Re: Research: Wind power pricier, emits more CO2 than thought

On 17 Jul, 18:13, "rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx" <rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jul 17, 1:54 am, disgoftunwells <disgoftunwe...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 17 Jul, 08:28, "rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx" <rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Jul 16, 11:03 am, disgoftunwells <disgoftunwe...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On 16 Jul, 08:11, "rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx" <rlbell.ns...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Jul 15, 2:13 am, disgoftunwells <disgoftunwe...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 13 Jul, 03:52, Bill Ghrist <notmyn...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Regarding the arguments about whether wind power is mature...

If you go back and read the article originally referenced by this topic
you will find that the premise has little if anything to do with the
maturity of wind power technology. Rather it has to do with the amount
and type of back up generation that must be provided if wind power is to
be a major portion of total generation. The article specifically
addresses the situation in the UK, and shows that it is not unusual to
have periods of calm winds over all of the UK and continental Europe,
sometimes for days at a time, meaning that you need an amount of backup
generating capacity equal to the total wind capacity.

Back on topic! Thanks.

And my response was it's an excellent article but there are several
points that the author misses. He concedes he doesn't analyse the
impact electric cars, which with a 30% market share might provide
10KWhrs x 10 million = 100 GWhrs flexible storage capacity.

Let me get this straight: During some parts of the winter when I plug
in my hypothetical electric car, not only will I not get any charge,
but the electric company will siphon some charge out of it. Even
better, it can last every night for a week.

If you agree yes. Probably the easiest way is when you park your car,
you set a time for when you want it fully charged. Cheap, complex
software does the rest.

So the vehicle battery is used not for storage, but the charger
interacts with the grid to manage the load curve, eliminating some of
the need for peaking units that wind supplements fuel for. This makes
the economic model for wind worse, not better. Baseload unit produce
very inexpensive electricity that wind generators cannot compete
against.

Onshore wind power is already cost competitive with most forms of
generation, measured by c/KWhr.

The issue raised is that an additional cost of standby capacity is
needed.

Making demand more flexible is a way of overcoming some of this
requirement.

There are a number of ways of making demand more flexible, of which
electric powered vehicles will be the largest scale. (It's like
running your dishwasher at night, but on a much bigger scale, and in a
smarter way).

This makes the economics of wind better.

If I accept that wind power is competive with most forms of
generation, you must acknowledge that it is not competitive with all
forms of generation. Wind is cost competitive with peaking units.
However load management reduces the need for peaking units, and enough
of it will eliminate peaking units altogether. In a fully managed
load environment, wind is only competing with baseload units. In that
environment, wind power makes no economic sense.

OK, but lets look at the alternatives.

- Coal is the cheapest and its abundant. However, if you price in the
carbon output, or require sequestration, it's now on a par with on
shore wind.
- Nuclear - if you look at the cost models, the overriding cost driver
is cost of capital. The French Government had a low cost of capital is
therefore able to supply very cheap electricity. The next biggest
variable is uncertainty over construction costs. I would expect
nuclear to be cheaper than the current cost of wind power. However,
Britain is not going to build more that a dozen nukes, which could
provide a maximum of 40% of the electricity supply.
- Gas: Cheap to build, but very expensive to operate. Given current
gas prices, on shore wind is cheaper. In future, gas should be used
for peaking units (or for home power generation - where its efficiency
can approach 100%).
- Oil: Similar analysis to gas, but more expensive.
- Wind: On shore can supply competitively, but is space constrained.
Offshore not yet competitive, but the cost curve (ref discussion above
about immaturity) is looking promising.
- Solar: Hugely expensive, but has the most promising cost curve, but
mainly for countries with a lot of sun and where maximum demand
correlates with maximum sun,

So I could see a rosy scenario where the UK electricty mix is 1/3
nuclear, 1/3 wind, 1/3 gas, with most of the gas being micro CHP. And
a high capacity line to Norway, where surplus wind is used to pump
water up mountains.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Turning wind power into hydrogen
    ... hydrogen from wind on a cost-competitive basis with gasoline ... The cost of solar photovoltaic electricity ... larger percentage for electrolysis using wind turbines exclusively. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Research: Wind power pricier, emits more CO2 than thought
    ... maturity of wind power technology. ... Wind is cost competitive with peaking units. ... therefore able to supply very cheap electricity. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Research: Wind power pricier, emits more CO2 than thought
    ... maturity of wind power technology. ... Wind is cost competitive with peaking units. ... therefore able to supply very cheap electricity. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Global Warming >
    ... the United States has added more wind energy to its grid ... the state expects to add 2 gigawatts to its ... expected to each produce 1 gigawatt by late-2007.Wind power generation ... electricity consumption of about 250 American households. ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Summation of Dr Olahs interview on Methanol
    ... the cost will likely be lower. ... full-range battery powered vehicles don't exist ... which is prime wind power land. ... I have plenty of buyers for my electricity ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)