Wind becomes No 2 power source in US, beating coal and nuclear

[excalibur]

Only works when the wind is blowing and then at certain speeds. You cannot run a power grid on wind and solar.

 

[daveman]

On March 29th for the first time, wind surpassed boat coal and nuclear as a US power source. It has surpassed both individually in the pasts but this was the first occasion for surpassing both. Natural gas remains at No 1.

Wind power overtook coal, nuclear for first time on March 29

Wind power was the No. 2 source for power generation in the U.S. for the first time ever on March 29, surpassing coal and nuclear power, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said Thursd…

thehill.com

Is that actual power produced, or dataplate rating?

 

[daveman]

So you are volunteering to keep the Nuclear Waste that stays toxic for 10,000 years next to your house, right?

I know you've been told about safer, far less waste-producing nuclear reactors.

But you just keep fear-mongering the way you were programmed.

 

[Elton]

On March 29th for the first time, wind surpassed boat coal and nuclear as a US power source. It has surpassed both individually in the pasts but this was the first occasion for surpassing both. Natural gas remains at No 1.

Wind power overtook coal, nuclear for first time on March 29

Wind power was the No. 2 source for power generation in the U.S. for the first time ever on March 29, surpassing coal and nuclear power, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said Thursd…

thehill.com

So I went to the actual site and they report that wind was EQUAL to nuclear at 19% of the generated power, and coal came in at 17%. So the headline is a lie. Why do they lie about this?

 

[Crick]

Boat coal....Is that like the nut coal you burn in your parlor stove?

I thought big ships burn big coal.

Should have read "both coal and nuclear".

 

[Crick]

{Wind power generation often hits an annual high in spring, when wind speeds tend to peak and electricity demand is usually at one of its lowest points}

You're such a fucking clown.

What do you think wind is doing as a segment of US power production? Even if spring has good winds and demand is low, surpassing coal and nuclear (which would also both be subject to spring's low demand) is a long, long ways from the trivial position you seem to believe alternative sources hold in the US energy infrastructure.

 

[jwoodie]

On March 29th for the first time, wind surpassed boat coal and nuclear as a US power source. It has surpassed both individually in the pasts but this was the first occasion for surpassing both. Natural gas remains at No 1.

Wind power overtook coal, nuclear for first time on March 29

Wind power was the No. 2 source for power generation in the U.S. for the first time ever on March 29, surpassing coal and nuclear power, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said Thursd…

thehill.com

It was ONE DAY ONLY, due low energy demand (and high winds).

 

[Crick]

You act like that is due to the success of wind turbines. It is not. It is due to the government regulations on coal and nuclear industries. We are about to experience a severe energy shortage and the price is going to "necessarily" skyrocket...

To what regulations do you refer? That the exhaust from coal plants not produce lethal levels of acid rain, soot and partiuculates? That nuclear power plants comport themselves with AEC and NRC regulations established decades ago? What do you believe is going to cause this energy shortage you're predicting?

 

[Crick]

I'm not buying it, but if true, where is all this wind coming from? Climate change.

So by going to green energy, over time, winds will die down forcing us to go back to coal.

Sorry, your resonse is simply too stupid to address.

 

[Calypso Jones]

One day. Is it worth it to kill all those bald eagles and other birds? I'm sure the left would love to see the end of our national symbol.

 

[Crick]

You waste effort, they are a cult of the psychotic, reason and rationale have long since been discarded... This was what all of those WWF drowning polar bear cub television spots were about, killing off children's ability to think and critically reason.

You believe that efforts to save polar bear populations were an effort to kill off children's ability to think critically? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHaahaahahaaa,,,,oh for fuck's sake. You're like someone criticizing someone else for believing in a flat Earth because he failed to point out that it;s both flat and square. What a fooking marooooooooon.

 

[Crick]

It was ONE DAY ONLY, due low energy demand (and high winds).

As I noted elsewhere, coal and nuclear were also facing that low demand. And the winds may have been coming in like a lion, but they weren't at record levels. Wind energy use across the nation is growing.

 

[jwoodie]

As I noted elsewhere, coal and nuclear were also facing that low demand. And the winds may have been coming in like a lion, but they weren't at record levels. Wind energy use across the nation is growing.

Coal and nuclear energy output can be adjusted according to demand. Wind energy output can't.

 

[Crick]

One day. Is it worth it to kill all those bald eagles and other birds? I'm sure the left would love to see the end of our national symbol.

I think supplying the national grid with coal will kill a lot more birds than wind turbines. How much land has been consumed by coal mines? How much fossil fuel has been burned to mine, process and transport the coal that has fed this nation's power plants for the last century? What has the effect on the birds and their habitats of the billions of tons of soot, nitrous oxide, sulfur compounds, CO and CO2 products produced by that coal? When I hear you ignorant, lying fools start pretending that you suddenly care about the environment, it make me puke.

 

[Crick]

Coal and nuclear energy output can be adjusted according to demand. Wind energy output can't.

Don't be a fucking idiot. Of coursse it can.

 

[Crick]

So I went to the actual site and they report that wind was EQUAL to nuclear at 19% of the generated power, and coal came in at 17%. So the headline is a lie. Why do they lie about this?

Let's see a link and a quote.

 

[MarathonMike]

On March 29th for the first time, wind surpassed boat coal and nuclear as a US power source. It has surpassed both individually in the pasts but this was the first occasion for surpassing both. Natural gas remains at No 1.

Wind power overtook coal, nuclear for first time on March 29

Wind power was the No. 2 source for power generation in the U.S. for the first time ever on March 29, surpassing coal and nuclear power, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said Thursd…

thehill.com

Gee all it took was massive government subsidies for Windpower while using massive government regulation and blocking to squash coal and nuclear power. Imagine that!

 

[Calypso Jones]

cuckoo, cuckoo

 

[Crick]

Total bullshit

Not worth a response.

 

[Crick]

Wind will never replace coal/gas/nuke, because the wind don't blow all the time, and there is no battery technology that allows saving of wind energy for the times when the wind don't blow. Same is true for solar.

Would that we could allow wind, solar, and all the other "clean" forms of energy to succeed or fail on their own technical and economic merits.

And would that the Lefties would get their collective head out of their collective ass and embrace nuke. But apparently not while I'm alive.

You seem to have missed the point that the most important need here is to produce the required energy without emitting GHGs. Beyond that, apply all the technical merits your little uneducated ass can come up with.