U.S. Wind Energy Potential Triples, New Study Reveals

Wired:

The amount of wind power that theoretically could be generated in the United States tripled in the newest assessment of the nation's wind resources.

Read the whole story: Wired

Comments

[AlfredoENewman]

10:53 AM on 03/03/2010

Wind is cheap if done right. When it is done wrong, it looks like a stupid investment. Use only local wind for low cost solutions without having to build the infrastructure of new transmission lines. http://www.simple-wind-solutions.com

[research]

09:20 PM on 02/27/2010

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12938722 France has very high radiation type cancers rates.

[YCSTS]

12:03 PM on 02/22/2010

240 Chinese Wind Turbines go to giant 600 MW peak Wind Farm in West Texas. Total Cost $1.5B including $450M (30%) from U.S. stimulus funding. Only 15% of the jobs will be in the USA.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125683832677216475.html

That's $1.5B/600MW = $2.5k per pk kw. Acc. to G. Preston, power engineer in Texas:

"...That is a good estimate for the $5 billion dollar CREZ lines in west Texas which I estimate will allow about another 5000 MW of new wind, and that is from my own load flow transmission analysis. So that also equates to $1/w transmission..."

So we have $2.5k+$1k=$3.5k per kwpk for Texas Wind. At 30% Capacity Factor = $11.6k per kwavg. Add 3% line loss = $12k per kwavg. There will likely be additional costs like Grid Stabilization Batteries or Flywheels to mitigate rapidly fluctuating Wind Energy. Altairnano is selling these at about $1k per kw for 15 min storage. http://www.b2i.cc/Document/546/93806.pdf

So now we are up to about $13.5k per kwavg. And we still will get 70% of the energy from the shadowing fossil fuel power plants, mostly NG, running at their most inefficient and costly. Try adding that cost to what is really a Wind/NG power generation system and you have a STUPID, RIDICULOUS WASTE OF MONEY. You are unquestionably better off to just go pure CCGT(NG) or IGCC(Cleaner Coal).

[research]

02:47 PM on 02/22/2010

Wind is cheaper than nukes or clean coal.

Coal Supercritical: 10.554
Coal Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC): 11.481
Coal IGCC with Carbon Capture & Storage (IGCC with CCS): 17.317
Alternatives:
Biogas: 8.552
Wind: 8.910
Gas Combined Cycle: 9.382
Geothermal: 10.182
Hydroelectric: 10.527
Concentrating solar thermal (CSP): 12.653
Nuclear: 15.316
Biomass: 16.485
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Comparative_electrical_generation_costs

[Moneypolitics]

03:33 PM on 02/22/2010

Do the wind numbers take into the account that you need secondary power plant because wind power only operates at around 30% capacity.

[friedfish2718]

05:03 PM on 02/22/2010

And yet nuclear plant to replace wind farm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/28/haverigg-turbines-nuclear power-plant

The site was subsequently expanded to a total of eight turbines after £6m additional investment. Haverigg was still one of the most efficient wind farms with a 35% "capacity factor" - or efficiency - compared with an average of 30%, said Palmer.

"Its worth pointing out that we could build up to 3,600 megawatts of low or free CO2 power compared to the 3.5MW or so of wind power that we might replace.
cost per kWh: wind = 5.42p; nuclear = 2.8 p
lifetime wind = 15 yr; nuclear = 50 yr
lifetme carbon footprint (gC02 equivalent/KWh):
wind = 4.62(land)/5.25(sea); nuclear = 5.00

[research]

06:19 PM on 02/28/2010

Solar rooftop pv is less expensive than nukes.

Rooftop PV Solar systems are being installed for 2$ or less:

Here is the proof of that:

rooftop pf install systems for less than 2$ per Wp installed(3 cents per KWH*):

http://eetd.lbl.gov/EA/EMP/reports/lbnl-2674e.pdf

Page 16, list the installed cost from 2$ to 20$.

35% of the system cost 7-8$
15% cost 6-7$
5% cost 5-6$
2% cost 4-5$
about 1% cost 3-4$

about .5% cost 2-3$
and 62 system were not included because they cost less than 2$

Here is where YOU CAN BUY panels for 1$/Wp for new panels.

Shop around. And this is before subsides. check for subsides in your area, state federal, utility, and solar contractors all have subsides and funding options.

Solar Panels prices per peak watt have dropped from 8$ per Wp to less than 2$ per peak what.
98 cents 201001 (1.88 /Wp 090929 was 1.55 per peak watt 090801)
http://www.atensolar.com/EPV.
http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm

*as an investment(cash) , over 30 years, 6 hours "sunniness"

Nukes 25 cents per KWH,
http://energyeconomyonline.com/uploads/Is_New_Nuclear_Competitive_July_10_2009_FNS_Event.pdf
http://climateprogress.org/2009/01/05/study-cost-risks-new-nuclear-power-plants/

10$ per W nuclear build cost.
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/15/nuclear-power-plant-cost-bombshell-ontario/

[Iowafarmgal]

02:16 AM on 02/22/2010

Our Iowa night sky used to be beautiful with stars and moonlight, but now our landscape is littered with flashing cell phone towers, and scores of windmills. Our countryside is being desecrated for the sake of "progress", and the almighty dollar. Every night when I look out my window I have to see huge flashing towers that impose themselves upon my family. The company that owns these towers pays around $1000.00 a yr. to the person on whose land they sit. The company is predominantly foreign owned and they could care less about the rest of us. I don't use a cell phone, but it is my home, my family, my privacy, and my life that is impacted by this trash. Just remember this the next time you talk about how wonderful all these towers are. They are just another venue for a few to make money from many.

[Clever Screen Name]

03:04 AM on 02/22/2010

I heard the coal-burning plants are real pretty at night, though.

[Moneypolitics]

03:59 AM on 02/22/2010

Yes, the flames and dark smoke spewing from them make it hellish to live near them.

[sethdayal]

01:05 PM on 02/22/2010

Nuke plants are small and tidy with no emissions. The Gen IV units they say would fit in a strip mall or at a current substation. Nobody would even know they were there.

[Dangerous Dan]

08:48 PM on 02/21/2010

Wow, if it were a government study, they would say, theoreticly 5 or 6 times more.
Asside from the hundreds of acres needed for commercial wind generation, Generators in the Northern locations are proving to be unuseable in extreme cold environments.
Synthetic blades become brittle. The electronics and mechanical sections freeze up.
Off shore farms will be subject to tropical storms and hurricanes.
On shore sites just happen to favor tornado alleys.
Good luck gaining the support of Earth First eco-lawyers.
Ask California how their alternative power infrastructure is coming along.

[urchinsadrift]

08:57 PM on 02/21/2010

The one thing envirowhackos love more than alternative energy is suing anyone that tries one.

[sethdayal]

08:20 PM on 02/21/2010

Scientists tell us we are maybe less than ten years away from a civilization ending peak oil and climate crisis.

75% of Americans don't believe in man made global warming and are damn sick of costly renewables that uninformed Nuclear Deniers keep pushing. 75% of Americans, likely the same ones, also believe nuclear power is an acceptable power source.It will be very easy for Republican engineers with all the facts on their side to kick the Democrats and their attorneys collective butts out of Washington on this issue.

Reasoning progressives and almost all Cons and Deniers will go along with nuclear power.It is politically doable. Renewables are not.

Nuclear Deniers like to laugh at their Global warming counterparts as intellectually challenged but if you stack the End of Civilization against whatever uninformed objection they might have to nuclear power, wouldn't it be smarter to just hold their nose and vote for the nukes.

[Moneypolitics]

08:28 PM on 02/21/2010

They also said in the 70's that by now we would be out of most minerals that we mine. While oil does have an end date, I would not be scared by the peak oil is coming soon scare mongers.

[RockyMissouri]

08:12 PM on 02/21/2010

Nuclear power anything is pure bs!0

[research]

08:03 PM on 02/21/2010

Rooftop pv solar as an investment: better than the market:

http://www.amecosolar.com/PVWHAT03.html

[ddpalmerr]

06:16 AM on 02/22/2010

Depends on where you live. If it is Nome Alaska I bet the pay off time is significantly longer than the life of the equipment.

[research]

02:39 PM on 02/22/2010

yes, of course. In fact, for now, I recommend it in Hawaii, Ca, Az, and other very sunny places, where the payback is best. As the price drops, I guess even Alaska long summer would be worth it.

[RomeoMD25]

04:14 PM on 02/21/2010

In the end, the economics just don’t add up. Without tax
breaks and government subsidies, not a single alternative energy will
be able to compete. So no matter how popular or fashionable alternative energy becomes, if it remains economically stupid, it’s destined to fail.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125193815050081615.html

[research]

04:21 PM on 02/21/2010

If you remove the subsides, loans, insurance and protection against pollution taxes that nukes and fossils get,

They would be out of business.

Drop the subsides fro Nukes first. That will KILL nukes.

And no, solar deserves the same subsides levels that nukes and fossil got for 50 and 100 years.

Charge Fossil and Nukes for the damage done to the Commons.

It's for the our nation security, for our general welfare.

Nuclear power is currently more expensive than wind
power in the UK and USA.

http://www.energyscience.org.au/FS01%20Economics.pdf

Go read
The Installed Cost of Photovoltaics
in the U.S. from 1998-2008

http://eetd.lbl.gov/EA/EMP/reports/lbnl-2674e.pdf

the average price is between 6 and 9$ per watt installed, true enough.

But there are also systems that cost 2$ per Wp or less.

The panels are less than 1$ per watt, the Inverters less than 50 cents, so the expected other costs including installation have always been estimated as twice the panels cost. Of 2$ per Wp.

Over 30 years * 365 * 6 hours = 65KWH

2 dollars per watt/64 kwh per installed watt = .03 $. 3 cents. Panels are expected to last longer than 30 years so that's cancels out the slight loss of efficiency over time.

This is a much better investment the government long term bonds.

One Corporate propaganda Murdoch rags article on Spain's economic problems notwithstanding.

[sethdayal]

01:25 PM on 02/23/2010

Nuclear plants pay all insurance and loan fees - no subsidies.

According to the OECD current nuclear power cost is 3 cents a kwh. Compare that to the 12 to 20 cents for wind and the 35 cents to 50 cents for solar both subsidized with billions in tax breaks and feedin subsidies.

"Over 30 years * 365 * 6 hours = 65KWH"

Should be 365*3 hours as the real efficiency of the average roof in phoenix with incorrect orientations,shading, and power conversion losses is less than 15% (18% with a perfectly oriented roof)

$2 per watt is the current fire sale panel cost caused by the collapse of the massive Spanish solar PV market.

We need to add $3 per watt for installation materials and labor based on an actual solar home built in Massachusetts.

The actual life of the chinese made panels is 20 years as the cheap panels like cheap skylights start leaking into their teens and die soon afterwards. Research then assumes that the cost of your array was neither borrowed, used funds normalled destined to pay down your mortgage, or reinvest ie no interest on a 30 year life. The real cost over the 20 year life of 6% money is 8%

"2 dollars per watt/64 kwh per installed watt = 3 cents"

Becomes

5 dollars per watt*.08/(365*3) = 36.5 cents a kilowatt hour.

Research has seen this calculation many times but still seeks to fool you with his outrageous claims.

[research]

01:13 PM on 02/21/2010

This is good news.

rooftop pv solar, wind and waste bio fuels can provide all the energy and fuels the worlds needs forever.

Wind must be subjected to full environmental impact studies, unlike rooftop solar. But sited well, off the coast in particularly, it can supply vast amounts of power, as much as 3 times or total need, but in practice, probably 30-60% for wind, variable with Solar about the same.

Wind , rooftop Solar and Waste Bio fuels(ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR STORAGE!), each have 2-3 times our energy needs EACH. see my profile.

[YCSTS]

07:04 PM on 02/22/2010

Waste Biofuels. My biggest use of biomass is my home. Almost all wood. I would have to consume my entire home's worth of biomass every two years JUST TO SUPPLY MY HEATING NEEDS!

There isn't even remotely enough biomass to power a civilization. They tried that in America & Britain in the 17-18th centuries and just about stripped the forests bare. The Danish Central Heating plants on Samso, use 5.2 tonnes of waste Wheat Straw per customer just to supply heat. That's the Wheat Straw off of 5 acres of land - per person. And Denmark isn't especially a cold place - and we aren't talking electricity consumption here. Nor are we talking Industrial Heat & Power. Multiply those numbers by 5X to include that energy and 7X to include transportation. Imagine a City like New York relying on biomass from an area of 35 acres per resident. Ridiculous.

Good discussion of the problems of biomass for Energy here:

http://tedrockwell.typepad.com/files/nuclearenergyfactsreport-2010jan22.pdf

[research]

07:45 PM on 02/22/2010

The total energy of the land can be reused all while reducing greenhouse gases.
We Use the Land for Food, Wood, grazing 100%.
THEN we BioChar the waste
This can provide all the fuels we will ever need.
In total, the upper limit of the bio-energy potential could be over 1000 EJ per year. This is considerably more than the current global energy use of 400 EJ.
http://www.uce-uu.nl/index.php?action=1&menuId=1&type=project&id=3&
(Use low estimates since using the WASTE)
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/company list of BioChar companies.
http://www.agri-therm.com/solution.html portable bio fuel oil BioChar units.
http://www.advbiorefineryinc.ca/news/ meat rending waste BioChar.
http://terrapretapot.org/

Rooftop pv solar and wind are used in conjunction to reduce fuel needs. see my profile for details and links.

[Dangerous Dan]

09:44 AM on 02/21/2010

Nice picture.
Access roads cut to the wind farm.
Access roads cut to each tower.
Access roads and right-of-way for power transmission line.
That as already blocked building in California.
From Ecology freaks!
Oh, and the blades kill birds.
And they are plain ugly.
And they require backup oil fuel powered generators for low wind and extreme cold seasons.
Lovely!

[roseau]

09:17 PM on 02/21/2010

Our newest windmill is going on top of a ski resort. No new roads. No new ugly. And the birds adjust.

[Moneypolitics]

10:21 PM on 02/21/2010

There has to be some sort of road to the windmill. To do the preventive maintenance.

[hippie4ever]

02:14 AM on 02/21/2010

Washington D.C. is a wind generator. I've no doubt there's lots more air flow, especially between peoples' ears. By all means let's have a new study so we can have a new study and then a new study. Hopefully the status quo can maintain its iron fist on behalf of The Homeland. Power not justice, profit not sustainability; war is peace.

[iceage7]

01:52 AM on 02/21/2010

Some 365 giant wind turbines are to be installed in desert around Lake Turkana in northern Kenya – used as a backdrop for the film The Constant Gardener – creating the biggest windfarm on the continent. When complete in 2012, the £533m project will have a capacity of 300MW, a quarter of Kenya's current installed power and one of the highest proportions of wind energy to be fed in a national grid anywhere in the world.

According to LTWP, which has an agreement to sell its electricity to the Kenya Power & Lighting Company, the average wind speed is 11metres per second, akin to "proven reserves" in the oil sector, said Carlo Van Wageningen, chairman of the company.

We believe that this site is one of the best in the world for wind," he said. If the project succeeds, the company estimates that there is the potential for the farm to generate a further 2,700MW of power, some of which could be exported.

[Dangerous Dan]

09:46 AM on 02/21/2010

How many indigenus species indangered? Who cares?

[quillsinister]

09:57 AM on 02/21/2010

People with at least half a functioning brain and a modicum of understanding.

[iceage7]

06:03 PM on 02/21/2010

U mean how many flying indangered species? We are talking about windmills..geeez.

[sethdayal]

11:13 PM on 02/21/2010

Works out to $11B/Gw ($824m, 25% load factor) not including the cost of the transmission line.

They could have bought two hyperion nuclear units for $60 M that would have given them 24/7 steady power without transmission lines.

[KellyRyan]

01:24 AM on 02/21/2010

Potential is good ... but more data needed.

Cost? Is it subsidized by state or federal government? Cost effective comparsion? Privately funded?

T Boone Pickens was a high proponent of wind farms, hoping to pass laws in CA which would allow subsidies to his, "corporation." Given the present state of the economy T Boome has withdrawn from active promotion.

[quiviran]

11:23 PM on 02/20/2010

Here I was thinking this would be about surrounding Washington with wind turbines.