According to the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), the electricity generation costs (not including cost-intensive connection to the grid) of modern wind turbines at good, windy sites are currently approx. e0.051/kWh. The EWEA forecasts that costs at good onshore sites can drop to e0.032/kWh by 2013, meaning that wind power is well on its way to becoming the most competitive means of producing renewable energy.
The financial viability of wind-generated installations (commonly known as wind farms) depends on wind speed, cost and efficiency of such machines and of course fossil fuel prices. It is an established fact that large turbines capable of selling power to the grid can be financially viable at locations where the average wind speed is more than seven metres per second.
The typical life span of such equipment manufactured in Europe today is likely to be in the range 15-25 years and will cost some e40-64 per megawatt generated, with an additional annual maintenance and insurance costs which could vary between two to five per cent of the capital outlay. The plus value that features with these machines is that they are likely to become more attractive to businesses in future, as its technology continues to improve at a faster rate than others and energy prices continue to escalate.
The minister’s recent statements regarding the subject clearly indicated that the wind farm project, anticipated to be the deep sea type, announced before the general election was still on the table. The Malta Resources Authority had identified areas suitable for such a wind farm and a call for tenders was being prepared. Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt also added that while the government would invest in alternative sources of energy, it needed to be stressed that electricity production from alternative sources was more expensive than that from fossil fuels.
My prompt question to such a statement would be why in heavens name the government would invest in alternative energy sources in the first place, if he for one, is so convinced that such an option is more expensive than fossil fuel? Is he being short sighted here? Judging feasibility in terms of monetary costs only? What about the hidden costs associated with fossil fuel emissions to the atmosphere indirectly contributing to the public health bill?
Being the spokesman in opposition on environment for the past five years, I have naturally devoted substantial time and effort to evaluate the subject matter and holistically compare the pros and cons of wind energy with other alternative energy options adaptable to our Island. In fact I’m more than pleased to state that during such time my team of voluntary experts have generated, through their diverse technical capabilities, enough knowledge on the subject matter to enable us to pursue a strategically modest direction.
What came out from our research definitely contrasts with the idea of sitting offshore wind farms in 80-metre deep waters as predicted by the government. Although it would be technically feasible to mount wind turbines on floating structures equipped with anchoring and wave compensation systems used by oil drilling ships, studies have shown that it would be very expensive to carry out such undertaking and no lesser to maintain it. Admittedly, future technological advancement may one day make floating offshore wind farms economically feasible however presently it would be unrealistic to invest in a technology which is practically still in its infancy. Besides, economic viability should not be considered in isolation. The impact of wind farms on birds for instance could prove substantial and therefore due consideration must be given when siting turbines close to bird habitats or their migration paths. Equally relevant concerns fisheries and sea navigation.
Production costs of wind energy machines based on land on the other hand are predictably accurate enough to guarantee the safest way of assuring a satisfactory, cost effective performance. If we are to go for wind power our options are limited to land based installation or near shore locations preferably shallower than 15 meters. To some this may all sound outrageous but one only has to look at our closest neighbours.
When and if needed, decommissioning is easy: when removed, wind farms leave no toxic residues or environmental damage. There are no direct fuel costs, and the cost of extracting power is bound to fall as the technology improves. In summary, wind power is sustainable, clean and is increasingly competitive economically. Its local impacts are relatively small compared with the global impacts of using conventional fuels.
Roderick Galdes is MLP spokesman for planning