There was a huge study done a year or two ago on capacity which covered thousands of wind generators around the world, both land and water based.
The land based wind sets averaged about 29% output (nameplate vs actual) and the sea based a little over 31 or 32%. That included all downtime, normal maintenance, breakdowns, no wind, and anything else that stopped them.
I'm not a big proponent of wind, but it is interesting to see how it is growing.
I'm also opposed to any subsidies (other than a tax break, which isn't a subsidy, just a relief of governmental punishment for financial success) so that the true financial appeal can show itself.
My concern is reliability. No one can count on the wind blowing so other units must be on line ready to pick up load when the wind stops. Yes those units on line have to be burning expensive fuel at a uneconomic level to be ready to pick up the load. So we end up spending money to back up a source that may or not be there in the next minute.
I like it as a supplemental energy source, each dollar of energy that it generates is $.50 that doesn't go to the middle east. For energy production, you just can't beat fossil fuel and nuclear. If Al Moron's farce of a movie has any positive effect, I hope it is the rebirth of nuclear power production in the USA, not for the "carbon neutral" crap but to keep our dollars away from the muzzies.
"I'm also opposed to any subsidies (other than a tax break, which isn't a subsidy, just a relief of governmental punishment for financial success) so that the true financial appeal can show itself."
Well said.