Vestas is now manufacturing its first V110-2.0 MW wind turbines that will be delivered to EDP Renovaveis (EDPR) for several wind energy projects in the United States. The turbines are part of a supply agreement to deliver 1,500 MW to wind power plants in the Americas and Europe. EDPR said it selected the V110-2.0 MW because of its competitive cost of energy compared with other options.
The V110-2.0 MW turbines are expected to be delivered and commissioned in 2014 and 2015. The new projects’ names and specific locations are not currently available.
“Vestas has successfully worked with EDPR for the past eight years to deliver many wind-power projects around the world,” said Chris Brown, President of Vestas’ sales and service division in the United States and Canada. “We look forward to supplying EDPR our new V110-2.0 MW wind turbine, which is a variant of the V100-1.8 MW that can provide over 13 per cent higher annual energy production compared with its predecessor. Our 2-MW platform has a long track record of success and reliability. The V110-2.0 MW will provide clean, reliable and low cost electricity for decades.”
Vestas’ factories in Colorado will manufacture the blades, towers and nacelles for these projects.
The projects include five-year service agreements featuring the Active Output Management (AOM) 5000 offering. AOM 5000 is an energy-based availability guarantee that ensures the turbines are operational when the wind is blowing. This service option includes the VestasOnline surveillance system that remotely controls and monitors the turbines and predicts potential wear-and-tear issues. This allows Vestas to plan maintenance so the turbines operate with the minimum amount of lost production.
Read the full story at scfwindturbine
web! If you love wind turbines, welcome
to contact us!
2013年8月29日 星期四
2013年6月12日 星期三
Wind farm generates fund money
The county's biggest wind farm has handed over its first community payment to surrounding villages. The 11-turbine Swinford wind farm, south of Lutterworth, has been generating green electricity since November.
As part of the planning approval, the company agreed to set up the community fund. Energy firm Vattenfall marked the project's first six months generating power at the weekend with a day of fun, games and activities for the family at the wind farm site and at South Kilworth.
The company also handed over 44,000, the first of 25 annual payments which will go into the combined fund during the life of the wind farm.
Michael Murphy, chairman of the community fund, who supported the project, said: "Vattenfall's contribution to a community fund will greatly help community life over the next two decades.
"Applications have been received for the fund to support a range of projects, from sports equipment for young people to community buses.
"I would encourage anyone who has any other suggestions to get in touch. Application forms can be picked up from parish councils."
Thousands of residents opposed the scheme and raised more than 50,000 to fight it at a planning inquiry.
However, the go-ahead was granted by then Secretary of State, John Denham, with the project due to power up to 12,000 homes a year.
Graham Hart, county councillor for the area, said: "Not everyone, myself included, welcomed the idea of wind turbines initially.
"But we're now delighted Vattenfall is investing in the future of our communities, with the parish councils and young people having their say in how the money is spent."
The family day featured a marquee full of arts, crafts and games, and saw the announcement of the winners of a turbine-naming competition run with children from South Kilworth and Swinford School.
Seven-year-old Harvey Everton, from Swinford School, won the overall prize for his artwork and naming one of the turbines Swift.
Later in the day, the event moved to South Kilworth village hall, where there was live music, activities for children, along with food and refreshments. The project took just over a year to construct and UK companies received key contracts.
Piers Guy, Vattenfall's head of onshore wind development in the UK, said: "It was great to see so many of the community taking part in the inauguration event.
"Being on site not only gave them the opportunity to get involved in the activities on the day, but also gave them the chance to see the wind farm up close.
"We were very happy to present the first year of community funding, which we are sure will have a very real impact in the area."
The turbine towers were constructed in south Wales and another British company was contracted to carry out all the civil engineering work on site.
Businesses in the area also received contracts to provide environmental and geographical surveying, site security, and gravel for the access tracks was supplied by a nearby quarry.
As part of the planning approval, the company agreed to set up the community fund. Energy firm Vattenfall marked the project's first six months generating power at the weekend with a day of fun, games and activities for the family at the wind farm site and at South Kilworth.
The company also handed over 44,000, the first of 25 annual payments which will go into the combined fund during the life of the wind farm.
Michael Murphy, chairman of the community fund, who supported the project, said: "Vattenfall's contribution to a community fund will greatly help community life over the next two decades.
"Applications have been received for the fund to support a range of projects, from sports equipment for young people to community buses.
"I would encourage anyone who has any other suggestions to get in touch. Application forms can be picked up from parish councils."
Thousands of residents opposed the scheme and raised more than 50,000 to fight it at a planning inquiry.
However, the go-ahead was granted by then Secretary of State, John Denham, with the project due to power up to 12,000 homes a year.
Graham Hart, county councillor for the area, said: "Not everyone, myself included, welcomed the idea of wind turbines initially.
"But we're now delighted Vattenfall is investing in the future of our communities, with the parish councils and young people having their say in how the money is spent."
The family day featured a marquee full of arts, crafts and games, and saw the announcement of the winners of a turbine-naming competition run with children from South Kilworth and Swinford School.
Seven-year-old Harvey Everton, from Swinford School, won the overall prize for his artwork and naming one of the turbines Swift.
Later in the day, the event moved to South Kilworth village hall, where there was live music, activities for children, along with food and refreshments. The project took just over a year to construct and UK companies received key contracts.
Piers Guy, Vattenfall's head of onshore wind development in the UK, said: "It was great to see so many of the community taking part in the inauguration event.
"Being on site not only gave them the opportunity to get involved in the activities on the day, but also gave them the chance to see the wind farm up close.
"We were very happy to present the first year of community funding, which we are sure will have a very real impact in the area."
The turbine towers were constructed in south Wales and another British company was contracted to carry out all the civil engineering work on site.
Businesses in the area also received contracts to provide environmental and geographical surveying, site security, and gravel for the access tracks was supplied by a nearby quarry.
2013年6月2日 星期日
No Wynne on wind
Premier Kathleen Wynne last week promised to give municipal governments a greater say in the location of industrial wind turbines (IWTs) in their communities, short of being able to veto them.
In other words, she’s promising residents across Ontario battling the imposition of industrial wind factories on their communities any and all assistance, short of help.
Given the Liberals’ appalling history on this issue, skepticism is justified about anything they say.
Indeed, the determination of Wynne’s predecessor, Dalton McGuinty, to ram IWTs down the throats of communities across Ontario is one of the most shameful episodes in the Liberals’ 10-year record of government.
People who objected to IWTs were mocked as suffering from NIMBYism (not-in-my-backyard syndrome) by McGuinty.
His Green Energy Act took away the rights of local municipalities to any say in the location of these giant, industrial wind factories.
When people started complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines, environment ministry officials lied to them.
They told them they were the only ones complaining — implying it was all in their heads — when in fact the ministry was receiving hundreds of complaints from across Ontario.More information about the program is available on the web site at www.scfwindturbine.com.
A 2011 CBC news investigation, which obtained 1,000 pages of internal government documents through a Freedom of Information request, revealed that even as the environment ministry was publicly downplaying the growing controversy, it was internally warning the government its noise limits and setbacks for wind turbines were flawed, inadequate, hard to monitor and difficult to enforce.
Meanwhile the Liberals publicly mouthed the same platitudes as the wind industry they were enriching by paying outrageous prices for unreliable electricity.
That fiasco was fully documented by then auditor general Jim McCarter in his devastating 2011 assessment of the Liberals’ renewable energy program. He concluded poor Liberal decision-making will cost Ontarians billions of dollars on their hydro bills for generations to come.
Meanwhile, back on the health front, the Liberals and the wind industry insisted scientific studies, often funded by the wind industry, showed turbines were safe.
They also cited a 2010 literature review by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health which found no “direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” At the same time, wind companies were buying out families driven from their homes by turbine noise, vibration and flickering, while making them sign confidentiality agreements, so they couldn’t talk about it.
More recently, however, there has been a growing pushback against the Liberals’ scurrilous suggestion anyone complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines must be a NIMBY or nuts.
An article in the May issue of Canadian Family Physician — official journal of The College of Family Physicians of Canada — warns doctors to brace for increasing numbers of medical complaints from people living close to industrial wind turbines.
“Adverse health affects of industrial wind turbines”, by Dr. Roy D. Jeffery, Carmen Krough and Brett Horner notes, “people who live or work in close proximity to IWTs have experienced symptoms that include decreased quality of life, annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headache, anxiety, depression and cognitive dysfunction. Some have also felt anger, grief or a sense of injustice. Suggested causes of symptoms include a combination of wind turbine noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, ground current and shadow flicker.”
The article cited a 2011 Ontario environmental review tribunal which concluded: “This case has successfully shown that the debate should not be simplified to one about whether wind turbines can cause harm to humans. The evidence presented to the Tribunal demonstrates that they can, if facilities are placed too close to residents. The debate has now evolved to one of degree.”
In other words, she’s promising residents across Ontario battling the imposition of industrial wind factories on their communities any and all assistance, short of help.
Given the Liberals’ appalling history on this issue, skepticism is justified about anything they say.
Indeed, the determination of Wynne’s predecessor, Dalton McGuinty, to ram IWTs down the throats of communities across Ontario is one of the most shameful episodes in the Liberals’ 10-year record of government.
People who objected to IWTs were mocked as suffering from NIMBYism (not-in-my-backyard syndrome) by McGuinty.
His Green Energy Act took away the rights of local municipalities to any say in the location of these giant, industrial wind factories.
When people started complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines, environment ministry officials lied to them.
A 2011 CBC news investigation, which obtained 1,000 pages of internal government documents through a Freedom of Information request, revealed that even as the environment ministry was publicly downplaying the growing controversy, it was internally warning the government its noise limits and setbacks for wind turbines were flawed, inadequate, hard to monitor and difficult to enforce.
Meanwhile the Liberals publicly mouthed the same platitudes as the wind industry they were enriching by paying outrageous prices for unreliable electricity.
That fiasco was fully documented by then auditor general Jim McCarter in his devastating 2011 assessment of the Liberals’ renewable energy program. He concluded poor Liberal decision-making will cost Ontarians billions of dollars on their hydro bills for generations to come.
Meanwhile, back on the health front, the Liberals and the wind industry insisted scientific studies, often funded by the wind industry, showed turbines were safe.
They also cited a 2010 literature review by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health which found no “direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” At the same time, wind companies were buying out families driven from their homes by turbine noise, vibration and flickering, while making them sign confidentiality agreements, so they couldn’t talk about it.
More recently, however, there has been a growing pushback against the Liberals’ scurrilous suggestion anyone complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines must be a NIMBY or nuts.
An article in the May issue of Canadian Family Physician — official journal of The College of Family Physicians of Canada — warns doctors to brace for increasing numbers of medical complaints from people living close to industrial wind turbines.
“Adverse health affects of industrial wind turbines”, by Dr. Roy D. Jeffery, Carmen Krough and Brett Horner notes, “people who live or work in close proximity to IWTs have experienced symptoms that include decreased quality of life, annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headache, anxiety, depression and cognitive dysfunction. Some have also felt anger, grief or a sense of injustice. Suggested causes of symptoms include a combination of wind turbine noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, ground current and shadow flicker.”
The article cited a 2011 Ontario environmental review tribunal which concluded: “This case has successfully shown that the debate should not be simplified to one about whether wind turbines can cause harm to humans. The evidence presented to the Tribunal demonstrates that they can, if facilities are placed too close to residents. The debate has now evolved to one of degree.”
2013年1月29日 星期二
Wind turbine project approved
After more than four years of research and community debate, the Clinton County Board of Commissioners voted 5-2 Tuesday to grant a special use permit to a Chicago company that wants to build a $123 million wind-turbine project to generate electricity.
Although turnouts of about 150 residents – most of them opposed to the project -- had been common at planning commission and township board meetings over the past year, barely 50 people attended the county board meeting, which started at 9 a.m. Only four local residents – two in favor and two against – made public comments.
Bob Boettger, a farmer who has agreed to host eight of the proposed 39 turbines on his land, described the project as “something our community can be proud of when it’s completed.” He said it had benefited from the extensive review process.
Ken Wieber, a farmer who has fought the project at every step, compared the approval process to watching a traffic crash develop in slow motion over several years. He challenged commissioners to recognize what he said was growing evidence of adverse health effects related to wind turbines.
Among the commissioners, only Adam Stacey commented. He described the local-government review as the most fascinating and most frustrating public process he’d ever been involved in. Three weeks ago he had said he would vote against the permit and he followed through on Tuesday.
Project developer Tim Brown said he was grateful to secure permit approval but said it was too early to discuss what would happen next. The turbines are proposed for location across Bengal, Dallas and Essex townships, all of which have approved special ordinances more restrictive than the county.
Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona SA, the Argentinean wind-turbine maker, hasn’t been paid by Brazil’s state-controlled energy company Centrais Eletricas Brasileiras SA (ELET6) for power from a project that began feeding electricity to the grid in June 2011.
The turbine supplier’s Energimp unit is owed 250 million reais ($125.9 million) for selling electricity from its 222- megawatt wind farm in the southern state of Santa Catarina, Jose Luis Menghini, vice president of Impsa, as the Mendoza, Argentina-based company is known, said today in a telephone interview from Sao Paulo.
The utility known as Eletrobras delayed payments after Brazil power regulator Agencia Nacional de Energia Eletrica established new compensation rules in June, Menghini said. He said the turbine company is compliant with the revised policies and is getting impatient.
“They want everything to be perfect.” Menghini said. “I understand that preoccupation. They have a responsibility to do this. But we have a responsibility to our shareholders.”
The 1.3 billion-real wind project is enrolled in a government renewable-energy support program called Proinfa that pays developers a set rate for electricity that rises with inflation, he said. Eletrobras is investigating “inconsistencies” in documents provided by Impsa, a spokesman for the utility who didn’t want to be named because of company policy, said today in an e-mail.
Impsa was last asked to submit documentation for its projects Jan. 10 and did so Jan. 16, Menghini said. “We’ve got no problem with Aneel” or the local environmental authority, he said. “The hold up is due to Eletrobras.”
Energimp is 55 percent owned by Impsa and 45 percent owned by Fundo de Investimento do Fundo de Garantia do Tempo de Servico, Brazil’s state-run severance and disability fund, he said.
Although turnouts of about 150 residents – most of them opposed to the project -- had been common at planning commission and township board meetings over the past year, barely 50 people attended the county board meeting, which started at 9 a.m. Only four local residents – two in favor and two against – made public comments.
Bob Boettger, a farmer who has agreed to host eight of the proposed 39 turbines on his land, described the project as “something our community can be proud of when it’s completed.” He said it had benefited from the extensive review process.
Ken Wieber, a farmer who has fought the project at every step, compared the approval process to watching a traffic crash develop in slow motion over several years. He challenged commissioners to recognize what he said was growing evidence of adverse health effects related to wind turbines.
Among the commissioners, only Adam Stacey commented. He described the local-government review as the most fascinating and most frustrating public process he’d ever been involved in. Three weeks ago he had said he would vote against the permit and he followed through on Tuesday.
Project developer Tim Brown said he was grateful to secure permit approval but said it was too early to discuss what would happen next. The turbines are proposed for location across Bengal, Dallas and Essex townships, all of which have approved special ordinances more restrictive than the county.
Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona SA, the Argentinean wind-turbine maker, hasn’t been paid by Brazil’s state-controlled energy company Centrais Eletricas Brasileiras SA (ELET6) for power from a project that began feeding electricity to the grid in June 2011.
The turbine supplier’s Energimp unit is owed 250 million reais ($125.9 million) for selling electricity from its 222- megawatt wind farm in the southern state of Santa Catarina, Jose Luis Menghini, vice president of Impsa, as the Mendoza, Argentina-based company is known, said today in a telephone interview from Sao Paulo.
The utility known as Eletrobras delayed payments after Brazil power regulator Agencia Nacional de Energia Eletrica established new compensation rules in June, Menghini said. He said the turbine company is compliant with the revised policies and is getting impatient.
“They want everything to be perfect.” Menghini said. “I understand that preoccupation. They have a responsibility to do this. But we have a responsibility to our shareholders.”
The 1.3 billion-real wind project is enrolled in a government renewable-energy support program called Proinfa that pays developers a set rate for electricity that rises with inflation, he said. Eletrobras is investigating “inconsistencies” in documents provided by Impsa, a spokesman for the utility who didn’t want to be named because of company policy, said today in an e-mail.
Impsa was last asked to submit documentation for its projects Jan. 10 and did so Jan. 16, Menghini said. “We’ve got no problem with Aneel” or the local environmental authority, he said. “The hold up is due to Eletrobras.”
Energimp is 55 percent owned by Impsa and 45 percent owned by Fundo de Investimento do Fundo de Garantia do Tempo de Servico, Brazil’s state-run severance and disability fund, he said.
訂閱：
意見 (Atom)