Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Ulenspiegel » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 09:12:15

kublikhan wrote:EIA numbers are not very favorable for offshore either. They got $58 vs $169 for capital costs alone onshore vs offshore. Or $74 vs $197 for total levelized cost onshore vs offshore(offshore partially offsets it's higher capital costs with higher utilization rates). That makes onshore wind one of the cheapest sources of electricity and offshore wind one of the most expensive.

Estimated levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for new generation resources, 2020


But we can expect clear cost reduction in case of off-shore wind turbines in the next years, while costs of on-shore turbines will change only little. But the basic issue still is that overbuilding on-shore and building more tranmission capacity to connect uncorrelated production may still be much cheaper than of-shore wind in 2020-2025.
Ulenspiegel
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 02:15:29

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 12:12:56

U - Perhaps a reduction in the cost of the turbines...but cheaper than onshore turbines at that time? And are you expecting those very expensive support structures to also decrease in costs? I haven't seen any cost estimate for the structures to be built off the east coast of the US. But I'm very familiar with the cost of offshore platform and I'll bet they are greater than the turbines themselves. Likewise maintenance will be significantly more offshore then onshore.

But the bottom line: when will it cost the same to set a wind turbine 10 miles off the coast as setting it 10 miles inland from the coast?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 13:20:34

Cost reduction = More subsidies, more austerity, more deindustrialization...

all for a piece of crap electricity generator that lasts maybe 20 years.

Eventually you run out of suckers and people to rob.
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 15:03:38

Lion - "Eventually you run out of suckers and people to rob." So true. Folks should send al those crappy wind turbines to Texas. We're so stupid and gluttons for punishment we would buy them all. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 15:15:33

JustinHayler wrote:Wind power is the way forward!

Regardless of the costs? And who should pay the higher costs? You?

I'm not saying you're wrong. I just expect more than "sloganeering" empty talking points if you want to back a cause.
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 15:21:41

ROCKMAN wrote:U - Perhaps a reduction in the cost of the turbines...but cheaper than onshore turbines at that time? And are you expecting those very expensive support structures to also decrease in costs? I haven't seen any cost estimate for the structures to be built off the east coast of the US. But I'm very familiar with the cost of offshore platform and I'll bet they are greater than the turbines themselves. Likewise maintenance will be significantly more offshore then onshore.

But the bottom line: when will it cost the same to set a wind turbine 10 miles off the coast as setting it 10 miles inland from the coast?

1). Given the physics problems involved, why should it ever be as cheap well offshore as on land?

2). IMO, the real question is how expensive is too expensive? If we're roasting the planet burning, say, coal -- so what if offshore wind turbines are somewhat more expensive, as long as they significantly contribute, over their life cycle, to producing lots of (relative to FF burning) green energy we need?

(As a (rare) consistent advocate of truly MASSIVE taxes on FF burning, I'd say a higher cost is well worth it, when you socialize ALL the costs (like military, pollution, and AGW) of FF burning).
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 15:28:41

OS - The point is that the increase cost of offshore wind is holding up the development. And they are going offshore because the public in that region doesn't want to see wind turbines. Look how long it took to just get approval for the offshore wind farm along with the big and expensive legal battle that required. OTOH other then a few wildlife lovers there was no serious public objection to our wind farms. And given the millions of birds we shoot during hunting season every year the argument over turbine bird kills got virtually no public support.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Thu 30 Jul 2015, 17:50:58

Windmills: a copycat of the failing nuclear industry. Great initial enthusiasm, followed by builds on prime sites...and then....

Thats it...just another too primitive technology to end up in the Energy Technology Junk Yard.

Why don't you people wake up and accept that new physics will have to be discovered and exploited to have any chance at all.
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Ulenspiegel » Fri 31 Jul 2015, 04:29:52

ROCKMAN wrote:U - Perhaps a reduction in the cost of the turbines...but cheaper than onshore turbines at that time? And are you expecting those very expensive support structures to also decrease in costs? I haven't seen any cost estimate for the structures to be built off the east coast of the US. But I'm very familiar with the cost of offshore platform and I'll bet they are greater than the turbines themselves. Likewise maintenance will be significantly more offshore then onshore.

But the bottom line: when will it cost the same to set a wind turbine 10 miles off the coast as setting it 10 miles inland from the coast?


Rockman,

I can only use the German far off-shore wind turbines, which are the worst case scenario, as reference: The turbine contributes to less than 30% of the overall costs, in comparison 80% in case of onshore. Therefore, the highest savings can be expected in the logistic chain, here more industrial production of the stuff, optimized procedures etc. promise >20% cost reduction until 2020. Windpower (esp. offshore) is when we talk about sophistication of production where cars were 1960, i.e. lot room for improvements.

Near off-shore is of course not competitive to onshore wind in costal regions, and will not be in future. Far off-shore may makes sense when you improve the CF significantly, possible in Germany, not really possible in the USA. Personally, I would not build offshore wind in the USA, onshore plus more transmission capacity is very likely much cheaper.
Ulenspiegel
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 02:15:29

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 31 Jul 2015, 08:18:59

U - " The turbine contributes to less than 30% of the overall costs, in comparison 80% in case of onshore. " Thanks. I had not seen any specific breakdowns. Tell me about what local resistance that might pop up with onshore coastline wind farms in your part of the world. As I mentioned above there was virtually no local resistance to that on the Texas coast. Likewise on the desolate plains of west Texas but that should be a surprise given the very low population density out there.

In an odd way I suspect the acceptance of onshore wind farms in Texas is our long history of hydrocarbon development. Not just folks working in the oil patch but no one here really notices drilling rigs, pump jack, refineries, etc. Beyond being used to the sight on energy production infrastructure there's also the obvious connect to economic activity: there are many non-oil patch businesses that wouldn't survive without our industry. There's no physical reason why the offshore wind farms in the NE US couldn't have been built onshore along the coast line. I'll guess the same might be true in your part of the world. But the public here and where you are wouldn't accept it.

I'm sure you're familiar with NIMBY. It also exists in Texas but we tend to be less rigid about it when it comes to economic activity that helps to grow our economy.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Ulenspiegel » Fri 31 Jul 2015, 12:11:20

Rockman,

onshore wind is concentrated in northern Germany, mainly in the states of Schleswig Holstein, Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony) and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. You find there a very high turbine density and most of the capacity is owned by the local people, usually farmers and their extended families. No chance for NIMBY. :-)

On the political stage we have the funny situation is that there is often simply no opposition against wind power in these states. When it come pro-wind legislation often the opposition votes for it, too.

The NIMBY problem is more prevalent in southern germany and is used by the Bavarian Minister-President for his populistic politics. But I can live with it because he needs in a few years when the last NPPs are switched-off electricity. :-)
Ulenspiegel
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 02:15:29

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Fri 31 Jul 2015, 22:37:38

"onshore wind is concentrated in northern Germany, mainly in the states of Schleswig Holstein, Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony) and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. You find there a very high turbine density and most of the capacity is owned by the local people, usually farmers and their extended families."

"Owned" by Farmers...LOL...since when do farmers ever own anything. Should be called DebtBagHolders instead.

http://www.theenergycollective.com/jess ... renewables

Here is noted internet Energiewende cheerleader, Bas Gresnigt (under a fake name), shedding crocodile tears for another group of German bagholders sucked in by the renewables scam:

"Germany has ~35 pumped storage facilities. Almost all use the 2 reservoir concept. The lower reservoir being a lake too (cheaper).

Almost all were built in the first decade after the Energiewende decisions of 2000 in S-Germany (lot of PV-solar). The ideas Jesse displays in his post played a role in the decisions to build those (Jesse's ideas were used in the hot debate in the nineties by nuclear, etc. to fight the Energiewende ideas).

Part is owned by village communities who did it to become 100% renewable, others by independent investors.
All facilities have to earn their own money. So (pumped) storage facilities earn their money via (automated) buying when whole sale price is low and selling when the price is high.

All pumped storage facilities make losses. Construction of the last one was stopped halfway. At least one is moth-balled, so it couldn't even earn its operations cost which are very low!
Even the Swiss facility makes losses.

There is hope that the situation may improve when the share of wind+solar in electricity production becomes >40% (~2030). Though at that time new competition (cheap batteries, extended grid, power-to-gas/fuel, etc.) may cause continued losses.

I feel sorrow for the idealistic village communities who invested lot of money in their pumped storage facilities."

The same can be said for "I feel sorrow for the idealistic village communities who invested lot of money in their wind turbines"...

Thats the Energiewende...Energy Miracle aka A German Sucker Born Every Minute.
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Ulenspiegel » Sat 01 Aug 2015, 03:53:40

#HerrrlassHirnregnenfürdenunterbelichtetenLöwen
Ulenspiegel
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 02:15:29

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 01 Aug 2015, 10:29:57

U - Thanks for the details. So is the northern onshore region so saturated with wind farms that they have to move offshore for expansion? Onshore S Texas has huge wind farms whose cost was obviously much less then moving just offshore. Many years ago the state issued offshore wind leases covering the first 10 miles out. Unlike most states the federal govt has no authority of that strip of offshore Texas so it wasn't a obstacle. The lack of Texas offshore wind development was strictly economical: couldn't compete with onshore wind farms less than 30 miles away.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Ulenspiegel » Sun 02 Aug 2015, 01:39:51

ROCKMAN wrote:U - Thanks for the details. So is the northern onshore region so saturated with wind farms that they have to move offshore for expansion? Onshore S Texas has huge wind farms whose cost was obviously much less then moving just offshore. Many years ago the state issued offshore wind leases covering the first 10 miles out. Unlike most states the federal govt has no authority of that strip of offshore Texas so it wasn't a obstacle. The lack of Texas offshore wind development was strictly economical: couldn't compete with onshore wind farms less than 30 miles away.


Rockman,

the northern states are NOT saturated with windpower, e.g. Lower Saxony will very likely triple its capacity until 2025-2030, however, the high interest of the local population in windpower does it make difficult for professional investors to do larger projects, the largest windfarms in Germany are smaller than the avarage windfarms in the USA.

Offshore windpower is a substitute for institutional investors and has, in clear contrast to the US situation, a much higher CF (>50%) than the onshore turbines (35-40%).
Ulenspiegel
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 02:15:29

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Sun 02 Aug 2015, 17:55:23

You are all completely delusional.

in 2007 Google committed $30 million to its REnewables < Carbon project, devoted to developing renewable energy sources that would generate electricity more cheaply than coal-fired power plants. The project was scrapped in 2011. Here, Google engineers Ross Koningstein & David Fork explain why:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewab ... ate-change

"While a large emissions cut sure sounded good, this scenario still showed substantial use of natural gas in the electricity sector. That’s because today’s renewable energy sources are limited by suitable geography and their own intermittent power production. Wind farms, for example, make economic sense only in parts of the country with strong and steady winds. The study also showed continued fossil fuel use in transportation, agriculture, and construction. Even if our best-case scenario were achievable, we wondered: Would it really be a climate victory?...

Suppose for a moment that it had achieved the most extraordinary success possible, and that we had found cheap renewable energy technologies that could gradually replace all the world’s coal plants—a situation roughly equivalent to the energy innovation study’s best-case scenario. Even if that dream had come to pass, it still wouldn’t have solved climate change. This realization was frankly shocking: Not only had RE<C failed to reach its goal of creating energy cheaper than coal, but that goal had not been ambitious enough to reverse climate change."

Yet "America's Power Plan" remains enthusiastic about the potential of renewable energy. What do you know that Google doesn't?

Within 10 years, the population of Texas will double. Do you really believe windmills are going to save that sorry state from total collapse?

US sucker taxpayers are spending 10's of billions of dollars subsidizing the solar and wind power scams in early adopting states (e.g. 15 GW of subsidized capacity in Texas and 10 GW in California). Your "capitalism" is nothing more than:

CORPORATE WELFARE
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby isgota » Wed 05 Aug 2015, 02:46:32

Then why Google has invested so much in wind & solar power since 2011?

Image

My 2 cents. Those Google engineers are making up excuses.

Their RE<C program was mainly based in technologies that have failed to reach significant scale and cost reductions like EGS or CSP and wind power & solar PV ate their lunch (and now both of them are cheaper than new coal in good locations, just what Google pretended).
User avatar
isgota
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Spain

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Thu 06 Aug 2015, 12:51:02

Look, the German Dolts are "green"...they get to pay higher prices for nothing. The FRAUD that solar and wind lowers electricity costs is true for the corporate welfare pigs who simply transfer the costs onto the idiots who believe the green ideology.

BOTTOMLINE: More renewables = Higher electricity bill for the little people. There is no benefit to the environment whatsoever.

THE THEORY THAT RENEWABLES ARE GETTING CHEAPER IS A COMPLETE FRAUD

Image

Image
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 10 Nov 2015, 09:41:39

One more reason for folks to be jealous of and/or hate Texas: Texas is generating more wind power than utility companies know what to do with, so they’re handing it out for free.

Over 50 companies in the state offer overnight plans that charge higher fees during the day, but nothing between the hours of 9 p.m. and 6 a.m., according to the New York Times. Texas is the largest generator of wind power in the United States, with about 10% of its generation coming from wind. Since it has its own electricity grid, any energy produced there has to also be used there. Since it produces so much wind power, especially at night, it leaves them with a hefty surplus.

Of course we’d all like to think that they’re giving it away for free out of the goodness of their hearts, but unfortunately that’s not the case. As it turns out, holding onto such a large excess comes with some burdens for the power grid, some of which are costly, so they need to unload. Encouraging consumers to use energy during off peak hours results in lower wholesale prices avoids the need to build more power plants, an expensive task. Omar Siddiqui, director of energy efficiency for the nonprofit group Electricity Power Research Institute calls this “a win-win for consumers and the utility companies."

As we say in Texas: you can be green AND make green. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10432
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 30 Mar 2016, 17:15:05

Pictures and more details at link below quote. Basically China is finding itself learning the same lessons many other countries have learned about renewable power. It often gets generated in inconvenient places far from where it is needed.


HONG KONG—The Chinese government has halted the expansion of wind power in its northern provinces where a large number of turbines are churning out power that's being wasted. The move underscores the challenges facing China as it works to fulfill its clean energy ambitions.

Chinese regulators said the windswept regions of Inner Mongolia, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Gansu, Ningxia and Xinjiang will suspend the approval of new wind projects in 2016, according to a March 17 statement published on the website of China's National Energy Administration. The six regions have installed nearly 71 gigawatts of turbines, more than the rest of China combined. It's at least the fourth time in five years that Beijing has ordered wind operators there to slow down growth.

The decision highlights a growing concern among energy analysts that China's spectacular growth in renewable energy is bumping up against the reality of grid constraints and shrinking electricity demand. Solar panels and wind turbines were virtually nonexistent in China a decade ago, and now the country leads the world in installing both.

Wind power installations, in particular, have exploded over the last five years as part of the country's ambitious push to combat climate change and bring down dangerous levels of air pollution from its massive coal consumption. Already the world's wind energy giant, China installed an additional 33 gigawatts of wind turbines in 2015, more than half of new installations worldwide, as developers rushed to build as many projects as possible to meet a year-end deadline for subsidies.

But too much of that energy is being squandered. In 2015 alone, 33.9 billion kilowatt-hours of wind-powered electricity was wasted, government statistics show—equivalent to the electricity consumed by 3 million American households a year. That was about 15 percent of China's total wind power generation, up from 8 percent a year earlier.

Some of the wind-generated electricity had no place to go because there's no transmission infrastructure to carry the power to population centers. In other cases, developers couldn't compete with coal for contracts to connect to the grid.


http://insideclimatenews.org/news/28032 ... ate-change
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13821
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ROCKMAN and 17 guests

cron