Thread: The Hidden Costs of Installing Wind Turbines.

.

Originally Posted by Tins

What on earth gave you that idea? They fall over, they catch fire, they explode. Meanwhile good old Hazelwood was still running at over 90% of its nameplate when it was switched off, totally reliably.
I wonder if any studies have been done comparing the costs, both financially and environmentally, of buying, making, transporting, installing, decommissioning and subsidising the turbine eyesores against keeping Hazlewood running. I seem to recall a figure being bandied about to modernise it of about $1 billion.

And some actually believe power will get cheaper,with all this change over to renewables.

Originally Posted by scarry

And some actually believe power will get cheaper,with all this change over to renewables.

Because they think that it comes from the wind/sun, but they don't realise that there is a capital cost plus maintenance costs and a shortish life before it needs an update. Plus, we keep forgetting we need a base load for when the wind doesn't blow (or blows too much) or the sun doesn't shine

Originally Posted by mrs

Because they think that it comes from the wind/sun, but they don't realise that there is a capital cost plus maintenance costs and a shortish life before it needs an update. Plus, we keep forgetting we need a base load for when the wind doesn't blow (or blows too much) or the sun doesn't shine

Also,we need all the cables,powerlines,transformers,etc,etc relocated to take the power from where it is going to be produced by solar,wind farms,etc..That is if the wind is blowing and sun is shining.
The whole grid needs to be restructured,rebuild,relocated and probably upgraded.

Maybe the energy providers are doing this for free

More likely up the costs by 100% at least, and on charge.

Originally Posted by Tins

What on earth gave you that idea? They fall over, they catch fire, they explode. Meanwhile good old Hazelwood was still running at over 90% of its nameplate when it was switched off, totally reliably.
I wonder if any studies have been done comparing the costs, both financially and environmentally, of buying, making, transporting, installing, decommissioning and subsidising the turbine eyesores against keeping Hazlewood running. I seem to recall a figure being bandied about to modernise it of about $1 billion.

Hazelwood is probably much like Trigger's 20-year-old broom, that has had 17 new handles and 14 new brushes.

Originally Posted by RANDLOVER;[URL="tel:3200283"

3200283[/URL]]Hazelwood is probably much like Trigger's 20-year-old broom, that has had 17 new handles and 14 new brushes.

If you had ever been inside a major power station you wouldn’t say that. Very few things in there are short term.

Originally Posted by Tins

If you had ever been inside a major power station you wouldn’t say that. Very few things in there are short term.

True , but a heap of people spend a lot of time and bucket loads of money keeping it that way.
A bit like most defenders.

Cheers Glen