Wind turbines are quite a popular form of energy production in
non-sun-blessed Countries, such as the UK, where it rains a lot of the
time and sun is more rare. As of 2020, wind
made up 24.8% of all of the UK’s energy production, with the
greatest source being natural gas at 34.5%. This beats nuclear energy
production at 17.2%, and easily beats out renewable sources such as
solar at 4.4%.
UK energy production (source:
Wikipedia)
Much of the wind turbine power generation is via offshore wind farms,
which is then piped via massive cables onshore. As the Wikipedia
article points out:
By the beginning of September 2021, the UK had 10,973 wind turbines
with a total installed capacity of over 24.2 gigawatts: 13.8 gigawatts
of onshore capacity and 10.4 gigawatts of offshore capacity [..]
Current Implementation
I’m going to use the UK as a use case for wind turbines, as the UK
has one of the largest and most successful implementations in the World
to date. If anything, wind production is likely to be less
efficient for other locations. The UK has quite strong
winds due to some relatively unique geography.
Efficiency
A wind turbine is a relatively simple concept, a motor is spun by the
force of the wind and this in turn generates electricity. It’s of course
a little more complex than this, but that is enough to get the
basic idea. Next we an take a look at efficiency:
Accordingly, Betz’s law gives the maximal achievable extraction of
wind power by a wind turbine as 16/27 (59.3%) of the rate at which the
kinetic energy of the air arrives at the turbine.
It’s worth noting this is not really a bad thing at all. 100%
conversion would mean zero wind speed after reaching the turbine, which
could have a dramatic impact on the environment, etc. It would also mean
it wouldn’t be possible to have them so close
to one another.
Wind-to-rotor efficiency (including rotor blade friction and drag)
are among the factors affecting the final price of wind power. Further
inefficiencies, such as gearbox losses, generator and converter losses,
reduce the power delivered by a wind turbine. To protect components from
undue wear, extracted power is held constant above the rated operating
speed as theoretical power increases at the cube of wind speed, further
reducing theoretical efficiency. In 2001, commercial utility-connected
turbines delivered 75% to 80% of the Betz limit of power extractable
from the wind, at rated operating speed.
As you can see, higher wind does not equal higher return, only higher
wear on the turbine parts. There is also some inefficiencies that simply
cannot be removed from the system. 75% - 80% of the theoretical upper
limit of energy conversion seen in the field is highly
impressive. Bare in mind, some of the most efficient engines out there
only see numbers like 50% efficiency in normal operating conditions.
Analysis of 3128 wind turbines older than 10 years in Denmark showed
that half of the turbines had no decrease, while the other half saw a
production decrease of 1.2% per year.
It’s quite interesting to see that there appears to be some form of
degradation in operating performance over time, similarly seen in solar
power. Something like nuclear power or fossil fuel power stations will
pretty much provide just as much power year after year (within limits).
Part of this is because they are simply more maintainable and the
conditions they operate under are more controllable. Wind turbine are
typically hard to repair (and this has knock-on effects we will discuss
later).
Infrastructure
One issue with building wind turbine farms offshore is that there is
no existing infrastructure out there. These farms are generating many
megawatts or electricity and this needs to make its way inland with
massive copper cables. These is resistance in these cables and therefore
a voltage drop, further increasing inefficiency.
Environmental impact of wind power includes effect on wildlife, but
can be mitigated if proper monitoring and mitigation strategies are
implemented. Thousands of birds, including rare species, have been
killed by the blades of wind turbines, though wind turbines contribute
relatively insignificantly to anthropogenic avian mortality. Wind farms
and nuclear power stations are responsible for between 0.3 and 0.4 bird
deaths per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while fossil fueled power
stations are responsible for about 5.2 fatalities per GWh. In 2009, for
every bird killed by a wind turbine in the US, nearly 500,000 were
killed by cats and another 500,000 by buildings.
Compared to other energy generation methods, the impact on wildlife
can be said to be better, but still not ideal.
End of Life
Another consideration is the carbon emissions generated during the
production of these massive structures. They have to operate some time
before they are carbon-neutral. As many of the parts cannot be recycled,
this is a carbon cost that must be considered when considering their
‘green’ nature.
In Germany, wind turbine blades are commercially recycled as part of
an alternative fuel mix for a cement factory. In the USA the town of
Casper, Wyoming has buried 1,000 non-recyclable blades in its landfill
site, earning $675,000 for the town. It pointed out that wind farm waste
is less toxic than other garbage.
When decommissioning the wind turbines, it is important to consider
that some
parts can simply not be recycled, such as the blades. They are often
made of some glass composite material and therefore cannot be easily
handled either. The only real safe way to deal with them is to bury them
or embed them in some material.
As of 2019, a wind turbine may cost around $1 million per
megawatt.
This includes labour costs and material costs, both of which are
difficult to reduce further given location and complexities regarding
optimal location for wind power generation. These locations can often be
inaccessible, if by altitude alone.
In 2015, it was estimated that the use of wind power in the UK had
added £18 to the average yearly electricity bill.
I believe one misconception that is often thrown out there is that
renewable energy is somehow a one-time investment into infinitely cheap
future electricity. This simply is not true. Renewable energy will be an
indefinitely increased cost to the bill/tax payer. As the UK and other
Countries switch to renewable sources of energy, their energy costs will
increase, not decrease.
In August and September 2021, the UK had to fire-up coal plants,
amidst a lack of wind, as power imports from Europe were insufficient to
satisfy demand.
Wind generation is very good when it is available, but wind cannot be
relied upon to be available at all times. Energy from storage makes up
just 0.5% of UK power - which is not even close to being sufficient to
make up for dips in wind-based energy production.
Putting more stress on the electric grid demand will be electric
vehicles, which could easily see electricity use jump by magnitudes.
Ironically, electric vehicles may also be the solution, with massive
batteries being attached to the energy grid in a decentralized manner,
they could equally be used to pump energy back into the grid at optimal
times to make up for generation shortages 1.
Main Issues
I believe the main issues with wind turbines can be summarised as
so:
Intermittent power generation - Wind turbines suck at
generating energy consistently. Wind generation can be highly
intermittent and will increase/decrease based on the time of the day.
Ideally, you want the ability to easily scale energy production based on
demand and be able to rely on some minimum power generation per turbine
- neither of which is true. As a result, less efficient methods are then
used to meet demand, such as coal plants.
Infrastructure - Many of these turbines are placed far-away
from the locations they serve - meaning that massive amounts of
infrastructure are required to integrate them. The closer we can get
wind turbines to the energy consumers, the better.
Cost/Investment - There is a significant investment
required before the wind turbines are able to generate power, something
that is ultimately passed onto the energy consumer.
I believe that through small-scale decentralization, many of these
issues can be addressed.
Decentralisation
I propose a decentralised solution, where individuals are able to
generate their own electricity from their own garden or land. This would
be very similar to how currently individuals can purchase their own
solar panels for their roof. This reduces costs as each person is able
to profit (reduce costs) from their own initial investment and can even
use low-cost materials to build out the wind turbine. As the turbines
would be located at the place where the generation is happening, this
massively reduces infrastructure costs too.
Using existing hardware will massively reduce costs in this space. As
electric vehicles are being pushed hard, it is not unreasonable to
consider what to do with the older vehicles, that will likely be
scrapped. On these vehicles can typically be found an alternator/starter
motor. There was already some discussion
in 2012 about low-cost small wind turbines using these. These would
not be the most efficient design, but more than good enough for a
note-worthy level of energy production.
Addressing localised storage, we could make use of mass-based
batteries by elevating a mass upwards and then lowering it to generate
energy, making use of the same motor for generation. Another method
could be to employ a flywheel, although it could be argued this requires
higher-precision engineering and could be significantly more dangerous.
A flywheel also leaks energy over time simply due to friction in the
bearings, etc, whereas an elevated mass will in theory not leak any
energy until lowered.
The reason why mass-based storage is not done on a large-scale is
simply that the problem also scales with the energy to be stored.
Elevating enough mass for a few kilowatts of power is relatively easy,
the same mass for a megawatt or gigawatt and the scale is enormous. This
appears to be an energy storage method only suitable for small
scale operations.