this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2023
399 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59979 readers
2610 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] atzanteol 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

On completion, the wind farm is expected to be operational for 35 years

That seems super short?

[–] bernieecclestoned 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's in the North Sea, pretty hostile environment for anything manmade. Oil rigs in the same area have an expected lifetime of 25 years.

[–] atzanteol 3 points 1 year ago

That's true - I was thinking about that after I posted since it's a salt-water environment and things will likely corrode over time.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a typical "lifespan" of these types of projects, that is to say, the lifespan where it produces sufficient amounts of energy versus the degradation of the equipment to justify upkeep costs (which may be greater for offshore wind than on-shore). It's not going to break down over night after 35 years, it could go 50 or even more, but at lower energy production. The other reason for these lifespan calculations is that, in 35 years, the technology may far out pace what is currently installed in likely a prime location, and maybe local energy demands have changed. If that's the case, a "repower" may occur where existing infrastructure is adapted to new equipment which produces far more energy.

[–] atzanteol 2 points 1 year ago

Makes sense - I did some searching on other project lifespans and they do seem similar (actually this seems on the longer-end of the range).

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's just the lifespan of a typical wind turbine. Most last less than that.

But then Trawsfynydd nuclear power station was only operational for 26 years. The coal station up the road from me has been going for 55 years, but who know how much of the original guts of that remain.

In any case £9bn for 35 years of clean power seems like a bargain.