Wind Energy

[Pidgey]

I'm in energy and have intuitively had several misgivings about mating wind generators to the grid. I've gone looking for more information and have discovered that my fears are justified. Summaries may be found here:

http://www.keepersoftheblueridge.com/faqs.html

http://www.aweo.org/ProblemWithWind.html

http://www.aweo.org/windCourtney1.html

 

[Pidgey]

We should add these as well:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/09/candour-from-beeb.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/09/can-it-last.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/09/bigger-scandal.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/08/6-billion-rip-off.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/08/in-fantasy-world-of-his-own.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/08/scourge-of-greenies-us-style.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/08/greenie-schizophrenia.html

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/09/confrontation-shapes-up.html

 

[Lagboltz]

I am also interested in other kinds of energy economies. I always wondered about the real total costs of wind energy, from manufacturing to installation, to power distribution; and maybe other hidden costs. The sites you quote are specifically created to be negative about wind energy. I have no doubt that the industry is overstating it.

Your cited link, http://www.keepersoftheblueridge.com/faqs.html has this information that seems to say Denmark has not done well with wind energy:

Denmark has 6000 wind turbines; in 2003 that country's greenhouse gas emissions increased 7.3% over 2002 levels.

Despite being blanketed with wind turbines, Denmark has not been able to shut down one single conventional power plant.

Development of onshore wind plants in Denmark has effectively stopped. The Government has cancelled plans for three offshore wind plants for 2008 and has scheduled the withdrawal of subsidies for existing sites.

I was curious to read what a more objective site would have to say. So I looked in Wikipedia since it is written by committee and generally opposing views are eventually compromised. Wiki has information that contradicts the above source:

A report from Denmark noted that their wind power network was without power for 54 days during 2002.[40] Wind power advocates argue that these periods of low wind can be dealt with by simply restarting existing power stations that have been held in readiness or interlinking with HVDC.[27] The cost of keeping a power station idle is in fact quite low, since the main cost of running a power station is the fuel.
....
Denmark has active plans to increase the percentage of power generated to over 50%. (by 2025)

Your source, http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/09/candour-from-beeb.html also contradicts the Denmark discussion in Wiki. Maybe the editors from eureferendum.blogspot should look at the Wiki site and haggle with the wind energy optimists there, and maybe the reality of the situation will eventually emerge.

 

[Pidgey]

Intuitively, I'd tend towards using the wind generators for pumped storage hydroelectricity. Of course, that wouldn't work in flat areas... I'm in power generation station control rooms quite a bit and, to me, they look like they'd only work well in areas with very constant winds. In iffy or varying conditions, it's pretty easy to see why you'd need them closely coupled to localities with a lot of hydroelectric power in order to balance the grid.

Yes, it's pretty tough to get real field numbers regarding their deployment. You'd think that if they were so great power companies wouldn't be able to buy them fast enough. Maybe a "follow the money" analysis would tell us more about what's really going on. Another thing you'd imagine is that the countries that have installed more of them would have booming industrial sectors and lowering unemployment seeing as how their cost of manufacturing should be constantly decreasing due to "free energy". Just something to look into.

 

[Andy]

Finely someone else stating what I have been saying for more than 2 years. Kudos. Good post.

A remarkable programme was aired yesterday on BBC Radio 4, remarkable in the sense that it allowed criticism of the great God wind energy – the totem of the greenie religion.

LOL

 

[Hobo1]

I am also interested in other kinds of energy economies. I always wondered about the real total costs of wind energy, from manufacturing to installation, to power distribution; and maybe other hidden costs. The sites you quote are specifically created to be negative about wind energy. I have no doubt that the industry is overstating it.

I too have always been curious about the true economies of wind energy. Sticking with this paragraph, and avoiding anecdotal examples, has anyone encountered a solid economic analysis of wind energy - from depreciation, to maintenance, to efficiency, etc, etc....? I have seen the wind farms in the remote areas of California and to an engineer's eye they seem very prone to mechanical failure - three large blades hanging off a relatively small generator. The stress on the mechanical parts must be enormous. I can't believe they have a life span of over 5 years without major overhaul.

As much as we complain about the cost of electricity, most of that cost is used to distribute and maintain the electrical grid. Any machine must produce an awful lot of electricity before it pays for itself, even if the fuel costs are zero.

As far as integrating into the electrical grid, I always assumed wind energy would be used to supply a small fraction of the total electrical generation capacity in a grid. For example, if a wind farm had the potential to generate 10% of the grid's energy supply, then the fluctuation of plus or minus 10% could be adjusted from alternative sources.

I suppose another alternative would be to dedicate the wind energy to some use that could accommodate an interpretable, variable supply of electricity. Pumping drinking water into reservoirs is one obvious answer but I suppose industry (or agriculture) could use an interpretable source as well.

Basically, I'd like to see a reliable, complete analysis of wind energy - and how it could fit into the existing electrical supply system.

 

[Pidgey]

I think the water's going to be so muddy due to the variables of wind itself that hard numbers can't be reliably produced. Wind farms become a terrible liability to The Grid when winds themselves get into the iffy territory. They ultimately cause horrific grid instability if you don't have a matching source that can be spun up and idled down just as fast as the wind can rise and drop. That's why you see them stopped all too often.

 

[BobfredXP]

I'm in energy and have intuitively had several misgivings about mating wind generators to the grid. I've gone looking for more information and have discovered that my fears are justified. Summaries may be found here:

http://www.keepersoftheblueridge.com/faqs.html

http://www.aweo.org/ProblemWithWind.html

http://www.aweo.org/windCourtney1.html

I think that wind energy will be a very possible answer to our energy crisis—it's clean, efficient, and cheap

 

[Plato]

I think that wind energy will be a very possible answer to our energy crisis—it's clean, efficient, and cheap

It takes a lot of space to create of lots of electricity from wind. I think hydroelectric is more feasible.

 

[Pidgey]

I think that wind energy will be a very possible answer to our energy crisis—it's clean, efficient, and cheap

Technically, you wouldn't need to support the "clean" part once fabrication and installation environmental costs are tabulated, but you'd need to justify the "efficient, and cheap" part with real economics and engineering numbers in order to make a viable argument out of it. Also, the return on investment needs to be positive for the entire group, not just from one particular unit.

 

[Hobo1]

I think that wind energy will be a very possible answer to our energy crisis—it's clean, efficient, and cheap

I certainly hope you don't vote. What do you do to "think". Have you looked at any of the links? Have you done any research?

Are you aware of the disruption that a wind farm can cause on any population that is living nearby? The "thump-thump" drives people nuts.

Efficient means you have done a cost vs benefit analysis. You know, comparing the life cycle costs of wind energy systems compared to other energy sources. Do you think you could post that kind of analysis for me so I can share your "wisdom"? Cheap - could you define that term? Also, what do you assume to be the cost per MKWH to be considered cheap?

God, I hate brainless pseudo-environmentalists who look at an idea and make an instant judgment if it is good or bad... "Don't bother me with the facts"

 

[Pidgey]

Well, looks like ASPO was right about Mexico and Cantarell:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=aCH3J3wXRtcI&refer=energy

Whatever we do, we better start getting it going pretty doggone quickly and everyone better start lowering their expectations for an economic rebound and their lifestyle even faster...

 

[foggedinn]

Are you aware of the disruption that a wind farm can cause on any population that is living nearby? The "thump-thump" drives people nuts.QUOTE]

I've know a lot of people who have lived downwind of papermills and pogey plants. Most people think they stink to high heaven. The people who work in them say "hmmm, smells like money to me".

 

[VicSmith]

I'm in energy and have intuitively had several misgivings about mating wind generators to the grid. I've gone looking for more information and have discovered that my fears are justified. Summaries may be found here:

http://www.keepersoftheblueridge.com/faqs.html

http://www.aweo.org/ProblemWithWind.html

http://www.aweo.org/windCourtney1.html

Personally, I think wind energy is a dead end. It is horribly inefficient. It's a renewable source—at least it's a start.

 

[Pidgey]

Well, at $1.6-3 million bucks a pop for a 4 MW installation (peak generating capacity) that's not going to be there whenever you want it... it does seem a bit on the impractical side. Of course, if the grid goes down, they go down with it.