Net Zero watchers cannot have failed to see this story recently: Britain’s climate watchdog has privately admitted that a number of its key net zero recommendations may have relied on insufficient data, it has been claimed. Sir Chris Llewellyn Smith, who led a recent Royal Society study on future energy supply, said that the
Articles like this are pathetic. Worldwide, 2.54% of electricity is produced from dams. Water behind dams is lost to evaporation, causes major environmental changes including impact on human food supplies, requires a steady supply of water that is not yet increasing with temperature, and most sites are taken.
It's a lie to suggest that such installations are anything more than showpiece non-solutions.
Hmmm. Paul Homewood put two and two together apparently and also figured out that the NAO was being ignored by CCC on the basis of an excellent comment by John Cullen. He gave credit to John for the comment. I replied to that comment of John's with a link to this post, which Paul must have somehow missed because I got no credit for getting there first on the NAO! Ah well, never mind, good to know I'm setting the pace for other more popular sceptic websites!
From the Supplementary Appendices to the Royal Society study:
"Thornton et al15 noted that it is possible that even a 40-year period is not long enough to
sample a representative range of possible changes in wind availability. The Met Office has
compared the period 1980-2016 studied here with large simulations using the UNSEEN
methodology16 and historical data back to 1871. It was found17 that in each winter there is a
1% chance of the mean wind speed in December, January or February being lower than the minimum experienced in any of these months in the period 1980-2016, i.e. there is
approximately a 10% chance/decade of a winter month with wind speeds lower than in
the period 1980-2016 considered in modelling here.
More needs to be known about the persistence and other characteristics of periods of low
wind, which are very likely correlated temporally, as is the case for periods with low
temperatures (Kolstad et.al.18 have shown that temperature anomalies of ‘at least one
standard deviation above or below climatology’ in March were found to be about 20%–120%
more likely than normal if the preceding February was anomalous by 0.5–1.5 standard
deviations). It turns out that wind speeds were lower in 1960-80 than in 1980-2016, as a result
of atmospheric blocking associated with the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation19,
when low wind months such as those seen in the UNSEEN simulation were observed (phases
of the oscillation last for about a month up to about a year and a half: the positive phases were
relatively less frequent and had a smaller amplitude in the years 1960-1980 than in later
years20). If/when weather data for that period have been converted into ersatz wind and solar
output, it will be possible to quantify their effects.
15 Thornton H, Scaife A, Hoskins B, Brayshaw D. 2017 The relationship between wind power,
electricity demand and winter weather patterns in Great Britain. Environmental Research Letters, 12.
16 Thompson V et al. 2017 High risk of unprecedented UK rainfall in the current climate. Nat Commun
8, 107. (doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00275-3).
17 Gillian Kay, Anna Maidens, Hazel Thornton, Nick Dunstone, Adam Scaife, Doug Smith (Unpublished,
private communication, December 2020). Preliminary assessment of low winter winds over the North
Sea,
18 E. W. Kolstad, S. P. Sobolowski, A. A. Scaife Intraseasonal Persistence of European Surface
Temperatures, Journal of Climate, 28, 5365 2015
19 Climate Variability: North Atlantic Oscillation | NOAA Climate.gov
The system as proposed by The Royal Society depends entirely on the availability of surplus wind to fill the storage. It works for the 37 years in the study, but that's because it has been designed to work for those 37 years. It depends on having a succession of high wind years to fill the storage so that there is enough to compensate for one very low wind year. But that low wind year can happen when the storage is empty. As I explain here:
There is no amount of storage that can work, the only option is to massively overbuild so that there is enough energy produced in the low wind years, or have a flexible supply available for backup.
Hydrogen production and storage is a totally different kettle of fish than hydrogen wells. You can locate the facility that uses hydrogen right on top of the wells or very close and this works because no storage.
There's also over speed wind, which is even worse. There's no guarantee that there won't be years with disastrously high peak wind speed. Because such years will destroy the windmill fleet faster, and this lowers the EROEI of the windmills, which is already too low to support an industrial society.
On top of that is the nonsense of hydrogen storage.
Clearly the meteorologists have been criminally negligent because they never bothered to warn us about wind droughts which are the fatal flaw in the wind and solar programme.
This has been obvious since about 2008 when independent investigators in Australia, Anton Lang and Paul Miskelly with associates started to investigate low windpower periods using the continuous record of the wind farms feeding into the southeastern Australian grid.
These studies revealed critically low levels of wind up to three days in duration across the whole of South eastern Australia
Since that time serious efforts around the world should have been directed to assess the low points of wind power production to see if they were sufficiently severe, prolonged and widespread to exceed the amount of storage that could be feasibly or affordably provided.
Of course the people in positions of power and influenced, and also academic researchers it seems, ignored the work of Lang and Miskelly.
Averages over a week or more wash out the low points in Australia which don’t exceed three days, more ingenuity was required to ignore the Dunkelflautes that can last for weeks, moreover sailors would have known about them for ever, likewise millers grinding grain and pumping water on land.
Its really as simple as ABC.
A. Input to the grid must continuously match the demand.
B. The continuity of RE is broken on nights with little or no wind.
C. There is no large-scale storage to bridge the gaps.
So the transition to wind and solar power can’t proceed with current storage technology.
Wind droughts happen.
Many people assume that the wind is always blowing somewhere not far away but there are periods of very little wind power, approaching zero, across the whole of the SE Australia for periods up to 3 days. Remember that the wind speed has to reach 4- to 5 metres per second before turbines start to generate power.
I’m convinced that the meteorological authorities, no doubt aided and abetted by Google et al, deliberately make it difficult to research areas they don’t want the general public to know about.
Take the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). If it follows its regular pattern, it will soon usher in about 30 years of global cooling but it is not mentioned in any UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers report. Try Googling it and all you find are graphs which have not been updated for years. Paul Homewood found this in 2021 but the NOAA source link he used no longer works: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-154.png.
The same applies to mean annual wind speed statistics. I’ve searched the Met Office website and I’ve discovered that they hold a dataset called sfcWind, Variable: Mean wind speed at 10 m, Description: Average of hourly mean wind speed at a height of 10 m above ground level over the month, season or year (knots), Start date: 1969. This would give a useful cross-check on Jamie’s study but I simply can’t locate it. If anyone else can find it, please post the results.
https://www.science.org/content/article/how-giant-water-batteries-could-make-green-power-reliable
Articles like this are pathetic. Worldwide, 2.54% of electricity is produced from dams. Water behind dams is lost to evaporation, causes major environmental changes including impact on human food supplies, requires a steady supply of water that is not yet increasing with temperature, and most sites are taken.
It's a lie to suggest that such installations are anything more than showpiece non-solutions.
Hmmm. Paul Homewood put two and two together apparently and also figured out that the NAO was being ignored by CCC on the basis of an excellent comment by John Cullen. He gave credit to John for the comment. I replied to that comment of John's with a link to this post, which Paul must have somehow missed because I got no credit for getting there first on the NAO! Ah well, never mind, good to know I'm setting the pace for other more popular sceptic websites!
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/01/26/ccc-wind-power-plans-ignore-the-nao/
From the Supplementary Appendices to the Royal Society study:
"Thornton et al15 noted that it is possible that even a 40-year period is not long enough to
sample a representative range of possible changes in wind availability. The Met Office has
compared the period 1980-2016 studied here with large simulations using the UNSEEN
methodology16 and historical data back to 1871. It was found17 that in each winter there is a
1% chance of the mean wind speed in December, January or February being lower than the minimum experienced in any of these months in the period 1980-2016, i.e. there is
approximately a 10% chance/decade of a winter month with wind speeds lower than in
the period 1980-2016 considered in modelling here.
More needs to be known about the persistence and other characteristics of periods of low
wind, which are very likely correlated temporally, as is the case for periods with low
temperatures (Kolstad et.al.18 have shown that temperature anomalies of ‘at least one
standard deviation above or below climatology’ in March were found to be about 20%–120%
more likely than normal if the preceding February was anomalous by 0.5–1.5 standard
deviations). It turns out that wind speeds were lower in 1960-80 than in 1980-2016, as a result
of atmospheric blocking associated with the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation19,
when low wind months such as those seen in the UNSEEN simulation were observed (phases
of the oscillation last for about a month up to about a year and a half: the positive phases were
relatively less frequent and had a smaller amplitude in the years 1960-1980 than in later
years20). If/when weather data for that period have been converted into ersatz wind and solar
output, it will be possible to quantify their effects.
15 Thornton H, Scaife A, Hoskins B, Brayshaw D. 2017 The relationship between wind power,
electricity demand and winter weather patterns in Great Britain. Environmental Research Letters, 12.
16 Thompson V et al. 2017 High risk of unprecedented UK rainfall in the current climate. Nat Commun
8, 107. (doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00275-3).
17 Gillian Kay, Anna Maidens, Hazel Thornton, Nick Dunstone, Adam Scaife, Doug Smith (Unpublished,
private communication, December 2020). Preliminary assessment of low winter winds over the North
Sea,
18 E. W. Kolstad, S. P. Sobolowski, A. A. Scaife Intraseasonal Persistence of European Surface
Temperatures, Journal of Climate, 28, 5365 2015
19 Climate Variability: North Atlantic Oscillation | NOAA Climate.gov
20 https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-variability-north-atlanticoscillation
So they knew, but failed to do anything about including it.
The system as proposed by The Royal Society depends entirely on the availability of surplus wind to fill the storage. It works for the 37 years in the study, but that's because it has been designed to work for those 37 years. It depends on having a succession of high wind years to fill the storage so that there is enough to compensate for one very low wind year. But that low wind year can happen when the storage is empty. As I explain here:
https://johnd12343.substack.com/p/the-energy-storage-conundrum
There is no amount of storage that can work, the only option is to massively overbuild so that there is enough energy produced in the low wind years, or have a flexible supply available for backup.
https://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2024/meetingapp.cgi/Session/32826?et_rid=704190052&et_cid=5076179
Hydrogen production and storage is a totally different kettle of fish than hydrogen wells. You can locate the facility that uses hydrogen right on top of the wells or very close and this works because no storage.
There's also over speed wind, which is even worse. There's no guarantee that there won't be years with disastrously high peak wind speed. Because such years will destroy the windmill fleet faster, and this lowers the EROEI of the windmills, which is already too low to support an industrial society.
On top of that is the nonsense of hydrogen storage.
The irritating thing, whether it is incompetence or deliberate dishonesty, is that nobody will be held accountable at all.
Clearly the meteorologists have been criminally negligent because they never bothered to warn us about wind droughts which are the fatal flaw in the wind and solar programme.
This has been obvious since about 2008 when independent investigators in Australia, Anton Lang and Paul Miskelly with associates started to investigate low windpower periods using the continuous record of the wind farms feeding into the southeastern Australian grid.
These studies revealed critically low levels of wind up to three days in duration across the whole of South eastern Australia
Since that time serious efforts around the world should have been directed to assess the low points of wind power production to see if they were sufficiently severe, prolonged and widespread to exceed the amount of storage that could be feasibly or affordably provided.
Of course the people in positions of power and influenced, and also academic researchers it seems, ignored the work of Lang and Miskelly.
Averages over a week or more wash out the low points in Australia which don’t exceed three days, more ingenuity was required to ignore the Dunkelflautes that can last for weeks, moreover sailors would have known about them for ever, likewise millers grinding grain and pumping water on land.
Its really as simple as ABC.
A. Input to the grid must continuously match the demand.
B. The continuity of RE is broken on nights with little or no wind.
C. There is no large-scale storage to bridge the gaps.
So the transition to wind and solar power can’t proceed with current storage technology.
Wind droughts happen.
Many people assume that the wind is always blowing somewhere not far away but there are periods of very little wind power, approaching zero, across the whole of the SE Australia for periods up to 3 days. Remember that the wind speed has to reach 4- to 5 metres per second before turbines start to generate power.
And there is more!
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/06/19/its-about-the-wind-droughts-stupid/
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/07/11/approaching-the-tipping-point/
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/04/30/dark-deeds-of-the-official-wind-watchers/
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/09/16/latest-evidence-windpower-wont-work-rafe/
https://newcatallaxy.blog/2023/07/18/lets-all-follow-germany/
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2020/07/no-gusts-no-glory/
Excellent analysis Jaime. I hop you don't mind, I have cross-posted this to my Substack too.
I’m convinced that the meteorological authorities, no doubt aided and abetted by Google et al, deliberately make it difficult to research areas they don’t want the general public to know about.
Take the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). If it follows its regular pattern, it will soon usher in about 30 years of global cooling but it is not mentioned in any UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers report. Try Googling it and all you find are graphs which have not been updated for years. Paul Homewood found this in 2021 but the NOAA source link he used no longer works: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2021/08/image-154.png.
The same applies to mean annual wind speed statistics. I’ve searched the Met Office website and I’ve discovered that they hold a dataset called sfcWind, Variable: Mean wind speed at 10 m, Description: Average of hourly mean wind speed at a height of 10 m above ground level over the month, season or year (knots), Start date: 1969. This would give a useful cross-check on Jamie’s study but I simply can’t locate it. If anyone else can find it, please post the results.