Wind Power Challenges In Pacific Northwest

[wtmusic]

"CENTERVILLE, Klickitat County — Along the ridge-top flanks of the Columbia River, hundreds upon hundreds of wind turbines rise from wheat fields and sagebrush.

On a blustery spring day, these turbines can crank out more than twice the power of the Northwest's sole nuclear power plant. Then, on hot days in the summer, when the winds go still, the output plunges."

Wind power shown in blue, balancing load in red.



<>

"The Northwest wind industry, which currently is able to generate more than 2,700 megawatts of electricity during peak winds, is expected to more than double or triple in size by 2016.

But the explosive growth in wind power isn't based on forecasts of growing regional demand for power.

The expansion is driven by federal incentives that offer generous tax credits or stimulus grants to wind-power producers. In addition, state laws in Washington, Oregon and California require utilities to generate or purchase an increasing amount of their power from renewable resources other than hydro.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011931473_windpower23m.html

[jpak]

1. Looks like they can handle it just fine - crank up the dams, let the power balance

yup!

[Statistical]

2. Except there is no new hydro coming online and already they are hitting limits of what

hydro can balance.

Don't worry though once they ran out of reserve capacity at the hydro plant they will simply back wind up with tons and tons and tons of natural gas.


Natural gas for the wind.

[jpak]

4. nope - with more wind power, less hydro power will be required for future demand

try again

[Statistical]

5. Did you even read the article?

Looks like you didn't as usual.

Wind rah-rah-rah. It is magic.

[kristopher]

8. JPAK is correct and the article (and you) are factually inaccurate

"But the bigger the wind industry grows, the bigger the potential for major gaps between forecasts and outputs."

This is what happens when "the wind industry grows":


The more wind is brought online, the greater the geographic dispersion; the greater the geographic distribution of the wind farms, the more stable the supply becomes.

Full article available for download from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences:
Electric power from offshore wind via synoptic-scale interconnection
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/03/29/0909075107.abstract


Also see:
http://www.olino.org/us/articles/2009/11/26/the-economics-of-nuclear-reactors-renaissance-or-relapse

[FBaggins]

9. Still haven't read what you cite, eh?

You just look foolish until you do.

Let me know if you need any of the big words explained.

[kristopher]

10. ROFLMAO

Standard nonresponsive reply from the Church of Uranus.

[FBaggins]

11. It was plenty "responsive"... but I don't expect you to be able to tell...

...nor do I expect that it would make a difference.

I swear it could go like this.

Paper posted by kristopher: "the sky is blue"
FBaggins: "the sky is blue"
kristopher: "Everything you just said was wrong and the paper I posted proves it!"

Feel free to roflyao... but the joke is on you.

Once again. Try reading what you post.

[kristopher]

12. The only thing you post is nonsense

JPAK is correct and the article (and you) are factually inaccurate.

From the OP article, "But the bigger the wind industry grows, the bigger the potential for major gaps between forecasts and outputs."

Actually this is what happens when "the wind industry grows":


The more wind is brought online, the greater the geographic dispersion; the greater the geographic distribution of the wind farms, the more stable the supply becomes. Full article available for download from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences:
Electric power from offshore wind via synoptic-scale interconnection
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/03/29/0909075107.abstract


Also see:
http://www.olino.org/us/articles/2009/11/26/the-economics-of-nuclear-reactors-renaissance-or-relapse

[FBaggins]

13. Nope. Both articles agree with what I've said.

It's you that is left out in the dark.

As wind power becomes a higher proportion of all generation, it will become more difficult for electric system operators to effectively integrate additional fluctuating power output.

The more wind is brought online, the greater the geographic dispersion; the greater the geographic distribution of the wind farms, the more stable the supply becomes.

"More" stable, sure. But not nearly stable enough (as the graphic you constantly spam clearly proves) and "stable" at a fraction of rated output WELL below other alternatives.

[kristopher]

14. Has it ever occurred to you

...that you really just aren't very bright?

[FBaggins]

15. So says the guy...

...who disagrees with his own sources yet continually claims they support his BS?

Yeah... I'm sure that's something to cause me pause. :rofl:


You don't even understand what those two graphs mean, do you?

You're actually going to agree with jpak's statement that it's HYDRO that will get cut back as wind power increased? If so... what's the freeking point!?!?

[AtheistCrusader]

16. 0 multiplied by 100,000,000,000,000 is still 0.

When the wind cuts completely, the turbines aren't turning. That can cover MASSIVE areas around here. You want to build quadruple or more the capacity in geographically disparate areas of the state for one stupid power source? What an idea.

We can better leverage the hydro we have, we can expand it somewhat, and we have lots of geothermal power just waiting to be tapped. Wind isn't awful per se, but it's not great around here. The sites in the state where I can think it would be excellent are pretty far from populated areas.

Go with what works. Wind really doesn't here. Most of our prototype plants that I drive past, all suffered the same sort of failures highlighted here. I do wonder if they will sell salvage rights though. The vertical axis turbines look like I could do something with them. Maybe connect them to a water wheel :D

Edit: now there are OTHER 'wind' power systems that might work in those specific conditions, like thermal updraft towers, which can be augmented by solar energy, which would happen to be present in those same 'wind doldrum' conditions.

[FBaggins]

7. Why on earth would anyone do that?

Unless you've been in a drought for a VERY long period of time, it makes no sense at all to do that.

You need to balance wind with forms of generation that actually save money (fuel costs) when you don't need them.

You've made a few boneheaded statements in the past jpak... but this one takes the cake.

[kristopher]

3. Another nukenut promoting the single power plant fallacy

Pretending the grid is a single power plant instead of a combination of a large number of different plants with different generating profiles. Here is what happens when multiple wind farms are connected. The OP deliberately ignores other potential renewable inputs such as solar, wave, current, tidal, stored energy (like hydro), geothermal or biofuel powered generators.


Kempton Atlantic Grid

Open Access paper available from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/03/29/0909075107.abstract



http://www.olino.org/us/articles/2009/11/26/the-economics-of-nuclear-reactors-renaissance-or-relapse

[NNadir]

6. Another oblivious anti-nuke trying to pass soothsaying off as reality.

Who gives a fuck what a bunch of mindless idiots define in their stupid imaginations as "negative consumer."

The fucking consumers in the anti-nuke crowd, car CULTists all, seem not to care for anything but imperiously reifying their ignorance anti-science based attitudes as "facts."

There is NOT ONE anti-nuke here who would recognize a fact if it bit them in the ass.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. The conclusion is ok I guess, but the chart is all kinds of (unprintable) up

Wind is riskier than Geothermal? Gas has the same social impact as hydro? Cogen feeds directly off Nuclear, or I guess if you have a coal plant in your city, coal. Get outta here

He just pulled these numbers out of his ass to make a pretty chart. He doesn't explain how he arrived at any of this shit

Oh that's just fantastic isn't it, he recycles that chart on page 9 and 64, and explains not one iota of how he weighted ANY of it. This whole article might as well be mental masturbation, I do hope it did the trick for him.

Edit: CALCULATED BY AUTHOR yes wonderful, that's great, fantastic. He's a fucking idiot.

[FBaggins]

18. "He just pulled these numbers out of his ass to make a pretty chart"

Ahh.... perhaps. But that might as well make it catnip for kristopher.

As long as the results are what he wants them to be, the science behind the image is irrelevant (but presumed to be beyond reproach).