Ripple Energy wind farm?

NigeWick

Alnat1 said:

Not sure there'll be another 25 years left in me though.

My understanding is that the contract is transferrable.

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

Coastalwatch said:

Coastalwatch said:

With normal financial investments your money is returned at the end of the agreed period, but at the end of the turbines life, 20 to 25 years there is little value remaining, hence returning 5% of capital each year to address this.

 

I've been pondering further on the above and while it is in essence correct then with the turbine at it's life's end and removed there remains a considerable asset value, not least connection to the Grid, turbine foundations and trackwork etc.

I've no idea how much a turbine is to purchase/deliver/install but presumably only a portion of the £4.7m originally required to install and connect to the grid from a bare greenfield site!

My only previous knowledge of anything similar was in regard to self build properties whereby once services were in place and foundations laid then a mortgage could be arranged and approved for up to 50% of the finished value of the property. No idea if a similar % would apply with WT1.

From the Coop's point of view then rather than just walking away from the site or starting again elsewhere presumably the aim would be to install a replacement turbine upon the same foundation and grid connection at a fraction of the cost of the first.

I appreciate an extension to the original lease would need to be negotiated(maybe an option for this is already in place) but fundamentally the cost to install a replacement should be significantly less than the original and for all its members a fresh opportunity to engage for a further 25 years on even better terms!

Or am I just peering through rose tinted glasses once again?

Hiya CW. I don't know if this follows for onshore wind, but a few years back I read that the cost of installing offshore wind monopiles and building out the leccy infrastructure, was around 40% of the cost. So if that follows, then a replacement onshore wind turbine, from the ground/base up, would be around 60%, assuming no cost savings as turbines develop.

[For PV farms, I think the non panel costs are around 50%.]

Thanks for that Mart, it certainly seems to confirm my suspicions and surely is in everybody's interest for the site to continue generating clean affordable energy in the years beyond.

I appreciate that upgrades may be required but for GF at least the height cannot be increased due to the proximity of the flight path for Cardiff airport so there's unlikely to be any significant increase in generating capacity. But with a reduced capital outlay will there need to be.

Can't help but wonder if the entire turbine would need replacing or if this might be limited to those parts most at risk of failing, ie Nacelle and blades?

Martyn1981

Coastalwatch said:

Martyn1981 said:

Coastalwatch said:

Coastalwatch said:

With normal financial investments your money is returned at the end of the agreed period, but at the end of the turbines life, 20 to 25 years there is little value remaining, hence returning 5% of capital each year to address this.

 

I've been pondering further on the above and while it is in essence correct then with the turbine at it's life's end and removed there remains a considerable asset value, not least connection to the Grid, turbine foundations and trackwork etc.

I've no idea how much a turbine is to purchase/deliver/install but presumably only a portion of the £4.7m originally required to install and connect to the grid from a bare greenfield site!

My only previous knowledge of anything similar was in regard to self build properties whereby once services were in place and foundations laid then a mortgage could be arranged and approved for up to 50% of the finished value of the property. No idea if a similar % would apply with WT1.

From the Coop's point of view then rather than just walking away from the site or starting again elsewhere presumably the aim would be to install a replacement turbine upon the same foundation and grid connection at a fraction of the cost of the first.

I appreciate an extension to the original lease would need to be negotiated(maybe an option for this is already in place) but fundamentally the cost to install a replacement should be significantly less than the original and for all its members a fresh opportunity to engage for a further 25 years on even better terms!

Or am I just peering through rose tinted glasses once again?

Hiya CW. I don't know if this follows for onshore wind, but a few years back I read that the cost of installing offshore wind monopiles and building out the leccy infrastructure, was around 40% of the cost. So if that follows, then a replacement onshore wind turbine, from the ground/base up, would be around 60%, assuming no cost savings as turbines develop.

[For PV farms, I think the non panel costs are around 50%.]

Thanks for that Mart, it certainly seems to confirm my suspicions and surely is in everybody's interest for the site to continue generating clean affordable energy in the years beyond.

I appreciate that upgrades may be required but for GF at least the height cannot be increased due to the proximity of the flight path for Cardiff airport so there's unlikely to be any significant increase in generating capacity. But with a reduced capital outlay will there need to be.

Can't help but wonder if the entire turbine would need replacing or if this might be limited to those parts most at risk of failing, ie Nacelle and blades?

Cool, I didn't know that about the flight path.

From the site visit, I think getting larger blades to site would be tricky, hence why so many UK onshore WT's seem to be about 2.5MW. That new Bristol one is 4.2MW, but in Avonmouth. I think I've heard of 6MW models being installed on large plains in the US/Australia. But not going to get those blades to rural UK sites and up steep twisty tracks.

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 said:

Coastalwatch said:

Cool, I didn't know that about the flight path.

From the site visit, I think getting larger blades to site would be tricky, hence why so many UK onshore WT's seem to be about 2.5MW. That new Bristol one is 4.2MW, but in Avonmouth. I think I've heard of 6MW models being installed on large plains in the US/Australia. But not going to get those blades to rural UK sites and up steep twisty tracks.

Co incidentally the topic of re powering a wind farm was posted on the Ripple crowdfunding website this morning, although in relation to Kirk Hill as opposed to Graig Fatha, and amongst others received the following response from Sarah Merrick, their founder and CEO.

Yes. In general you'd expect turbine costs to have fallen further over the 25 year lifetime of the first project.

Repowering tend to involve the removal of the whole turbine, including foundation and replacing it with a bigger, more powerful one. Refurbishment and life extension are normally where major components are replaced, like new gear boxes or longer blades. There's not a hard and fast rule about what's repowering and what's life extension.

will-he-payitoff

Coastalwatch said:

Co incidentally the topic of re powering a wind farm was posted on the Ripple crowdfunding website this morning, although in relation to Kirk Hill as opposed to Graig Fatha, and amongst others received the following response from Sarah Merrick, their founder and CEO.

Yes. In general you'd expect turbine costs to have fallen further over the 25 year lifetime of the first project.

Repowering tend to involve the removal of the whole turbine, including foundation and replacing it with a bigger, more powerful one. Refurbishment and life extension are normally where major components are replaced, like new gear boxes or longer blades. There's not a hard and fast rule about what's repowering and what's life extension.

I would imagine that is because turbines built 25 years ago are a lot smaller. One near us has 450Kw turbines, its also going to be 30 years old this year.

Coastalwatch

will-he-payitoff said:

Coastalwatch said:

Co incidentally the topic of re powering a wind farm was posted on the Ripple crowdfunding website this morning, although in relation to Kirk Hill as opposed to Graig Fatha, and amongst others received the following response from Sarah Merrick, their founder and CEO.

Yes. In general you'd expect turbine costs to have fallen further over the 25 year lifetime of the first project.

Repowering tend to involve the removal of the whole turbine, including foundation and replacing it with a bigger, more powerful one. Refurbishment and life extension are normally where major components are replaced, like new gear boxes or longer blades. There's not a hard and fast rule about what's repowering and what's life extension.

I would imagine that is because turbines built 25 years ago are a lot smaller. One near us has 450Kw turbines, its also going to be 30 years old this year.

will-he-payitoff. 30 years old, thats quite a testimony to the design and manufacture of the time, circa 1990 and while not large by todays standards, 450 kW's is still a sizeable generation contribution to the local area. It's certainly encouraging to learn our predecessors have survived so long.

I wonder if they've paid off their carbon debt yet!

You're triggering all sorts of questions in my head now, so apologies in advance for asking the following:-

Like, How many turbines are there and would you know if they have undergone any refurbishment or life extension work upon them?

Also, can I ask  and what part of the country are you in and/or, pushing my luck here perhaps, what the name of the wind farm is?

Your obviously under no obligation to reply but would appreciate it if you would.

Martyn1981

450kW is really decent for that age, some were only 20-50kW.

Took me a while to get the Google search right, but I've found an old pic that really puts the scale into .... scale!

This is a repowering, where 54 old WT's were removed. I've searched for a power figure for them, but can't find it. But from memory I think 1 or 2 of the new ones was more than equal to the whole original fleet. But being coastal they were able to install giant onshore turbines of 7.5MW.

Community owners take leap of faith for 320MW repowering

RWE starts construction of Zuidwester wind farm with world’s largest onshore wind turbines

Coastalwatch

Wow Mart, that's really impressive and even more so for a community project. So much for the UK being at the forefront of wind power, at least from the community aspect. Seems we have a lot to learn in that area and with the Community Energy Bill on it's way through parliament with a couple of amendments proposed to remove further obstacles in it's path then I'll follow the outcome with interest. The amendments were raised by "Power for People" and have cross party support so we keep fingers crossed that Government will bend just a little to accommodate them! 

That picture conjures up all sorts thoughts too around climate change, not least of which would be the rise in sea levels. Now that would be a scary prospect for the Dutch as much of the country is barely a metre above it!

will-he-payitoff

Coastalwatch

Royd Moor wind farm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royd_Moor_Wind_Farm

Alnat1

Just over the hill from us, my kids would always "look for the windmills" when they were little, if we drove that way.