mill is still standing there. Not in use.

        30

        • #
          Ronin

          Southern Cros mfg made a tidy income producing those hit’n’miss pumpjack engines, very basic just to keep the water flowing when the wind died.

          10

          • #
            Ted1.

            “The Farm Pumper” that one was called if I remember right. Integrating the motor and the pumpjack into a single unit. A clever design, even if a primitive motor, but our bore was too deep for it to supply enough water.

            10

  • #
    MrGrimNasty

    Drax CCS project turning to mush, delay, before the inevitable budget busting, then the inevitable admission that it’ll never work?
    Just reading what the scheme involves makes it obvious the whole idea is nuts.
    https://twitter.com/NetZeroWatch/status/1688942888300756992

    110

  • #
    Graham Richards

    I guess the Chinese will pick up the supply hole left in the market.

    Next victim will be the automotive industries. Ford USA already $4:5 billion out of pocket!

    140

  • #
    Dianeh

    Chinese companies that dominate their home market are looking increasingly to expand overseas, pressuring pricing.

    Next Siemens will be calling for tariffs on imported wind turbines, to protect them from downward pricing pressures.

    90

  • #
    Uber

    Nimbyism – the insult created by greedy developers.

    100

  • #
    Robber

    In Australia, across the AEMO grid, back in 2008 wind generated 0.4% of demand on average.
    In 2022 wind delivered 12.5% of demand on average. That’s 3,000 MW from a nameplate capacity of 10,300 MW.
    But it varied on a weekly basis from 8.4% of demand to 20.7%.
    And on a daily basis from 3.7% to 30%.
    Without investment in massive storage, what happens to the grid if windmills double by 2030 when we are supposed to be 80% “renewables”?

    180

    • #
      ozfred

      Much to the dismay of the “Green Lobby” natural gas on demand generation will likely be the logical answer. The per unit cost of this gas generated electricity will be fairly high but hopefully the needed volumes will be fairly low. At least in southern WA the sites of wind generation have been located near existing distribution lines, limiting the added costs. Ask in another ten years or so, if the costs of fuel for the FF generation has been reduced as a result of the RE inputs.

      31

  • #
    another ian

    Around this thread IMO

    “Seeing the other side’s playbook – Project of the Century”

    “Ever want to see the other team’s playbook? Project of the Century (report link)– the most comprehensive discussion of energy transition we’ve seen to date, was published by the Public Policy Forum. It’s principally about doubling the electrical grid, or more, but doing so without increasing fossil fuel emissions. The dollar figure is up to $1.7 trillion – with a ‘t’ – mostly from federal taxpayer dollars.”

    “Here’s the story on it: https://pipelineonline.ca/project-of-the-century-the-most-comprehensive-discussion-of-energy-transition-weve-seen-to-date/

    Via http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2023/08/08/seeing-the-other-sides-playbook-project-of-the-century/

    60

  • #
    Neville

    Let’s hope they go bankrupt and save the poor OECD taxpayers even more WASTED billions of $ for a SFA return.
    Even a loony like Bob Brown changed to a NIMBY very fast when TOXIC wind started to invade his cosy area of Tasmania.
    He couldn’t care less for the rest of Australia and the Whale migrations off our east coast when these TOXIC loony disasters start to wreck our coastal environment.
    When will the Aussie voters start to wake up and when will the MSM start to join Sky News, Quadrant, IPA, Spectator etc and tell the truth about the TOXIC, UNRELIABLE, DILUTE W & S disasters?

    320

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN Willis Eschenbach has updated to 2022 all the data using OWI Data, BP etc and shows the tiny global W & S generation compared to Fossil fuels, bio mass, Hydro, Nuclear etc.
    Why can’t our Govt and the rest of the OECD Govts spend just a few minutes online to find out the truth?
    The choice is very easy, you either WASTE more DECADES chasing an endless TRILLIONs $ FAIRY TALE or spend a few minutes online to check out the REAL WORLD DATA.
    What’s their problem and why do they continue to lie?

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/03/the-myth-of-replacing-fossil-fuels/

    180

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Why can’t governments spend a few munutes to find out the truth?

      It’s hard to teach anybody anything when their pay packet depends on them not understanding.

      130

      • #
        ivan

        Simple reason, they are following the diktats of the IPCC and WEF who got the idea if the Club of Rome that the world is overpopulated so they need to thin out the little people, totally forgetting that the increase in CO2 is pushing increased crops for both people and animals.

        100

    • #
      Dave in the States

      What’s their problem and why do they continue to lie?

      It is a trillions of dollars gravy train for them. And they are gambling with other people’s money.

      60

      • #
        Gary S

        Let’s not forget that this entire worldwide fiasco only exists because organisations too well known to list, plus compliant and now compromised governments and (pseudo)scientific institutions, have somehow managed to convince the sadly dumbed down and indoctrinated populace, that carbon dioxide is causing the collapse of our planetary systems.
        Using the example of ‘One Hundred Scientists Against Einstein’, it would only require rebuttal of this theory by a panel of competent and highly qualified real scientists using simple and compelling evidence. They are out there as we know.
        Given the walkbacks which now seem to be occurring around Net Zero policies around the world, now may be the opportune time to strike.
        If we could only provide a platform which had the potential to reach a substantial percentage of the populace – maybe on multiple fronts such as GBNews, Sky, Joe Rogan, etc., if they could be persuaded to broadcast a debate simultaneously, it could stand a chance of reaching some of those responsible for making the stupid and hugely damaging decisions.
        Others here may have better ideas, but it seems the tide is turning right now.

        50

  • #
    Yancey Ward

    Having such huge blades rotating in a plane vertical to the surface of the earth puts enormous stress on the mechanical structure. I can’t imagine these last very long without major renovation on a regular basis.

    210

    • #
      David Maddison

      They don’t last very long. They are temporary semi-disposable structures and the blades are not recyclable.

      Their true purpose is to harvest subsidies. In Australia the subsidies come directly from the consumer electricity bill.

      Average life about 15 years or less. See https://stopthesethings.com/2023/04/23/costly-pathetic-performance-thousands-of-wind-turbines-being-replaced-after-12-years/

      Wind turbine propagandists claim much longer lives.

      Average life of a power station is 50+ years.

      180

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Agreed. The blade at the bottom of the arc is in a ‘dead spot’ for wind while the other 2 are getting more wind (and more so as being higher where wind is stronger too). Leaving aside the forces n the blade, there is enormous forces on the blade hub (hence its massive structure).
      The offshore industry used to have an annual inspection of each turbine but apparently (from cost cutting) out to 2 years.

      120

  • #
    Charles k May

    Joanne,

    I will try to find an article from Machine Design a few years ago about the problems with bearings. I sent the article, but I don’t know whether I preserved it on this newer computer.

    50

  • #
    Hanrahan

    The Law of Diminishing Returns meets Moore’s Law. Who wins?

    I have never swallowed the idea that batteries will become ever cheaper either. They long ago changed from being a technology where Moore’s Law might be applicable to being a commodity where scale has only a small effect, and Musk’s “giga factory” is the end play of scale. Proof of this is with your car battery, they go up every year with inflation.

    110

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      And in EVs they ‘go up’ spectaculary.

      80

    • #
      Lawrie

      Wheat gets cheaper because we grow more than we can use and input costs remain fairly static. Batteries are made from non renewable minerals which are in short supply so the more batteries being made the more material is required and if that material is becoming more scarce then the battery has to get dearer. So batteries will not get cheaper unless they are made from something else that is abundant and cheap to mine and refine. Coal maybe.

      20

  • #
    Neville

    AGAIN why don’t the OECD MSM and govts quote the real ” Global Primary Energy Consumption by SOURCE”?
    Here’s the 2022 update from OWI Data and you’ll note the HORIZONTAL line at the bottom of the graph is for TOXIC W & S, Modern biofuels, other renewables and COMBINED these sources are still LESS than TRADITIONAL BIOMASS ( wood, straw and DUNG) at 6.91%.
    When will our OECD GOVTs look up the REAL WORLD DATA and return to ONLY BASE-LOAD energy ASAP?
    Just check the OWI Data link for the Primary Energy percentages by SOURCE in 2022.

    https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy-share-inc-biomass

    30

  • #
    Steve

    The renewables fantasy will only have failed if you start hearing about some millionaires or billionaires losing their fortunes.
    The mistake commonly made, IMO, is to assume that renewables are there to provide cheap, green, efficient energy. They are not and neither can they.
    The real objective of renewables is wealth transfer, from the tax payer to the already rich. In that respect they are a massive success.

    170

    • #
      Rupert Ashford

      Spot on. And to exact revenge on the Aussie plebs who dared vote against him by some ghost of PMs past. Harvesting heaps of subsidy dosh through his investment firm from Aussie taxpayers as well I bet, all the while pushing up energy prices as well..

      40

  • #
    Old Goat

    The excreta has finally hit the fan . Those who invested will have to take a bath…..

    50

  • #
    Ronin

    It also seems that windmills are losing ‘their social licence’.

    60

  • #
    Forrest Gardener

    The one thing you can say with certainty is that the sheer unreliability of wind power makes the predictability of the daily yeild of solar power look good.

    Of course neither work at all without a backup for when they provide zero power.

    Exhibit 1 – https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/king-island

    60

    • #
      Neville

      Thanks for the reminder Forrest and the Diesel is about 80 to 90% W & S and battery are SFA as usual.
      But don’t worry the Bowen loony BELIEVEs we can power Australia using his delusional W & S fantasies.

      70

  • #

    For so long now I have written that wind generation delivers so little power from what is now quite a huge total Nameplate.

    I can highlight this by showing a direct comparison between ALL that Australian Nameplate and just the one coal fired power plant, that plant I have often used for a comparison like this, Bayswater, a 38 years old power plant, now three generations older than the most recent technology, compared to what is now the latest technology wind plants.

    Bayswater is situated on the one site. It has four generators.

    Wind Generation now has 79 separate industrial wind plants and (around) 3500+ separate turbine generators.

    Bayswater has a Nameplate of 2640MW.

    Wind has a Nameplate of 10,277MW, so that’s almost FOUR times the total of Bayswater. (3.89 to be exact)

    Bayswater, already 15 years older than the best case life span for any wind plant, just in the most recent whole of year (2022) delivered 14,500GWH of generated power to the grid.

    ALL that wind generation delivered across that same year 25,940GWH to the grid, so that’s 1.8 times (ONE POINT EIGHT) the delivered power from Bayswater.

    4 times the Nameplate compared to 1.8 times the delivered power.

    One plant versus 79 plants.

    The highest wind generation has operated at was for ONE five minute point in time four weeks ago, when wind was operating at 7909MW, so it never even gets within a ‘bulls roar’ of its total Nameplate.

    Feed coal into Bayswater and it operates at 2640MW with all four Units running.

    Why, just yesterday, all of that wind Nameplate delivered 38GWH across the whole 24 hour day.

    For that same 24 hour day, Bayswater delivered 44.8GWH of generated power.

    ONE plant versus 79 Plants.

    The cost comparison becomes pretty obvious, but the main point in all this is that actual power delivery is so small by comparison.

    Same day, yesterday as above, those 79 wind plants delivered 38GWH.

    All 15 coal fired power plants, (that’s all there is) delivered 360GWH, almost ten times the generated power from wind.

    How do they even begin to hope to ….. umm, replace coal fired power, if wind is to make up the bulk of that. Now think of the exponential extra wind Nameplate (and by extrapolation, the COST of it all) which would be needed to do that, when at times, wind is only operating at less than 5% of its total.

    Tony.

    420

    • #
      Ross

      Tony, love the way you call them industrial wind plants. Well done. I hope you use that term on other blogs as well. That would really rankle the pro winders.

      170

      • #
        Honk R Smith

        ‘industrial wind plant’
        Here in the US, we use the term ‘Congress’.

        (Ok, I know, low hanging fruit.
        But somebody had to make that joke.
        Try to appreciate my sacrifice.)

        160

    • #
      Robber

      Thanks Tony. And then add the costs of all the extra transmission systems to connect those distributed wind plants that must be sized for their maximum output.
      Plus the backup dispatchable generators (gas?) for when the wind doesn’t blow. What a massive misuse of resources.

      120

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Speaking of coal generation – How are the repairs to Callide going, anyone know?

      30

      • #
        • #

          Thanks Hanrahan.

          Hmm, at that article, it was said that Unit 3 might run up to 234MW in January of 2024, and might I mention that’s about ‘half rat power’.

          Umm, yesterday, at 3.30PM, EVERY ONE of those 79 Australian industrial wind plants was delivering a combined total of ….. 247MW, across the whole of the Australian wind generation fleet.

          Need I say more?

          Tony.

          110

          • #
            Ted1.

            The Callide case warrants a crimial investigation. There are people at large who would believe that sabotaging a power statuin would render the world a service. There would be a security system in place to prevent such people from gaining access. Could it have failed?

            I downloaded a copy of an early report. Memory tells me that a generator “motored” for more than half an hour before blowing up.

            How could this be? I would have thought bells would instantly ring if a generator got even a little bit out of whack.

            50

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Frankly Tony I’m surprised that wind power is as useful as your figures indicate.

      I wouldn’t have guessed they were producing more than they are on King Island which is 5/8 of SFA. The exact percentage at any time (19% as I type) is at https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/king-island

      Sorry to post that link twice in these comments but the sheer audacity of claiming King Island as a “success story” leaves me flabberghasted.

      40

  • #
    Neville

    Here’s a very dismal comparison for anyone who respects DATA and EVIDENCE.
    Maths Guru Harry Markopoulas took about 5 minutes to understand the Bernie Madoff BILLIONs $ PONZI scheme, but he had to hound the US SEC for 9 years before they would take any notice.
    And it was actually brought on by the GFC share collapse and the poor investors demanding their money.
    But the crooked Madoff’s PONZI scheme was a tiny fleabite compared to the endless TRILLIONs $ delusional W & S disasters and their climate change BS and Fraud.
    This has now lasted about 35 years and who knows when they’ll start to WAKE UP?
    I’ll believe it when I see it.

    130

  • #
    Ronin

    O/T a bit, the climate loons now predict that Antarctica, the planets refrigerator will become the planets radiator.

    100

  • #
    STJOHNOFGRAFTON

    These gigantic wind turbines experience the torque effects of any propellor, but on a grand scale. Parts like bearings wear out and have to be replaced because the vibrational friction causes overheating and sometimes destructive burnouts. It’s the enormous size of these wind turbines that makes replacing parts an expensive challenge to their cost effectiveness and investment potential.

    60

    • #

      And what is so ironic is that these turbines need oil for lubrication. Isn’t oil a hydrocarbon? Yes. Maybe they want to now use whale oil or seal oil or other animal oil. Hello Greenpeace. How about saving those whales and the others?

      What a load of hypocrites.

      80

  • #
    Ronin

    “What the CSIRO have not been doing is properly factoring in all the transmission lines, the backup storage, that’s required to support wind and solar energy.”

    Don’t the climate clowns realise or understand that they have to actually build TWO power generation systems, one to utilise the weather dependent wind and solar and another one to back up or ‘firm’ the first one, now that’s real clever, seeing as how ONE system used to work just fine.

    180

  • #
    RickWill

    Meanwhile, Star of the South is forging ahead in Victoria. This offshore wind project will bleed the next generation of Australians of their wealth to support retires in Denmark through CIP and retired tradies in Australia though Cbus.

    The project is gathering pace as it offers well paying job opportunities for locals:
    https://www.starofthesouth.com.au/community-advisory-group

    The Community Advisory Group is one way the community can be involved in Star of the South – it’s an important point of connection between the project and the Gippsland community.

    Star of the South is a 2.2GW offshore wind project with potential to supply around 20 percent of Victoria’s energy needs and create up to 2,000 direct new jobs in Victoria.

    The last statement is wonderful. Potential for 20% BUT guaranteed ZERO. That is where this nonsense falls apart.

    Australia has led the developed world in eliminating passenger vehicle manufacturing but it appears Australia is slow to learn from the rest of the world that offshore wind energy is an expensive fantasy. No wonder the Danish retirees are focused on Australia now.

    80

  • #
    Philip

    So if the problems affect 4% of the fleet, does that mean that 96% of them are good to go?

    10

  • #
    Ronin

    “No wonder the Danish retirees are focused on Australia now.”

    The world sees Australia as ” Mugs With Money”

    50

  • #
    Philip

    King Island is flying high today 50% wind. Mind you the headlines of the project were always, 100% capability. I’ve never seen that delivered in all my check-ins on our very own Fantasy Island “ze plane ze plane!”

    40

  • #
    David Maddison

    There is no excuse for our “leaders” (sic) to be so ignorant and stupid in destroying our energy supply.

    This is wilfull, purposeful destruction.

    When the appropriate time comes:

    DON’T FORGIVE. DON’T FORGET. PROSECUTE.

    And whenever you meet a politician, remind them that that’s what, we, the people, intend to do.

    80

  • #
    Neville

    So AGAIN here’s my very simple, accurate version of Human flourishing since 1950, or about the last 0.1% of our Human journey.
    In 1950 global Human life expectancy was about 45.5 years and population about 2.5 billion.
    YET in 2023 global life expectancy is now about 73 years and population over 8 billion or 5.5 billion more people in just 73 years.
    YET our poorest continent Africa ( 53 countries) had a life expectancy of just 36 years in 1950 and a pop of just 227 million.
    Yet in 2023 Africa’s life expectancy is now 64 years and their pop is now 1460 million.
    And that’s an increase of 1233 million more people since 1950.
    IOW this record Human flourishing proves that the GLOBAL CLIMATE has been very BENIGN for the last 73 years and compared to the last 200,000 + years.
    And all the data I’ve included above is from Macrotrends or OWI Data etc using UN data. So when will the OECD govts start to THINK and WAKE UP?.

    70

  • #
    Hanrahan

    Surely [and don’t call me Shirley] energy poverty will kill more people and sooner than CC ever could.

    50

  • #
    Peter

    Talking about wind energy, a German filmed the collapse of a wind turbine a few days ago:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s_AD3sgRkc

    40

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      Summer snow up on their Alps and collapsing toy windmills down on the flats: it’s not the planet which is ‘fragile’, it’s man’s folly which can’t handle a little weather. There’s a German word for that, and no, it’s not kaput, but close.

      40

    • #
      Philip

      Wow that thing really sent the debris flying. Nice find. I didnt see that on the news for some reason.

      20

    • #
      Ted1.

      About that failing turbine.

      That land was cropped in the previous year. The stubble is still standing. I wonder what the plans for it are this year?

      And I wonder if that mill might be less than one year old?

      10

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Failure of the blades and failure of the bearings would seem to go hand in hand.
    The bearing manufacturer will be blaming the blades as the primary cause . .

    10

    • #

      Bearings and ball bearings need to have their bearings. And at those heights, the bearings have no bearings with those vibrations.

      Simple engineering really.

      I’m amazed that the Europeans and especially the Germans got it so wrong. Obviously, these monsters were never tested properly.

      20

      • #
        Ted1.

        I wonder what stress they are designed to handle. With blades so long it would test the unit if it got middled by a whirlwind.

        00

  • #
    crakar24

    One can only imagine the stresses on the bearings with even the slightest variation in length/weight of a blade compared to the other two.

    What is obvious to those not possessed by wokism is impossible to be seen by those that are

    30

  • #
    Saighdear

    Well, if you do it here, you shouldn’t lose anything : No Salt, NO Land grab, no SEA waves. NIMBY either.

    00

  • #
    Charles k May

    I notified Joanne that I found the article I was looking for from Machine Design.

    The title of the article is Fixing Wind-Turbine Gearbox Problems:
    http://www.machinedesign.com /motors-drives/article/21831955/fixing-windturbine-gearbox-problems

    [Thanks Charles! – Jo]

    20

  • #
    CHRIS

    I agree with Johnny Rotten’s comment about wind and solar being free, but converting them to electricity isn’t. I stopped using the term “renewable energy” long ago, and instead use “alternate energy sources”. I constantly get ridiculed for this, until I point out that solar panels and wind turbines are not made out of thin air; they require mining, just like fossil fuels, so they are NOT renewable. Some people then agree with me, others (zombies) still refuse to change their mind. To me, it is amazing what people will simply accept as true, and not think about it (I blame the lack of proper Science teaching in schools).

    30

  • #
  • #

    Today’s impractical and expensive alternative electricity technology may well become tomorrow’s energy mainstay, as alternative energy collection and storage technologies are developing. In addition, factors such as new technologies and the law of inflation may lead to a sharp decrease in the cost of renewable energy over the next decade.

    00