Wind energy in France and Germany: key figures

Renewable energies except solar electric or thermal (seeforums dedicated below): wind turbines, energy from the sea, hydraulic and hydroelectricity, biomass, biogas, deep geothermal energy ...
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/09/08, 15:13

I don't agree, we don't have the same bases, that's all. once again with nuclear power, we must talk about quality! because it is an atom; you probably understand the nuance.

I don't understand why you hit so much on the French ... is it because you're Belgian? : Mrgreen:

and AGAIN it is not the fault of the activists if they have a nuclear CSE: it is because they have been imposed on them and it is precisely what they want! you're heavy to transform everything that doesn't mean anything anymore!

and to tell you, there are plenty like me who are not from grennpeace or other ecolo, but who simply want electricity that is not manufactured with atoms that pollute the environment so much!

if you lived next to a power plant you would understand ...

for the survey I start:
http://www.agirpourlenvironnement.org/p ... leaire.pdf

yours
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 09/09/08, 15:55

Woodcutter wrote:And why would we take them off? In 25 years, the traces of installations will be erased and these blocks will be in balance with the local vegetation ...

First of all, like everything, concrete wears out therefore even well maintained, a concrete will not be able to stand for 100 years facing wind, rain, salt ... with all the constraints which are subjected to it.
Then why not remove the base why not (but it will not be easy to plow the field : Lol: ) but what do we do with the 200 m tall pillar ?? : Shock: We leave it for the birds until it falls alone ??
Removing them means: again tracks for trucks, again machines, again earthworks, even more important than for the installation probably ...
Completely agree but the manufacturers say that there is no impact on the environment so why worry?
lumberjack wrote:I recently spoke with someone very knowledgeable about the subject who told me that he did not see why wind turbines would last "only" 25 years ...
A fleet that runs well will be maintained over time and the wearing parts will be replaced! Nothing to do with a nuclear power plant ...
Let's not go back to nuclear but know that apart from the tank, everything can be replaced in a power plant.
That said, I hope your friend is right but I have big doubts because without the subsidies, wind power is not profitable economically. Do you really believe that a company will invest in a profitable installation after 20 years to generate profits for only 5 years?
You haven't understood anything yet !!!

We do not defend the nuke we say that wind power is not profitable without "nuclear" in France!

It's not really the same as defending the brothel nuke !!

Nothing to add

As for prices, read these links, we will talk about it when it has really increased.
http://www.lariposte.com/L-electricite-en-Europe-l-exemple-a-ne-pas-suivre-595.html
http://www.industrie.gouv.fr/energie/statisti/pdf/hanprix2.pdf
Honestly, I'm happy not to pay too much for electricity. I am happy for myself and for the most disadvantaged because if overall I can afford to pay more for electricity for the benefit of ENR, this is not the case for all French people.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/09/08, 16:04

it's really too nice to worry about the + poor Cmoa!
know that they are completely electric in their social housing, and that they have not chosen it!
you have to see the bills in winter ...

for your information electricity in France is NOT ENOUGH EXPENSIVE and that's why we run into nuclear power and that development is not important enough for wind power: exactly the same as for oil .

on a central you cannot change the tank so everything stops. and radioactive concrete, what do you do with it after 25 years? will you bury it in your garden?
0 x
Rulian
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 686
Registration: 02/02/04, 19:46
Location: Caen




by Rulian » 09/09/08, 16:34

C moa wrote:[
Then why not remove the base why not (but it will not be easy to plow the field : Lol: ) but what do we do with the 200 m tall pillar ?? : Shock: We leave it for the birds until it falls alone ??

Once again it is necessary to inform oneself. The wind farm promoters are obliged to provision in advance on a blocked account the sums allowing to finance the dismantling of the park. Only the promoter has access to this money on the express condition that it is either to pay for the dismantling, or it is the communities (town hall, community of communes ...) which can use it to dismantle. This guarantees the municipalities against a possible bankruptcy of the operating company, or against a possible will not pay the dismantling on the part of said operator. Note that this does not prevent the operating company from being able to change. So the dismantling is already paid and guaranteed! This is far from the case for nuclear power plants, by the way.

Here it is ... again unfounded rumors.

And I'm not even talking about the 200m high pillars. It does not exist on the market today. And it is frankly not common today machines with a mast of more than 100 m.
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 09/09/08, 18:07

Rulian wrote:
C moa wrote:[
Then why not remove the base why not (but it will not be easy to plow the field : Lol: ) but what do we do with the 200 m tall pillar ?? : Shock: We leave it for the birds until it falls alone ??

Once again it is necessary to inform oneself. The wind farm promoters are obliged to provision in advance on a blocked account the sums allowing to finance the dismantling of the park. Only the promoter has access to this money on the express condition that it is either to pay for the dismantling, or it is the communities (town hall, community of communes ...) which can use it to dismantle. This guarantees the municipalities against a possible bankruptcy of the operating company, or against a possible will not pay the dismantling on the part of said operator. Note that this does not prevent the operating company from being able to change. So the dismantling is already paid and guaranteed! This is far from the case for nuclear power plants, by the way.

Here it is ... again unfounded rumors.

And I'm not even talking about the 200m high pillars. It does not exist on the market today. And it is frankly not common today machines with a mast of more than 100 m.

Link my interventions, at no time did I speak of the funding for insanity. I'm just saying that for energies presented as without impact by the manufacturers, there are many interventions.
The lumberjack question was "why dismantle?"
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 09/09/08, 18:18

jonule wrote:it's really too nice to worry about the + poor Cmoa!
know that they are completely electric in their social housing, and that they have not chosen it!
you have to see the bills in winter ...

Find out in your turn, in most HLMs, there are central heaters with gas or oil boilers !!! Stop with your "you're all electric", it's ridiculous.
for your information electricity in France is NOT ENOUGH EXPENSIVE and that's why we run into nuclear power and that development is not important enough for wind power: exactly the same as for oil .
Indeed electricity is cheaper in France but to say that this is why wind power does not develop is bullshit. The purchase price imposed on EDF is much higher than the cost price. Just look at the results of the installers !!! : Shock:
Otherwise, regarding the price, do you really believe that the coal and gas installations in Germany are helping to reduce the price?

on a central you cannot change the tank so everything stops. and radioactive concrete, what do you do with it after 25 years? will you bury it in your garden?
There too there are dementia channels which are provided for by law with the associated budgets.
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 09/09/08, 19:58

Please note, I was only talking about concrete bases ... It is very clear in the construction of my post:
Woodcutter wrote:
C moa wrote:[...] And the 300 tonnes of concrete, after 25 years ?? What do we do with it ?? Well 300 tonnes we know how to backfill with but 1000 x 300 tonnes ....
And why would we remove them? [...]


C moa wrote:
Woodcutter wrote:And why would we take them off? In 25 years, the traces of installations will be erased and these blocks will be in balance with the local vegetation ...

First of all, like everything, concrete wears out therefore even well maintained, a concrete will not be able to stand for 100 years facing wind, rain, salt ... with all the constraints which are subjected to it.
I even said that it was bio-degradable ...
If it takes 100 years for a dam, why would it not hold 100 years elsewhere, except at sea because there I think it is really aggressive as an environment ... Finally even if the base lasts 50 years it is already not bad.

C moa wrote:[...] Then, that one does not remove the base why not (but it will not be simple to plow the field : Lol: )
I am not sure that the majority of the wind turbines are located "in the plowed fields" ...
And if this is the case, the reservations concerning the disturbance induced on the flora and fauna have absolutely no place to be, so there, yes we can very easily remove the base at lower cost ...



C moa wrote:[...]
Removing them means: again tracks for trucks, again machines, again earthworks, even more important than for the installation probably ...
Completely agree but the manufacturers say that there is no impact on the environment so why worry?
In my opinion, either you are very badly informed, or in very bad faith ...
The environmental impact is quite low in operation but, as very often in many major projects, the construction phase is quite impacting on the environment ... I do not think that serious studies during implantations make an impasse there- above.

C moa wrote:[...]
lumberjack wrote:I recently spoke with someone very knowledgeable about the subject who told me that he did not see why wind turbines would last "only" 25 years ...
A fleet that runs well will be maintained over time and the wearing parts will be replaced! Nothing to do with a nuclear power plant ...
Let's not go back to nuclear but know that apart from the tank, everything can be replaced in a power plant.
And the plant can run without its tank? : Cheesy:


C moa wrote:[...] Having said that, I hope your friend is right but I have big doubts because without the subsidies, wind power is not profitable economically. Do you really believe that a company will invest in a profitable installation after 20 years to generate profits for only 5 years?
From the moment when all the initial studies have been done, the generators connected, the foundations and the access tracks, etc ... At what percentage of the initial investment do you estimate the cost of what I call " maintenance" ? :?:
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 09/09/08, 20:04

C moa wrote:[...] The lumberjack question was "why dismantle?"
Not really, no... : roll:

The question was very specific: "why should we remove concrete bases after 25 years ?"
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Rulian
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 686
Registration: 02/02/04, 19:46
Location: Caen




by Rulian » 10/09/08, 02:27

C moa wrote:Link my interventions, at no time did I speak of the funding for insanity. I'm just saying that for energies presented as without impact by the manufacturers, there are many interventions.

But no serious manufacturer will have the nerve to present their products to you as "impact free". The simple reason is that no human activity is without impact. In the meantime, I guarantee you that today it is by far the least dirty means of production of elec that we know how to do.

Where did you see that the manufacturers claim that their machines have no impact? Let us stop lending words and intentions to others according to what suits us. It's the same kind of baseless assertion as the 200m pillar shot ... A bit of credibility was there.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 10/09/08, 08:36

for the bases of wind turbines which are in the fields, I do not see what it disturbs, it is not better than the EDF HORRIBLES pylons which already cross them with the forests ...

Cmoa wrote:Inform yourself in turn, in most HLM, there are central heaters with gas or oil boilers !!!

Cmoa, we can see that you have never raided in winter for your electric heating!
I tell you that there are all electric HLM, electric heating, electric plates, etc etc!
these are factories with electric consumption, which make EDF happy, you just have to see the mouth of the transformers of these HLM bars ...
so maybe the new ones, but not the old ones which are 30 years old and have not yet been destroyed, with toasters as heating, without regulation etc ...

Denying them is propaganda, they are "social housing" where the rent is cheap, but not the energy consumption ...


Cmoa wrote:Indeed electricity is cheaper in France but to say that this is why wind power does not develop is bullshit.

and ben will have to prove it, because for me like petroleum, nuclear fossil electricity is not expensive enough compared to what it pollutes: Capice?
Fortunately, EDF is forced to buy renewable NR! No but !
for the problem you raise on wind power, that is for sure, it should be nationalized, but that is like any production of energy, so that it does not fall on the mercantiles, like the resellers of nuclear power plants so as not to quote that they ...

Cmoa wrote:on a central you cannot change the tank so everything stops. and radioactive concrete, what do you do with it after 25 years? will you bury it in your garden?
There too there are dementia channels which are provided for by law with the associated budgets.

but come on, devellopes my big one, we're looking at you! : Cheesy:
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "hydraulic, wind, geothermal, marine energy, biogas ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 321 guests