Lies In The Wind

11/21/08 | knowseverything

[knowseverything]

Lies in the Wind

This past election season every politician on both sides of the isle had them in their commercials. Every oil, gas, or major energy company advertises with them in their publications, brochures, and public announcements. They are the answer to our energy problem, the solution to the global climate crisis. I am speaking of wind turbines; the massive structures being erected at break neck speeds across the Midwest and coastal regions.

As an electrical engineer working for a power generation company, I have been naturally curious as to the actual application of this technology, its cost, performance abilities, and overall impact on the industry. Simply put, we are constructing them, how are we going to use them? The answers I have found are not only startling, but down right disturbing when put in the context of consumers being sold something they are not being told the truth about. The following is a 2 part series of reasons wind power is not the answer to our problems, and the corresponding half truths and bold lies being sold to the public on the issue.

Part I… Feasibility

Wind turbines today are being manufactured to provide much more power than those of even 5 years ago. It is not uncommon to hear about 2 megawatt machines being put into service in farm sizes that may be thousands of megawatts. So the average person can look at a 4,000 MW (megawatt) wind farm and comfortably believe this will eliminate the need for say 4 power coal fired power plants of 1,000 MW each, correct? Well, not so fast. First we must understand what this 4,000 MW number means. When wind farms are installed they advertise their size on a total “Max Capacity” number. Meaning this is the amount of power they will generate if the wind is blowing at exactly the right speed, in the right direction, 100% of the time. Studies have shown however that average onshore wind farms will produce about 22% of their max capacity annually. Suddenly we are down to 880 MW. Well, you think, we can still get rid of almost one small coal fired power plant. Wrong again. To explain this we must realize the difference between “base load” and “peaking” power generation. Base load power is the “cheap” power that the majority of your electricity comes from, and the power plant generating it is generally running at close to full output the entire time. (ie. coal, nuclear) Peaking generation plants are called into service only during times when electrical demand is higher than normal. Typically times like afternoons in the summer when everyone’s AC is running the hardest. Most peaking plants are natural gas fired because of their ability to ramp up and down quickly. Keep in mind this is also much more expensive generation than your cheap base load facilities, primarily because of the price of natural gas.

So where does the wind fit in? Due to the nature of the wind itself, it generates rapid ups and downs as far as electrical outputs, sometimes hundreds of times per month. It is because of this characteristic that wind power could NEVER be a substitute for base load power. From an engineering standpoint, these ups and downs must be backed by quick start gas turbines in order to balance the frequency swings on the electrical grid. Simply put, if the wind falls off, and the power is not replaced from somewhere else almost immediately you will experience either a “brown out” or a “black out” if the loss is large enough. Since base load power plants cannot ramp up and down nearly fast enough to match the erratic output of the wind farms, power companies end up running natural gas turbines in a fashion that would compare to you driving your car by going 0-100 as fast as possible, slamming on the brakes, and then repeating. This creates inefficient power, tears up machines (which costs money), and also ……creates CO2 emissions. Aside from having to balance wind with “quick start” peaking power, engineers really have no idea how to accomplish even this if the wind power on the grid is more than just a few percent of the total grid capacity. Earlier this year, Texas had a massive power outage because the wind fell off one day, and they did not have enough “quick start” replacement power to inject into the grid. So best case scenario you will be running gas turbines like a teenager who just swiped the keys to dad’s Corvette, and worst case… your lights will go off. In conclusion, not one pound less coal will be burned because of the wind, and more CO2 will be created to chase it.

Power companies across the country are installing wind turbines at record speeds simply because they are being forced to by laws requiring certain amounts of “renewable energy” by a certain date. Thus they are also building a lot of natural gas fired “peaking” plants.

Knowing T. Boone Pickens didn’t become a billionaire because he was stupid, I couldn’t figure out what he was thinking when he starting pitching his wind/natural gas energy solution. The more I learn about wind generation, the more I’m convinced he’s a financial genius. He’s going to make another billion drilling for and selling natural gas.

Part II .....Cost

In my investigation into the true cost of wind power I started at the residential level. As a staunch advocate of the free market, I was a bit skeptical of the true feasibility of wind power since if we could all install wind turbines, spin our electric meters backwards, and pay back our initial investments after just a few years, wouldn’t we all have one?

After realizing that installation is typically twice as expensive as advertised, and that the “payback” assumes the machine will last for 20 years or more virtually maintenance free, I started to see the catch. These machines are money pits. They break and cost a lot of money to fix unless you happen to be one of the few who owns your own crane.

The situation with commercial wind turbines is not much different with a few additional complications. First of all, they start with an inherent advantage because they are heavily subsidized through federal and state governments. In the northern plains subsidized wind energy costs about 5 cents a kwh to produce. Compare this to the fact that electricity in the same area can be made for 2.5 cents per kwh with coal. So WITH tax incentives and subsidies from the government, wind is already way behind. Adding to the problem is the fact that in order to comply with new standard and renewable energy quotas, power companies have to take the wind power whenever it is available. Study after study has shown that the wind is generally more stable and produces best at night, and other “off-peak” hours when electricity is not worth as much because demand is low. So to make a long story short, power companies are being forced to buy wind power at 5 cents per kwh and sell it at night for 1.5 cents per kwh(or whatever their off peak rate is). They are losing money on the wind. This also does not take into account the capital cost for construction of gas fired peaking plants, their operation, and maintenance costs. The bottom line is that the more wind turbines you see your local utility erecting, the higher your electric bills are going to be. When you see the term “power cost adjustment” on your bill, a major culprit is blowing in the wind.

To risk sounding like a pessimist I must mention that wind proponents do have a solution to fix the cost problem. The answer that is being proposed is a tax on coal. Cap and trade, CO2 emissions restrictions, carbon sequestration laws, etc… These are all phrases that mean coal is about to be taxed to the point, where it is no longer the cheapest solution available. As an engineer this troubles me. We aught to be striving to fix these problems of feasibility and cost, not tax the other guy to the point that suddenly wind becomes competitive.

Conclusion

The biggest problem with the renewable, “green power” industry today is its blatant dishonesty to the public. If a select few want to pay more for a less reliable source of power that would be one thing. However, it is being sold to the masses as a complete and better solution, when that is simply not true. Let’s tell the truth and make it better, after all this country is the world’s birthplace of new ideas and innovation. Leave the lies out of it.

-knowseverything

[crazyhorse691]

The Law of Unintended Consequences

---

LOL. I can’t think of a better example...too bad the progressives pushing sustainable energy don’t take the time to think.

[RC2]

My neighbors have those water heaters and they love them. Problem we have here is we are all electric. That could be good or bad I guess. If you can’t get propane....no hot water. That’s why I was thinking about a diesel generator.

[palmer]

You could get an instant-on electric water heater, then just turn on your 10kW diesel generator when you need to heat some water and turn it off when you are done. Your other power needs might be satisfied with a smallish solar system. Obviously heat would have to use something else, I use wood with propane as backup.

[Balding_Eagle]

Somewhere on my computer is stored a study of IIRC about 30,000 windmills, both over water and on land.

Again, IIRC correctly, the over-water mills produced about 30%+ their maximum stated capacity, the on-land about 29%, slightly higher than the numbers you used.

Freepmail me if you want the study and I’ll try to dig it up.

[RC2]

We use a woodstove about 90% of the time in winter. I only use the house heater to take the chill off if the fire goes out. Since we work out of our home, the fire is going about 24 hours a day.....when winter sets in. I’ve thought about the electric instant hot water but haven’t looked into them yet.