NewEnergyNews: TODAY’S STUDY: THE FACTS ABOUT WIND

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

Every day is Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-WHERE NEW ENERGY NEEDS TO BE
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-KUWAIT’S POSSIBLE SOLAR
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-WHAT INDIA WIND NEEDS
  • -------------------

    GET THE DAILY HEADLINES EMAIL: CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS OR SEND YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    THE DAY BEFORE

  • TTTA Thursday- HOW CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL WORKS
  • TTTA Thursday-HOW WOMEN MAKE A DIFFERENCE
  • TTTA Thursday-POLITICS AND THE EPA
  • TTTA Thursday-THE ENORMOUS LED OPPORTUNITY
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

  • TODAY’S STUDY: THE NEW INTELLIGENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY
  • QUICK NEWS, May 15: MINNESOTA’S SOLAR AMBITIONS IN CONTEXT; RHODE ISLAND’S FIGHT OVER OCEAN WIND; VC MONEY FOR SMART GRID STEADY

    THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • TODAY’S STUDY: HOW OIL MARKETS ARE MANIPULATED
  • QUICK NEWS, May 14: HUGE BUFFETT WIND BUY IN IOWA; THE VALUE OF ARIZONA’S SUN; MINNESOTA LOVES WIND
  • AND THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • TODAY’S STUDY: THE VALUE OF SOLAR WITH STORAGE
  • QUICK NEWS, May 13: HOW BIG OIL USES REPUBLICANS; WIND SAVES MONEY FOR RATEPAYERS – STUDY; BRIGHTSOURCE EXEC TALKS SOLAR TOWER TECH & BIZ
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

  • Weekend Video: Senator Blasts Senator For Using Religion To Deny Climate Change
  • Weekend Video: The Remarkable Wind In Scotland
  • Weekend Video: The Sci Show Does Solar
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Anne B. Butterfield of Daily Camera and Huffington Post, is a biweekly contributor to NewEnergyNews

  • Lies, damned lies and politicians (October 8, 2012) by Anne Butterfield (Boulder Daily Camera via NewEnergyNews)

    From the sparring at the first presidential debate, it's pretty sure that energy has become a divisive as well as a competitive issue. Both President Obama and Governor Romney want to be the triumphal producer of energy.

    However Romney likes to smear climate change concerns and clean energy investments, as if all of them go like Solyndra, where a half a billion in loan guarantees went down with the company, as he crowed that 50 percent of clean energy investments supported by the stimulus bill had gone belly up. This was dubbed the "lie of the night" by Michael Grunwald, author of a book about the stimulus bill, citing that maybe one percent of government backed clean energy ventures failed.

    Try getting that rate of safety in your investing. According to a new poll by Hart for the solar industry, voters seem to know that loan guarantees are a steadfast service of government and highly safe, as the Solyndra debacle was deemed unimportant by respondents. Ninety-two percent of registered voters found it important that solar be more widespread, with 70 percent believing that the federal government should be doing more to promote it with incentives (with 71 percent of swing voters feeling this way).

    And, sigh, with tens of thousands of wind power jobs on the chopping block already, Mitt Romney opposes the renewal of the Production Tax Credit. This, even as red states need it renewed, putting him in the dog house with GOP politicians such as Senator Chuck Grassely of Iowa whose state produces 20 percent of its power from wind, and Governor Brownback of Kansas who has made vigorous pleas for the extension of the credit, due to expire this at the end of this year.

    Didn't Romney get the memo? Republican governors are making hay with clean energy such as Haley Barbour and Chris Christie. To Mississippi, Barbour brought four solar sector firms to Mississippi along with two in biofuels plus a clean tech car venture with China. Christie made New Jersey a leading solar market in the nation, this year contending with California for first place.

    But Romney and other high priests of the GOP act as though the only real energy is the type that can be burned, and somehow, Obama has nibbled at this hemlock by constantly touting his success with fracking and his openness to the XL pipeline.

    A truly strange specter is that pipeline; it lets our heartland be used as a byway for tar sands products (which sink rather than float when spilled), so they can go straight to international markets. We get the downsides and none of the upsides -- even as the pipeline could increase gasoline prices in the Midwest, which would lose its existing access to tar sands products.

    One plausible upside of the pipeline being routed through the United States (where it might be built quickly, as would not happen in the alternative route through western Canada) is that it could strengthen the hand of President Obama in his suite of sanctions against Iran, including a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil. Our recent frack-mania allows our nation to resume oil production levels not seen for 15 years and thus strengthens our hand. Three weeks ago Iran admitted having problems selling oil due to U.S. and European sanctions; now the nation's currency is in free fall.

    One certainly hopes that tar sands will thrive mightily as a "psy-ops" against Iran and not as a chemical weapon against our climate, as Dr. James Hansen has sternly warned.

    Never bounded by his prior convictions about the climate, Romney crows that he would authorize the pipeline on day one and build it himself if need be (as if he in his wingtips could "John Wayne" his way around an oil field). It's all such a sham he-man rodeo.

    And no one mentioned the climate -- in spite of hundreds of thousands of petition signatures demanding the topic. Neither candidate pushed clean energy as the vote winner that poll after poll have shown it to be. Authors for DBL Investors in their study of green energy exclaim, "We all need to understand that green jobs are not the idle dreaming of a small group of partisan activists and insiders, but a source of livelihood for millions, literally in all parts of the country." The light shines in the darkness but the darkness of our politics has not understood it.

    Author's note: Want to support my work? Please "fan" me at Huffpost Denver, here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-butterfield). Thanks.

    -------------------

    Anne's previous NewEnergyNews columns:

  • Lies, damned lies and politicians (October 8, 2012)
  • Colorado's Elegant Solution to Fracking (April 23, 2012)
  • Shale Gas: From Geologic Bubble to Economic Bubble (March 15, 2012)
  • Taken for granted no more (February 5, 2012)
  • The Republican clown car circus (January 6, 2012)
  • Twenty-Somethings of Colorado With Skin in the Game (November 22, 2011)
  • Occupy, Xcel, and the Mother of All Cliffs (October 31, 2011)
  • Boulder Can Own Its Power With Distributed Generation (June 7, 2011)
  • The Plunging Cost of Renewables and Boulder's Energy Future (April 19, 2011)
  • Paddling Down the River Denial (January 12, 2011)
  • The Fox (News) That Jumped the Shark (December 16, 2010)
  • Click here for an archive of Butterfield columns

    -------------------

    Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    Your intrepid reporter

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • Tuesday, September 04, 2012

    TODAY’S STUDY: THE FACTS ABOUT WIND

    Beyond The Bluster; Why Wind Power Is An Effective Technology

    Reg Platt, Oscar Fitch-Roy, Paul Gardner, August 2012 (Institute for Public Policy Research via GLGH)

    Foreword -- Getting ‘Beyond The Bluster’ On Wind Power

    The British Isles sit at Europe’s windy Atlantic fringe. As a result of its exposed location, the UK has the greatest potential for wind power of any European country, both onshore and offshore (DECC 2012a). This resource, when combined with the UK’s engineering heritage and the right market and policy framework, could be a source of significant economic opportunities for the UK. However, whether or not Britain should pursue an ambitious wind power strategy is hotly contested.

    In February 2012 a group of more than 100 MPs sent a letter to David Cameron arguing for a cut in government support for onshore wind power. Many of these MPs are based in rural constituencies where onshore wind developments may be sited. Wind farm developments are sometimes strongly opposed by people in local areas and it is right that their views are properly considered in debates about how we generate electricity. At the same time wider public opinion, which consistently and strongly supports wind power, should also be considered (see for example DECC 2012a). Similarly, with households’ budgets under pressure and energy bills at high levels, it is right that the costs of government support for wind power and other low-carbon technologies are scrutinised.

    However, it is important to recognise that recent increases in energy bills are far less the result of subsidies for renewable power than they are due to rises in the wholesale cost of gas. From 2004 to 2010, government support for renewables added £30 to the average energy bill while rises in the wholesale cost of gas added £290 (CCC 2011a).

    Despite these legitimate concerns about local impact and cost, much opposition to wind power appears to be based on the belief that it is an inef fective technology. For example, in the letter sent to David Cameron, the technology was described as ‘inefficient’ and less reliable than other energy sources. This claim is untrue and it is important to get ‘beyond the bluster’ in assessing the effectiveness of wind power.

    IPPR has worked with GL Garrad Hassan, a leading renewable energy consultancy, to produce this report, and the findings have been reviewed by a leading academic. The report addresses two commonly held misconceptions around two important, often misunderstood, questions:

    - Is wind power an effective way of reducing carbon emissions?

    - Is wind power a secure and reliable source of energy for the UK?

    This report shows unequivocally that wind power can significantly reduce carbon emissions, is reliable, poses no threat to energy security, and is technically capable of providing a significant proportion of the UK’s electricity supply with minimal impact on the existing operation of the grid. Claims to the contrary are not supported by the evidence.

    Wind power and energy policy

    The government is committed to securing Britain’s energy supply, keeping consumers’ energy bills as low as possible, and reducing carbon emissions in line with its legal commitments. As part of this process, the government has pledged to produce 15 percent of the country’s energy and 30 percent of the country’s electricity from renewable sources by 2020. Wind power has a vital role to play in meeting these objectives.

    Onshore wind is one of the most cost-ef fective of the low-carbon technologies and, with continuing government support, the average wind farm globally may produce power at costs that compete with fossil fuels as soon as 2016 (BNEF 2011). This means that it is an important technology for keeping down the costs of reducing emissions and meeting the 2020 renewable target. A low ambition for onshore wind would mean a greater amount of generation from other, more expensive, technologies and, therefore, higher electricity bills.

    Offshore wind is more expensive than onshore wind but the cost is expected to come down rapidly (DECC 2012c). It is capable of providing huge amounts of low-carbon electricity for the UK (potentially 45 percent of the UK’ s total electricity needs in 2030 (CCC 2011b)) and can make a major contribution to the 2020 renewables target. It could also generate significant benefits for the economy, with the Carbon Trust estimating it could contribute £3–10 billion annually between 2010 and 2050 (Carbon Trust 2011).

    The energy minister, Charles Hendry, has described offshore wind as ‘an industry of strategic national importance’ for the UK.

    In light of these important and positive potential outcomes for the UK, wind power should be the subject of a balanced debate based on accurate evidence. False claims that influence policy outcomes and result in a low ambition for the technology could sacrifice important opportunities for the British economy. Inconsistent support from government will increase the riskiness with which businesses regard investment opportunities and increase their cost of capital. This will ultimately mean higher energy bills for consumers and businesses.

    The government’s recent approach to wind power is worrying. Although a decision has now been reached to reduce financial support for onshore wind by the anticipated amount of 10 per cent, rather than 25 per cent as HM T reasury had preferred, the postponement of the announcement and the decision to almost immediately conduct a further review of this support level has created widespread concerns in the industry.

    It is entirely proper that subsidies for wind power are not overly generous and that local concerns are taken into account through the planning process with opportunities for local residents to share in the dividends of local development. But an ad hoc approach to policymaking based on political whims is not the right approach. The government should only alter support levels for wind power, and any other low-carbon technology, on the basis of evidence that has been published and consulted on in a timely fashion with industry.

    The transition to a secure, affordable and low-carbon energy system will be extremely challenging and an important subject of debate for years to come. This report does not attempt to provide all of the answers. Nor does it aim to bring an end to the debates on wind power. Instead, we hope to show that of the many challenging issues that must be resolved, the area of wind power technology is one of the least troubling.

    Technical Report On The Effectiveness Of Wind Power Technology

    Executive Summary

    This report aims to improve the quality of public debate on wind power by addressing two common misconceptions about wind power technology:

    - Is wind power an effective means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions?

    - Is wind power a secure and reliable source of energy for the UK?

    We show that the answer to both of these questions is unequivocally ‘yes’. 2 Is switching to use more wind power an effective way of reducing carbon emissions? Wind turbines convert wind into electrical energy without emitting polluting gases. However, the effectiveness of wind power in reducing emissions has been questioned. Using a simple model we show that every megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity produced by wind power in Great Britain results in a minimum CO2 saving of around 350kg. On this basis carbon dioxide emission savings from wind energy were at least 5.5 million tonnes in Great Britain in 2011. While this is a reliable minimum, there are good reasons to think that the actual figure is considerably greater (DECC 2012) and empirical examples from electricity systems in the US support this conclusion. Is wind power a secure and reliable energy source?

    Although wind is a variable energy resource, it can be easily integrated into electricity systems. Wind power output is predictable and varies at similar rates to existing electricity demand. Our ability to ‘keep the lights’ on during ‘cold, calm spells’ is secure at the levels of wind power projected for the UK by 2020. The experience of overseas systems such as the Iberian peninsula and island of Ireland show that the level of wind contribution expected by the government in the UK in 2020 is achievable. W e show that there are several adaptations to the grid that could enable a much greater contribution from wind…

    Is wind power an effective way of reducing carbon emissions? … The marginal emissions approach to calculating emission savings: a simple ‘steady-state’ model…An empirical approach to assessing the carbon savings from wind power…Summary…

    Is wind power a secure and reliable energy source? …Managing the variability of wind power output…International precedents for the UK’s 2020 wind power ambitions…Options for adapting the grid to maintain security of supply with very high levels of wind generation…Summary

    Conclusions

    This report has addressed two common misconceptions on wind power technology: firstly, that it is not an effective way of reducing carbon emissions; and, secondly, that wind power is too variable to be a reliable source of electricity. We have clearly demonstrated that deriving energy from wind power is a potent way of reducing carbon emissions and does not threaten energy security. In the UK during 2011 wind energy reduced emissions of carbon dioxide by at least 5.5 million tonnes. Even during a prolonged period of calm, cold weather it poses no threat to the security of electricity supply.

    We have also shown that wind power is able to provide a significant proportion of the UK’s electricity needs with little impact on the existing operation of the grid . Evidence from numerous rigorous studies shows that integrating wind generation in the UK system at the levels expected in 2020 is technically feasible without major modification to the electricity system. The experience of high levels of wind power in the Iberian peninsula and the island of Ireland offer examples of where these levels of wind power have been successfully integrated.

    Finally, we have outlined how the role for variable, low-carbon generation technologies like wind power could extend significantly beyond the levels that are currently expected in the UK. As the GB grid makes a transition to a low-carbon, secur e and affordable system it will need to adapt in important ways. While the optimal mix and ultimate costs of the options remain uncertain, a range of different technologies will have a part to play in this transformed energy system.

    The transition to a low-carbon, secure and affordable GB electricity system will be the subject of debate for some years to come. W ith this report we hope to have shown that of the many challenging issues that must resolved, the area of wind power technology is probably one of the least troubling.

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    << Home