The Fundamental Limitations of Renewable Energy

[Old Rocks]

State Wind Energy Statistics: Wyoming

Wyoming is one of the top states in the country for wind generation, with 8.4% of their electricity coming from wind energy during 2013. The state is so windy it has the potential to receive more than 110 x electricity load from wind.

 

[flacaltenn]

What powers the grid when the wind is not blowing?

You just stink at basic logic.

Say X energy is required, and the choices are wind or coal.

No wind power, X energy comes from coal.

With Y wind power, X-Y energy comes from coal.

X-Y is less than X, not more.

And of course, you complete ignored the cost data provided which indicates how uneconomic wind power truly is. That's fine...carry on.

Because, unlike you, I understand what fallacies you're using (cherrypicking and single cause). But it's expected you can't recognize such fallacies. If people can use reason properly, they don't get sucked into the denier cult.

Nice attempt at algebra -- complete failure on energy systems facts.. Wind has periods of 20 minutes on 40 minutes off.. You do not turn on a coal plant like a light switch. Judgement calls have to be made because SOMEBODY'S energy is gonna get dumped to Ground.. Coal is a LOUSY SENIOR partner for wind because of latencies. Nat gas is better --- hydro is best.

If you ignore gusty wind days -- Wind's production numbers would go into the high 20% of rated. Fortunately, there's not enough of it right now to destabilize the grid mgt. But ADDING more will....

 

[WelfareQueen]

What powers the grid when the wind is not blowing?

You just stink at basic logic.

Say X energy is required, and the choices are wind or coal.

No wind power, X energy comes from coal.

With Y wind power, X-Y energy comes from coal.

X-Y is less than X, not more.

And of course, you complete ignored the cost data provided which indicates how uneconomic wind power truly is. That's fine...carry on.

Because, unlike you, I understand what fallacies you're using (cherrypicking and single cause). But it's expected you can't recognize such fallacies. If people can use reason properly, they don't get sucked into the denier cult.

Clearly you're a liberal...so you don't understand basic economics. In order to subsidize wind power, you need to back it up with the cheapest conventional alternative. That would be coal. Some countries have converted the coal plants over to natural gas, but that generally raises the cost. Hence, why Denmark has some of the highest power costs in the world (which you have yet to acknowledge).

 

[flacaltenn]

Let's check in on one of the best sited Danish Wind Farms in the world.
Each turbine is RATED at 2 MWatt.. Numbers in the last column are
YESTERDAY'S output in KWatt. If they were turning at RATED CAPACITY,
those numbers would be 2,000 KWatt

Turbine Wind Speed [m/s] Energy [kWh] Mean Power [kW]
T01 3.2 8 47.0
T02 2.6 76 28.2
T03 3.3 8 37.9
T04 3.0 8 36.8
T05 2.9 8 34.2
T06 2.6 4 34.1
T07 2.8 2 28.3
T08 2.7 8 28.5
T09 2.6 1 26.1
T10 2.6 8 25.0
T11 2.6 8 23.5
T12 2.6 4 20.3
T13 2.2 12 19.7
T14 2.3 4 17.7
T15 2.2 12 8.3
T16 2.5 8 16.8
T17 2.1 4 17.6
T18 2.3 8 7.1
T19 2.3 8 17.8
T20 2.3 8 7.1
Totals
Average 2.6 10 24.1

Produced less than 2% of their rated power -- yesterday -- 29 April, 2014..
THIS is why wind is a joke..

 

[elektra]

Wrong. Denmark started going heavily into wind in the 1970's.

More like the 1990s. All aspects of your unsupported story seems to be fictional.

For years their carbon emissions actually went up due to back up coal fired power plants.

So according to you, getting more power from wind causes more coal to be burned. That's bizarro-world logic.

Yet it's a fact in Oregon. Oregon is increasing the rate at which coal is burned while increasing the number of windmills in the state. Even old crock does not argue against this fact.

 

[elektra]

Simbol Materials Starts Lithium Production at Salton Sea Site

California’s Simbol Materialsis starting domestic commercial production of the world’s highest-purity lithium carbonate, which is used as an electrolyte for electric vehicle batteries and other energy storage devices, the company announced Sept. 28.

The lithium carbonate produced from the company’s 500-metric ton facility near the Salton Sea in California’s Imperial Valley will outdo other sources of not only lithium, but manganese and zinc, in terms of quality and performance, helping ensure that growth of clean energy and technologies in the US continues. Simbol is preparing to extract manganese and zinc, as well as lithium, from the Salton Sea’s geothermal brines, according to the Pleasanton-based company.

With the start of commercial production at its Salton Sea facility, Simbol joins MolyCorp as the only two commercial producers of rare earths in the US. Assuring a ready, cost-effective supply of lithium and other so-called rare earth minerals is crucial to ramping up production of electric vehicles (EVs). At present, China produces 95% of global rare earth mineral production, and it’s been cutting back on exports, as well as nationalizing the operations of its rare earth mineral producers.

Simbol is making use of what it says is a “breakthrough” technology for extracting lithium, manganese and zinc found in geothermal brines.

Also significantly, its technology can be incorporated into geothermal power plants, making geothermal power an even more attractive and cost-effective source of clean, renewable baseload electrical power

As you know old crock, the salton sea is littered with failed geothermal projects. I see you as a liar when you ignore this fact that you are aware of.

First and foremost this lithium experiment is exempted from california's environmental laws.

They will use frackng to inject poisonous death causing toxins into the earth instead of disposing of the concentrated toxin as all other industries are required.

To compete, geothereal demands no environmental regulations.

 

[FA_Q2]

Wrong. Denmark started going heavily into wind in the 1970's.

More like the 1990s. All aspects of your unsupported story seems to be fictional.

For years their carbon emissions actually went up due to back up coal fired power plants.

So according to you, getting more power from wind causes more coal to be burned. That's bizarro-world logic.

Yet it's a fact in Oregon. Oregon is increasing the rate at which coal is burned while increasing the number of windmills in the state. Even old crock does not argue against this fact.

Old Rocks already made a statement about that though – it seems that the wind farms in Oregon are not being used in Oregon but rather in CA.

That would make the wind generation irrelevant to the coal used there – that power is affecting CA. coal figures not Oregon’s….

 

[FA_Q2]

Well, for a small nation like Denmark, that can be a problem. For a large one, such as the US, China, Russia, there is always someplace the wind is blowing, and by having many windfarms in differant places, a significant portion of our electrical needs can always be supplied by wind. Wyoming and Oregon have wind seasons almost 180 degrees from each other. We already have the power lines in from Wyoming to Oregon that presently bring coal fired electricity to Oregon. As Wyoming is installing more and more wind farms, that will change to wind generated electricity. Oh yes, why isn't Oregon using it's wind generated electricity in Oregon? Because the utilities in California put up the money to build the wind farms in Oregon.

I don’t think that is completely true though either considering the fact that the farther you transport energy through power lines the less efferent they are. Power loss will occur.

There is still the issue of powering areas on cloudy and stagnant days. There is also only so much area and wind to suck up. I don’t think that the grid or even significant amounts can be powered by renewables alone – at least not at the technologies current level.

 

[elektra]

More like the 1990s. All aspects of your unsupported story seems to be fictional.

So according to you, getting more power from wind causes more coal to be burned. That's bizarro-world logic.

Yet it's a fact in Oregon. Oregon is increasing the rate at which coal is burned while increasing the number of windmills in the state. Even old crock does not argue against this fact.

Old Rocks already made a statement about that though – it seems that the wind farms in Oregon are not being used in Oregon but rather in CA.

That would make the wind generation irrelevant to the coal used there – that power is affecting CA. coal figures not Oregon’s….

I think I do not understand what you're trying to say.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yet it's a fact in Oregon. Oregon is increasing the rate at which coal is burned while increasing the number of windmills in the state. Even old crock does not argue against this fact.

Old Rocks already made a statement about that though – it seems that the wind farms in Oregon are not being used in Oregon but rather in CA.

That would make the wind generation irrelevant to the coal used there – that power is affecting CA. coal figures not Oregon’s….

I think I do not understand what you're trying to say.

I was saying that Old Rocks pointed out the wind farms in Oregon are not powering Oregon.

If that power is not being used in Oregon then why would it affect the coal generation there? It wouldn’t.

Now, I don’t know that Rocks is correct but your statement does not really mean much without refuting his contention.

 

[elektra]

Old Rocks has said lots of things. I pointed out Old Rocks the scam in which Oregon claims to be increasing wind energy while at the same time importing dirty coal power from wyoming. Why should the people of Oregon be forced to pay for green energy only to see that power exported at a loss, a loss in dollars as well as over a 50% line loss in shipping.

Every major city should gave power plants located close to the city, the line loss us too much shipping electricity hundreds of miles over transmission lines.

You pay more for food because of these ridiculous scams.

 

[mamooth]

Someone forgot to tell Colorado how terrible wind power is.

Smart Forecasts Lower the Power of Wind and Solar | MIT Technology Review

---
Every few seconds, almost every one of the hundreds of turbines records the wind speed and its own power output. Every five minutes they dispatch data to high-performance computers 100 miles away at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder. There artificial-intelligence-based software crunches the numbers, along with data from weather satellites, weather stations, and other wind farms in the state. The result: wind power forecasts of unprecedented accuracy that are making it possible for Colorado to use far more renewable energy, at lower cost, than utilities ever thought possible.

...

Last year, on a windy weekend when power demand was low, Xcel set a record: during one hour, 60 percent of its electricity for Colorado was coming from the wind. “That kind of wind penetration would have given dispatchers a heart attack a few years ago,” says Drake Bartlett, who heads renewable-energy integration for Xcel. Back then, he notes, they wouldn’t have known whether they might suddenly lose all that power. “Now we’re taking it in stride,” he says. “And that record is going to fall.”
---