Large Area Wind Success?

Print Friendly

All puff (wind) power installation proposals use terms like “equal to powering X homes” or “reducing carbon dioxide emissions by Y tons”.  These proposals also state that average production is 30+% of rated.   Then there are others who note that the performance is showing differently and puff power is unreliable.  To counter that, we see the argument that wind is always blowing somewhere and therefore we need larger area and MORE breeze fans, ie., not enough installed.

The US west coast states have aggressively encouraged installation of puff power systems to the point where installed capacity in the Bonneville Power Administration region (OR, WA) is nominally about 30% of load demand.  This is far above industry maximum recommendations of 15% to preserve grid stability.  If not for huge hydro, BPA would have an impossible task.  As it is, even the more traditional power grids have difficulty with any puff power.

Here’s why.  The wind is not necessarily ‘blowing somewhere’ and the average is misleading.  We have two West Coast online real time records for puff power for comparison.  The California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) provides hourly data for puff farms over the region from San Francisco to San Diego.  The BPA provides similar data on 5 minute intervals.  Both show comparisons to load demand.BPA_CAISOFeb2012

The sidebar chart shows a comparison of the two regions for the same weekly period.  Both systems were flatline or near so at the same time for 2 days.  Digging into the datasets, one can also see flat lines for up to two weeks at a time.  Note too that the variability ramps are extreme, the primary reason for avoiding attachment to conventional energy sources which perform best under more predictable regimes.  And, the demand curves show generally predictable patterns of high usage morning and evening with a minima at midday, not the comparative puffer performance.

If the combined West Coast performance is not sufficient, maybe we still don’t have a big enough area to gather breeze energy.  Another study takes on a quite large region, namely a number of the world’s puff power installations (BPA, Australia-New South Wales, Ireland, Canada-Alberta, and Canada-Ontario).  The combination still shows “flatline” and  high variability, enough to drive any grid operator crazy.

So, is puff power the answer to the energy needs of an industrialized society with ultra high dependence on reliable energy?  You be the judge.  4.20.11 July WindBut remember, the actual useful performance capacity factors are counter to “equal to powering X homes” and those factors include ZERO.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Reader
  • LinkedIn

2 comments to Large Area Wind Success?

  • Carlgh

    Wind is the darling of the political elite and their green energy brethren. Across Europe, evaluation of government debt and efforts to curb defaults reveal the true costs of wind-power subsidies.
    Many energy writers talk about “energy density” as the direction choice. Wind power moves dramatically toward “diversity” with huge land area required, largely along scenic vistas, migratory bird corridors, and low-flying aircraft byways.
    I am moved by the recent picture of the most modern “clipper ship” a beautiful example of the wind power, v.s. the modern cargo container ship. A new generation of super-cargo ship will be powered with nuclear reactors – just like the modern Navy.
    With the charts above, how can energy planners can depend upon wind energy to power a modern, post-industrial economy? No one wants higher electricity bills to pay for a dreadful “green” energy experiment.

  • I guess you are right… good read .. thanks!

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>