Where do Wind Farms belong?

[marty]

I grew up in Northwest Nebraska and always thought it was a perfect place for wind farms. I think more and more are popping up around there (I think one main issue is intersecting the paths of migrating birds, not sure how that is dealt with)

It appears that neighboring Iowa is getting into wind energy in a big way. See attached link for trends on the the top 5 US wind producing states: http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/californias-wind-slowdown/

Marty

 

[erugs]

I
After 100 years we’re now accustomed to overhead power/phone/cable lines everywhere even though they are hardly pleasing to the eye. We’re used to the noise and stench of cars, etc. It’s just going to take time to work the kinks out and once that happens I think (and hope) we’ll be in a better place...

The-Green-Man says it well about the importance of adjusting to new technology. I worked for a small alternative energy company back in the 80s and so I'm probably not as objective as I might be. I would not mind living near a wind farm. I wouldn't mind living near the ocean and hearing fog horns and bells sounding. I live beside a simi-active railroad track and enjoy hearing and feeling the rumble as the train runs by. I'm not sure if a steady whomping sound is something that I could deal with. When the heating system at work is out of sync, I have to use ear plugs to avoid headaches and nausea.

I'm thinking of the adjustment to something new in comparison to audience reaction to the premier of "The Rite of Spring" by Igor Stravinsky. When it was first performed, the sounds were so new that no one had ever heard anything like them before and the sounds caused the audience to break out into a brawl. Before long, audiences adjusted to the tonal quailty. Today the composition is considered brilliant music.

 

[DougPaul]

Visual: Apart from a huge tower dominating the landscape you also have to consider the effect of the spinning blades combined with sunlight: Some have compared this “strobe effect” to Chinese water torture. Up-close they are truly dominating, I agree, but when they are off in the distance I’d say they aren’t that bad.

The blades (particularly if metal) can also interfere with radio and TV signals. (Probably even worse with DTV.)

Noise: This largely depends on the wind conditions and the design of the Nacel (the turbine and gearing).

Noise can also come from the turbine blades--the tips of large turbines can be moving at over 100 mph.

Some have raised concerns as to how wildlife may be affected by the “strobe effect” from the spinning blades and the noise made by the turbines.

Also bird and bat kill.


People have been focusing on the aesthetic aspects of placing a wind farm--there are other considerations. First, they have to be placed in a location with adequate wind--otherwise they will not pay for themselves. Second, they are hardly ideal power sources--the power production is unpredictable and highly variable. (Solar has the same problem.) So while they may be useful power sources, neither can supply a large percentage of the total power load.

Doug

 

[The-Green-Man]

DougPaul: I hadn't even thought about electrical interference... That's a very good point. Bird/bat kills are also an issue.

People have been focusing on the aesthetic aspects of placing a wind farm--there are other considerations. First, they have to be placed in a location with adequate wind--otherwise they will not pay for themselves.

You're right: No wind no $$. Wind companies in general do lengthly studies before develping a site to make sure they will be profitable, just like any business (hopefully).

Second, they are hardly ideal power sources--the power production is unpredictable and highly variable. (Solar has the same problem.) So while they may be useful power sources, neither can supply a large percentage of the total power load.

Wind/Solar are definitely intermittent power. To be feasible they require backup capacity that is cheap and efficient to bring online quickly, such as natural gas power plants. Using coal plants for backup capacity is NOT a good idea because they can’t simply be powered up on-demand. We’re lucky in the US since we have massive reserves of natural gas. In the UK they have a real national security dilemma regarding wind-power because they don’t have large reserves of natural gas, so they have to get it from Russia...

I see no reason why they couldn't supply a large percentage (~20-40%) of our power needs. There are large open areas in the US where the wind blows almost constantly, and on the days it doesn't blow, it is blowing somewhere else. The same goes for solar. The key is backup capacity from natural gas, or storing excess capacity (a whole other topic).

 

[marty]

People have been focusing on the aesthetic aspects of placing a wind farm--there are other considerations. First, they have to be placed in a location with adequate wind--otherwise they will not pay for themselves. Second, they are hardly ideal power sources--the power production is unpredictable and highly variable. (Solar has the same problem.) So while they may be useful power sources, neither can supply a large percentage of the total power load.

Doug

Denmark current has 18-20% of its electricity through wind power. Germany currently has 7% with plans to reach 20% or more by the year 2020. Wind may never produce the majority of our power, but it certainly could be a significant contributor.

Marty

 

[DougPaul]

Wind/Solar are definitely intermittent power. To be feasible they require backup capacity that is cheap and efficient to bring online quickly, such as natural gas power plants. Using coal plants for backup capacity is NOT a good idea because they can’t simply be powered up on-demand. We’re lucky in the US since we have massive reserves of natural gas. In the UK they have a real national security dilemma regarding wind-power because they don’t have large reserves of natural gas, so they have to get it from Russia...

There are conceptually two types of power plants: base load and peaking. The base load plants (eg coal, nuclear) are generally more efficient, but are not good at varying their outputs quickly to adapt to varying loads. Peaking plants (eg gas turbine) are generally less efficient, but can vary their outputs easily. In general, a power company will try to run a high percentage of base load plants and just use the peaking load plants to cover the variations. When you add wind, wave, solar, etc you now have uncontrolled variable sources to add to the mix. The power company is now forced to run a higher percentage of peaking plants to give them the ability to handle the additional variation, which, of course, lowers the overall efficiency of their fuel-based plants.

There are also technologies for power storage to smooth the flow, but they are generally impractical (eg batteries), expensive, and/or may have high environmental impact (eg pumped storage).

So one has to consider the entire system to make sure there is a net benefit.


Marty:
Yes, I am aware that Denmark has a high percentage of wind and Germany has a tax surcharge on power to fund solar and wind. Many tend to focus on just the purported advantages of renewable power sources--the entire system needs to be evaluated, not just some aspects of some parts and I am trying to fill in some of the broader perspective. For instance, does a green power source produce more energy than it took to manufacture it?


BTW, the Mar 2009 issue of Scientific American magazine has an article entitled "The Power of Renewables" which appears to summarize the prospects for a number of technologies. Might be worth looking at. (Just got the mag--haven't had time to read it yet.) There also appears to be more online (www.sciam.com).

Doug

 

[peakbagger]

For everyones reference heres a map of the wind resources in the US.

http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp

Now assuming that folks down along the coast want to ignore the obvious and discount offshore wind, look where the wind resources are judged the best in Northern New England. Bascially the mountains of VT & NH and the western Maine boundary Mountains (AKA the Longfellow range). Thats why the wind farms are proposed where people like to hike. Now exclude popular recreation areas like the Whites the Greens and the AT corrdor and what is left, basically the areas that are proposed for or currently are having wind power development.

 

[The-Green-Man]

There are conceptually two types of power plants: base load and peaking. The base load plants (eg coal, nuclear) are generally more efficient, but are not good at varying their outputs quickly to adapt to varying loads. Peaking plants (eg gas turbine) are generally less efficient, but can vary their outputs easily. In general, a power company will try to run a high percentage of base load plants and just use the peaking load plants to cover the variations. When you add wind, wave, solar, etc you now have uncontrolled variable sources to add to the mix. The power company is now forced to run a higher percentage of peaking plants to give them the ability to handle the additional variation, which, of course, lowers the overall efficiency of their fuel-based plants.

For clarity: When I said "backup capacity" I was referring to peaking plants. The need for more efficient peaking plants should spur developments in this area. I know of two companies that are developing solutions to this problem (and there are probably many more).

When you add more random-producers (solar, wind wave etc) to the mix the overall effect will be random, but not as random as each individual source taken on its own. It is true, however that it complicates matters for the power companies: Hence the need to upgrade the grid, develop new technology, and be intelligent in the way this is rolled out.

So one has to consider the entire system to make sure there is a net benefit.

I agree 100% : There is no point adopting wind/solar or any energy production method if there's no net benefit.

 

[andrewb]

The intermittent nature of solar and wind power is a problem, but this can be compensated for. Another gripe by anti- wind or solar types is that the power may come at times of low demand. The solution to both of these problems is the same, although possibly the solution will only ruffle even more feathers. You need an elevation difference, like a mountain or hill. Put an artificial lake at the top and when you get your unpredictable and intermittent power, pump water up into the "battery", if demand is below output. When demand gets too high, drain the battery and run hydro to get more power. This system is pretty efficient. They already use this coupled attack to demand for regular plants, so why not green power as well?

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Alternative energy will catch on when it is A) profitable for the producer and B) cheaper than conventional for the consumer, and not a minute sooner. Meanwhile the best thing we as individuals can do is to make sure our daily usage is as efficient or minimal as possible.

Tim

 

[cushetunk]

These two photos from the Tug Hill (northern NY) wind farm provide a good sense of the scale of those generators. The photos also spook me, in a way.

G.

Of course, you can compare these photos to an empty hillside, or you can compare them to these places:

http://www.sfmoma.org/images/artwork/large/2006.56_01_b02.jpg


http://www.sun-volt.com/images/coal_fired_power_plant.jpg

http://pro.corbis.com/images/42-17963823.jpg?size=67&uid={5e8f2c42-fe9d-4058-8b10-09ac798ea831}

The trouble is that both these comparisons have their own merit.

 

[Mike P.]

So along I-95 10 miles each side of Providence, 20 miles south of Boston & from Branfod, CT to somewhere south of Philly...... 91 From Hartord to New Haven

It's never quiet there, the trucks & cars will cover any noise.

What about landfills, no one is living on Hartford Mt., also methane possibilities.

 

[pks4000]

WInd turbines and Burger Kings

Put em up all over Eastern Mass. ....couldn't ruin the aesthetics more than we already have .

AH haaa brain storm.When they build a chain store ....Burger Kings etc with the huge neon signs simply require they add a wind turbine.

Imagine requiring one turbine per,,,,say,,, 5000 square feet.

Home Depot could power Shrewsbury!

 

[DougPaul]

The intermittent nature of solar and wind power is a problem, but this can be compensated for. Another gripe by anti- wind or solar types is that the power may come at times of low demand. The solution to both of these problems is the same, although possibly the solution will only ruffle even more feathers. You need an elevation difference, like a mountain or hill. Put an artificial lake at the top and when you get your unpredictable and intermittent power, pump water up into the "battery", if demand is below output. When demand gets too high, drain the battery and run hydro to get more power. This system is pretty efficient. They already use this coupled attack to demand for regular plants, so why not green power as well?

This, while it works, is a high environmental impact approach. You either have to find an existing pond or build one. The pond can have unnaturally high daily level fluctuations (flood to drought in a day) that are hard on anything that attempts to live in it.

They can be risky too--there was also a failure of an artificial storage pond that washed out a park and a house downstream. (There were links to the reports on the America's Roof website, but it is shut down now.)

Electricity is hard to store in large quantities.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

When they build a chain store ....Burger Kings etc with the huge neon signs simply require they add a wind turbine.

Some businesses (eg Google) with large flat roofs have populated them with solar panels. It makes sense from a purely business viewpoint--the payback break-even point is typically several years and it results in a significantly reduced power bill.

Doug

 

[Craig]

Some businesses (eg Google) with large flat roofs have populated them with solar panels. It makes sense from a purely business viewpoint--the payback break-even point is typically several years and it results in a significantly reduced power bill.

Doug

True, but this is only because of the huge governmental funding and tax breaks now available.
Because of this, these industries expects a huge increase in research/development and implementation of renewables, especially wind and solar.

The plan, like many before it, is to subsidize the development of these technologies until they become economically viable.

IMO, wind and solar will not be economically viable (large scale) at the least in our lifetime.

It sure would be a shame to litter the higher landscape with wind or solar projects to have them abandoned in 10-15 years when their maintenance cost become more than their revenues.

Do you remember the solar water panels folks were putting on their roofs in the 70’s because of the tax credits?

My answer to the threads question: Nowhere.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

It appears that neighboring Iowa is getting into wind energy in a big way. See attached link for trends on the the top 5 US wind producing states: http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/californias-wind-slowdown/

Marty

Thanks for that link, Marty. I listened to a show on NPR's "Science Friday" several years ago, in which a couple of fellows were interviewd. They were managers of the wind power initiative about to get started in west Texas, and the article in the Times reflects their efforts. Apparently west Texas has enormous wind power potential, and since it's a sparely populated and a rather dreary place (their words, not mine), they expected to be able to bring lots of power on line rather quickly.

Yet again, the US lags behind the rest of the world in the manufacture of high-efficiency wind turbines. I hiked thru a rather large wind turbine farm in the Tehachapi's last spring, and all the new, big turbines were imported.

 

[peakbagger]

A dirty secret that doesnt get a lot of PR is that Texas has had an ongoing serious issue with grid reliability due to their large installed wind fleet. They have almost lost the grid a couple of times when the wind stopped unexpectedly and there was not enough spinning reserve (conventional power plants that could be brought up to speed quickly). The solution to date is a major building boom of natural gas fired plants that can be cranked up quickly. Its a good short term fix, but natural gas tends to track the price of oil fairly closely. For those who were familiar with the "Pickens plan" do note that he had investments in natural gas as well as wind so it was a win win situation.

The "smart grid" that is being proposed is supposed to help with this issue from the demand side. Essentially when the sytem operator of the grid detects a shortage of power, they will be able to automatically turn off loads on the system remotely and can remotely change the cost of power to the consumer. Currently its done on a crude scale, where large users can buy power at a lower rate if they agree to be interupted, but the system is only set up for longer term events (typically 24 hour notice). Some folks even envision having electric cars plugged into the wall recharging that can be called upon to supply some of their battery power to the grid if there is a short term power shortage.

Bummer we cant have some of these in the region

http://www.seia.org/galleries/pdf/CSP_Plants_in_the_US_Final.pdf

Of course given the difference in solar output between the southwest and New England, the plants would have to be several times larger and already the plants in the southwest are measured in square miles.

 

[hikingfish]

Where do Wind Farms belong?

Hmm, I'll go out on a limb here and say: Wherever there's wind?

Unfortunately, this is usually where there are great views: Top of mountains, near the oceans, etc.

Fish

 

[The-Green-Man]

... For those who were familiar with the "Pickens plan" do note that he had investments in natural gas as well as wind so it was a win win situation.

This is a good point. I heard someone railing against Pickens for pushing his plan while owning investments in wind and nat-gas. I guess it can be seen two ways:He's scammng everyone, OR he knows a good plan when he sees one and is putting his money where his mouth is.

He openly admits he expects to make a lot of money, which is what I would expect from any successful business man.