Posted on 10/13/2012 9:19:15 AM PDT by Twotone
PORTLAND, Oregon—Because of its variable nature, wind energy is not suited to be the lone or primary source of a grid’s total electricity, according to a new Cascade Policy Institute–Reason Foundation study. If used to produce more than 10-20 percent of a system’s electricity, wind power increases operating costs, due to the need for expensive storage facilities or continuously available CO2-emitting backup power generation facilities.
(Excerpt) Read more at cascadepolicy.org ...
As Texas found to its sorrow during the very cold winter of 2010, wind turbines stop producing in near-zero temperatures...at the very time that those depending on electric heat are cranking up their thermostats.
Texas had to go off-grid and buy electric power from Mexico, and in true Mexican fashion, our neighbors charged ten times the normal rate, which the freezing consumers saw in their electric bills.
Environmentalists should the the first ones cut off in any energy crisis.
They should volunteer to show their true commitment to the cause.
Shut The Front Door! When did that happen????? Man am I crushed now. I was going to install 2 dozen in the back yard and sell the overage back to NVEnergy through my newly installed “smart” meter. LOL!
Happy Birthday US Navy!!!
Helping keep mankind warm for 65 years. (In a deep Hemi rumble sort of way.)
We’ve got enormous new wind farms in Indiana and Illinois. I wonder how they’re paid for.
I assume that this is sarcasm. They are being paid for by YOU, of course.
thats right..my engineer brother explained it all to me. and I hear they are going to use another vegetable along with corn for fuel and cause more high prices and hunger in the world
“We’ve got enormous new wind farms in Indiana and Illinois. I wonder how they’re paid for.”
Look at the tax deductions on your paycheck, and at your electricity bill.
How much did this study cost taxpayers? As wind is not consistent, this should be an obvious conclusion that does not require further study.
MJ
Instead of attacking the basic changes in energy supply created by this regime which are directly contributing to the recipients dependency on whatever the regime is handing out ,by design.
Too many pundits drawn from their limited personal immediate surrounding and life style are attacking the recipients with condemnation for using what a one time was termed “relief” .They are demonstrating they haven’t a clue what a retiree on a fixed income or even those out of work are going through at this time. And that’s the problem.
You have a regime which by design is driving up the costs and uses of energy the most a basic resource because it suits its “look at US saving the world “socialist matrix. What’s even worse is the massive corrpution resulting from that regime doling out tons of funds towards its campaign donners for so called alternate forms which don’t work or are laughingly inefficient .
This seems to be getting a pass even by the Romney campaign and a huge mistake because that “feel good” policy affects everyone. It is a bread a butter issue.
As far as wind generation goes the US would have been far better off if WE offered tax write off incentives to locations which decided to supplement electric energy usage by different means of localized generation. That would reduce the need of extending greater the power transmission grid and its ultimate costly maintainence.
Look, you people are viewing this all wrong. Where the heck did you get the idea that you have a right to reliable power “any time you want it, anywhere you need it?” This isn’t a Journey moment, we’re talking Gaia here!
oh well then. On to the backup green energy source .....unicorn f@rts.
I am looking for investors for my wind storage facility.
Why not be one of the first to benefit from this new technology!!!
Then there’s the fact that a windmill needs to be replaced every 20 years at best.
When your “wind storage facility” has maintenance problems is ti called “breaking wind”?
While this report has some nice points, I’d like to see someone with a “EE P.E.” after his name finally nail this coffin shut.
Ephemeral power sources destabilize the grid, especially when these ephemeral generation sources are so localized in the nation (or even regional) transmission grids. There’s limits to how quickly the grid can respond and spinning reserves scheduled onto the grid when the reserves are located in different parts of the grid than the ephemeral sources.
The number of these eyesore turbines going up in Wyoming is appalling... .especially because we’re peddling the power to idiots in places like California and Oregon. But the next eyesore to come will be huge transmission facilities (with redundancy) to allow more, “fatter” transmission paths between the ephemeral sources (wind and solar) and urban areas, while probably leaving the existing transmission facilities for the base load generation.
I think the economics could be improved if we used the shredded poultry downstream to feed the starving victims of the Baraqqi Depression instead of EBT.
That’s when ERCOT became a curse word for a lot of Texas, who found out that building all this green energy capacity upped their electric rates while causing black outs.
Just wait two years when the CREZ adder starts showing up on your monthly electric bill.
CREZ was the idea to build a new transmission grid over the top of the existing grid to transport wind generation to the load areas.
“near-zero temperatures”
Wind Generators don’t run when it gets too hot, too cold, too windy or freezing rain. The Three Little Bears of Generation, they want it just right.
Oh yeal, their Production Tax Credit too!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.