@@feyaia We can still generate more intermittent clean energy without storage and not have excess. Yes storage is required to completely displace fossil fuels. But even without storage the grid needs more clean energy
While energy storage is constantly growing and not quite there yet, it’s better to have the means and availability for the energy to be produced to be readily available for when it does happen. Chicken and the egg situation.
the benefits of utilising energy from renewable certainly outweighs other factors on energy generated from fossil fuels. the long term result in using renewable energy is undeniably priceless to save humanity and our only planet.
I would tell the local officials that they may keep their coal and other carbon fueled generators if they wish. But, they must also keep the CO2 and other pollutants in their jurisdictions along with them instead of sending them off into the atmosphere to share with the green power jurisdictions. For every benefit, there is a cost. So, you can't have the sole benefit while passing along the costs to others.
oh you mean the West, which has "exported" much of it's CO2 production to Asian nations, and then pontificate to them on how bad they are? Maybe the fat rich West (especially US, Canada, Australia etc) should IMMEDIATELY CUT THEIR CO2 EMISSIONS BY AT LEAST 50%. Percapita these hypocrits ARE THE PROBLEM (remember the West's industrial revolution is responsible for about 70% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. If anyone needs to reduce their standard of living it must be the rich West; it must stop its overconsumption and accept lower per capital incomes .
All the problems associated with this installation were known in advance. It's typical that significant quantities of renewable energy are located in remote areas. It's typical that the need for energy storage and transportation aren't reported or ignored by project planners. it's really unfortunate because wind energy gets a bad reputation.
Energy storage isn't always needed for VRE projects to be viable. It really only becomes more of an issue as a grid reaches 65% VRE. Just look at the South Australian grid. Transmission is normally taken into account for VRE projects, but sometimes regulations distort the planning or hide the conditions of the transmission network.
Don't be fooled by China-haters. There is such thing called UHV transimmsion line used mainly by China to transit electrical power over 3,000km distance with the minimum loss. China has about 35 of them. UHV starts at 800kv. Maximum voltage used in US and UK are 500kv and 400kv respectively. China's hydro are in Sichuan, Tibet and Yunnan, Solar parks in Xinjiang and wind farms in Gansu all transmitted 2,000 to 3,000 km to the coastal consumers in the East.
With every advancement of technology a certain number of jobs are eliminated. The biggest issue is supporting new job growth in other industries while phasing out coal. Continuing to use coal unabated is just like doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. That is the very definition of madness. Help and time is needed for people to develop and transition to a different economic sector (i.e. agriculture, service, manufacturing or tech) also a bit of patience and foresight. How do you replace all those coal mining jobs in such a limited time? What economic sector can be diversified in that province? What investments will be need to accomplish this in the short term? But one thing is certain, standing still is not an option.
China has a comprehensive carbon trading system to change the cost structure to favour alternative energy systems like wind farms. Other nations need to follow
When the automobile come into used all the Horses stage a protest. Same as here. The world will keep moving forward and we all must change to meet it or get left behind. Nothing stay the same.
Intuitively it seems like there are too many turbines and it will be super expensive to maintain them. Also the generators are so high in the air that it seems like it will further complicate the maintenance.
A truly great project, but like all there is the moral, economic and effectiveness to consider. Short termism, self interest and vested interests will impact on efficiency, all costs (assuming all costs including pollution, environmental, food and water, human life, etc. are considered). Individuals and leaders perhaps need to take responsibility for this by reinventing the economy, communities, and retraining. We all need to improve in these and many other areas to create a more cohesive future.
if possible set up metal refining plant that use a lot of power ie aluminium ill bet that some metal ores are available thats a vast area, provides jobs and gives the power a use the initial planni g was very poor not to spot the problems.
Gobi Desert? No water. Hydrogen production at sea is being tried in the EU. The Europeans are doing wind power at sea. Not impressed with this episode, considering China is the biggest burner of coal in the world.
Well in Texas the percentage of green energy including wind is pretty low . The best example from the US will be Iowa 60% wind, Kansas 51% wind or Oklahoma 48% wind.
That was a shit show. We didn't have power for 3 days. People were dying. People Did die. Now, granted, 3 days without power doesn't seem too bad. But when it's bitter cold, it's a different story.
@@najibyarzerachic My country (Scotland) met 97% of its needs via wind last year and we exported over 40% of the electricity produced. The American Power grid system is 50 years behind where it should be, that isn’t the fault of clean energy.
America is not exactly a model of sophistication lol. China knows how to integrate energy systems. It has to first and foremost serve the public interest, not greedy Western oligarchs!
Its a problem the entire world is struggling with. Man is the bad link in any production process. But every production process is there because of man, In the days before they ban asbestos the mine workers did not want those mines to close as they had a family to support on the other hand they also knew the asbestos fibers is going to put them in a early grave.
The landscape is aesthetically devastated for tens of miles around these architectonic monstrosities. The avi-fauna is sterilized even further. Besides, Does anybody know what happens when Terawatts are subtracted to the prevailing currents??? You can cancel this post but you cannot cancel the problems.
@@prutherford2522 The biggest problem with Wind and Solar is they are non-continuous...Non-continuous energy is worthless for industry, transportation and the general energy needs of individual citizens. You bring up China's energy reforms when Wind power can't even get out of the gate because it would require a back-up energy source?
This video is a laugh because it said just the local government refusing to cooperate the biggest wind farm in China failed. Here are the last few years electricity generated by wind Year Electrical power generated in (TWh) 2012 95.9 2013 141.1 2014 156.0 2015 185.7 2016 237.0 2017 304,6 2018 365.8 2019 405.3 2020 465.5 2021 655.6 2022 772.0 Bearing in mind a country like UK generated about 310 TWh each years from coal, gas, nuclear, wind, hydro and solar combined so the wind power alone captured by China in each of the last two years is more than double the UK national total generation! This video is full of errors because it claimed 6.1 GW was commissioned in 2021 globally. Between 2010 to 2021 China alone in each year had commissioned more than 6.1GW according to Wikipedia. Since China had installed total wind power capacity of 31.1GW and 328.48GW in 2010 and 2021 respectively the average increase is already 24.7GW per annum!
@@DavidOfWhitehills such statistics would depend on the idiosyncratic details of the land over which the transmission has to happen, as the voiceover in the video mentions. If you want explicit calculations of cost benefit, ask the folks who made the video.
@@ne4534 I'm familiar with the proposed Asia Australia energy link and the solar park that it will be attached to. I look forward to it and think it will be a great project. But in the context of this video, the video authors have already explicitly said that transmitting the energy to Beijing would be more expensive than alternatives. Wether such a project is worthwhile depends both on the idiosyncratic nature of the transmission path, and the cost of alternatives. It's my own opinion that fossil fuel alternatives should be made more expensive by a carbon tax so as to encompass their true cost, but in the context of this video, the question is the alternative cost of local generation via fossil fuel is more or less than long distance transmission.
These sort of reports only give the nameplate capacity. If it was known generally that the real output is significantly less ( 25% to 45 % when new, and drops off steadily from then) perhaps there would be less hype about this technically deficient source of electricity. However much wind generation capacity is built there must be an equivelant amount of conventional generation to back up when wind power drops of, as it frequently does, to near zero. It is also a misconception to think that wind can replace conventional generation, it simply cannot. There is no option for reliable non CO2 emitting generation which is nuclear, nothing else we have can work.
John, while one or two wind farms in the U.K. have acapacity fcator of 50%, it's not general. However that is still an overcapacity of 200% looking from the other perspective. Conventional plants can acheive near 100% when required. If you look at the records this is not shown as planned maintenance for nuclear drops it to the high 80% and gas\coal plants rarely run at maximum as they are balancing demand and supply but they are capable of near 100% when required.
Renewables are cheaper now. Its where the world is heading. So, shall we just stick to coal cause some politician being supported by coal says so??? Those pesky greenies must be stopped!!! Do you still use your mobile phone from 5 years ago? 10 years ago?
coal is actually more expensive than renewable power. That line of argument goes nowhere. Europe did not reduce coal to be "green", but because renewables etc are cheaper.
WIND POWER IS NOT BENIGN. Wind farms are located where there are rivers of wind. Birds follow these rivers of wind when they migrate; wind farms are walls of death for the birds. Since 1970, bird populations in North America have plummeted by 30%, with an appalling acceleration of the decline since the advent of wind farms. Migrating bats are also slaughtered. The exterminated birds and bats fed on insects; they were essential to the ecological systems. There was a species of butterfly that used to migrate from Florida to New England, pollinating crops along the way, Wind farms have exterminated this species, crops are not getting pollinated. Less food for us. Wind power kills, but hey, the corporations are making lots of money!!
@@Peter4475 When I moved to the Columbia Hills in Washington State in 2000, there was an abundant population of raptors. Any time of the day, one would see raptors circling in the sky. When one drove down the country road, it seemed as if raptors were perched on every telephone pole. Then they built the wind farms. Within a few years, the raptors vanished, slaughtered by the blades of the wind turbines. Wind farm employees confirmed that the ground below the turbines were littered with raptor carcasses, though of course the corporate suits denied it. The total absence of raptors bears witness to the truth. With no raptors, the ecological balance in these hills is sorely damaged. I miss them.
@@zeitgeist5134 Sounds like you should move to Denmark then. I just looked it up and national studies confirm my own observations - that our overall raptor population is strong and getting stronger still. So if you like birds and raptors, don't fight big wind in Washington, just move to Denmark.
You are 100% right, lets stick to coal, which is being over taken by cheaper renewables. Not to mention all the subsidies fossil fuel get in the billions every year! Not to mention all the mines not cleaned up after closure! Then Gov has to pay for it from tax, AKA citizens pay for it not the mining company, they already made the money and ran. Not to mention all the health issues caused by burning coal. So, yes, some scrap metal we can't recycle now is the issue with wind farms as to why we should stick with fossil fuel. Shall we calculate the cost of renewables vs fossil fuel again???
This project is fantastic!
We need many more of these. This much clean energy makes a real difference. Well done
No. We don't. Not one word was said in this video about energy Storage.
@@feyaia
We can still generate more intermittent clean energy without storage and not have excess. Yes storage is required to completely displace fossil fuels. But even without storage the grid needs more clean energy
While energy storage is constantly growing and not quite there yet, it’s better to have the means and availability for the energy to be produced to be readily available for when it does happen. Chicken and the egg situation.
Perhaps any manufacturing which requires a lot of energy could be built closer to this energy source to take advantage of it.
the benefits of utilising energy from renewable certainly outweighs other factors on energy generated from fossil fuels. the long term result in using renewable energy is undeniably priceless to save humanity and our only planet.
I would tell the local officials that they may keep their coal and other carbon fueled generators if they wish. But, they must also keep the CO2 and other pollutants in their jurisdictions along with them instead of sending them off into the atmosphere to share with the green power jurisdictions. For every benefit, there is a cost. So, you can't have the sole benefit while passing along the costs to others.
oh you mean the West, which has "exported" much of it's CO2 production to Asian nations, and then pontificate to them on how bad they are? Maybe the fat rich West (especially US, Canada, Australia etc) should IMMEDIATELY CUT THEIR CO2 EMISSIONS BY AT LEAST 50%. Percapita these hypocrits ARE THE PROBLEM (remember the West's industrial revolution is responsible for about 70% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. If anyone needs to reduce their standard of living it must be the rich West; it must stop its overconsumption and accept lower per capital incomes .
Would be interesting to see if the energy crisis has pushed them to use the wind farm more again.
Never been an energy crisis but a globalist elite needs more money and power crisis.
All the problems associated with this installation were known in advance. It's typical that significant quantities of renewable energy are located in remote areas. It's typical that the need for energy storage and transportation aren't reported or ignored by project planners. it's really unfortunate because wind energy gets a bad reputation.
Energy storage isn't always needed for VRE projects to be viable. It really only becomes more of an issue as a grid reaches 65% VRE. Just look at the South Australian grid. Transmission is normally taken into account for VRE projects, but sometimes regulations distort the planning or hide the conditions of the transmission network.
Is it a catch 22 situation,,,
Don't be fooled by China-haters. There is such thing called UHV transimmsion line used mainly by China to transit electrical power over 3,000km distance with the minimum loss. China has about 35 of them. UHV starts at 800kv. Maximum voltage used in US and UK are 500kv and 400kv respectively. China's hydro are in Sichuan, Tibet and Yunnan, Solar parks in Xinjiang and wind farms in Gansu all transmitted 2,000 to 3,000 km to the coastal consumers in the East.
With every advancement of technology a certain number of jobs are eliminated. The biggest issue is supporting new job growth in other industries while phasing out coal. Continuing to use coal unabated is just like doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. That is the very definition of madness. Help and time is needed for people to develop and transition to a different economic sector (i.e. agriculture, service, manufacturing or tech) also a bit of patience and foresight. How do you replace all those coal mining jobs in such a limited time? What economic sector can be diversified in that province? What investments will be need to accomplish this in the short term? But one thing is certain, standing still is not an option.
People thought that computers were going to eliminate jobs. Sure they eliminated some jobs, but they created far more than they eliminated.
@@CraigFryer just wait and watch
@@arpankumardas4221 You are going to have to explain more than that.
China has a comprehensive carbon trading system to change the cost structure to favour alternative energy systems like wind farms. Other nations need to follow
go ahead make more of that!
When the automobile come into used all the Horses stage a protest. Same as here. The world will keep moving forward and we all must change to meet it or get left behind. Nothing stay the same.
Important lessons learned, and to be learned
Go Green. Our Children will understand.
Don't fail Humanity.
We are All in this together.
Smoke Weed and be Nice to people:).
The capacity of this project had achieved 9.25 GW in end of 2020, not as big as 20 GW in 2010 plan, but still remarkable.
It is still not complete, so drawing concusions must be tempered with reality!
@@prutherford2522 If you only count on money and profits, then most renewable energy projects shouldn't exist.
The capacity keeps growing and had been over 10 GW by the mid of 2021 according to open data.
No energy crisis was caused by the calm in the north sea....
Intuitively it seems like there are too many turbines and it will be super expensive to maintain them. Also the generators are so high in the air that it seems like it will further complicate the maintenance.
A truly great project, but like all there is the moral, economic and effectiveness to consider. Short termism, self interest and vested interests will impact on efficiency, all costs (assuming all costs including pollution, environmental, food and water, human life, etc. are considered). Individuals and leaders perhaps need to take responsibility for this by reinventing the economy, communities, and retraining. We all need to improve in these and many other areas to create a more cohesive future.
Why not supply energy to counties around the area then?
if possible set up metal refining plant that use a lot of power ie aluminium ill bet that some metal ores are available thats a vast area, provides jobs and gives the power a use the initial planni g was very poor not to spot the problems.
Could they utilise the unused capacity to generate green hydrogen? Such a waste of potential
Gobi Desert? No water. Hydrogen production at sea is being tried in the EU. The Europeans are doing wind power at sea. Not impressed with this episode, considering China is the biggest burner of coal in the world.
Calm in the North sea?
Are you joking its windy 90% of the time
Ask Texas how that switch to green energy worked out for them.
Well in Texas the percentage of green energy including wind is pretty low . The best example from the US will be Iowa 60% wind, Kansas 51% wind or Oklahoma 48% wind.
That was a shit show. We didn't have power for 3 days. People were dying. People Did die. Now, granted, 3 days without power doesn't seem too bad. But when it's bitter cold, it's a different story.
@@najibyarzerachic My country (Scotland) met 97% of its needs via wind last year and we exported over 40% of the electricity produced. The American Power grid system is 50 years behind where it should be, that isn’t the fault of clean energy.
America is not exactly a model of sophistication lol. China knows how to integrate energy systems. It has to first and foremost serve the public interest, not greedy Western oligarchs!
The best way to produce energy is to open up more coal fired power plants and nuclear power and natural gas
Pair wind with base income and you start to handle the job situation
1000 miles is not so long of a ditance in power transmission. They only need some storage of ekectricity to reduce waste. Which is not that difficult.
1 comment ,,,,,,,,, Hornsey 2 and 3
Sometimes work
I am waiting for someone to scream wind farms cause Globull warming / cooling.
Its a problem the entire world is struggling with. Man is the bad link in any production process. But every production process is there because of man, In the days before they ban asbestos the mine workers did not want those mines to close as they had a family to support on the other hand they also knew the asbestos fibers is going to put them in a early grave.
The landscape is aesthetically devastated for tens of miles around these architectonic monstrosities.
The avi-fauna is sterilized even further.
Besides, Does anybody know what happens when Terawatts are subtracted to the prevailing currents???
You can cancel this post but you cannot cancel the problems.
You clearly do not understand the complexity of China's energy reforms. Educate yourself.
@@prutherford2522 The biggest problem with Wind and Solar is they are non-continuous...Non-continuous energy is worthless for industry, transportation and the general energy needs of individual citizens. You bring up China's energy reforms when Wind power can't even get out of the gate because it would require a back-up energy source?
They should build Bitcoin mining farms.
No. Idiot.
This video is a laugh because it said just the local government refusing to cooperate the biggest wind farm in China failed.
Here are the last few years electricity generated by wind
Year Electrical power generated in (TWh)
2012 95.9
2013 141.1
2014 156.0
2015 185.7
2016 237.0
2017 304,6
2018 365.8
2019 405.3
2020 465.5
2021 655.6
2022 772.0
Bearing in mind a country like UK generated about 310 TWh each years from coal, gas, nuclear, wind, hydro and solar combined so the wind power alone captured by China in each of the last two years is more than double the UK national total generation!
This video is full of errors because it claimed 6.1 GW was commissioned in 2021 globally. Between 2010 to 2021 China alone in each year had commissioned more than 6.1GW according to Wikipedia. Since China had installed total wind power capacity of 31.1GW and 328.48GW in 2010 and 2021 respectively the average increase is already 24.7GW per annum!
Need to use it for a crypto mining economic zone rather than utilizing coal fired power generation.
Sell the energy to Nearby Countries.
Long transmission lines make the resultant electricity more expensive than fossil alternatives. That's what the segment at 5:48 is about.
@@Natabus Please supply statistics.
@@Natabus Then why is Singapore working on a project to get renewable power from Australia 5000km away??
@@DavidOfWhitehills such statistics would depend on the idiosyncratic details of the land over which the transmission has to happen, as the voiceover in the video mentions. If you want explicit calculations of cost benefit, ask the folks who made the video.
@@ne4534 I'm familiar with the proposed Asia Australia energy link and the solar park that it will be attached to. I look forward to it and think it will be a great project. But in the context of this video, the video authors have already explicitly said that transmitting the energy to Beijing would be more expensive than alternatives. Wether such a project is worthwhile depends both on the idiosyncratic nature of the transmission path, and the cost of alternatives. It's my own opinion that fossil fuel alternatives should be made more expensive by a carbon tax so as to encompass their true cost, but in the context of this video, the question is the alternative cost of local generation via fossil fuel is more or less than long distance transmission.
However large it is, it cannot provide baseload.....
They don't work. Stop making these inefficient things.
This is what happens when you try and jam things down throats. Did Anyone ask the people that would be the customers if they wanted all this?
they don't know, there will NEVER be enough wind generated elect, lol. They will always use all that is generated and need more! lol
No really the only issue with wind is that it is intermittent we need energy storage
These sort of reports only give the nameplate capacity. If it was known generally that the real output is significantly less ( 25% to 45 % when new, and drops off steadily from then) perhaps there would be less hype about this technically deficient source of electricity.
However much wind generation capacity is built there must be an equivelant amount of conventional generation to back up when wind power drops of, as it frequently does, to near zero.
It is also a misconception to think that wind can replace conventional generation, it simply cannot.
There is no option for reliable non CO2 emitting generation which is nuclear, nothing else we have can work.
Storage is the key
Sherri,
stporage is not an answer to intermittency, it can't be. The deficit of low renewable output can't be covered by storage, it's a falacy.
They specifically said the capacity factor exceeded that of off shore wind in this location, meaning probably more than 45%
John,
while one or two wind farms in the U.K. have acapacity fcator of 50%, it's not general. However that is still an overcapacity of 200% looking from the other perspective. Conventional plants can acheive near 100% when required.
If you look at the records this is not shown as planned maintenance for nuclear drops it to the high 80% and gas\coal plants rarely run at maximum as they are balancing demand and supply but they are capable of near 100% when required.
Problem is - burning coal is Not expansive - there is the fault
Numbers please. Without numbers is merely opinion.
Renewables are cheaper now. Its where the world is heading.
So, shall we just stick to coal cause some politician being supported by coal says so??? Those pesky greenies must be stopped!!!
Do you still use your mobile phone from 5 years ago? 10 years ago?
coal is actually more expensive than renewable power. That line of argument goes nowhere. Europe did not reduce coal to be "green", but because renewables etc are cheaper.
A government planned project is a contradiction in terms.
WIND POWER IS NOT BENIGN. Wind farms are located where there are rivers of wind. Birds follow these rivers of wind when they migrate; wind farms are walls of death for the birds. Since 1970, bird populations in North America have plummeted by 30%, with an appalling acceleration of the decline since the advent of wind farms. Migrating bats are also slaughtered. The exterminated birds and bats fed on insects; they were essential to the ecological systems. There was a species of butterfly that used to migrate from Florida to New England, pollinating crops along the way, Wind farms have exterminated this species, crops are not getting pollinated. Less food for us. Wind power kills, but hey, the corporations are making lots of money!!
It's been a while since I've last seen so much misinformation condensed into only four lines of text. Good job!
@@Peter4475 When I moved to the Columbia Hills in Washington State in 2000, there was an abundant population of raptors. Any time of the day, one would see raptors circling in the sky. When one drove down the country road, it seemed as if raptors were perched on every telephone pole. Then they built the wind farms. Within a few years, the raptors vanished, slaughtered by the blades of the wind turbines. Wind farm employees confirmed that the ground below the turbines were littered with raptor carcasses, though of course the corporate suits denied it. The total absence of raptors bears witness to the truth. With no raptors, the ecological balance in these hills is sorely damaged. I miss them.
@@zeitgeist5134 Sounds like you should move to Denmark then. I just looked it up and national studies confirm my own observations - that our overall raptor population is strong and getting stronger still. So if you like birds and raptors, don't fight big wind in Washington, just move to Denmark.
@@Peter4475 By the way, I condemn people (including, on occasion, myself) who use sarcasm as a weapon of personal attack. It reveals an ugly mind.
Just wow.
Worst thing ever invented. Too difficult to fix and maintain.... There's wind farm graveyards that need to be talked about more than this shite.
Where are they?
You are 100% right, lets stick to coal, which is being over taken by cheaper renewables.
Not to mention all the subsidies fossil fuel get in the billions every year!
Not to mention all the mines not cleaned up after closure! Then Gov has to pay for it from tax, AKA citizens pay for it not the mining company, they already made the money and ran.
Not to mention all the health issues caused by burning coal.
So, yes, some scrap metal we can't recycle now is the issue with wind farms as to why we should stick with fossil fuel.
Shall we calculate the cost of renewables vs fossil fuel again???
You haven’t looked to closely inside a coal fired power station then. Because that’s sooooo simple and easy to fix and maintain.
What a joke!