NWF - NZ Windfarms

[BlackPeter]

Not sure why you are "disappointed in NWF board and management" PSE.
You must be referring to something in history that I know nothing of.
Right now I am pretty pleased with them.

Well, I guess its all relative. If we consider that this company started in their IPO (9 years ago) with $75M shareholder capital, supplemented by the subsequent 2010 8 for 3 capital rise of $31.5M. They never paid a dividend and turned the initial capital plus capital rises into a now $17M market cap. Thats a capital loss of nearly 85% over 9 years.
(edit: checked the numbers and amended as appropriate ...)

Yes, there have been a number of factors the board was not able to control (like e.g. the carbon credits basically turning to custard), and being the development sandpit for the not so successful NZ inventor Windflow didn't help either.

Still - I have my doubts, whether the board did always their best with the hand dealt to them. Their ongoing results are clearly telling a different message.

Discl: holding - and yes, I think that the share is currently undervalued (at less than 16% of original shareholders capital). Believe however that a different board could improve the companies value.

[JAYAY]

Whoa PSE/ I am a relatively new NWF shareholder. My comments that you know more than me were meant as an acknowledgement that you have more knowledge of the company history than I do which you obviously do. And I respect you for that. There was never any implication that you were trading on inside information.
Latest developments are a positive for me. That's all I am saying.

[ratkin]

On a recent trip to Cornwall i noticed less wind farms than previously. What was new from my last visits was countless fields filled with solar panels. Why do we not have them here? After all we get more sun than them.
Have a feeling it was due to some european subsidy for farmers, but not sure

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...ood-production

[JAYAY]

On a recent trip to Cornwall i noticed less wind farms than previously. What was new from my last visits was countless fields filled with solar panels. Why do we not have them here? After all we get more sun than them.
Have a feeling it was due to some european subsidy for farmers, but not sure

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...ood-production

.

I guess someone will do it here when the numbers stack up.

[Harvey Specter]

.

I guess someone will do it here when the numbers stack up.

if you already have a high voltage cable for the wind farm, adding solar panels along a fence line could stake up quicker?

[jonu]

No worries JAYJAY just making sure, i am a bit firey by nature
Solar panels cost 27c/kWh vs windfarms costing 9c kWh and can use the existing cabling network at TRH which is 33kV. Solar panels provide no power in winter when nz demand is highest so are a total waste of space, also rains a lot in most major nz centres.

I'm no expert on this stuff, but I recently had a look at a friend's off grid power supply which consisted of integrated solar and diesel generator. He deliberately avoided a wind turbine due to likely maintenance issues, even though he is in a windy coastal location. He told me 1/3 of his solar panels were of a super sensitive type that generated well even on dull days. Also that heat had nothing to do with it. A bright day in winter was just as good as summer (just shorter).

[BlackPeter]

I'm no expert on this stuff, but I recently had a look at a friend's off grid power supply which consisted of integrated solar and diesel generator. He deliberately avoided a wind turbine due to likely maintenance issues, even though he is in a windy coastal location. He told me 1/3 of his solar panels were of a super sensitive type that generated well even on dull days. Also that heat had nothing to do with it. A bright day in winter was just as good as summer (just shorter).

Actually - solar panels are more effective when the outside temperature is low. However - as you rightly observed, the number of sunshine hours is lower in winter - and at least as important: the intensity of the sun is much lower (due to the lower angle with which the sun rays come through the atmosphere).

Part of my dissertation (many years ago) looked into the efficiency of solar panels - and while the technology has improved since than, the physical characteristics of sunlight have not. The solar energy hitting the ground in our geographic location (say between 40 and 45 degrees South) is (per hour) on a misty autumn or winter day about 1% of the energy hitting the same area on a sunny day in summer.

Quite hopeless technology, if you need your power during winter, even if you invest into some storage for a days consumption (very expensive). What you would need is storage to cover basically for the full winter - and this technology is not yet available (well, you obviously could pump lots of water uphill and store in a lake - if you have enough space and water ...).

And the other thing - as PSE rightly highlighted .. solar energy costs are still something like 25 to 30 cts per kWh, wind energy is something like 7 to 8 cents, and hydro energy can be as cheap as 3 cents per kWh. Why would anybody in their right mind install solar as long as they can connect to the grid? Unless obviously - their solar gets subsidized by everybody else, which drives power prices for everybody else into the sky?

[Harvey Specter]

Why would anybody in their right mind install solar as long as they can connect to the grid? Unless obviously - their solar gets subsidized by everybody else, which drives power prices for everybody else into the sky?

Because in part they are comparing the cost they can generate onsite to the price they have to pay to import it which includes not just the generation cost, but the transmission, distribution and retail costs and potentially the profit margin from 4 different operators.

So you cant just compare the relative generation costs, you have to compare the generation to retail cost.

[BlackPeter]

Because in part they are comparing the cost they can generate onsite to the price they have to pay to import it which includes not just the generation cost, but the transmission, distribution and retail costs and potentially the profit margin from 4 different operators.

So you cant just compare the relative generation costs, you have to compare the generation to retail cost.

Sure - this is as long as some other poor sucker keeps subsidizing the network costs for the solar freeloaders. Lets assume that everybody goes solar and lets say that this could cover half of the electrical energy needed in NZ. The network cost wouldn't drop by a cent, as long as all these solar freeloaders keep sucking the same amount of electricity out of the net on a cold winter evening. Its just that everybody else than would need to pay twice the cost per (grid originated) kWh of power (given that people draw in this example only half the amount of energy out of the grid, but the cost for the grid maintenance didn't change).

No net savings to the country, just higher power prices for everybody using grid power (no matter how you calculate it). solar is just cheaper as long as a non solar majority is subsidizing the free loaders.

Obviously - we could just remove the solar freeloaders totally off the grid. If they manage to store enough of the energy they need throughout the winter onsite (or find during winter an alternative supply - e.g. diesel?), than they aren't free loaders anymore - however they will find out very soon that they have to pay an arm and a leg for their self containedness ...

[Harvey Specter]

Blackpeter - agree. I forgot to point out that this is a virtuous circle. As solar gets cheaper, and more people get it, the grid power price will increase (as you point out) so more will get solar ...

Not sure if I posted this here yet: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=11436175

Why would someone in Hawaii need over $50k of solar! Some utilities are trying to charge a fixed monthly fee to those who feed into the Grid. One utility asked the regulator for a $50 fee by only got approved to charge $4.90!!