The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in 2008, on a dollar per MWh basis, the U.S. government subsidizes wind at $23.34 — compared to reliable energy sources: natural gas at 25¢; coal at 44¢; hydro at 67¢; and nuclear at $1.59, leading to what some U.S. commentators call “a huge corporate welfare feeding frenzy.” The Wall Street Journal advises that “wind generation is the prime example of what can go wrong when the government decides to pick winners.”
There is no evidence that industrial wind power is likely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions. The European experience is instructive. Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone).
Truth Squad wrote: »
Reliable small wind is a good 50 years into the future at least, I'd say.
jacobs wrote: »
Reliable small wind was developed back in the 1930's. The problem is that it isn't inexpensive. The general public has become accustomed with inexpensive (cheep, poorly made) products from China. Until we are willing to pay for a quality product, it's not economically feasible for a manufacturer to design and market a quality product.
Windsun wrote: »
I am not so sure any more that commercial wind is much of an answer either, especially following the unmitigated disaster that Spain had (and still has) with wind.http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2009/04/09/wind-power-is-a-complete-disaster/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-MmmfQG9vo&feature=related
Massachusetts Small Wind Report 2008: Consultants to the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative have issued a damning report on the performance of small wind turbines installed under the MTC's subsidy program.
"MTC is now considering program changes to the Small Renewables Initiative that will apply to future small wind projects. MTC expects that these program changes will be announced in late summer, 2008.
As a result of the information outlined in the following small wind progress briefing, MTC believes that it is in the best interest of the small wind community for MTC to stop accepting applications from new, small wind projects. . . ."
The variable resources for the MRO-U.S. (wind generation) expected to be available at peak times is 1,130 MW, based on 20 percent of nameplate capacity of 5,924 MW. For wind generation, nameplate capability is assumed as maximum capability, although simultaneous output of geographically disperse wind farms at 100 percent nameplate capability is highly unlikely. 20 percent of nameplate capacity is used by the Midwest ISO when determining capacity of variable generation. 20 percent is also assumed available at peak load by the MRO Model Building Subcommittee when building peak models. Historically, the Midwest ISO has recorded a maximum output of about 65 percent of wind nameplate capacity operating simultaneously throughout the Region during peak demand. The Midwest ISO has also recorded approximately 2 percent of wind nameplate capacity operating simultaneously throughout the Region during peak demand. Saskatchewan, which has about 172 MW of nameplate wind, and Manitoba Hydro, which has about 100 MW of nameplate wind, do not count wind resources for reliability/capacity purposes.
Rob said at May 26, 2009 01:52 PM: In 2007, Jim Detmers, VP of the California ISO gave a talk at Stanford in which he said this:
"Wind is not produced on peak. This last summer, when we went across the summer peak, I had 3,000 megawatts of capacity of wind. How much did I have on the summer peak, back in August? No, no, no, I didn't have zero. I had a total of 63 out of 3,000 [2.1% -BB]. And we're investing all of this money in wind..."
My source for this is the audio of the talk at iTunes U, here's the URL for those who wish to listen: http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/itunes.stanford.edu.1291176865.01291176868.1427408599?i=1204795563
This speaks only of California, of course, but I know that Texas almost had an outage last year when the wind in west Texas unexpectedly quit blowing. Wind is a scam, text excerpts from the speech can be found here: http://roborant.info/main.do?entry=1386
Windsun wrote: »
http://www.stthomasspringdale.org/?page_id=79 Read down the page for a timeline.http://www.earthbilly.com/wind_turbine.htm I feel sorry for this guy...http://www.nrel.gov/wind/smallwind/pdfs/mariah_report.pdf (this NREL report is about the failed Mariah VAWT type turbine tests, June 2009. Though not associated with SWWP it mirrors many of the problems with small wind turbines, especially the recently much hype vertical axis turbines).
emsai wrote: »
I built a small VAWT (2’dia x 5.5’ ht) out of PVC, and mounted it on a floating dock, 50’ out into the NE Cape Fear River. I am about 18 miles from the ocean, and regularly get a strong W, NW, SW wind up the river. The VAWT works great, particularly with the deflectors I built to channel more wind to it.
ggunn wrote: »
I'm skeptical, but then I always am.
GreenPowerManiac wrote: »
My personal opinion, the scam is mostly in the advertisement. High claims and stats with little to show for. Expensive for what little power is produced and they break down after a few weeks or months. Unless you make you own from scratch, one can't really appreciate any benefits.
Mine have been running for about a year now, however, they're based on alternator technology that's been around for many decades. I get good output from them on windy days and non-windy days they're just spinning for spite and appearance. It's a nice addition to dark windy nights....Just don't expect much from the beginning.
Think of it as another way to produce energy when the sun goes down, that's all.
Cariboocoot wrote: »
You know, if we as a society did a better job of teaching science in high school (instead of whatever they do teach - butter sculpturing I guess) fewer people would be taken in by these scams.
dwh wrote: »
They teach TV watching, wage slaving, loan application filling out and propaganda swallowing.
Oh...and patriotism! Woo boy! Yay for us! We're the best!
"The man who reads nothing at all is better than educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." - Thomas Jefferson