2019 Saw Over 60 Gigawatts of Wind Power Installed (arstechnica.com) 59
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.
Wow! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's 50 DeLorean trips through time!
Doc, what the hell is a jigawatt?!?
Re: (Score:2)
Doc, what the hell is a jigawatt?!?
It's about 60 scruple-watts, or 15 teaspoon-watts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US and China leading the world (Score:5, Informative)
That's because wind (and solar) has a much lower capacity factor [wikipedia.org] than fossil fuel and nuclear plants. Capacity factor is what percentage of production capacity is actually realized, and results in generated electricity over the span of a year.
Most of our electricity still comes from fossil fuel plants, and the ratio in capacity factor between wind and fossil fuel plants is (0.22 / 0.5) = 0.44. So wind accounting for a 1% increase in production capacity, but only a 0.5% increase in generation makes perfect sense. That's exactly the ratio you'd expect due to capacity factor.
Wind capacity factor driven by the cube law (Score:5, Informative)
To expand on what you said, it may be useful to mention WHY physics limits the capacity factor of wind power. This is the biggest problem with wind. (It is a good source of power at some times and places).
Imagine you're designing a bicycle for a 45 pound kid.
You're going to use small, lightweight components appropriate for the kid's strength and weight. Contrast that with how you'd build it a bike for a 1,000 monster to ride. It would have much beefier, stronger, heavier components. The little kid couldn't ride a bike made for a 1,000 pound, 18' tall monster of a man. If the 1,000 guy tried to ride the kid's bike, his weight would probably bend it and destroy it. A normal adult bike wouldn't work for either of them.
The power from wind is proportional to the CUBE of the wind speed. Which means a 50 mph wind, which the turbine needs to withstand, is 125 times as powerful as a 10 mph wind. A turbine built beefy enough to survive a severe thunderstorm may not even turn at all in a 10 mph wind. If it does turn, it won't be producing any significant power after overcoming internal friction.
Wind turbines produce good power when the wind speed is in the sweet spot.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You are aware the wind velocity at the moment and the location are two different things, right? Sometimes there is a moderate breeze at your house, sometimes there is a severe storm, most of the time there is no wimd to speak of. At the same location.
You can choose a location, yeah ... You can choose the color too.
You can't choose how fast the wind is blowing right now, and with the cube power law, that means you can't choose even generally if the wind is very powerful or nearly non-existent.
Re: (Score:2)
I think because we're at the beginning of wind and solar's technological development we're going to be solving challenges as we meet them. As opposed to coal and nuclear being about as technologically developed as they're going to get. Perhaps that will change with material technology advances, but so will everything.
For wind, technological developments can occur in parallel and reuse many components such as bases and towers. We have much the same situation with PV solar because they come in units that
Re: (Score:3)
Capacity factor by itself is not a useful metric, you have to combine it with cost at the very least.
In the UK wind is so much cheaper than nuclear that even with the capacity factor and some smoothing included it's overall cheaper per Wh of energy produced. That's not the only benefit though, it also produces less CO2 (British nuclear plants are not particularly great for emissions), doesn't produce hazardous waste and creates more jobs.
Most importantly though it's much, much easier to build (planning perm
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
nonsense, they can be cut down, the towers recycled and the blades are just inert material that can be buried. fiberglass same as rock for th environment.
Re:What a waste - literally (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/oct/25/chain-email/no-there-arent-14000-abandoned-wind-turbines-litte/
Re:What a waste - literally (Score:5, Interesting)
An Australian nutjob's website - "Rite-ON! Is committed to fighting for common sense Australian values so our children can grow up in a free and democratic society." - copying an article on an American nutjob's blog - "https://americanelephant.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/14000-abandoned-wind-turbines-litter-the-united-states/" - neither of which provided sources.
Rather than lending credibility to your argument, it makes your position weak.
Re: (Score:2)
That's hundreds of rusting discarded husks polluting landscape visuals in 10-20 years.
All this has happened before [riteon.org.au], and all this will happen again...
source:American Elephants [wordpress.com] published in 2013 with no information on where or how it got its source data.
Please stop spreading bullshit.
Renewable Energy is Cheap (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
The crazy thing is what it's going to do (Score:2)
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.
Zillions and zillions (Score:2)
Solar +Wind +Storage needed. And is coming (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot deal with a 30 minute charge twice a year, but you can deal with numerous 5-minute fillups throughout the year.
Yes, because I sometimes can't can't predict when the 30-minute charges will happen. My wife calls me up at the last moment on my way home and tells me to go somewhere. Or dinner plans change. Or schools close early. Or a cold spell coupled with a traffic jam saps my range. With a BEV today, I have to constantly think about where I might need to go and when I would have to charge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No problem, you got guaranteed 300 miles in the morning even if the governor orders evacuation at 3 AM. ...
Traffic jams are no problems for BEV. The motor consumes 0 watts when stopped.
Unless you have cold weather. My car battery sometimes only gets 75% of the full charge in cold weather since I charge outside, and that's just California. Electric cars are more efficient than gas car at almost everything with the big exception of heating the car's interior. In a traffic jam, the idling gas car gives out "free" heat, while the electric car is draining the battery. It's not uncommon for me to get half of the expected range in wintertime.
What does this mean? Well, I have reduced range i
Re: (Score:2)
If you dont want to buy BEV, that is your call, told you several posts ago. There are others who BEV compelling and the market is big enough for us. We dont need you. I dont have to convince you. You dont have to buy BEV ok?
BTW, let us say you are tea drinker. Do you make it a point to buttonhole coffee drinkers and feel the need to explain coffee is not your cup of tea?
Re: (Score:2)
So old Leaf with best possible range of 125 miles is same as Tesla with worst possible range of 150?
If you dont want to buy BEV, that is your call, told you several posts ago. There are others who BEV compelling and the market is big enough for us. We dont need you. I dont have to convince you. You dont have to buy BEV ok?
BTW, let us say you are tea drinker. Do you make it a point to buttonhole coffee drinkers and feel the need to explain coffee is not your cup of tea?
I think we care equally about each other's opinions. This forum is not a peep show for one-on-one conversations. Rather, there are pros and cons for different car technologies that are relevant on different levels to different people. That's all fine and good. I personally don't claim that BEVs are impractical. Rather, I point out that the current market is far from being dominated by BEVs and that the main reason is not capital cost. So, what are those reasons? Whether my ideas apply to me personall
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Its night time and the solar stops for hours.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Storage is pointless until fossil fuels reach 0% (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
"Adding battery storage to your solar panels actually increases fossil fuel consumption by 2 kWh" - in your dreams
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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)
Re: (Score:3)
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)
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)
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,
60GW at maximum (Score:1)
I'll invest in landfill space (Score:2)
Sadly Turbine Blades Effectively Not Recyclable (Score:2)
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.