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 StarvingLion » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 12:54:21

The earliest known wind powered grain mills and water pumps were used by the Persians in A.D. 500-900

Progress? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

I guess 1000's of years from now the energy device of the future will be

The Windmill.

Year 2165: New and improved Windmills are ready for deployment.

Billions are gonna die and you hapless clowns are just jabbering about.
America cannot afford combustion.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 13:55:45

What happened to all the harmony between Ponzi Gas and Bird Choppers?

The Carnival Barker from the Ponzi Gas "Industry" surely doesn't think those hordes of electrical engineers and brainless pseudos in the pinko universities are gonna embrace ng without useless Bird Choppers having priority on the grid?

What are all these scammers gonna "invest" in if not Wind Scams?
America cannot afford combustion.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 987
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 15:50:20

jaw - "If the goal is to lower CO2 emissions, this is a massive failure given the amount of money and effort spent over the past 20 years since the Kyoto Accord." As I've repeatedly pointed out Texas didn't develop world class wind power with the goal of reducing CO2 emissions. It wasn't even a secondary consideration. After all:

"Texas emitted more carbon dioxide from burning energy in 2013 than it did at any point since 2004. And, for at least the 24th year in a row, the Lone Star State tops the list of the nation’s biggest carbon polluters, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration."

Check the chart: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/carb ... ates-19615

What our wind power build out did accomplish was preventing an equivalent expansion of our fossil fuel fired generation: we were going to expand one way or the other to meet our growing demand.

Folks can f*ck around with the economic numbers all they want but it doesn't change the fact: every wind farm built in Texas was done because of a profit motive. And given they continued to be built profits must have been realized. And while the fed tax credits are a benefit the value is there only if the investment is producing a taxable profit. IOW losing money means no profit to apply the credit to.

The two wind and solar companies that will supply Georgetown, Texas, with 100% alt electricity are doing so to make a profit. And thanks to a contracted rate structure with the utility company the profit IS NOT theoretical: it's locked in from Day 1. And now E.ON is building grid scale battery story to be fed by two wind farms it owns in Texas. And this isn't the first such effort by those Germans. Having done it before they should have a good handle on the profitability: they aren't subsidizing Texas alt out of the goodness of their hearts. LOL.

Texas does have have some geographic advantages over other states. But that's not the primary reason why we've expanded alts so quickly: OK has the same strong winds just across the state line. We have ERCOT: it is composed of electricity generators, transmission companies, consumers via the utility commission and the state's politicians. Essentially it's forces cooperation amongst all parties to provide not just the lowest possible rates but also accetable profit margins for the investors. Membership isn't really voluntary: you either cooperate with the ERCOT regulations or you don't participate in the state's power generation system as a provider or consumer. And given that Texas is by far the biggest electricity consumer in the country that's a very big pie to grab a slice of.

ERCOT comes as close to a "benevolent overlord" as we'll ever see in this country. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 17:30:27

ROCKMAN

In a weird way you are a very hard line cc realist.

Hope I’m not outing you

Did you listen to that short interview with Rees (Global Footprint guy) on our front page about a week ago?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 9390
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby pstarr » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 18:17:22

"Texas does have have some geographic advantages over other states. But that's not the primary reason why we've expanded alts so quickly . . . "

Has nothing to do with greenwashing your Permian fracting? A few windmills and a couple of PowerWalls are chump change next to the huge profit in good will and business atmosphere the state will incur.
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26285
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby jawagord » Wed 08 Nov 2017, 18:32:06

ROCKMAN wrote:jaw - "If the goal is to lower CO2 emissions, this is a massive failure given the amount of money and effort spent over the past 20 years since the Kyoto Accord." As I've repeatedly pointed out Texas didn't develop world class wind power with the goal of reducing CO2 emissions. It wasn't even a secondary consideration. After all:

"Texas emitted more carbon dioxide from burning energy in 2013 than it did at any point since 2004. And, for at least the 24th year in a row, the Lone Star State tops the list of the nation’s biggest carbon polluters, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration."

Check the chart: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/carb ... ates-19615

What our wind power build out did accomplish was preventing an equivalent expansion of our fossil fuel fired generation: we were going to expand one way or the other to meet our growing demand.

Folks can f*ck around with the economic numbers all they want but it doesn't change the fact: every wind farm built in Texas was done because of a profit motive. And given they continued to be built profits must have been realized. And while the fed tax credits are a benefit the value is there only if the investment is producing a taxable profit. IOW losing money means no profit to apply the credit to.

The two wind and solar companies that will supply Georgetown, Texas, with 100% alt electricity are doing so to make a profit. And thanks to a contracted rate structure with the utility company the profit IS NOT theoretical: it's locked in from Day 1. And now E.ON is building grid scale battery story to be fed by two wind farms it owns in Texas. And this isn't the first such effort by those Germans. Having done it before they should have a good handle on the profitability: they aren't subsidizing Texas alt out of the goodness of their hearts. LOL.

Texas does have have some geographic advantages over other states. But that's not the primary reason why we've expanded alts so quickly: OK has the same strong winds just across the state line. We have ERCOT: it is composed of electricity generators, transmission companies, consumers via the utility commission and the state's politicians. Essentially it's forces cooperation amongst all parties to provide not just the lowest possible rates but also accetable profit margins for the investors. Membership isn't really voluntary: you either cooperate with the ERCOT regulations or you don't participate in the state's power generation system as a provider or consumer. And given that Texas is by far the biggest electricity consumer in the country that's a very big pie to grab a slice of.

ERCOT comes as close to a "benevolent overlord" as we'll ever see in this country. LOL.


Rockman a 2 second internet search on Texas wind farm subsidies should make it apparent Texas wind power is highly subsidized. Texas like all other states and provinces with large wind power generation has created a guaranteed market for wind power and if the wind blows consumers have to pay for this power even if it is not needed. This can drive power prices into the negative, which hurts traditional power producers who are stuck with fluctuating market rates. If the wind power industry existed on market rates there would only be galvanized steel windmills pumping water on the dry West Texas landscape. Texas wind energy will be in the shitter like all the rest once the government subsidies end.

"Wind power in Texas receives subsidies regardless of whether power prices are positive or negative. Wind power has occasionally supplied 14 GW in Texas, about half the consumption in the somewhat islanded state.[23][24][25]."

"In fact, federal tax subsidies for wind power are so large, that Texas wind generators have begun to pay people to take their electricity, just so they can be eligible for the subsidy. "

"In 2014 and 2015, according to the Energy Information Administration, during times of peak demand, the average wholesale price of electricity was about $50 per megawatt-hour. Last winter in Texas, peak wholesale electricity prices averaged $21 per megawatt hour. Thus, on the national level, wind-energy subsidies are worth nearly half the cost of wholesale power, and in the Texas market, those subsidies can actually exceed the wholesale price of electricity."


https://www.texaspolicy.com/content/det ... ubsidies-2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Texas

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... ax-dollars
jawagord
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon 29 May 2017, 09:49:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 10:36:29

Good time, perhaps, for folks to do a little checking up on exactly what the ITCs and PTCs actually are. (Investment Tax Credits/Production Tax Credits).
I will repeat a statement previously made, whirleys would shut down tomorrow sans subsidies. Check out the statement by the US' largest owner of whirley farms, made in 2014, Warren Buffet claiming they made no economic sense without credits.

North Dakota just looked into taxing the income on whirley farms in the state and discovered income was zero.

These credits are also transferable.
coffeeguyzz
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 10:43:00

coffeeguyzz wrote:Good time, perhaps, for folks to do a little checking up on exactly what the ITCs and PTCs actually are. (Investment Tax Credits/Production Tax Credits).
I will repeat a statement previously made, whirleys would shut down tomorrow sans subsidies. Check out the statement by the US' largest owner of whirley farms, made in 2014, Warren Buffet claiming they made no economic sense without credits.

North Dakota just looked into taxing the income on whirley farms in the state and discovered income was zero.

These credits are also transferable.


Yet wind generated a record total of 226 million megawatt-hours (MWh) to US grids in 2016 (EIA). Just sayin'.....
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:03:52

Ghung

Suggest you do a quick check on the Scot wind farm situation where the production is both large and increasing.

As was stated above, not only can whirley producers crank out the juice without worrying about profit making, their advantages destroy legacy producers as juice price drops (see South Australia for advanced state of this situation) , which is why the nuke boys are heading out the door toot sweet.
coffeeguyzz
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:16:34

coffeeguyzz wrote:Ghung

Suggest you do a quick check on the Scot wind farm situation where the production is both large and increasing.

As was stated above, not only can whirley producers crank out the juice without worrying about profit making, their advantages destroy legacy producers as juice price drops (see South Australia for advanced state of this situation) , which is why the nuke boys are heading out the door toot sweet.


The nuke boys are probably heading out the door because Southern Company is losing its ass trying to build two new AP-1000 reactors at the Vogtle Plant in Georgia (not to mention the Westinghouse bankruptcy), despite billions in guaranteed federal loans and incentives. Grossly over budget and behind schedule.
Southeast rate payers beware.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:29:26

Not just the nukes being built, long term producers in New York and Ohio just got government incentives to stay operating.
Huge (2,000 Mw) nuke plant in Connecticut - Millstone - is in process of getting legislative assistance to keep their turbines spinning.
If Millstone were to shut down, New England would be in a world of hurt.
The price of natgas fueled electricity is exceptionally cheap, which pressures competitors in free market wholesale market.
(Pull up ISO site for real time New England electricity pricing at wholesale level).
Throw in perks for whirleys like 23 bucks per Mw produced - needed or not - and things get screwy real quick.
coffeeguyzz
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:46:18

Hell, you folks are forgetting one of the biggest "gifts" to the Texas wind industry from our consumers: $7 BILLION in tax payer money to expand our grid. Without which there might not be a single west Texas wind farm. Hell again, forget subsidies: how about the consumers in Georgetown, Texas, initially paying ABOVE market rate for the electricity that will make the city run on 100% alt? And they voluntary chose to do so.

Forks get such a hard on over whatever financial leverage is provided that will ultimately benefit consumers. Talk about huge subsidies: what about home mortgage write offs? And govt subsidized lending that still allows folks to borrow with as little as 1% down even after the subprime melt down? What about the depletion deduction given to the Texas petroleum industry? The deduction that helped make Texas the largest producer in the country with production taxes building the $10+ BILLION sovereign fund owned by our citizens? You never hear anyone in Texas bitching about the depletion allowance do you?

Seems like many forget the ultimate goal of any of these programs: public benefit. Looking at any portion of the system as if exist in a vacuum by itself its pointless...and dishonest IMO. You don't hear the Texas tax payers complaining about the $7 BILLION they chipped to support wind development. Maybe because at $.086 per kWh Texas, the largest electricity consumer in the country, is lower then that of 40 other states and about half that of many New England states. And what about our job growth thanks to companies locating in Texas to take advantage of our lower energy costs...including a couple from Europe? And that's today with cheap NG generating much of our electricity. And when fuel prices double or triple?

Wind development in Texas has been profitable for investors AND consumers for a variety of reasons. And will be even more so when NG prices inevitably increase. That's the whole story. Piss and moan all you want: Texas is one of the WORLD'S leading wind power producers. And likely will be in a similar position with solar and maybe even grid storage not too many years down the road.

And leaving the rest of y'all in the west Texas dust. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:51:29

"...their advantages destroy legacy producers as juice price drops..." So reducing fossil fuel consumption by any means is a bad thing? Damn you, fellow destroyer of the climate!!! LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 11:58:13

Newfie - "In a weird way you are a very hard line cc realist." Hell, I was a realist on cc when I wrote my first paper on AGW in the early 70's when I was working on my B.S. in Earth Science. Got an A-. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 12:04:06

Rock
Your comments are why a 'bigger' view on these matters is both necessary and long overdue.

Heck, roads, sewage treatment, communal water supply, education are just a few of the modern world's realities that most of today's countries either have or aspire to obtain.

Unfortunately, the intense political polarization. Mis and dis information, public apathy, dearth of integrity, etc., have left electricity production and transmission in a somewhat uncertain state.

I would guess the increasing cost and precarious nature of this stuff will prompt more widespread public engagement.

Time's getting pretty short, though, in both Australia and New England.
coffeeguyzz
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby jawagord » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 19:08:00

Antarctic research station lost one of its wind turbines when the nacelle and rotor fell off, 14 years in use almost made the average lifespan.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-08/m ... ed/9130554
jawagord
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon 29 May 2017, 09:49:17

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Thu 09 Nov 2017, 19:17:41

jawagord wrote:Antarctic research station lost one of its wind turbines when the nacelle and rotor fell off, 14 years in use almost made the average lifespan.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-08/m ... ed/9130554


Forty knot + winds for 14 years with sub-zero temperatures producing over 90% of their power on many days. Impressive technology, IMO.

The winds at Mawson are always quite strong at night, so they were up to about 40 knots, but that's not, by Mawson standards, especially strong."

Dr Wooding said the turbine was one of two on the station, but both had been deactivated as a precaution while investigations continued.

"We use turbines at Mawson to supplement our diesel-powered power station, and they can provide up to 95 per cent of the station's power on any given day," he said.

The pair of turbines had been in operation since 2003 and usually provided about half of the station's power each year.

"That's a good energy efficiency ... and cost-saving measure for us, but we do have enough diesel power available at the station to meet all our electricity needs," Dr Wooding said.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 10 Nov 2017, 12:08:27

coffee - "Time's getting pretty short, though, in both Australia and New England." Yep. And relatively low energy cost today hurt alt expansion. Which is why any economic leverage given to alt build out is critical. When the day comes when electricity becomes so expensive that the alts can stand alone economically it will take so long for them to expand there will be an extended period of suffering by consumers. As you say the long game plan is what is needed to avoid that situation.

Maybe in an odd way Texas politicians see that better then most. To some degree they see the future more clearly given their better appreciation of the future of petroleum. For instance a fair number of the Georgetown residents are oil patch retirees. Including the former Halliburton hand I bought my current home from. They see the future petroleum supply problems and are willing to pay a premium today to avoid such crippling future pain.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 10 Nov 2017, 12:24:24

Ghung - Given the cost of shipping diesel to the station I suspect their wind project was the most profitable alt effort on the planet.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10625
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Wind Power Thread pt 3 (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Fri 10 Nov 2017, 12:28:22

ROCKMAN wrote:coffee - "Time's getting pretty short, though, in both Australia and New England." Yep. And relatively low energy cost today hurt alt expansion. Which is why any economic leverage given to alt build out is critical. When the day comes when electricity becomes so expensive that the alts can stand alone economically it will take so long for them to expand there will be an extended period of suffering by consumers. As you say the long game plan is what is needed to avoid that situation.

Maybe in an odd way Texas politicians see that better then most. To some degree they see the future more clearly given their better appreciation of the future of petroleum. For instance a fair number of the Georgetown residents are oil patch retirees. Including the former Halliburton hand I bought my current home from. They see the future petroleum supply problems and are willing to pay a premium today to avoid such crippling future pain.


I entered that long game about 20 years ago. I figure the time will come when we need oil and gas for things for which there is no viable substitute (maybe not us, but our kids), and we already have other ways to generate electricity. May as well get ahead of that, even if it's not currently economically as competitive. Good to know at least some folks are willing to sacrifice short-term benefits for long-term security, such as it is.

I designed this into my whole home. Hot water? I have 4 ways to heat our water: Propane (least desirable), solar thermal, solar electric dump once the batteries are charged, and our wood stove makes hot water while heating the home. Same story with heating our home: Passive solar->wood->radiant floor->propane. I prefer to keep our propane for cooking and clothes drying what doesn't go on the clothes line, and have reduced our propane use to less than 60 gallons per year. None of this cost a lot with a bit of foresight, especially considering the solar energy is free for the taking when the sun shines. Redundancy helps if one of these systems fails or needs maintenance.

Too bad wind energy is a no-go here, eh?
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests