Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power

2019 Saw Over 60 Gigawatts of Wind Power Installed (arstechnica.com) 59

Posted by msmash from the some-good-news dept.
The Global Wind Energy Council, an industry trade organization, released its review of the market in 2019. During the past year, wind power saw its second-largest amount of new installed capacity ever, with over 60GW going in. From a report: But the news going forward is a bit more uncertain, with the report predicting that after years of double-digit growth, the industry would see things tail off into steady-but-unspectacular territory. And that prediction was made before many key markets started dealing with the coronavirus. Wind power is now one of the cheapest options for generating electricity. In many areas of the globe, building and maintaining wind power is cheaper per unit of power than it is to fuel a previously constructed fossil fuel plant. While offshore wind remains more expensive, its prices have dropped dramatically over the last several years, and it is rapidly approaching price parity with fossil fuels.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

2019 Saw Over 60 Gigawatts of Wind Power Installed More

2019 Saw Over 60 Gigawatts of Wind Power Installed

Comments Filter:
  • That's 50 DeLorean trips through time!

  • Renewable Energy is getting Cheap,
    Electic Cars outperform ICE Care, and they are getting cheaper and better every generation.

    Now things are going to get interesting.
    1. Countries and States that once had most of their money via Fossel Fuel collection will see reduced demand, this will make the cost of Fuel cheaper however these once-wealthy countries will be in a cash crunch. Loose their global influence. This usually increases political strife and general global instability until the new normal comes up.

    2.

    • No, a $40K electric care doesn't outperform a ICE that costs half as much, the $20K difference is more than the fuel I'd use in 10 years.

      • the $20K difference is more than the fuel I'd use in 10 years.
        Depends on region/country: in Europe most certainly he fuel price difference makes equal of it.

      • One thing for sure: the drivetrain of an electric car will last far longer than the ICE and with far less maintenance. There are Teslas out there pushing 500,000 miles and going strong. Even Prius owners find themselves routinely ahead of the game. And that's while prices are plunging on batteries, and technology gains are promising that will continue.

        The cases for ICE being the affordable choice over time are dwindling.

      • did you factor in the costs of maintenance, servicing, tuning, brakes, oil, new exhaust, tailpipe pollution hurting asthma suffers, etc in that 10 years or just what came out of the pump?

        • yes, cars don't need much maintenance these days and the electric car will also need its things too like the big kahuna battery replacement (a bell curve thing that some luck out on, others get screwed just like certain ICE components)

          Hurting asthma sufferers? A modern car with catalytic converter doesn't do much of that compared to pollen, coal plants and smokers.

    • to the US. USD is the defacto currency because that's how people buy oil.

      And let's not forget much money in assets are in oil. If that stuff becomes even half as valuable then trillions of dollars of wealth gets wiped out. Sure, it's all on paper, but you're correct that it will be a mess. Those folks aren't going to want their assets devalued, and while they probably can't stop it they're going to try.

      Things could get ugly fast.
  • Compared to the 5800 zillion watts we need. Keep 'em coming!

  • Solar +Wind +Storage needed. And is coming (Score:5, Informative)

    by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Monday March 30, 2020 @03:51PM (#59889748) Journal
    Though wind is cheaper, it is intermittent and it forces utilities to keep gas turbine plants alive. Solar is also very competitive, solar generation curve follows the demand curve, but late evening neck of the "duck curve" forces utilities to keep gas turbine plants alive. But there is good news. Battery storage is becoming seriously viable. The costs are falling and will continue to fall.

    We are not talking about a few minutes or seconds of battery power. Specs like 750 MW x 4hours or 375 MW x 4 hours. The distributed residential batteries in south australia is just 2% complete. 1000 homes out of 50,000 planned. But already it is providing big savings to the utilities

    Levelized cost of solar+wind+storage is falling steadily.

    The cell phone, lap top, tablet market is huge and they are/were willing to pay for more than 500 $ /kWh. They paid for the R&D in the Lithium ion electro chemistries and now the batteries are well below 125$/kWh at cell level and below 150 $kWh at pack level. This is the reason electric cars are becoming viable. It is widely accepted 100 $/kWh pack will break the back of gasoline vehicles. BEV will cost the same as ICEV off the dealer lot, and it will cost much less to maintain. That is where the R&D money is coming from to take the batteries into lower cost. The portable electronics market does not care much for the battery price per kWh now. They want smaller batteries and lighter batteries. They are willing to pay 500 $/kWh for higher power densities. That is providing a constant stream of innovations there.

    As the auto market matures, the economy of scales provided by auto batteries will make the batteries cheap enough for grid level storage for a few hours.

    People who do not look at the batteries at all levels and at all scales, the R&D funding needed to keep the innovations coming make mistakes like betting on hydrogen in automotive sector or nuclear for grid level.

    Future is clearly wind + solar + lithium ion battery storage, fundamentally changing both automobile sector and electric grids.

    • This is the reason electric cars are becoming viable. It is widely accepted 100 $/kWh pack will break the back of gasoline vehicles. BEV will cost the same as ICEV off the dealer lot, and it will cost much less to maintain.

      The problem with BEV is not capital or operating cost, but rather the technological challenges for charging. Charging takes too long, which limits the set of practical use cases, e.g., no cars parked curb-side or at apartments, no long trips (no, 30-minute refueling is not good enough), etc. Battery charging technology needs to improve by an order of magnitude, and even then, the investment for building the required charging infrastructure will be immense. Either gas stations need to be replaced by 5-min

      • If the cars are cheap enough free market will provide a solution. After all gasoline was sold at drug stores before gas stations existed.

        • If the cars are cheap enough free market will provide a solution. After all gasoline was sold at drug stores before gas stations existed.

          I sort of agree. But there is a chicken and egg problem. The cars are already cheap enough for much of the market. I would buy one, but the charging problem is a show-stopper for me, so I bought a plug-in hybrid instead. Because of the charging problem, I have to have a car with greater range than a Tesla once or twice a year, so that means having a gasoline car. If I could go to a charging station for a 5-minute charge, then the problem would be solved at least for local trips. But, who's going to go

          • That is ok. You buy what suits you. If charging time is a show stopper for you, it is, no argument about it.

            But it is *not* a show stopper for many. There are enough people with garages where they can charge their BEVs, willing to spend an hour more on the occassional long distance trips. They will keep the market alive, and pay for developments. Eventually there will be critical mass of users who might make an EV compelling enough for you. Even if that never happens that is fine.

            Mass adoption will begi

            • Mass adoption will begin when BEVs and ICEVs cost the same off the dealer lot.

              I Agree.
              And that happens faster than you might think, as 15 year loans for electric cars become a thing.
              Payments on a $50k, 15 year loan (at 5%) are about the same as payments on a $20k, 6 year loan.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jezwel ( 2451108 )

            I have to have a %vehicle% with %capability not in a BEV%once or twice a year, so that means...

            ..that you rent what you need for those special occasions? That's what I do - hire a truck to move lots of big things, hire a trailer to move a few big things. I have a gasoline powered car right now, but if I could afford a BEV I would.

    • Leveraging renewables as much as possible seems clear assuming it lowers energy cost and environmental impact. That said, you do realize none of the things you mention eliminate the need for keeping gas turbine plants alive? No modern society/economy would rightly accept a risk of just 4 hours of backup power before we're totally screwed and need to wait for the sun to start shining or wind blowing to get back in business. Losing electricity on a widescale basis is not an inconvenience - people will die
      • Four hours is all we really need for daily load balancing. The base load plants that run 24/7 have enough capacity. During the day the demand goes up, mainly due to airconditioning need for homes, factories, offices and retail. As the demand increases, the generation also increases in solar. So they are well balanced. Till about 6 PM. Solar tapers off, but the demand does not taper off till about 8 pm. This is known as the neck of the duck curve [wikipedia.org]. If batteries can provide four hours of juice that is enough.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Until the wind is too slow, too fast.
      Its night time and the solar stops for hours.
      • Oh! My !! God!! What a genius!

        Not a single person knew this. This is a momentous discovery. You need to inform all the people investing, building and developing wind and solar plants of this stupendous oversight.

    • As the auto market matures, the economy of scales provided by auto batteries will make the batteries cheap enough for grid level storage for a few hours.

      Battery storage is pointless until fossil fuel power generation reaches 0% for part of the day (or put another way, generation from renewables and nuclear exceeds 100% at some point during the day). Until you reach that point, using energy storage mechanisms actually increases your energy consumption.

      Say you and your neighbor's homes each consume 10 kW

      • you don't half write a load of bollox about renewables

        "Adding battery storage to your solar panels actually increases fossil fuel consumption by 2 kWh" - in your dreams

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by shilly ( 142940 )

        You have a ridiculous starting point.

        The starting point is not local grid-balancing between neighbours. That's the end-point (along with storage).
        The starting point is: you and your neighbour both use today's grid, whose carbon intensity varies from place to place and time of year, but is undoubtedly higher than the carbon intensity of one of you or your neighbour using solar panels, unless you're buying your power already from a utility that is focused on low carbon power and has the REGOs to prove it.
        Then

      • Would you put money where your mouth is and short renewable sector? Or at least some company with an erratic CEO with twitchy twitter finger who has made many enemies in the media and the SEC? would you, would you, please short Tesla?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Wind is only locally intermittent. Over a wide area it's constant, especially for offshore wind. Check wind speed measurements for the North Sea at turbine height, for example. At no time since records began has the wind stopped blowing.

      Storage is mainly for smoothing to even out short term variations in output.

  • Texas (Score:4, Interesting)

    by J-1000 ( 869558 ) on Monday March 30, 2020 @03:54PM (#59889774)
    I'm in Texas where you have a bunch of websites all selling you the same electricity. It's easy to go 100% wind-powered (whether that's directly or through some system like credits, I don't know), and in fact wind turned out to be the cheapest option for me this time, for my usage level.

    • You might enjoy this video: https://youtu.be/x_IAKNtgvxw [youtu.be]

      GOP mayor in a Texas town gets contract for 100% renewable energy sources for the entire town, cheaper than fossil fuel. He then locks it in with a long contract, so businesses moving there can plan for future energy costs.

      I enjoyed it, anyway... (I'm also in Texas).

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Gives you hope, doesn't it? Even a GOP mayor can be swayed once he sees the economic reality of the situation. Ideology falls to the almighty dollar.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by shilly ( 142940 )

        God I miss the time when it was these kind of Republicans who led their party. Hard-nosed rational business people, instead of swivel-eyed lunatics,

  • But wind turbines maxes out at around 14 m/s wind speed. If the wind is at 7 m/s it only produces 1/8th of the maximum. So in reality 60 GW installed capacity only gives maybe 20 GW as the wind usually is somewhat the wind speed at maximum capacity.
  • Great!!! In 20 years, massive quantities of landfill space will be consumed again... and the net net will be what exactly?
  • Wind Power is fantastic and I hope humans continue to develop and utilize that kind of power.

    The recyclability is a major hurtle though. When those things wear out, we can't effectively recycle them and just have to landfil/bury them. Humans 200 years from now will dig up millions of these things thinking they're cyber dino bones or something.

Slashdot Top Deals

Whoever dies with the most toys wins.

Close