CCD Editor’s Note: Paul Homewood takes a buzzsaw to some of the more popular canards about the viability and affordability of wind power, in which governments like the UK (where Paul dwells) and America (and elsewhere) are building the towering beacons to appease the global warming faithful. Currently, solar and wind make up 0.8% of the energy used worldwide.
Bear with me, as this is a bit of a recap on wind power, to fulfill a couple of objectives. I sometimes get asked how the subsidy scheme works for renewable energy.
Onshore
Most onshore wind generators (about 85% of capacity) operate under the Renewable Obligation system.
Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) are issued to operators of accredited renewable generating stations for the eligible renewable electricity they generate.
The number of certificates per unit of electricity varies by technology, but onshore wind earns on average ROCs worth £47/MWh.
Energy suppliers have an obligation to source a certain proportion of their electricity from renewable sources each year, and therefore need to purchase these certificates to demonstrate that they have met their obligation.
On top of the income from ROCs, wind farms also receive the value of electricity sold, typically about £45/MWh.
Smaller generators are paid via the Feed-in Tariff scheme (FIT). Rates vary according to the capacity of the unit, but the total subsidy budgeted this year for FITs is £1.5bn. Although this includes solar, anaerobic, CHP and certain hydro projects, a large chunk will go to wind farms.
The ROC scheme was ended for new applicants in 2015, although generators already covered will remain so for their lifetime. Several new projects since have successfully applied for subsidies under the Contracts for Difference (CfDs) system, which has replaced ROC.
These schemes will receive a guaranteed price, index linked for 15 years, currently ranging from £88.37/MWh to £91.94/MWh. Given the market price of £45/MWh, this is effectively a subsidy of between £43 and £47/MWh. In other words, a similar amount to the ROC subsidy.
Following the 2015 election, the government has withdrawn onshore wind from further CfD auctions, but there is pressure from the renewable lobby to reverse this decision.
Last year, onshore wind produced 28.7 TWh, at an estimated subsidy of £1.4bn.
Offshore
There is currently 7.0 GW of offshore wind capacity, of which 6.3 GW is covered by ROCs. On average, they receive 1.9 ROCs per MWh, worth £90/MWh.
Again this is on top of the market price of £45/MWh, so they receive a total income of about £135/MWh.
There is also 0.7 GW of capacity covered by CfDs, which currently pay a guaranteed price of £166.59/MWh.
Last year offshore wind generated 20.9 TWh, at an estimated subsidy of £2.0bn.
By 2023, there will be 7.5 GW of offshore capacity under CfD contracts, at an average price of £117/MWh. This will cost electricity bill payers an extra £1.8bn in subsidies.
Intermittency
Despite these obscene subsidies, wind power is highly variable. Today, for instance, wind power has been virtually non-existent, currently amounting to just 171 MW, less than 1% of capacity.
https://www.bmreports.com/bmrs/?q=eds/main
This means that standby capacity has to be kept in reserve. By 2020/21, this will be costing £1.3bn in capacity market payments.
In all, subsidies for wind power and standby will be costing the country more than £7bn a year, equivalent to about £270 per household.
Read more at Not A Lot Of People Know That
Will Rakooi and their dogs please just GO AWAY
Your list of so called subsidizes for coal and oil also applies to wind power. Do you really think that wind power operates without infra structure or that the wind industry pays for what they need?
This article does a good job of showing that wind energy is more expensive. Your claim that wind energy is cheaper than coal is based on the concept of social cost of carbon, which is bogus.
The studies blaming fossil fuels for asthma blame 100% of asthma cases on fossil fuels. The real death toll is there are about 10,000 extra deaths a year in England alone because people can’t afford to adequately heat their home due to the inflated cost of power to lower emissions.
Your own data shows that renewable energy is more expensive. With a ratio of 16 jobs to 5.3 jobs for fossil fuels, that is 11 extra jobs that must be paid for by the homes using the power. One study showed that if the United States used 100% renewable energy, it would be require 300 million working in the industry, more than our total population.
Drewski
You are a LIAR
Wind Turbines are not enviromentaly friendly their a hazard to Birds and Bats and whales as well their not quite and many people dont want wind turbines in their neighborhood for these reasons