THE Wind Power Thread pt 2 (merged)

[dday]

Thats not much power, wind energy will never be a significant source.

Here in Denmark it is 20 % of our electrical energy supply annualised, ther have been quite a few days this fall and winter where it has been 50 %.

I don't know what you mean by significant, but in my vocabulary 20% is significant.

The goverment here is planning to take it to 50 % by merely replacing older windmills with newer ones that are bigger and more efficient. This will also reduce the amount of windmills that we dot the countryside.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Thats not much power, wind energy will never be a significant source.

Here in Denmark it is 20 % of our electrical energy supply annualised, ther have been quite a few days this fall and winter where it has been 50 %.

I don't know what you mean by significant, but in my vocabulary 20% is significant.

The goverment here is planning to take it to 50 % by merely replacing older windmills with newer ones that are bigger and more efficient. This will also reduce the amount of windmills that we dot the countryside.

Well, Denmark is a coastal nation placed in favourable geographic location to rely on wind power this much.
Not many countries are in that position.

[jbeckton]

By insignificant I mean 0.1% of US power comes from wind turbines.

Denmark is a relativly small country with very favorable conditions for wind generation, however you must realize that power cannot be stored, it must be activly produced when its needed. This means at the precise times durring the day when a peak load is demanded, you better hope its windy if you go to 50% wind power. Oh yeah, and not too windy because that isn't good for the turbine.

Also many ideal locations for wind turbines are in the path of bird migration(where its windy). So you see that there are several problems with wind. If projections are accurate and the power needed continues to clime at current rates you will need an unbelievable number of wind turbines to sustain that.

A source of energy that is uncontrolable can never be a primary source of generation with much reliability.

Wind energy will always be a supplemental source.

[aahala]

It's about as easy to exaggerate as to belittle claims about the
future of wind power. It is what it is.

It's not a perfect solution nor a complete solution to future
electrical needs. But it is something, whether you call it
significant or insignificant

Germany and Spain are producing about 5% of their electricity now from wind and the US figure is about .6%.

[jbeckton]

Its wasting valuable time and money that could be spent exploring other options that could play a significant role.

[dday]

By insignificant I mean 0.1% of US power comes from wind turbines.

Denmark is a relativly small country with very favorable conditions for wind generation, however you must realize that power cannot be stored, it must be activly produced when its needed. This means at the precise times durring the day when a peak load is demanded, you better hope its windy if you go to 50% wind power. Oh yeah, and not too windy because that isn't good for the turbine.

Also many ideal locations for wind turbines are in the path of bird migration(where its windy). So you see that there are several problems with wind. If projections are accurate and the power needed continues to clime at current rates you will need an unbelievable number of wind turbines to sustain that.

A source of energy that is uncontrolable can never be a primary source of generation with much reliability.

Wind energy will always be a supplemental source.

This is where cooperation comes in. We share electrical distribution grid with Norway, Sweden and Germany. On windy days we export to these countries, they in turn (Norway, Sweden) save using water from there hydro dams. There is not going to be one solution to the coming liquid energy crunch, but multiple ones. Countries that are flexible and thinking ahead will be fine. Denmark has also build lots of CHP large and smal that produce electricity and heat. They have been designed to also burn garbage as well as straw, a by product of agriculture. Danish farmers produce enough straw after harvest to heat the whole country in these plants, which we are not taking advantage of yet. A smaller island community in Denmark is now self sufficient in energy.

I have been on this site for a while and what strikes me is the pessisism. Sure there will be changes, but Europe survied after Rome collapsed. Life will go on, consumption and waste will drop, life will be simpler. Heres to the future.look at this link http://www.veo.dk/eng/default.htm

[jbeckton]

This is where you will have a problem, electricity doesn't just magically travel through the grid. It has to be pushed by voltage and it can only be pushed so far. So perhaps boarder cities will be ok, but then again they will probabally be in the same situation if they are within 100 miles.

Its not pessisism, its being a realist and understanding the limits of the technology up front. I am a Mechanical Engineer working in the power industry, I know that we need to improve but we need to put our efforts into controlable resources like Nuclear and Solar power. Wind energy, much like hydro and geothermal energy is great supplemental energy that we should use where its fiesable, but not a significan part of the solution and should be treated as such.

Also, Denmark doesn't have the coal supply of the US, if it did they might not be so into wind power.

[TigPil]

Wind is currently cheap (compared to solar) and clean (compared to coal or nuclear). Since the US is so far behind in terms of wind generated power to countries like Spain, Germany and Denmark, there is a lot more room for growth. Wind can only be a partial solution in the US (probably 20% of generation at most) but considering the fact that it is cheap and clean there is no reason not to invest in it now to offset future demand or replace costlier and dirtier sources. It is pretty clear that there currently isn't a magic bullet solution to the energy challenges being faced.

[Bleep]

Thats not much power, wind energy will never be a significant source.

So we shouldn't even try to build it up? HA! Energy source diversity is essential.

[dday]

This is where you will have a problem, electricity doesn't just magically travel through the grid. It has to be pushed by voltage and it can only be pushed so far. So perhaps boarder cities will be ok, but then again they will probabally be in the same situation if they are within 100 miles.

Its not pessisism, its being a realist and understanding the limits of the technology up front. I am a Mechanical Engineer working in the power industry, I know that we need to improve but we need to put our efforts into controlable resources like Nuclear and Solar power. Wind energy, much like hydro and geothermal energy is great supplemental energy that we should use where its fiesable, but not a significan part of the solution and should be treated as such.

Also, Denmark doesn't have the coal supply of the US, if it did they might not be so into wind power.

Denmark is an oil and NG exporting country, we might not have coal, but we have oil. The politicians are not using this as a pillow, but are trying to plan ahead. Democracy works here, porportional representation, the people want to go sustainable and vote for those leaders.

Wind will not solve energy problems, but it will supply part of the solution. Solar is by far the best bet together with some kind of storage.

[Denny]

There is not going to be one solution to the coming liquid energy crunch, but multiple ones. Countries that are flexible and thinking ahead will be fine. Denmark has also build lots of CHP large and smal that produce electricity and heat. They have been designed to also burn garbage as well as straw, a by product of agriculture. Danish farmers produce enough straw after harvest to heat the whole country in these plants, which we are not taking advantage of yet. A smaller island community in Denmark is now self sufficient in energy.

I have been on this site for a while and what strikes me is the pessisism. Sure there will be changes, but Europe survied after Rome collapsed. Life will go on, consumption and waste will drop, life will be simpler. Heres to the future.look at this link http://www.veo.dk/eng/default.htm

You are 100% correct. I don't know why this site attracts so many pessimists, but it really does. I am impressed by the diversity of energy alternatives in Europe. Perhaps because it has been so challenged in the last century by war and shortages, technology there seems much quicker to adapt. I recall an equipment designer who worked with me here in Canada back 30 years ago. He came from Belgium, and it just amazed him how wasteful we were here with steel design in process equipment. He felt that Canadians had been so pampered by material abundance, that they never wanted to sweat the details to make the most economical design. In essence, we were fat and lazy.

Seems to be the same thing now. We seek some "perfect" solution to our energy dillemmas and we shun the smaller but possible things in our grasp, because they take thought and effort and learning how to co-ordinate the mix.

As for one of the earlier posts, did I really see hydro power deemed to be marginal? There are states, provinces and even countries for which hydro is the dominant prime mover for power generation. Perhaps, in another generation, wind power will be a major form too. I've been to Newfoundland, and its windy and its big too. Bigger than some European countries. Probably a longer coastline than any European country except Russia.

[timbo]

One of the things that really irritates me about people who reject alternative energy sources is the "when the wind isn't blowing or the sun is shining" arguments. It is entirely possible to store excess power pump water uphill, heat things, use your imagination.

[dday]

You are 100% correct. I don't know why this site attracts so many pessimists, but it really does. I am impressed by the diversity of energy alternatives in Europe. Perhaps because it has been so challenged in the last century by war and shortages, technology there seems much quicker to adapt. I recall an equipment designer who worked with me here in Canada back 30 years ago. He came from Belgium, and it just amazed him how wasteful we were here with steel design in process equipment. He felt that Canadians had been so pampered by material abundance, that they never wanted to sweat the details to make the most economical design. In essence, we were fat and lazy.

......

As for one of the earlier posts, did I really see hydro power deemed to be marginal? There are states, provinces and even countries for which hydro is the dominant prime mover for power generation. Perhaps, in another generation, wind power will be a major form too. I've been to Newfoundland, and its windy and its big too. Bigger than some European countries. Probably a longer coastline than any European country except Russia.[/quote]

Denny I am actually Canadian, grew up on the west coast, saw my grandmother live a sustainable lifestyle, she never owned a car, grew her own food, left no ecological footprint, didn't get electricity until 1961. She lived a great life. after living here(Denmark - married a dane) I think one of the biggest problems in Canada is that it is too big. A little country like DK has to think resourceful as there are few natural resources. They invest heavily in Education (universities are free).
This I think is what makes them so innovative.

As for Hydro , sweden and norway have a large percentage of their power supplied through dams. I think in norway it is the main supply, yet although they have tons of oil and natural gas they are investing in wind and other technologies. All scandinavians know that oil will run out so they are planning. Sweden has now plans to be oil free by 2020!

I think that it is big corporations in NA that keep things status quo. Here it is a more true democracy - 5 million people and 8 federal political parties ! There is never a majority goverment so they have to get along and reach compromises on policies. This ensures that long term planning is a success as the politicians bind themselves to agreements made with previous goverments if they were a part of the negotiations. In canada everything goes back to zero when the goverment changes. Hopefully a few rounds of minority goverments will change that.

[pup55]

http://peakoil.com/fortopic23018.html+turbines+iowa

Once again, we are left with questions:

In this case, the Italian company is "partnering" with some locals, TradeWind Energy. Enel is the main stockholder in Tradewind, so what happened is that they needed some local connections, bought out/hired back some entrepreneurs, and are now co-owners in this business.

But the question is: Why doesn't Ford or GM see fit to be in this business?

The second question is: What is it about American business practices that allows foreign companies to be aggressive about this kind of investment, while US businesses are busy closing down plants, etc. One possible explanation: US managers are idiots.

The third question: How much of this is an artifact of the weak dollar vs. Euro? Two years ago, this investment would have been about 25% less profitable for an Italian. Or the other way to look at it is, the improved exchange rate radically lowers the risk.

The TradeWind website has a little information about the economics of this sort of operation:

TradeWind

Apparently, the space needed is 50 acres per megawatt, but 95% of the land is still useable for whatever purpose after the wind turbine goes in. The farmer gets $3000 royalty per plant, so if you have 500 acres, like some of those big farms out in Kansas are, you get $30K per year royalty, so this is not chicken feed. This might be just as profitable as "real" farming.

There are also some videos of these things going around. No sound, though, unfortunately.

[jbeckton]

This is where you will have a problem, electricity doesn't just magically travel through the grid. It has to be pushed by voltage and it can only be pushed so far. So perhaps boarder cities will be ok, but then again they will probabally be in the same situation if they are within 100 miles.

Its not pessisism, its being a realist and understanding the limits of the technology up front. I am a Mechanical Engineer working in the power industry, I know that we need to improve but we need to put our efforts into controlable resources like Nuclear and Solar power. Wind energy, much like hydro and geothermal energy is great supplemental energy that we should use where its fiesable, but not a significan part of the solution and should be treated as such.

Also, Denmark doesn't have the coal supply of the US, if it did they might not be so into wind power.

Denmark is an oil and NG exporting country, we might not have coal, but we have oil. The politicians are not using this as a pillow, but are trying to plan ahead. Democracy works here, porportional representation, the people want to go sustainable and vote for those leaders.

Wind will not solve energy problems, but it will supply part of the solution. Solar is by far the best bet together with some kind of storage.

You do have oil, but the last figure that I read was only about a 20 year supply compared to about 250 years that the US has in coal. So you are left with no choice but to take immediate action.

Also, coal is much cheaper than oil.

The US, right or not, has the resources to power the country into the solar era. The government dosen't run the power industries, private companies do and they sell off power to the grid. The best price wins. I don't know where everyone gets the notion that wind power is so cheap, my company sold off its wind turbine because they couldn't compete.

And when renewable power is used, it doesn't mean we stop burning coal, we burn less oil, we always burn coal, no matter what, its the cheapest.

And the oil that Demark saves by using wind turbunes? Oh yeah, they will sell it to another countery to burn for power.

You are not so perfect.

[Doly]

This is where you will have a problem, electricity doesn't just magically travel through the grid. It has to be pushed by voltage and it can only be pushed so far.

Yes, but I've heard that there are ways to transport electricity through long distances. Anybody knows more about this?

[WisJim]

Part of the solution could be to encourage business and industries to move to where the power is, like they did in days of old, when power came directly from water wheels etc. Perhaps the next generation of population centers will be where wind and solar resources are strongest--makes more sense than me sending power all over, although that is what they are doing with electricity generated by other means, such as hydro from Canada used in the midwestern states.

My opinion--PVs on every roof where the solar exposure is good, and use the power close to where it is generated.

[jbeckton]

hydro from Canada used in the midwestern states.

Got a reference on that? I seriously doubt that they are sending power all the way to St. Louis, maybe Detroit but thats insignificant.

[WisJim]

They are sending power to Minnesota and Wisconsin, specifically the Milwaukee area. The building of new transmission lines across Wisconsin has been highly publicized in the state, and the subject of protests and demonstrations.

We consider St Louis to be in the south, and Detroit s out east to those of us here in the mid-midwest <G>

[kaktus]

Thats not much power, wind energy will never be a significant source.

Well that depends on the total, doesnt it? Peak oil is about the access to cheap oil and energy is going down. If you believe that then wind will not be insignificant of the total.

Hydro in Norway accounts for something like 95% of electricity. In sweden 45%. not really insignificant.

The second question is: What is it about American business practices that allows foreign companies to be aggressive about this kind of investment, while US businesses are busy closing down plants, etc. One possible explanation: US managers are idiots.

I dont think you need be that pesimistic. Lots of idiots in Europe:). the truth it seems is that now everyone in the wind business is working at full speed. it is currently difficult to by a wind mill. Vestas tried to speed up capacity and got into trouble. So if you have access to production you invest in wind parks.