Money quote!
Posted on 09/02/2006 1:17:08 PM PDT by saganite
CALIFORNIA may be a leader in curbing greenhouse gases and creating solar power, but Texas hasbreezed past the Golden State as the nation's top producer of wind power.
The Lone Star State, better known for its oil derricks and natural gas, now has a capacity of 2,370 wind-generated megawatts, enough to power 600,000 average-sized homes a year, according to a report released by the American Wind Energy Association.
California, the nation's wind energy leader since 1981, has 2,323 wind-generated megawatts, a mere 47 megawatts less than Texas.
California industry observers shrugged off the development, describing it as a relatively small difference and citing the state's overall record — nearly 11 percent of its electricity was generated by renewable forms of power in 2005 — as evidence of its good standing in conservation matters.
The state's peak capacity at present, counting all forms of power generation, is about 50,000 megawatts. One megawatt generally equals roughly enough electricity for 750 average California homes, depending on demand.
"I applaud Texas. I think it's greatthey are taking advantage of their wind resources," said Susanne Garfield of the California Energy Commission. "California has been the leader and will probably move forward.
"It's a great contest to be in, vying to surpass each others' renewable energy and continuing to leapfrog each other," Garfield said. "It's just 50 megawatts. That's not a big jump."
California has four main wind resource areas: Altamont Pass, where some concerns have arisen over birds getting caught in wind farm turbines; Tehachapi Pass; San Gorgonio Pass; and a new, rapidly growing wind resources area near Rio Vista in Solano County, said Case van Dam, a professor at the University of California, Davis.
The latter is an "up and coming" area that has turbine blades the length of a football field, Garfield said. She believes that new technology and slower-turning turbines that pose less danger to birds could help California catch up with Texas.
Wind energy plants use turbines to generate electricity. Such plants generate no emissions, unlike fossil fuel power plants. Coal-fired plants emit tons of pollutants and greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury.
Texas has been creeping up on California for a number of years, and taking the top spot was "bound to happen," said van Dam, who is also director of the California Wind Energy Collaborative.
"First of all, Texas has better wind resources," van Dam said. "Secondly, it is easier to do business and get permits for wind turbines in Texas, and there is plentiful land there."
California state law requires that by 2017 its investor-owned utilities must get 20 percent of their electric energy from renewable energy sources such as hydro, wind, solar, biomass and geothermal energy, van Dam said.
In the last two weeks, California lawmakers have passed major legislation affecting alternative energy.
Just this week, they passed the first bill in the United States to cap greenhouse gas emissions. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly supported the bill and has said he plans to sign it.
On Aug. 21, Schwarzenegger signed a cornerstone piece of his Million Solar Roofs initiative. The initiative's goal is to stimulate construction of one million solar roofs, both business and residential, in California by 2018.
The directive means such practices will continue to grow, van Dam said.
"Right now, California is lagging a little bit, but in the long run installed capacity for wind energy will pick up," the professor said.
At least one entity from the private sector agreed.
"With technology constantly improving and state requirements for utilities to purchase 20 percent of their power from renewable energy, the future remains bright for wind power in the Golden State," said Florida Power and Light, which claims to be the state's leading producer of wind energy.
Tx Dove season opened 91-06.
Wow! I knew things were bigger in Texas but I didn't know they had more months in the year than the rest of us! LOL
The only location. Sure. Spoken like a Stalinist. Here on FR.
Unless of course the Piper Cub that crashed into one had the FAA require obstacle lighting to be installed on them after the fact.
Hit a subject I am very much on. My favorite County Commissioner here in Texas wants wind farms here, detailed me to do research.
Long ago, I lived in N.C. saw an early farm go up in appropriately named Blowing Rock. Slice and dice windmills, very noisey, shut down over commplaints of all sorts.
The new models, two primary types are 1.5 megawatt per. Cvenger, a football field is only a slight exaggeration, blades are 120', flex on the last 20'. Unlike earlier models, these turn at a steady rate regardless of wind speed, slightly over one rev per second, I drive by them once a week, I have stopped and timed them. They need only 6 MPH to start, shut down at about 40 MPH, turn at the same speed regardless. Above 40 the vanes feather out and lock down, too much stress on the reduction gearing.
It would take a remarkably stupid bird to commit suicide on this stately turning blade. In the year I have been driving this route, I have seen the number of windmills more than double, literally more going up every day.
As to NIMBY, I have stood at the base of these big rascals, they do make an audible noise, but nothing like the "whoop whoop" that closed down Blowing Rock. And saganite, "oil derricks that used to dot West Texas"; I service 300+ wells a month, at $70 a Bbl, the pumpjacks are going strong.
Koblenz, the windfarm south of Abilene is hardly middle of a desert. It is on the south face of a ridge that really runs from Ablene to Pecos, very scenic terrain.
NoBlueStates, we should be so lucky as to see these mills take out grackles. Nuisance birds, it is said that all God's creatures have a purpose, far as I can tell the purpose of a grackle is to provide me with target practice.
I have spoken, off record, with people in the industry. They admit, this energy alternative lives or dies on a two cent per KWH subsidy (tax incentive, all same, nevermind), even with oil at $70. The question then becomes, are we willing to pay a quality of life excise for wind energy?
Finally, on nukes, I worked concrete crew at the last commercial nuclear plant uilt in America, Shearon Harris in N.C. Big fan of nuclear power. One of the things I helped build was a spent rod containment capable of holding 150% of the spent rods over the projected life of the reactors. Screw Yucca Mt. we need to recycle spent fuel, not bury it.
Hope this helps, wind is worth going after, but down to the nut-cuttin', if every promising wind site in America were developed, and every ear of corn turned into ethanol, and every acre of suitable ground paved in solar cells, all that might amount to 18-20% of energy needs. Short term, open ANWAR, long term, build nukes, fast as we can build them.
I promise you, domestic oilfield is doing all it can, out of greed if not patriotism. Everybody I know in oilfield now is doing 60/70 hour weeks. Money is nice, be nice to have a life. Hay while the sun shines. Bumper sticker from the 80's; "Please God, give us one more oil boom, we promise not to pi** it away".
Hell, in West Texas, they ARE scenery.
There's a good article here on the West Texas oil boom going on in the Permian basin now.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/business/stories/MYSA082606.01A.oilboom.305aeac.html
Money quote!
Interesting you pick a story from Big Lake. My route goes through there four times a month. A freind of mine is working out of there, absolutely no rentals or even buys available, he is living in an RV he pays outrageous rent on space for.
Frantic doesn't do it justice. Stop to fuel up at 4:00 AM, there is a headhunter there offering a dollar or two more to jump companies, and that's before he asks what you are making now.
By the way, of side interest, Big Lake is named for a playa south of town. This is essentially a scoop in the ground with no regular riverine or spring fed source. When it rains, about once a decade, it fills up, then dries out over time. Not far west of Big Lake is the Santa Rita site of the first "gusher" in Texas. Those fields are "mature" but still very productive.
Another of my leases is the Cree/Sykes east of Winters. Last year they had a real live gusher, blew out and blackened all the brush within about 300 yards. Took them three days to find an old hand who had dealt with such a phenomenom to help shut it down. That lease has gone from two desultory wells to ten, and punching holes as fast as they can.
Good info. It's nice to know West Texas is booming again. I guess Odessa and Midland are growing like weeds again.
I think they would look better painted camo that matches the local terrain.
But the fact that every Kilowatt is made in the USA is certainly a selling point.
Kill a greckle for me. I want to shoot them but being in a subdivision I am slow let any sort of bullet leave the yard.
However, my dachshund did kill 3 this summer.
Im glad most of them have finaly migrated to mexico or wherever they go.
Great post you made...fun to read and insightful.
We are having a natural gas boom here in the FW area from the barnett shale, I can see a drilling rig when I walk out my front door.
A couple of my nephews are making good money working them.
I dream of going back in time and buying land with minerals on my childhood stomping grounds with the money I partied away in the 80s. lol
Good to read your report. I'm originally from the caprock area and see nothing wrong with petroleum (oil/gas). I agree, wind has some good potential, but for a niche 'alternate power' industry, I still think a large solar power space station in geosynchronous orbit, beaming power by microwave to an off shore receiving facility then transmitting electrical power ashore to the grid is the smartest thing going.
Next up would be continuance of hydroelectric, along with Nuclear power. Politics bastardized Nuclear power so badly, that even with well designed plants and all well engineered facets involved, IMHO, there are just too many greedy bastards out there who would find some way to screw it up, and in part fostered by the political hype against nuclear power for so many years. IMHO, they've created a self-fulfilling prophecy that will attract nutballs to try to find a way to screw up the works.
IMHO, the same environmental wackos who fail miserably at even sophomoric level science, but are elevated to national league power structures, have sought to get their mits into every portion of the power industry and oil/gas. IMHO, they will never satiate themselves with power and control, but will simply squander our resources on their megamaniacal games.
Every time I attempt to research the 'pollutants' they regulate, I expect to find some decent science with at least some partial differential equations in their argumentation and at least over ten chemical reactions to justify their positions. Instead, I'm challenged to find anything in the literature that might be expected of an inner city junior college attendee taking a course in Algebra for the fifth time. (I could have referenced a Berkeley graduate level knowledge, but I felt more gracious with the junior college hyperbole.)
As to the charming grackle (and there are at least two major species) bullet be damned, a .410 is ideal and not that noisey. Neighbors closer than that? Try a .22 short with ratshot. Effective range of maybe 15 feet, but doesn't make squat for noise. I took one out with a wrist-rocket slingshot, 00 buckshot ammo.
BTTT
Check out the windmill carnage here (toppled windmills and bird carcasses)
Horrors of wind power
http://www.matsuvalleynews.com/wind1.html
Wind farm 'hits eagle numbers'
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5108666.stm
Wind farm turbine blades are killing a key population of Europe's largest bird of prey, UK wildlife campaigners warn.
Wind turbines taking toll on birds of prey
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm
Group's lawsuit over bird deaths gets green light
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1346697/posts
Nuclear vs. Wind, Part I
http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2006/03/nuclear-vs-wind-part-i.html
Wind Farms Provide Negligible Useful Electricity - White Paper
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20060331_wind.pdf
SUMMARY: wind farms for power generation can only provide negligible electricity to grid supply systems, make no significant reduction in pollution, cause significant environmental damage, increase the costs of electricity and create risks of power failures
Only reason these poodle power devices are being erected is stupid politicians succumbing to greenie pressure and an ill informed electorate. Windmills are feel good devices that will topple in hurricanes, require baseload (fossil and nuclear backups) and visually pollute large sections of beautiful landscape due to their low energy density per sq mile compared to fossil and nuke.
Thanks barkeep for the thoughtful post and observations.
I would point out that at one rev per sec the wingtip speed of a 120' radius blade is over 500 mph. I suspect the blades take more than a second, but even at two revs per second the speed is likely fast enough to swat lots of birds.
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.