3 ms·
The Netherlands has plenty of space for on-shore wind, what it doesn't have is sufficient space for them to get away from the NIMBY's. Hence building them off-s
by avar 6y ago
The Netherlands has plenty of space for on-shore wind, what it doesn't have is sufficient space for them to get away from the NIMBY's. Hence building them off-shore.
- GekkePrutser 6y agoOff-shore is of course a great way to have the benefits without the drawbacks. The Netherlands is quite full already and we should be careful with the small amounts of nature we have left. The added cost isn't a huge thing when your factor in it's clean energy without long term waste like nuclear.
- avar 6y agoOf course it has a huge drawback: opportunity cost. If you look at two recently constructed wind farms in The Netherlands[1][2] then by a conservative estimate the offshore one costs around 5 million/MW compared to 2.5 million/MW for the (mostly) on-shore one. That conservatively gives you a cost difference of around 1.5 billion for building it offshore. Or around 1 million EUR per the 150 turbines that make up Gemini. So yes, I agree with you about the importance of preserving nature. I just think it's a better investment to place 150 relatively low-footprint turbines around the country and use the 1 million leftover EUR for each one to expand the public land around them into a park or outdoor area. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windpark_Noordoostpolder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windpark_Noordoostpolder 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_Wind_Farm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_Wind_Farm