Thailand's Largest Wind Turbine Officially Launched

[webfact]

Wind turbines officially launched

By The Nation

NAKHON SI THAMMARAT: -- Energy Minister Wannarat Charnnukul today opened the country's largest wind turbine in Hua Sai, Nakhon Si Thammarat. The 1.5-MW turbine can generate 1.8 million units of electricity, worth about Bt10 million per year. This will save energy imports by 0.155 kilo tonne equivalent (ktoe). Wannarat said the project, also including a 250-kilowatt turbine nearby, will pave way for a commercial wind farm.

The 250-kw turbine can generate 0.3 milion units of electricty, worth Bt2 million a year. This will reduce energy import by 0.028 ktoe.

Krairit Nilkuha, director-general of the Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, said that surveys showed that the coastal area of the Gulf of Thailand, from Nakhon Ratchasima to Pattani, is supporting wind power generating. The department is conducting a feasibility study on the installation of wind turbines in the area, with plans to welcome private investment

-- The Nation 2010-01-29

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[jambla]

There is a large one being built on Koh Larn. Probably doesn't compare to this one in size, but great to see it in LOS.

Edited January 29, 2010 by jambla

[Paul123456]

Excellent

[runker]

What about the possible geothermo energy available in the NW?

[Artabus]

Wind turbines are at best 15% efficient. As for getting excited about 1.75MW, it's nothing. It will barely run the lights at Siam Paragon! Which store I do like, but that's a different matter.

On the other hand, if every farmer that currently spends 2 months of the year burning the stubble off his fields put it into an Anaerobic Digester, far more energy than this would be generated, as well as fertiliser for the fields - to say nothing of the reduction in atmospheric pollution. In the tropics this is extremely simple to set up and run.

There are other solutions as well - pv for windows, building design, building use, wave, tidal. A combination of all of these will go some reasonable way towards a reduction in energy consumption, allied to an increase in energy production. And thenn you have to look at transport use and industrial processes if you want to continue to make a difference.

If the government is serious about renewable energy generation, that's excellent. But they should opt for simple methods that work, not more expensive ones that work but only after a fashion.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Artabus

[walterego]

I will boycott double tier pricing at national parks... but will gladly support going to see this and pay. WELL DONE THAILAND! Keep it UP!

Edited January 29, 2010 by walterego

[walterego]

And so as the sangsom melds my mood into mellow. I am compelled to sing that great song by Khun Robert Zimmerman "The Answer my friend is blowi'n in the wind the answer is blowin in the wind."

Edited January 29, 2010 by walterego

[nakachalet]

YOU OUGHT TO PRESENT YOURSELF AT THE OFFICE FOR INFORMED VOLUNTEER ADVISOR....

if you are around pacificrims

would you like me to put you in touch with someone, sir/madam?

Wind turbines are at best 15% efficient. As for getting excited about 1.75MW, it's nothing. It will barely run the lights at

am Paragon! Which store I do like, but that's a different matter.

On the other hand, if every farmer that currently spends 2 months of the year burning the stubble off his fields put it into an Anaerobic Digester, far more energy than this would be generated, as well as fertiliser for the fields - to say nothing of the reduction in atmospheric pollution. In the tropics this is extremely simple to set up and run.

There are other solutions as well - pv for windows, building design, building use, wave, tidal. A combination of all of these will go some reasonable way towards a reduction in energy consumption, allied to an increase in energy production. And thenn you have to look at transport use and industrial processes if you want to continue to make a difference.

If the government is serious about renewable energy generation, that's excellent. But they should opt for simple methods that work, not more expensive ones that work but only after a fashion.

[rakman]

Wind turbines are at best 15% efficient. As for getting excited about 1.75MW, it's nothing. It will barely run the lights at Siam Paragon! Which store I do like, but that's a different matter.

On the other hand, if every farmer that currently spends 2 months of the year burning the stubble off his fields put it into an Anaerobic Digester, far more energy than this would be generated, as well as fertiliser for the fields - to say nothing of the reduction in atmospheric pollution. In the tropics this is extremely simple to set up and run.

There are other solutions as well - pv for windows, building design, building use, wave, tidal. A combination of all of these will go some reasonable way towards a reduction in energy consumption, allied to an increase in energy production. And thenn you have to look at transport use and industrial processes if you want to continue to make a difference.

If the government is serious about renewable energy generation, that's excellent. But they should opt for simple methods that work, not more expensive ones that work but only after a fashion.

According to Eon in Germany, a windfarm requires 80% of the wind power generated with hot standby generating capacity. So 15% efficiency about right. If we only had that magic battery.. Maybe one day.. Or maybe not.

Then there will be the bird kills, the unsightly and noisy turbines drumming in the background replacing the whistling of the breeze through the palms.

[Donnyboy]

any one got a photo?

[Trickcyclist]

Don't underestimate wind energy.

With the recent wind farm initiatives in the North Sea the UK could be 80% independent of fossil fuels by 2020.

In fact, the UK could be exporting energy to a Euro grid to power Germany and rest of Europe.

[lasiana]

Yes, I think wind energy is a good thing. But may be not so much for Thailand as this part of the globe does not generate too much wind.

What we think is wind is in fact thermic which blows twice a day. Morning from see to land and evening reverse.

Everyone experiences the "no or low wind nights". This is because the sun does not heat the surface of the earth in the night.

This "wind" is not compareable with wind of areas which are geographically on the half way between aequator and northpole like England e.g. The driving force there is the coriolisforce due to the geographical different position compared to countries along the aequator.

I believe the power number mentioned is more related to the wind turbine maximal power rather than the real power available in this area.

Nevertheless I think even a bit green energy is better than nothing, right?

Thailand is very sure good for bioenergy as it is rich on organic matter.

[Artabus]

Don't underestimate wind energy.

With the recent wind farm initiatives in the North Sea the UK could be 80% independent of fossil fuels by 2020.

In fact, the UK could be exporting energy to a Euro grid to power Germany and rest of Europe.

With respect, that's not going to happen. Have you done the calculations?

On the other hand, there is an argument for utilising windfarms, if the design is changed fundamentally. As one of the other posters alluded to, storage is part of the required change. There are other aspects as well.

So, I'm not underestimating wind power. I'm merely stating that the current designs are not the solution, and consequently I do not support them.

I think Thailand would be better served by also using tidal power - especially distributed around the Gulf, to compensate for the problems of intermittent supply from any one facility. It has other benefits as well.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Artabus