Wind Articles
Community Fights Back. February 12, 2006
Wind Farms Cost More than Nuclear. October 23, 2005
Tax Breaks Fuel Wind Energy. April 24, 2005
Wind Hits Turbulence. February 20, 2005
Largest Wind Turbine. December 19, 2004
True Costs of Wind Power. July 11, 2004
Wind Farm Benefits Overstated. May 16, 2004
Wind Energy’s Real Costs. March 21, 2004
Largest Wind Turbine. December 14, 2003
Wind Troubles. November 23, 2003
Doubts
About Wind in Germany
Groups Protest Bird Kills. July 6, 2003
Wind
Power Hits Downdraft.
Community Fights Back.
Pendleton County West Virginia is fighting to prevent wind turbines from being built.
US Route 219 Tucker County
Large-scale industrial wind turbines threaten the one sure economic resource Pendleton County has; magnificent, unblighted scenery that forms the basis for its tourism enterprises and the second home/vacation home real estate market”.
They have established a web site that states: “Property values and scenic values are under assault in Pendleton County.
The previous photo reinforces the way that wind turbines affect scenery.
Liberty Gap Wind Force gave notice to Pendleton County that it has applied to the PSC for a siting certificate for 50 turbines on Jack Mountain.
The Pendleton community has taken legal action and established a letter writing campaign to stop Liberty Gap Wind Force from building 50 turbines. The letters highlight the killing of bats by wind turbines, the lack of accurate maps showing the route of the transmission lines from the wind turbines, and the way that short term construction projects provide little lasting benefit to the County or its residents.
Sources: Protect Pendleton web site www.protectpendleton.com; and www.windwatch.org that has additional pictures of wind turbines and their impact on housing etc.
Wind Farms Cost More than Nuclear.
The capital costs for a wind turbine, not including transmission lines or back-up power, is frequently quoted as $1,000 /Kw.
Capital costs for the first new nuclear plants are estimated to be $1,400 /Kw by the nuclear power industry. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) believes the costs will be $1,928 /Kw.
Nuclear plants operate with a better than 90% capacity factor while wind turbines operate at 33%. In other words, to generate the same amount of electricity as a nuclear power plant will require capital investment of nearly $3,000 /Kw for wind power versus $1,928 /Kw (EIA estimate) or $1,400 /Kw (Industry estimate) for nuclear.
Using the EIA’s estimate for the cost of the first new nuclear plants, wind power capital costs are 55% greater than for nuclear power.
For wind, this is the most optimistic calculation.
Capital costs for wind power have recently increased: By one calculation (FPD Canada) the cost for wind power is now $US 1,300 /Kw.
At $1,300 /Kw the capital cost for wind power (to generate the same amount of electricity) is nearly twice the capital cost for nuclear using the EIA cost estimate; or 2.5 times more costly when compared with industry estimates for the initial new nuclear plants.
While capital costs for wind are increasing, the nuclear industry expects that capital costs for nuclear will be approximately $1,000 /Kw after the first few new units are built and start-up costs have been assimilated.
CBO Analysis and Nuclear Energy Institute. See http://www.nei.org/documents/Testimony_Fertel_02-03-05.doc
Federal
Programs Division of Environment Canada.
See www.on.ec.gc.ca/pollution/fpd/technologies/t-1000-e.html
October 23, 2005
Tax Breaks Fuel Wind Energy.
Meanwhile more and more people are objecting to the environmental and scenic impact of wind farms.
Companies such as Florida Power and Light (FPL), one of the largest wind farm owners, avoided paying any income taxes in 2002 or 2003 on income of $2 billion. “Apparently FPL Energy (FPL’s wind energy subsidiary) took more than $1.2 billion in depreciation deductions in those years."
J.P.Morgan and Goldman Sachs are major financers of wind farms and are acquiring wind farms themselves.
These are a few of the findings in a comprehensive paper by Glenn Schleede.
Hidden behind all the hype surrounding wind farms is that the true cost of electricity from wind farms and damage to the environment is much greater than the advocates of wind power would admit.
Wind power only works when the wind is blowing so that the electricity generated by wind farms is variable and inconsistent: It doesn’t start until wind is blowing at 8 mph and cuts off when the wind blows above 56 mph. All the while a backup gas turbine must be kept running to go on line at a moment’s notice when the wind stops blowing. The cost of backup power isn’t included when advocates calculate the cost of wind power. The extra burden of managing the grid and transmitting this power is also excluded.
Last
year the Royal Academy of Engineering established that wind
energy costs twice as much as coal, gas or nuclear generated
electricity.
Bird
kills, scenic destruction and emissions from the backup gas
turbines are not included in the hype by wind advocates.
This
latest report shows how big money and unknowing politicians have
foisted wind power on the public; with the tax payer picking up
the bill.
Wind Hits Turbulence.
Recent events have seen wind hit some rough turbulence; here and in Germany.
In Germany, a country that has embraced wind power, the magazine Der Spiegel published details leaked from a report prepared at the behest of the German Parliament that said overall energy costs for consumers will climb from EU 1.4 billion to EU 5.4 billion if Germany doubles its wind power by 2015; this is a 380% increase.
In addition the newspaper Die Welt reported that German banks are increasingly unwilling to finance off-shore wind farms. Their reasoning is that off-shore installations are too risky.
Thousands of bat carcasses have been found among the trees and ridges of West Virginia and Pennsylvania.
The off-shore wind farm at Cape Cod suffered a set back when the Army Corps of Engineers reported that radar detected 127,697 birds and bats flying through the project’s proposed area during a recent two month period.
This proposed wind farm covers 24 square miles and sits less than five miles from shore in places. The 130 wind turbines would stand 328 feet high, or roughly the height of a 33 story building.
In California, the slaughter of thousands of birds each year, including golden eagles, hawks and owls, has led the San Francisco based Center for Biological Diversity to file a lawsuit seeking a halt or significant reduction in bird deaths from wind turbines.
Farmers near Flint Hills, Kansas, together with the Audubon Society and The Nature Conservancy, have opposed the building of wind farms. What has these groups up in arms is that the Flint Hills area is where two thirds of the remnants of America’s tallgrass prairie still exists. The proposed wind farms would destroy the habitat and beauty afforded by this area. Furthermore, it is claimed that only two absentee land owners would benefit from lucrative leases at the first complex; a 10 acre site near Rosalia in Butler County.
In Louisiana there is a proposal to build up to 10 wind farms totaling as many as 250 wind turbines as tall as 27 story buildings; with many visible from the shoreline. Even supporters of these wind farms admit that they are economically unviable and will fail unless the state forces Louisiana residents to purchase power at up to three times the cost of conventional electricity: Supporters seek such a requirement through a proposed renewable portfolio standard. The Times-Picayune observed "in most cases, green power costs more-- sometimes considerably more--than electricity produced by more conventional methods. Commissioner Foster Campbell, a supporter of the wind farm proposal, said "Without a renewable energy portfolio standard, this project will be dead".
February 20, 2005
Largest Wind Turbine.
REpower Sytems AG completed the installation of a prototype 5MW wind turbine next to the 800 MW Brunsbüttel nuclear power station in northern Germany in October and connected it to the grid in early November.
The 5MW unit is intended for off-shore applications and has a rating twice that of GE’s largest unit which is also designed for off-shore applications.
To test the unit off-shore, REpower also signed an agreement to install another 5MW unit in the Cuxhaven test field in 2005.
Siting the 5MW unit next to the nuclear power station begs comparison of wind energy and nuclear power.
Because wind turbines have a capacity factor of approximately 30% while nuclear has a capacity factor of over 90%, it will require approximately 480, 5MW wind turbines to produce the same power as the 800 MW nuclear power plant.
The operating costs of nuclear are approximately 1.5 cents per KwH while wind, after accounting for the need to maintain spinning reserves, is about 4 times as costly.
Capital cost of the 5 MW units were not given by REpower systems AG so capital costs of these wind turbines cannot be compared with the capital cost of nuclear.
Two other issues; area required for wind turbines, and whether wind energy contributes to energy independence are important.
Larger wind turbines require more area due to the way wind turbines disturb the air flow around the units: Larger units require that they be spaced further apart so that output per area does not increase with larger units.
Only 2.45% of the electricity generated in the U.S. is generated by oil, so that little if any oil is saved by using wind power. Adopting wind power, therefore, does not contribute to energy independence.
The 5 MW unit stands about 330 feet above sea level and has a rotor diameter of approximately 430 feet. For comparison purposes the height of the Statue of Liberty is 307 feet (distance from pedestal foundation to torch).
December 19, 2004
True Costs of Wind Power.
“The
true cost of electricity from wind is much greater than the benefits”.
This was the message at a meeting of the owners and members of the
Associated Electric Cooperative Inc.,
Tax
avoidance by wind farm developers is the prime motivation for building
wind farms…Not the environment. Accelerated depreciation and the
production
tax credit (PTC) result in huge write offs to the developer,
with the consumer ultimately paying the bill. This was only part
of the message presented by Glenn Schleede at the meeting.
The
fact that wind produced only about one third of 1% of the
electricity consumed in 2002 and that the US energy Information
Administration (EIA) doesn’t expect wind to supply even 1% of
US electricity by 2025 demonstrates the false promise of wind
power; wind power will not play a significant role in US power
generation by 2025…if ever.
In
fact, the EIA forecasts that traditional methods using coal,
natural gas, hydro and nuclear will continue to produce 95% of
the electricity consumed in the
Some
of the technical reasons for the poor performance of wind
include:
-
Very low capacity factor. (The units only generate electricity when the wind is blowing…and isn’t blowing too fast.)
-
Transmission line losses compared with traditional units located nearer the customer. (Remote wind turbines must move power from their remote location to where it is used which incurs line losses.)
-
The need for stand-by power. Since wind doesn’t blow steadily, traditional generating units must be kept spinning to take up the slack or fill in when wind power varies; or stops.
Arguments
often used by the proponents of wind power include a contention
that traditional fuels, coal, nuclear and natural gas, receive
subsidies and that the
The
presentation demonstrates that wind receives a disproportionate
amount of subsidization.
And,
in so far as the
The
entire presentation “Facing
up to the True Costs and Benefits of Wind Energy” can be
downloaded from the renewables section of this web site.
A new analysis of wind farms shows that the Jobs and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) model developed by the Department of Energy grossly overstates the economic benefits derived from the building of wind farms. (See next page to download full report.)
The JEDI model uses default values to determine the number of jobs and other economic benefits resulting from the building of a wind farm. Default values can be adjusted to reflect local conditions.
The
new study shows that the JEDI “default recommendations produces
estimates of economic benefits and jobs that are more than 200% higherthan
estimates based on more reasonable assumptions”.
For
example the JEDI model includes, in its job forecast, highly
specialized jobs for which local workers will not be qualified.
These specialized jobs, such as for tower construction and
turbine installation, will likely be filled by imported workers.
Similarly, maintenance of turbines and controls will probably be
performed by traveling specialists, not by local workers.
The
JEDI model also does not include costs that the community will
incur once the wind farm is built. These costs include police
and fire protection, road maintenance and possible environmental
costs, including loss of scenic value. The JEDI model also does
not include the higher cost of electricity produced by the wind
farm.
State
and local government officials and those interested in wind
farms can download this report from this web site.
Report can be downloaded from Renewables section.
“Errors and Excesses in the NREL’s JEDI-WIM Model
that Provides
Estimates of the State or Local Economic Impact of “Wind Farms”
Includes
A demonstration of the NREL Model’s Overestimates --
Using the Example of a “Wind Farm” proposed
for Highland County, Virginia
By
Glenn Schleede
Wind Energy’s Real Costs.
A
study published by the Royal Academy of Engineering established that wind
energy costs twice as much as coal, gas or nuclear generated electricity.
Furthermore, the study established that wind power was generally more costly even after assigning charges for CO2 against the coal and gas power plants.
The
RAE web site introduces their
report as follows:
“Can we afford to keep the lights on?
Real future electricity costs"
"In
a report published today (10 March), The Royal Academy of
Engineering reveals that electricity from offshore wind farms,
currently the most viable renewable source, will cost at least
twice as much as that from conventional sources.”
Study
results are shown here. Costs are in pence per kWhr.
Without CO2 emissions charge
-
Gas fired Combined Cycle Gas Turbine 2.2 p
-
Nuclear 2.3 p
-
Coal fired pulverized coal 2.5 p
With
CO2 emissions charge
-
Gas fired Combined Cycle Gas Turbine 3.4 p
-
Nuclear 2.3 p
-
Coal fired pulverized coal 5.0 p
The
CO2 charge was £30 per ton (approximately $45 per ton)
-
On Shore Wind farm, and 3.7 p
-
Off Shore Wind Farm and 5.5 p
With
standby generation
-
On Shore Wind farm, 5.4 p
-
Off Shore Wind Farm 7.2 p
These costs were derived by accounting for construction cost of
new plants together with maintenance, operation and fuel costs.
Decommissioning costs were assigned to the nuclear alternatives
but not the others on the assumption that scrap value would
equal decommissioning costs for wind etc.
The
complete report can be seen by going to the Royal Academy of
Engineering web site www.raeng.org.uk
Largest Wind Turbine.
REpower Systems AG recently unveiled plans for a 5 MW wind turbine at the Husam, Germany wind exhibition. The completed unit will have a rotor diameter of 415 feet and stand 400 feet tall. Typical 2.5 MW units are around 360 feet tall.
For comparison purposes the Statue of Liberty is 305 feet tall.
The unit is targeting offshore applications. It is believed that fewer units spaced further apart will reduce objections people have re wind turbines obstructing the scenery.
The larger unit will not produce more electricity per acre than smaller units. Aerodynamics require that all wind turbines be separated by approximately seven times their rotor diameter which results in larger units having a greater distance between them: And with fewer units per land (or sea) area the amount of electricity generated per acre remains unchanged. 5 KW per acre has been determined to be the approximate amount that can be generated by wind turbines.
The prototype is to be built in 2004. Typical large units currently in production by GE, Vestas and other companies are rated 2.5 MW. 3 MW prototype units have been built with GE advertising a 3.6 MW unit.
When considering the amount of electricity wind turbines can generate, it is important to remember that their capacity factor is about 30%.
For
more complete information on Renewable Energy see ”The False
Promise of Renewable Energy” under “Renewables” on the
home page.
Wind Troubles.
European industry and individuals oppose wind turbines while in the U.S. Winergy LLC cut its offshore Virginia wind farm proposal from 271 wind turbines to 150.
Couple Winergy's actions with the fact that total U.S. installations in 2003 are still below the 1000 unit peak achieved two years ago and it's clear that wind energy isn’t growing fast enough to have any serious effect on U.S. electric production.
European opposition to wind farms is growing: Developers are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain permits: Businesses oppose wind farms claiming they are being burdened with expensive green electricity that threatens their competitiveness in world markets: Local citizens have obtained court orders blocking wind farms by complaining that wind farms are noisy and ugly.
Ironically,
while wind is not growing rapidly in the
Looming ahead is the technical fact that wind power relies on wind and the wind doesn’t blow when there is a high pressure air mass that is coincidental with heat waves and very cold weather. This precludes wind power from meeting sudden surges in demand when European’s turn on the heat or air-conditioning. When the wind doesn’t blow there is no electricity from wind turbines.
In
the
As
expected, the proponents of the
Bottom line, however, is that wind farms are becoming increasingly controversial.
Doubts About Wind in Germany
Growing chorus of German politicians want to shift back to coal, oil and
gas. Economic Minister Clement has stated that the 4.5 percent of
Meanwhile
the summer heat wave showed that wind power wasn’t available
when it was needed the most: for air conditioning. The heat wave
produced windless days and nights: and little power from wind
turbines.
Critics
have argued that wind power is too expensive to fill the vacuum
left after
Clement's
predecessor in 2001, Werner Miller, concluded Germany
could not meet its energy needs and emissions targets
established in the Kyoto Protocol if it entirely abandoned
nuclear energy.
Groups Protest Bird Kills.
Over
25 environmental groups and individuals called on the Secretary of the Interior, Gale
Norton, to investigate the impact of wind turbines on migratory birds.
The letter specifically
referred to the planned construction of several hundred wind
turbines along Appalachian mountain ridges. Wind turbines rise
400 feet above the ground and there have been reported deaths of
migratory birds, such as warblers and other song birds, in
Over
500 wind turbines have been planned within a fifteen mile area
in
The
organizations responsible for the letter included the National
Audubon Society, Endangered Species Coalition, The Humane
Society of the United States, Friends of Blackwater,
Massachusetts Audubon Society, Audubon-Pennsylvania, Appalachian
Voices, The Center for Biological Diversity, International
Wildlife Coalition, Center for Native Ecosystems, Southern
Appalachian Biodiversity Project, Defenders of Wildlife, Animal
Protection Institute, plus another seventeen organizations and
numerous scientists and individuals.
Wind Power Hits Downdraft.
Wind
power in the
On
the upside for wind power, GE has introduced a new 3.7 MW wind
turbine which is nearly twice the size of the largest current
production models and six times the size of the 600 MW units
still commonly installed. Use of these larger machines may help
Cape Wind Associates LLC obtain approval for their proposed wind
farm offshore from
GE’s participation in the business brings tremendous engineering talent to bear on the problem of turbine design. GE reportedly has 1500 employees dedicated to wind power which represents a huge investment of GE resources in a fledgling technology.
Wind Blows Grimly in EU
Vestas,
German utilities produce base load power for 2.6 cents per KWhr but must buy it from wind producers at 8.6 cents per KWhr when the wind is blowing: And charge its customers for the higher cost.
Sunday December 1, 2002
Copyright © 2002 - 2006 TSAugust