Comment by pyrale

3 days ago

1.5mw is likely a nameplate capacity for the turbine, not the actual output (which should be labeled in GWh per year).

The article likely double-dips on this by saying that 6MW could provide for 7k homes, which it obviously can’t at peak use.

Why is it obvious that it can't? I just looked up the numbers and Scotlands absolute peak demand is 6.5 GW and there are about 2.5 M households. With those numbers they would need 18MW for 7000k households, but that ignores all commercial contributors to peak demand (I could not find data on commercial vs residential demand), but it seems to me the number isn't completely off.

Also I would say the expression "powering a home" usually implies average demand not peak demand.

  • Well, with 6.5 GW for 2.5M households, you’re at a peak around 2.6kW per home.

    Assuming these turbines are always at nameplate production, which they are not, they produce 6MW. Spread among 7k homes, that’s less than 1kW, which is not a lot.

    Given the previously stated peak of 2.6kW per household, 6MW would cover about 2300 homes.

    The only way you could get to this kind of number would be if you calculate the average use for a household over a year. But then you would have to compare it to the plant’s yearly production rather than its nameplate capacity.

    Wikipedia quotes MeyGen at 10.2GWh in 2023, that means 1.14MW on average instead of 6MW. Assuming perfect storage, that would mean an average of 163W per house for 7000 houses. That is barely enough for a fridge.

    > Also I would say the expression "powering a home" usually implies average demand not peak demand.

    That's my issue. Comparing average demand to nameplate capacity is dishonest.