MAR 04

Transmission lines are a big problem for wind development. I don't really see much progress in this area, and there is a "not in my back yard" opposition in general. Unlike nuclear, there is no shortage of investors willing to fund wind energy projects. Supposedly there is 300GW in the queue waiting for transmission lines.

Before, the limit was reached on transmission from wind energy parks, and they ended up bidding to sell power at negative cost (they paid a utility to take the power). Since they get a small clean-energy credit (1.8c/kWh), paying 1c for the utility to take the power is better than letting them run idle!

I'm sure they'll find a way to work it out. I guess that's how powerful the wind is.

Evan says: "I'm sure they'll find a way to work it out." You betcha. It looks like Texas will remain the great American energy state.
Several days ago The Energy Bulletin posted a story quoting The Texas banker Matt Simmonds suggesting we build huge wind farms off the State of Maine along with facilities to desalinate the Atlantic water and electrolize that into methane. Then build distribution pipelines from there.
We already have an abundance of gas lines from Texas to all points North. I should think it would be easier to pump and pipe water from the Gulf of Mexico to the West Texas wind farms. That way they would not disturb one of the great fishing grounds of the world And avoid the famous Maine coast perfect storms.
It has been written that there could be an overabundance of electricity produced from wind in this country so why not get get your eggs out of one basket?

Texas could accept discharged batteries for recharging. This would effectively bypass the grid because the batteries would be transported by road, rail and air.

As long as the turn around time wasn't excessive, people would use the service because they would be helping to save the planet.

Of course "they'll find a way to work it out" -- are in the process now of building competitive renewable energy zones (crez) to increase wind generation capacity to 18,456 MW.

http://www.lcra.org/energy/trans/crez/index.html

It does not surprise me that transmission lines capacity is an issue since up to 10 percent of electricity is lost while being transported over such lines, making it that much more important to generate closer to the user.

AIR AND WATER NEVER INCREASES
BUT THE CONSUMPTION DOES

WE HAVE TO CONTROL THE BIRTH OF EVERY OCCUPANTS LIVING IN THIS PLANET REGARDLESS OF THEIR COLOR, CREED,RELIGION, CONSIDER THE RIGHT OF EVERY BEINGS IN THEIR PAIN, PLEASURE, HUNGER, THIRST.EQUALLY AS YOU DO
THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE GENERATION THEIR EXISTENCE AFTER US AND THINK "WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR YOUR MOTHER AND FOR THIS EARTH"

JOIN NOW IN THE STRUGGLE TO PUT THE POWER BACK BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS PLANET

A key reason that Denmark and Germany have been able to lead the world in the development and implementation of wind and solar technology is that they have a law that gives renewable sources priority access to the grid. This does a couple of crucial things - first, it maximizes the amount of renewable energy on the grid at any given time, since renewables will displace non-renewable power. Second, it completely shifts the investment landscape, making investment in non-renewable generation riskier than renewables. It is a simple thing in theory, but challenging given the politics and power of non-renewable energy stakeholders. But it might be the single most effective change and the most straightforward way to eliminate this problem and shift the whole market.

Anytime the generation of clean energy exceeds expectations there is a silver lining in that it tells the rest of the world that the technology works and the infrastructure needs to be upgraded to handle it.

The issue isn't that the grid can't handle it, but the wind farms aren't yet CONNECTED to the grid for the DFW area. The main wind farm outside amarillo is a good 5 hour drive from the metroplex, mostly straight ranchland. Until it is connected (ETA 2015 from what I've heard) then turbine's energy doesn't go far.

And shipping batteries is a terrible idea? Wind energy cuts down on air emissions, that's why its "clean". If truckloads of batteries and planes were flown out to the middle of nowhere, or anywhere for that matter, it would completely negate the issue.

Infrastructure is the main issue here, the govt. needs more money invested in infrastructure, not *other* things.

The grid limitations shouldn't be a issue. The wind power should have #1 priority over all other forms of power generation. Not only for the source of power but also for infastructure setup by the utilities to distribute the power.

The South Texas Project is expected to begin construction on two new 1.35GW advanced boiling water reactors in 2012 to begin producing power in 2016. When you look at the total nameplate capacity of Texas wind generators (9.4GW±) multiplied by the capacity factor determined by ERCOT (8.7%) you get an actual generation of about 0.82GW. That's 0.82GW of unreliable power that has to be backed up by natural gas powered spinning reserve, that takes up thousands of acres in remote areas requiring hundreds of miles of new transmission lines, that spoils natural vistas, that irritates nearby residents, and that is a danger to wildlife. Compare that to over 3 times that amount of actual generating capacity added to an existing power plant in one shot, not far from the end users, with grid capacity already in place, and no need to attenuate for variable voltages and frequencies from thousands of individual generators spread across the state.

If you want to displace a polluter like the nearly 2GW Monticello coal plant, you could build two reactors like this with 500MW to spare, or you could build over 5,000 3MW turbines and hope the wind keeps up. Why are we bending over backwards for wind when safe, reliable nuclear is so available?