Wind Farm Slaughter

[Wayne SW/MO]

That's true Greasy. For some reason it's cheaper to HVAC a house than to turn the tires on the vehicle.

[bfishn]

...Have you ever looked out the window of an airliner when approaching a city in the night? Look at all the empty parking lots and streets lit up. What’s up with that? Are we scared of the dark? Are we afraid of some boogie man? Do we have a need to conquer the natural world by turning night into day? I’m pretty sure it’s because energy is so cheap we can afford such a folly without giving it any thought. Energy conservation and alternate energy sources will never be viable when our cost is so low. Maybe the real question is does our energy cost reflect the actual cost to our environment and society?

Excellent points!

Here's a photo taken from the International Space Station to illustrate your comments;

On first viewing, I amused myself by identifying cities I knew. I was stumped by the boxed area though. What the heck is that out in the middle of nowhere???

Turns out it's the gas flares at the new Bakken Field oil well complex in ND. Six years ago that area was dark. There's reportedly enough NG by-product being burned off there 24/7 to power Minneapolis and Chicago combined. No infrastructure exists to make it cost effective to pipe it away to use, so they just light it up. ND greenhouse gas emissions are up 20% as a result.

But back to leaving the lights on... Criminy!

[Justin Spencer]

I’m as clueless as anyone so I’ll chime in.

Have you ever looked out the window of an airliner when approaching a city in the night? Look at all the empty parking lots and streets lit up. What’s up with that? Are we scared of the dark? Are we afraid of some boogie man? Do we have a need to conquer the natural world by turning night into day? I’m pretty sure it’s because energy is so cheap we can afford such a folly without giving it any thought. Energy conservation and alternate energy sources will never be viable when our cost is so low. Maybe the real question is does our energy cost reflect the actual cost to our environment and society?

That's so simple and so spot on that it can't be argued with. I remember people complaining about the new light bulbs and how they don't come on as quick and don't put out the right light and on and on. Energy, much like gasoline used to be, is so cheap that we don't even worrry about wasting it. Gas prices went up, now we don't drive as many SUV's, and if we go a distance we take the efficient car. I guess if we can't conserve on our own, we need higher prices to force us into it.

[Wayne SW/MO]

If you really want something to think about, think about CNG at 1.65 a gallon? Ad 20% for the fact that it isn't as efficient as gasoline and you get $1.98. Given the fact it's cheaper, cleaner and domestic, why are we buying crude from overseas?

[Terrierman]

If you really want something to think about, think about CNG at 1.65 a gallon? Ad 20% for the fact that it isn't as efficient as gasoline and you get $1.98. Given the fact it's cheaper, cleaner and domestic, why are we buying crude from overseas?

Infrastructure investment needed, going to MIC instead if you ask me.

[Buzz]

You're right, but all is not equal. Wind farms exist because they are visible and in spite of the blight, make people believe they are viable. We raise Cain over animal farms too close to the water and would come unglued if they wanted to cross the NFOW with a rusty pipeline to no where, but don't mind an energy source that is 180 degress with the environment and exists because it's profitable for big business as a subsidy magnet.

The biggest problem with solar is that it doesn't draw the money that wind does, even though in the long run it's more sensible. It's hard to give a substantial subsidy to the XYZ corporation and not one to aunt Martha., especially if Martha's son can build her solar panels with a few tools.

We spend billions make sources as safe as possible, but you can't do much with a meat grinder running 200 or 300 miles an hour sitting high in the sky.

The wind turbines I've seen might make 4 miles an hour.

Even though I think they look really cool, I wouldn't want to look at them all the time.

I can't see where noise would be a problem. I've been right next to the ones Justin is talking about and they were pretty quiet. I spent about an hour out there one evening taking some pictures. I could not believe how slow they turned or how quiet they were.

Great pics Flysmallie. I'm sure that small windmill has taken out it's fair share of birds.

Solar does have more promise if it was utilized right. While lighting isn't a large percentage of the load, it is universal enough to make an impact. Most roofs are vacant and could easily be used for preheating water and solar panes for lighting. Solar panels could be produced cheaply enough if they got the attention they deserve.

Nuclear is probably the quickest way to clean energy. Nuclear is saddled with a few accidents caused by either poor engineering or apathy for safety, but can be safe. One of the big drawbacks is disposal of spent fuel and I've never understood why it couldn't be jettisoned into space? Surely it could be package to withstand a failure.

Nuclear waste is not worse than a few bird deaths???????????????? Where do we store it??? How do we transport the waste??? Well duhhhhh, what happens when it falls to earth??? And It would.....

Don't have time to dive into this completely but from a contractors perspective the only thing that belongs on a roof is shingles, I have seen the damage solar panels and anything else put on roofs cause. The benefits of solar energy do not offset the cost of the damages when they occur. I know they are a viable product but need to be put someplace that will not damage the property.

There are so many products available now to make your house environmentally friendly but the cost is high and from most the journals I have read it can range between 10 and 25 years to just break even in compare to non-green building. There is a lot to take in to consideration in those numbers without doubt and it is up to the buyer to make the choice of is it worth it. My suggestion is if the person is in the 30's buying the house and it will be the last place they buy then yes it is worth it as when you hit retirement age you will have broke even and now are saving money and living cheaper. But if you are going to move again don't waste the money.

http://www.oksolar.com/roof/ We have come along way since the old solar panels of yesteryear. They are much more light weight than what was available 10 or 20 years ago.

What was the total cost for the solar power installation? If you're willing to spend enough money, then you can probably power your house and charge your electric car with solar power. I've thought about installing solar panels on my house, but the payback doesn't work out.

We don't get the incentives that California does. If we did it would be a much better Missouri. The problem is that the oil and corn industry is so deeply ingrained in our political structure that they make it so that we can't afford the initial investment.

[dgames]

Combination facilities are usually important to cover natural cycles, yes, but peak wind times are generally during daylight hours when demand is high.

I'm not sure of your sources, but everything I have read and heard in presentations is that wind power output is pretty low when electric demand is highest. Here is an excerpt from an Congressional Research Service report. RTO's are Regional Transmission Organizations. They are the entities that administer the electrical transmission grid and ensure reliable power. MISO is the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (covers up midwest) and PJM is the RTO that covers the mid-atlantic area as well as the chicago area. Here is a link to the report. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42818.pdf

"In order to estimate and plan for resource adequacy and reserve margins, RTOs assign capacity

credits (expressed as a percentage of nameplate capacity) to generators based on a generator’s

ability to supply needed power during peak demand periods. Capacity credits generally take into

account planned and unplanned outages for power generators during a calendar year. Wind

generators are typically assigned relatively low capacity credits to reflect the variable nature and

generation profile of wind power. In the MISO RTO, wind generators receive a 14.9% capacity

credit,38 while PJM assigns wind generators a 13% capacity credit.39 As an example, a 100 MW

wind project in PJM would only contribute 13 MW towards resource adequacy and reserve

margins. By comparison, a coal or nuclear generator may be assigned 80% to 85% capacity

credits."

These RTOs are saying they can only count on 14.9% and 13% respectively of installed wind capacity to be available during their electric peaks when they need the power the most.

I am not saying there isn't a place for wind energy at all. I just believe there are limits to how much of a slice it can occupy in the overall portfolio of US electric generation and that the intermittency of wind power output is one of its big limiting factors.

[Tim Smith]

Dgames. I confess I was thinking about coastal generation when I wrote that.

Shrimp farms I worked with in Belize wanted to use wind power for aeration in their ponds but needed power at night when oxygen was low in their ponds and they needed to aerate. Personal wind plants worked well for homes and resorts.

Peak times vary regionally You're right that In the US, inland summer peak does not match peak demand, but that is not the case in winter or in coastal/offshore areas. There is talk about using the oceans as windmill sites and if those sites are used, wind supposedly has the potential to supply most of the wind to the east coast.

http://sailorsenergy.com/node/1

(wind peak map from North Dakota)

Otherwise, yes, you are right that summer peak wind and energy demand do not mesh.

Your larger point that wind has limits and is limited by variability is important. Wind and solar aren't as reliable as other sources and will probably always be an add on. Still. 14% is 14%. Coastal sites or long distance transmission might build up from there, but let's take what we can get for now.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/december5/windfarm-120507.html

[Wayne SW/MO]

The wind turbines I've seen might make 4 miles an hour.

Do some research Buzz, you're not even in the same universe. I don't have the figure in front of me, but the tips are moving much faster than you think.

Well duhhhhh, what happens when it falls to earth??? And It would.....

It would be silly to put it in orbit, but the earths pull is small in the big picture.

http://www.oksolar.com/roof/ We have come along way since the old solar panels of yesteryear. They are much more light weight than what was available 10 or 20 years ago.

Yup, and while I don't have a cost, it isn't that hard to build one. The biggest challenge is making a lot of soldered connections with no bad ones and keeping the circuit right.

There is talk about using the oceans as windmill sites and if those sites are used, wind supposedly has the potential to supply most of the wind to the east coast.

Yeah but a well known environmentalist and his politician uncle shot that idea down. Not in their backyard because they were ugly, noisy and bad for waterfowl. It is alright to put them in your back 40 however.

[Justin Spencer]

I think wave and tidal power is something that has great potential. It won't be high output, but it is as reliable as the sun coming up and going down every day. I know F& F can attest to the power of the tides ripping through the inlets and all the culverts set up for mosquito control. Best part is the tide is always going one way or the other and the output should be as simple as a few figures on paper. The times of peak production would change every day, but could easily be predicted.