M25 protests

[clubchamp98]

That's just lazy nonsense.

Could start with all the private jets going to Copt27.
Prince Harry.
The list is endless.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Hook, line & sinker?
Have a trolling infraction ?

What? ???????

 

[Dando]

Exhibit A - Gary Lineker.

he’ll be giving tax and relationship advice next

 

[theoneandonly]

No it's not. Only a couple of weeks ago Gary Lineker was tweeting about how his plane to Barcelona to watch a football match was delayed and he was going to miss the match. The very next day he was retweeting stories from about the climate emergency and how we need to do everything we can to reduce our emissions. How about not flying to Barcelona to watch a football match that was on TV as a good way to start to reduce emissions.

Of course it is. There are plenty of hypocrites of course , but the statement it's self is a lazy trope.

 

[Fade and Die]

Of course it is. There are plenty of hypocrites of course , but the statement it's self is a lazy trope.

Brilliant but lazy. ?

 

[theoneandonly]

Brilliant but lazy. ?

Wrong search result.

 

[Ian_George]

On the Energy front in general, there seems to be this conception that wind is a cleaner energy than oil, why is this I wonder, wind turbines have a life expectancy of 10 years, then the cost to maintain them will be too much.
There is a place in my opinion for wind and oil energy.
I’m involved right now for building two offshore wind farms and it’s not as Rosie as people think, but unless you’re involved in the industry or have seriously studied it, you wouldn’t know.
This isn’t a dig at anybody but you really need to know your stuff and not believe everything you read, people will always tell you what you want to hear.

Just done a bit of googling about life of turbines...While offshore ones are likely to somewhat shorter, your '10years' is vastly shorter than even the lowest estimate! From this article https://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operationalhttps://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operational.
'In reality, offshore wind turbines are expected to last up to 35 years once operational. This is not a one-off either, with turbines in early projects such as North Hoyle, Scroby Sands, Kentish Flats, Barrow and Beatrice all proving - through asset management methodologies and O&M activity - that it is realistic to expect the lifespan of a turbine to exceed 30 years'.

Other articles state smaller values, but all seem to be at last twice the value stated!

How do resolve that anomaly!

 

[clubchamp98]

Just done a bit of googling about life of turbines...While offshore ones are likely to somewhat shorter, your '10years' is vastly shorter than even the lowest estimate! From this article https://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operationalhttps://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operational.
'In reality, offshore wind turbines are expected to last up to 35 years once operational. This is not a one-off either, with turbines in early projects such as North Hoyle, Scroby Sands, Kentish Flats, Barrow and Beatrice all proving - through asset management methodologies and O&M activity - that it is realistic to expect the lifespan of a turbine to exceed 30 years'.

Other articles state smaller values, but all seem to be at last twice the value stated!

How do resolve that anomaly!

I do think you have to listen to people who actually work in this industry.
All the written things you can Google can’t be trusted to tell the whole truth.
These things must be under massive stress and won’t last as long as people think.

 

[BrianM]

Just done a bit of googling about life of turbines...While offshore ones are likely to somewhat shorter, your '10years' is vastly shorter than even the lowest estimate! From this article https://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operationalhttps://www.ijglobal.com/articles/157132/turbine-lifetime-limits-require-a-reality-check#:~:text=In reality, offshore wind turbines,to 35 years once operational.
'In reality, offshore wind turbines are expected to last up to 35 years once operational. This is not a one-off either, with turbines in early projects such as North Hoyle, Scroby Sands, Kentish Flats, Barrow and Beatrice all proving - through asset management methodologies and O&M activity - that it is realistic to expect the lifespan of a turbine to exceed 30 years'.

Other articles state smaller values, but all seem to be at last twice the value stated!

How do resolve that anomaly!

Like anything you can keep on maintaining, maintaining, maintaining!!!
We need 11 major components changed already, it’s not just the cost of the generators though, it’s getting a vessel into do the work, 10 years is supposed to be until major works might be required to keep them running.

 

[Ian_George]

I do think you have to listen to people who actually work in this industry.
All the written things you can Google can’t be trusted to tell the whole truth.
These things must be under massive stress and won’t last as long as people think.

That's why I asked the question!

Like anything you can keep on maintaining, maintaining, maintaining!!!
We need 11 major components changed already, it’s not just the cost of the generators though, it’s getting a vessel into do the work, 10 years is supposed to be until major works might be required to keep them running.

I'm calling 'spin' on your 'wind turbines have a life expectancy of 10 years, then the cost to maintain them will be too much.'! I've seen the figure 60 years that would seem more like the upper boundary for that figure! The 20-35 years would seem to be the period beyond which maintenance is not cost-effective!
North Hoyle started producing power about 20 years ago and, as far as I know, turbines haven't been replaced! And, given that 'the turbines' were actually nearly 50% of the cost of the project cost, I can understand why maintaining them is highly desirable compared to replacing them!
Either that or North Hoyle is wasting money!

 

[BrianM]

That's why I asked the question!
I'm calling 'spin' on your 'wind turbines have a life expectancy of 10 years, then the cost to maintain them will be too much.'! I've seen the figure 60 years that would seem more like the upper boundary for that figure! The 20-35 years would seem to be the period beyond which maintenance is not cost-effective!
North Hoyle started producing power about 20 years ago and, as far as I know, turbines haven't been replaced! And, given that 'the turbines' were actually nearly 50% of the cost of the project cost, I can understand why maintaining them is highly desirable compared to replacing them!
Either that or North Hoyle is wasting money!

Call it what you like, you seem to be a subject matter expert on everything since you’ve joined the forum ?

 

[Ian_George]

Call it what you like, you seem to be a subject matter expert on everything since you’ve joined the forum ?

No! I simply tend to research topics of interest to me and question apparent anomalies! I've had a tiny experience with a couple of major engineering projects and realise things rarely go to plan! Can you explain the North Hoyle maintenance discrepancy?

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Hi Foxy ?

 

[clubchamp98]

That's why I asked the question!
I'm calling 'spin' on your 'wind turbines have a life expectancy of 10 years, then the cost to maintain them will be too much.'! I've seen the figure 60 years that would seem more like the upper boundary for that figure! The 20-35 years would seem to be the period beyond which maintenance is not cost-effective!
North Hoyle started producing power about 20 years ago and, as far as I know, turbines haven't been replaced! And, given that 'the turbines' were actually nearly 50% of the cost of the project cost, I can understand why maintaining them is highly desirable compared to replacing them!
Either that or North Hoyle is wasting money!

But chose to dismiss the answer.

 

[BrianM]

Hi Foxy ?

???

 

[Ian_George]

But chose to challenge the answer.

FTFY! Are you suggesting that's forbidden?

 

[Pants]

Hi Foxy ?

Surely not !!!!!!!!!!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Call it what you like, you seem to be a subject matter expert on everything since you’ve joined the forum ?

I suspect a Kiwi arrogant twang ?

 

[Blue in Munich]

Surely not !!!!!!!!!!

Pedantic? Check.
Expert on everything? Check.
Never wrong? Check.

I suppose if he picks you up on your excessive use of exclamation marks that'll confirm it.

 

[clubchamp98]

FTFY! Are you suggesting that's forbidden?

No not at all.
But when you accuse somebody of SPIN it means you don’t belive him.
But you do belive what you read online.