• Wed
  • Oct 2, 2013
  • Updated: 4:58pm
Lai See
Tuesday, 01 October, 2013, 3:02am

Typhoon Usagi's message for Hong Kong's wind farms

BIO

Howard Winn has been with the South China Morning Post for two and half years after previous stints as business editor and deputy editor of The Standard, and business editor of Asia Times. His writing has also been published in the Far Eastern Economic Review, the Wall Street Journal, and the International Herald Tribune. He writes the Lai See column which focuses on the lighter side of business.
 

One of the effects of Typhoon Usagi, which received little attention, was its impact on the Honghaiwan wind farm in Shanwei, eastern Guangdong, about 130 kilometres northeast of Hong Kong. The onshore wind farm comprises 25 imported Vestas V47 600KW turbines. The website Windpower Intelligence reports that eight of the turbines were blown down by the typhoon, while the blades of another eight turbines were blown off, and the blades of the remaining turbines are being examined to see if they can operate normally.

Our picture is from CCTV2's website, which reported that 70 per cent of the wind farm had been knocked out. Windpower Intelligence reports that one of the managers says the typhoon has led to 100 million yuan in losses for the wind farm. This is the second time the wind farm has suffered typhoon damage. The farm was hit in 2003 with damage to 13 out of 25 turbines, causing losses of 10 million yuan.

The recent damage may have caused some unease within the government and possibly within Hongkong Electric and CLP, the two companies planning wind farms in Hong Kong waters. CLP, Hong Kong's largest power company, plans to build what will be one of the biggest offshore wind farms in the world off Sai Kung - generating 200 megawatts a year - at a cost of almost HK$7 billion. Hongkong Electric is to build a HK$3 billion wind farm between Lamma Island and Cheung Chau that would generate 100MW of power - enough for 50,000 households.

Since Shanwei is fairly close to Hong Kong, it is frequently used as a reference for winds in Hong Kong. "This is another indication of how ill-advised these Hong Kong wind projects are," Ng Young, the chairman of Hong Kong's Association for Geoconservation, told Lai See.

The companies are still involved in testing work, and construction has yet to begin. At best the two wind farms might produce about 1.5 per cent of Hong Kong's total electricity production, and reduce its output of carbon dioxide by about 2 per cent. This miniscule contribution comes at a cost of HK$10 billion. Regardless of how useless these wind farms are, the government can point to them as its contribution to reducing Hong Kong's carbon footprint and take its place in the world's effort to limit the production of carbon dioxide, and thereby global warming, or so they would have us believe. As for the power companies, the farms are a wonderful opportunity for them to increase their net assets at a time when returns from the scheme of control, which governs them, have been reduced from 13.5 per cent to 15 per cent under the previous scheme, which ended in 2009, to 9.99 per cent under the current scheme. But they will get 11 per cent on their wind farm assets since they are a form of renewable energy. Meanwhile, the public picks up the bill in the form of higher electricity prices. Higher fuel costs are inevitable, but better to spend this on efficient clean energy like gas.

Ng says the wind farms are unsightly and kill birds, and are an unreliable source of energy. He makes the point that the Shanwei wind farm operates at an average of 17 per cent to 18 per cent efficiency: "The government is silly to support this project - building this white elephant just for the sake of appearing to do something green, when in fact it is damaging the environment, and costing the community a lot of money in terms of higher fuel bills and higher costs to business. The only beneficiaries are the power companies."

 

New Noble venture

Hong Kong's Noble Group, together with TPG, are each investing US$500 million in a new mining venture, X2 Resources, which is being established by former executives who set up Xstrata. Former Xstrata chief executive Mick Davis, former chief financial officer Trevor Reid and other executives who left Xstrata when it was taken over by Glencore, intend to create a new mid-tier diversified mining and metals firm by "leveraging the extensive track record of the X2 team in identifying and acquiring assets and businesses at an opportune time in the cycle and applying their proven approach to integration and value enhancement to the resulting portfolio of operations", Noble said in a statement. The Hong Kong company will be X2 Resources' preferred marketer and provider of supply chain management and investments around the world.

 

Have you got any stories that Lai See should know about? E-mail them to howard.winn@scmp.com

Comments

iandubin
Hong Kong needs to revisit the policies that are encouraging HEC and CLP to forge ahead with plans for useless, expensive and destructive Offshore Industrial Wind Energy Installations.
Whether or not giant offshore turbines can be engineered to withstand typhoons, they do not produce affordable, despatchable energy. As experience in overseas jurisdictions shows, they make no appreciable difference to carbon emissions. They cause social, economic and environmental problems and result in increased consumer costs for no benefit.
bruce.m.williams.3
What was the peak gust recorded?!?
Shoddy reporting.
dunndavid
No. This can't be true. Despite being 6-10 times more than thermal power, wind turbines just run and run with no fuel cost so no operating cost including no operation and maintenance cost. What? They are actually quite fragile? No, can't possibly be true of such a utopian power source... Well, I guess this means we'll have to harness the power of unicorn **** now. Good thing Hong Kong had just 20 wind turbines rather than 20,000. Sweltering in the dark would sorta suck.
faisaltheonly1
Just lower the blades to the poll which supports it that will largely prevent damage. Fools!
captam
Its not that simple from an engineering perspective. It would weaken the blade attachment structures and could also increase stress on the pole making these even more susceptible to failure. Giant wind turbines in Europe's North Sea experience strong gale force winds frequently and the newer designs of turbine are able to withstand these winds if the units are properly maintained. Computers constantly measure wind speed and direction and make constant adjustments to the blade pitch and direction of as well as governing their speed. Cyclones are especially problematic because winds can change speed and direction rapidly, allowing little time for adjustments to be made. However the latest turbine designs allow for wind speeds up to about 220 kph and the if these had been fitted at Shanwei the damage would in all likelihood not have been so severe. We have to keep supporting this green technology and cut down the burning of fossil fuels.
iandubin
If you are 'green energy' proponent I suggest you need to do some further research. While I agree we need a solution to burning fossil fuels, wind energy is not it. Overseas experience in Ontario, Denmark, Spain and many other jurisdictions is demonstrating that these things are a waste of time and money - taxpayer and ratepayer money.
dienw
Don't read too much into this failure. It's just typically poor standard PRC infrastructure (cf. high speed rail, innumerable bridges and roads, milk powder, food standards). Don't expect Hong Kong companies to accept such unacceptably low standards.
KwunTongBypass
And instead of building windmills, wouldn't we be held back by a bunch of incompetent ignorants since years, we could be burning half of our garbage = get rid of it forever! in proven "old fashioned" incinerators, and get about 100 MW of electricity generation capacity, as a by-product.
captam
@Typhoon Usagi's message for Hong Kong's wind farms
Simple. Just engineer them to be stronger. Double the strength of the towers and the blades. Probably about 25% additional investment cost but will save them in a typhoon.
iandubin
What's the point? Onshore wind is already hugely more expensive than fossil, gas or nukes, does not produce despatchable power and makes no difference to carbon emissions. Offshore is three times the cost of onshore already. These things are a boondoggle.

Pages

Login

SCMP.com Account

or