wind mill construction and CO2

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Old Rocks, Jan 11, 2012.

  1. Old Rocks

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Oct 31, 2008
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Portland, Ore.
    Many people have posted that windmills cost more in emitted CO2 than they save. Here is a study that puts numbers on that arguement, and shows conclusively how false it is.

    AGW Observer

    Carbon dioxide emissions from global wind power deployment

    Environmental implications of large-scale adoption of wind power: a scenario-based life cycle assessment – Arvesen & Hertwich (2011) “We investigate the potential environmental impacts of a large-scale adoption of wind power to meet up to 22% of the world’s growing electricity demand. The analysis builds on life cycle assessments of generic onshore and offshore wind farms, meant to represent average conditions for global deployment of wind power. We scale unit-based findings to estimate aggregated emissions of building, operating and decommissioning wind farms toward 2050, taking into account changes in the electricity mix in manufacturing. The energy scenarios investigated are the International Energy Agency’s BLUE scenarios. We estimate 1.7–2.6 Gt CO2-eq climate change, 2.1–3.2 Mt N-eq marine eutrophication, 9.2–14 Mt NMVOC photochemical oxidant formation, and 9.5–15 Mt SO2-eq terrestrial acidification impact category indicators due to global wind power in 2007–50. Assuming lifetimes 5 yr longer than reference, the total climate change indicator values are reduced by 8%. In the BLUE Map scenario, construction of new capacity contributes 64%, and repowering of existing capacity 38%, to total cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The total emissions of wind electricity range between 4% and 14% of the direct emissions of the replaced fossil-fueled power plants. For all impact categories, the indirect emissions of displaced fossil power are larger than the total emissions caused by wind power.” Anders Arvesen and Edgar G Hertwich 2011 Environ. Res. Lett. 6 045102 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/045102. [Full text]

Share This Page