Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: newgeezer

It’s a US Govt study for crying out loud.

If they are comparing, say a coal plant at 100% vs. a wind plant at 100% they can get these numbers.

But a coal plant can generate 90% of the time, a wind plant perhaps 30% of the time as it is not consistently windy. So the capital cost has to be paid off at a rate 3x higher than the coal plant.

Time is money. It takes three years to generate the equivalent megawatt hours as the coal plant. Factor that into the cost and wind becomes a joke.


12 posted on 07/07/2015 1:03:36 PM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: cicero2k

Denmark now gets 18% of its energy from wind. But it’s carbon output has increased by 36%. The unintended consequence is running coal plants in their inherantly dirty spin up cycle every morning. (Wind generates mostly at night)


14 posted on 07/07/2015 1:11:45 PM PDT by D Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: cicero2k

Wind generates 17% to 23% capacity factor. Only 1/5 nameplate rating worldwide - and that’s in the “good areas” of optimal wind speeds and wind availability.


28 posted on 07/07/2015 3:40:15 PM PDT by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson