Wind energy–singapore?

Heh, when i m categorizing this post, i had to click on the “show all categories” thing, since Singapore info is soo little and rarely used. Thx to those who have posted anything abt it!

here’s some bits of info found here and there.

http://www.nccc.gov.sg/renewables/Others.shtm thinks that Wind turbines are usually designed to operate at a minimal wind speed in order to generate electricity. Singapore does not have abundant winds except near coastal areas or at some off-shore islands. This could reduce the performance of wind turbines and hence the viability of wind as a renewable resource for Singapore.

http://www.nuspa.org/cms/?q=node/38 also thinks that Solar and wind energy is basically land-intensive, therefore it may not be a feasible solution for land-scarce Singapore. However, small scale electricity and energy production is reasonable and beneficial.

but!

http://www.technologystudent.com/energy1/wind8.htm says that Although wind turbines can be very tall each takes up only a small plot of land. This means that the land below can still be used. This is especially the case in agricultural areas as farming can still continue.

Wind turbines are available in a range of sizes which means a vast range of people and businesses can use them. Single households to small towns and villages can make good use of range of wind turbines available today.

Wind turbines have a role to play in both the developed and third world. (very vague, i know)

however, still in that very same website:

Large wind farms are needed to provide entire communities with enough electricity. For example, the largest single turbine available today can only provide enough electricity for 475 homes, when running at full capacity. How many would be needed for a town of 100 000 people?

oh well.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/wind_ad.html mentions that Wind power must compete with conventional generation sources on a cost basis. Depending on how energetic a wind site is, the wind farm may or may not be cost competitive. Even though the cost of wind power has decreased dramatically in the past 10 years, the technology requires a higher initial investment than fossil-fueled generators. (Therefore the COST may deter Singapore in using wind energy?)

Wind resource development may compete with other uses for the land and those alternative uses may be more highly valued than electricity generation. (This i think is one of the best points given. true, even if u think that wind energy is impt, but feels that the space can be used for something more impt, esp in s;pore that has so limited space…)

Good thing is, Wind energy is one of the lowest-priced renewable energy technologies available today, costing between 4 and 6 cents per kilowatt-hour, depending upon the wind resource and project financing of the particular project.

yay!

but wait! regarding costs, this is what http://environment.newarchaeology.com/wind_energy.php has to say. The debate over costs is never clear cut and both sides will massage figures for their own benefit. The truth is that in the UK, wind energy is more expensive than Combined cycle gas turbines and cheaper than hydroelectricity. The initial start-up costs of turbines are expensive, but the running costs are minimal in comparison to most other forms of energy generation. This is because the ‘fuel’ (the wind) is a free resource. In addition, pro-turbine groups will point out that the real cost of gas (and coal) power generators should include the cost to the environment of global warming. This is hard to quantify, so be vary wary about all figures. (In other words we can’t fully trust if wind energy is really quite cheap or quite expensive)

And there’s this problem with wind’s varying speeds, or sometimes lack of it. The wind doesn’t blow all the time What do we do on still evenings? Sit in the dark? This is an emotive argument with some merit.
Variable generation can only supply up to 10% or 20% of
peak demand, without having to make any significant changes to the grid. However, nobody is really sure how to deal with a figure larger than 20% at present.

Also about use of space here: Both sides argue about the ecological impact of wind farms. Pro-wind campaigners point out that only 1 percent of a farms ground surface actually gets built on, so natural wilderness or crop and livestock farming can continue around the bases of the turbines. However, no studies have been conducted on the effects on livestock of living beneath turbines. (Furthermore, Singapore can’t really spare space for farming…are there other things we can do under a wind turbine? Since land is a scarce resource here, land use has to be planned carefully.)

The potential effects on birds is often cited as an issue, but in the UK, the The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) supports the increased use of wind power, “as long as wind farms are sited, designed and managed so they do not harm birds or their habitats”. (singapore has limited sites to choose from though, as we only have few good sites for wind energy. but hopefully one day, part of our energy can be from nice, clean renewable energy.)

The arguments about the health problems are not to be dismissed lightly. Symptoms such as headaches, nausea, sleeplessness and
depression have all been attributed to low frequency emissions from wind turbines. Medical experts are best placed to conduct more research. Most turbines are placed far away from human habitation so the issue rarely arises at present. (this is even more important. Singapore is quite urbanised everywhere, even wikipedia states so, except in Bukit Timah nature reserve and reclaimed land still undergoing the process of being developed. Hard to find somewhere far enough from people so as not to suffer from ill health!)

And if anyone notices, i purposely did not put out the arguments about how Wind turbines spoil the scenery. See, the world is really dying, and if nothing is done about it we won’t have any beautiful scenery left to protect. In my opinion (other opinions are gladly accepted too tho! we’ll like to hear everyone’s views as far as possible), wind turbines can go a long way in helping to save the environment, but by rejecting using wind turbines we might be able to stare at the landscape for a couple more years…then the poor Earth dies on us. And anyway whenever i see a picture with a nice landscape and wind turbines, i think of how beautiful it is, since it’s helping us to save the environment. There’s also a very interesting effect when u see how nature interacts with man-made stuff.

There. My two-cents worth.

chia2