← Back to context

Comment by avianlyric

3 years ago

From the article

> the National Grid pays the windfarms to turn off, and pays a (typically gas powered) alternative generator, closer to the demand, to turn on.

Curtailing wind means paying someone else to generate that energy in the “right” location, which usually means burning gas. So all the extra wind being built isn’t reducing amount of gas being burned, it’s just increasing the total cost of electricity.

> Probably the cheapest and best option is to build more wind and not care too much if it increases curtailment.

We can build all the wind we want, but if connected to consumers by nothing more than a long extension lead that barely run a kettle, then it’s totally useless. The wind needs to be located so the energy generated can actually be transported to end users. Curtailment is basically a direct measure of the amount of wind we’ve built, that can’t actually be used. Building more isn’t helpful in the slightest.

The article certainly doesn’t advocate for reducing the amount of wind built, quite the opposite, they just point out we need it built in the right places so we can actually use the energy produced. Rather than built bunch of wind turbines that will forever be pointed out of the wind.