 |
|
« Reform Takes Energy, Too | Main | Light Friday: Earth-Like Planet, Space Wars Revisited, Offensive Bloggage... »
April 26, 2007
Is Wind Power Full of Hot Air?
In the U.S., as people recently poured into Earth Day celebrations, they encountered all sorts of booths and speeches extolling the virtues of wind power and other renewable resources. What participants were highly unlikely to hear were the limitations of wind power. Let's revisit wind.
When it comes to green sources of energy, most of the attention is devoted to different types of clean fuels that have the ability to make cars and factories run more efficiently while reducing the amount of toxins released into the Earth's atmosphere. So why doesn't wind power garner similar attention? While green advocates like Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger aren't known for speaking very well about the virtues of wind power, recent news indicates that this area is gaining more attention, even if the technology doesn't pack the punch of other alternative forms of energy.
One of the side effects of China's booming economy is the havoc being wreaked on the atmosphere due to large volumes of carbon dioxide and other pollutants being produced. It was announced this week that China is set to overtake the United States as the world's biggest source of greenhouse gases within months — much earlier than forecast — because of its runaway economic growth. China now releases about 5 billion tons of CO2 a year, according to the report "Energy Revolution: A Sustainable China Energy Outlook," released yesterday in Beijing.
In response, the country is taking a long, hard look at how it can reduce emissions, Xinhua reports.
Wind power might be the ticket, as 4,000MW of wind power capacity is possible by the end of 2007, according to research reported by Manufacturing.Net earlier this month. Industrial Info Resources has found that China's geography provides an estimated wind power potential of 3.2 billion kilowatts, and it is expected to surpass Germany and the U.S. as the world's largest wind power producer by 2020.
While these are no doubt impressive statistics, it is important to understand what it is involved to make wind power work.
The National Center for Policy Analysis recently provided a short and sweet guide of examples to wind power that highlights both its merits and its shortcomings. Consider these NCPA facts that don't exactly paint a rosy picture for wind power:
• In 2002, there were 54 days in western Denmark on which the wind power systems supplied less than 1 percent of demand, according to an analysis by Denmark energy consulting firm Incoteco.
• For half the days in Germany in 2004, wind plant output was less than 11 percent of rated capacity; in California, at the time of peak demand in July 2006, turbines generated 10 percent of capacity, and Texas generates about 17 percent.
• In contrast, coal and natural gas plants generate at a little better than 70 percent of capacity, and nuclear plants at more than 90 percent.
"If our electricity was generated only by wind turbines, such inefficiencies and variability in the electrical power supply would be routine and entirely unacceptable," says Pete du Pont, chairman of the NCPA and former governor of Delaware. Du Pont also cites plenty of wind power benefits, though, and says the technology is best used as part of a larger, alternative energy strategy.
Shortcomings notwithstanding, plenty of people are betting big on wind power's potential.
The San Jose Mercury News this week takes an in-depth look at how European wind-energy companies will soon be landing on U.S. soil to tap what appears to be an untapped wind energy market here. Check it out:
Two deals announced last month reflect the competition. Portuguese utility EDP Energias de Portugal SA agreed to pay $2.15 billion to buy Houston-based Horizon Wind Energy LLC, from investment bank Goldman Sachs, giving the company its first toehold in the U.S. And Denmark's Vestas Wind Systems, the world's largest wind turbine maker, announced plans to build a $60 million wind turbine blade factory in Colorado, its first U.S. manufacturing plant.
Some say this isn't such a good thing for the U.S., and that we're missing a huge revenue opportunity.
"We could have had our own homegrown wind-power companies competing for these new wind farm developments and manufacturing (plants) had we had the right policies in place," according to Ron Pernick, a principal with research firm Clean Edge Inc.
The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)'s latest annual rankings claim that there has been a steady growth in market. "These wind power rankings tell the story of a vibrant industry that is growing fast, competing hard, gaining market share, and all the while powering a cleaner, stronger America," Randall Swisher, executive director with AWEA, said in a statement published by ElectricNet mid-this month.
The rankings released by the AWEA list not only the U.S. states that produce most power from wind, the largest wind farms in the nation and the leading wind turbine suppliers, but this year also include the rankings of "Congressional districts having most wind-power installed."
So, even though wind power might not be as efficient as other sources of alternative energy, it sure seems as though it is gaining a lot of global attention.
Is wind energy able to meet future energy demands more effectively, or is it simply a concept that is full of hot air and a way for investors to make a quick buck?
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://news.thomasnet.com/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/1022
|
Advertisement
|
Comment
8 CommentsHaving studied various alternative energies, I have my favorites and wind isn't one of them. I consider wind power far and away the worst possible means of generating electricity, one that is overly expensive yet insignificant. The AWEA, the cheerleading sponsored industry voice of the wind power industry, consistently lies and makes misleading statements about the technology, as well as about competing technologies. Nor does this article fully comprehend the disadvantages of wind. In particular, comparing megawatt capacities of various generation facilities (e.g. 16% capacity wind versus 70% capacity of natural gas plants) makes no sense whatsoever. Even if wind farm capacities equalled the capacity of another type of power plant, the wind generated electricity is in no way equivalent in value. Wind generated electricity is the least valued and garners correspondingly the lowest prices. Why? because the power is variable and totally unreliable. Not only is wind power a variable input to the grid, it actually possesses a strong negative correlelation with periods of peak demand. The implications of this are startling, in terms of costs : it means that any wind power capacity not only must be backstopped by idling reliable power sources (which are being operated at their lowest possible efficiencies and highest emission output profiles) but also that the new capacities that must be added each year due to increased peak demand can never be satisfied by wind generators. In effect, the utility must pay for wind capacity twice over - once for the wind initially, and then again later because the money put into wind capacity was valueless in terms of meeting additional demand. And demand for electricity will increase each and every year, as it has for decades. These excessive costs are never considered by wind advocates when they calculate their misleadingly low cost estimates for wind. Nor are the very high hook up costs that are due to the fact that wind turbines have to be located where there is wind, which is seldom anywhere near either a transmision line or a population center. And the turbines are themselves spread far and wide. There are also access roads required,and the supposed free energy source requires that landowners be paid monthly royalties for siting the turbines, which in certain cases (i.e. nuclear power) exceeds the fuel costs of reliable power generators. Let's not forget the very high price for the turbines and the cost of installation of these 70 ton monsters out in the middle of nowhere.
The article quotes capacity ratings for wind during peak demand periods, but this is a very simplistic and meaningless way of looking at the problem. It really doesn't matter what the average capacity of wind is during peak demands, since the utility operator can't count on that capacity when needed (or,indeed, count on anything at all). The capacity has to be there EVERY day during peak demand, which an average will obviously not guarantee. The Texas Electric Reliability Council, which operates most Texas utilities, recently published statsitics that showed
wind capacity as a practically nonexistent 2.5% during peak demand periods during 2006.
The megawatt ratings for wind farms and their turbines are mostly meaningless, although this is another case where the AWEA and wind advocates consistently mislead the public. They will characterize a facility as a "150 megawatt windfarm," knowing full well that it will
never have the capability of averaging even 40 megawatts of output.The U.S. generates 3.8 billion megawatt hours each year. Those 7500 wind turbines can produce no more than 9 million megawatt hours, or less than 1/4 of 1 percent of our electricity. Claims by wind industry
promotors like the AWEA that the U.S. contains enough wind resources to produce so many billions of megawatt hours are simply meaningless numbers meant to impress the ignorant public. Whether true (doubtful) or not, the proper question is whether it makes any sense to errect
turbines to capture any of that wind energy. On this score it's pretty clear that wind energy has been a total flop. The only conceivable reason anyone would (and does) errect wind turbines is because they are desperate to reduce emissions and can't think of a better method of doing so. Aapparently they are not thinking very hard, I must
say, because there are plenty of superior technologies around, or just around the corner.
Another more humorous situation has developed in the wind industry. The AWEA, which I have already characterized as about as reliable as their precious wind power, recently released a description of wind power which began "Wind power is a reliable source of electricity ..." Apparently the AWEA is living in some parallel universe where the term "reliable" actually means the opposite. Regardless, other wind advocates, eager to answer criticisms of wind's unreliability, point to air compression storage facilities being built in a few places that will store wind output and then release it during pek demand periods later to earn higher prices for the electricity. What's amusing is that this technology requires that a lot of natural gas be burned in order to release the stored energy. So we now have the strange situation in which the AWEA is both ignoring the issue of unreliability and extolling the "clean energy" of wind power,while those in the field are at the same time producing plenty of not-very-clean wind energy in order to make enough money to pay for the heavily subsidized turbines (approximately $200 million/year is thrown at wind operators by the Feds).
April 26, 2007 6:02 PMComparing renewable energy and fossil fuels isn't fair or reasonable in the bigger picture.
Improving storage systems, along with improved efficiency and conservation of consumption can take us farther in the long run, whether resource depletion or global warming is the bigger enemy to our future.
April 27, 2007 3:25 PMPeople and/or companies are quick to denounce Wind Power as a viable source of energy. After all, the Oil, Gas, and Coal companies stand to lose market share in support of the energy needs of the United States. Yet the U.S. has the ability to address the shortfalls of Wind Power as noted in this article with new technology.
I live in Maine and have seen the environmental groups closing the doors to proposed Wind Power projects of which some are huge. Two or three 400-600 MW facilities would provide energy for many homes in Maine. But I guess this shouldn't surprise me for Maine is also closing down dams that provide energy to allow fish to migrate upstream from the ocean. I enjoy fishing too, but where is our common since with future energy needs and how that generation of power will continue to feed CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere.
Global Warming? Yes, it is real and getting worse, but I guess the majority are not concerned.
April 30, 2007 12:00 PMThe reason power companies are putting up wind farms is because they co-exist well with existing sources like natural gas. When the wind is blowing they save on fuel, over the course of time it adds up. Natural gas is a good source, but its future price possibilities are a scary thing, and the less we use the better.
Wind energy critics are literally wailing at the wind talking about problems like variability which have already been solved, meanwhile the technology grows worldwide by leaps and bounds. The fact that wind energy only accounts for 1% now only means that it can probably grow for another 20 years before load management becomes a problem.
The only thing that will stop this growth is a better idea. Clearly one hasn't come along yet.
May 2, 2007 11:34 PM
