finlo Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 21 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Half will be fine. Average 10.8MW would be fantastic for the island. Even 8.5MW would be great. That's about £8M worth of gas saved every year. Yippee new Discovery's for all the MUA staff! 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 If you use less of a product, the unit price you pay will increase. Making the assumption that gas will still be used here and wind turbine installations are expanded, would there eventually be reached the point that the gas pipeline is no longer financially viable (or substitute the interconnector, if you wish)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: Half will be fine. Average 10.8MW would be fantastic for the island. Even 8.5MW would be great. That's about £8M worth of gas saved every year. Two things. Firstly, the gas power plant Will be running at full power, selling electricity to uk. Why? Because it runs most efficiently at full power. There are two turbines, each of which use X amount of gas. If both are running at full capacity, a third turbine is fired up and basically runs off the exhaust of the other two, generating an extra 30% electricity for free. So if the gas station is going to be running, it will be at full power. Secondly, Earystane is completely the wrong place. £40 million will not touch the sides of the installation. Transportation is virtually impossible. There is no electricity infrastructure to connect to. Hundreds of tons of metal work. Roughly 800 cement trucks. Years of disruption. All for just over s third the electricity we are being promised by the spin doctors. Jurby is an obvious place for large turbines. As is Andreas Airfield. Smaller ones could be landed at Peel and put on the hill behind the power station. Even a few small ones on Douglas head. More realistically, there are s couple of private companies trying to install solar farms and being pushed back! Why? Someone else paying for the infrastructure and our government obstructing them! What planet are they living on! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 hour ago, Two-lane said: If you use less of a product, the unit price you pay will increase. Making the assumption that gas will still be used here and wind turbine installations are expanded, would there eventually be reached the point that the gas pipeline is no longer financially viable (or substitute the interconnector, if you wish)? Assuming you have to invest in dispatchable electricity such as gas turbines and/or interconnectors (which the IOM has to for resilience), then the capital base is relatively fixed but the marginal cost can be vastly reduced with a chunk of demand offset by onshore wind generation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 hour ago, Two-lane said: If you use less of a product, the unit price you pay will increase. Making the assumption that gas will still be used here and wind turbine installations are expanded, would there eventually be reached the point that the gas pipeline is no longer financially viable (or substitute the interconnector, if you wish)? Good comments The plan is to shut the power station. All based load power from the interconnectors. Good question about the viability of operating the pipeline just for domestic gas. I thinks it's about 50 50 but not sure where I got that info from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 1 hour ago, Cambon said: Two things. Firstly, the gas power plant Will be running at full power, selling electricity to uk. Why? Because it runs most efficiently at full power. There are two turbines, each of which use X amount of gas. If both are running at full capacity, a third turbine is fired up and basically runs off the exhaust of the other two, generating an extra 30% electricity for free. So if the gas station is going to be running, it will be at full power. Secondly, Earystane is completely the wrong place. £40 million will not touch the sides of the installation. Transportation is virtually impossible. There is no electricity infrastructure to connect to. Hundreds of tons of metal work. Roughly 800 cement trucks. Years of disruption. All for just over s third the electricity we are being promised by the spin doctors. Jurby is an obvious place for large turbines. As is Andreas Airfield. Smaller ones could be landed at Peel and put on the hill behind the power station. Even a few small ones on Douglas head. The higher you are the more windy it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissolt Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 2 hours ago, Happier diner said: The UK is nothing like as windy as the isle of man thought is it? Are you actually for real? Can't you accept that the UK figures are way lower than the MUA estimates and in fact the mua would be setting new world records to achieve that average. Stick to painting the lines for the DOI love 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 Jurby has not been nicknamed "Windy City" for no reason. It's windswept, flat and virtually at sea-level, the same altitude as marine windfarms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 18 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Jurby has not been nicknamed "Windy City" for no reason. It's windswept, flat and virtually at sea-level, the same altitude as marine windfarms. Correct. Those RAF people know what they are doing when choosing sites for new runways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 2 hours ago, Non-Believer said: Jurby has not been nicknamed "Windy City" for no reason. It's windswept, flat and virtually at sea-level, the same altitude as marine windfarms. Jurby would be fine for a windfarm. However @Cambon says it's the obvious choice. It's not the obvious choice at all. It's an alternative choice. Be good to see them on both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 3 Share Posted July 3 2 hours ago, cissolt said: Are you actually for real? Can't you accept that the UK figures are way lower than the MUA estimates and in fact the mua would be setting new world records to achieve that average. Stick to painting the lines for the DOI love Yes the UK figures are way lower than the IOm estimates. Let's hope they do get world record results. Thanks for the advice love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 The only world record we will achieve, will be the differential between the cost at which it was sold to the populace, and the debt burden for being wildly inaccurate for years thereafter ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 10 hours ago, Happier diner said: Jurby would be fine for a windfarm. However @Cambon says it's the obvious choice. It's not the obvious choice at all. It's an alternative choice. Be good to see them on both. It is the obvious choice. Ease of delivery, ease of installation, brown field site, already connected to the grid and there is space for at least nine windmills. Tell me how Earystane can even equal that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 24 minutes ago, Cambon said: It is the obvious choice. Ease of delivery, ease of installation, brown field site, already connected to the grid and there is space for at least nine windmills. Tell me how Earystane can even equal that? What is the official reasoning for not choosing Jurby? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 4 minutes ago, NoTail said: What is the official reasoning for not choosing Jurby? Is there an official reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.