Wind hits a new high — setting record generation rates in Texas

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://green.venturebeat.com/2010/03/05/wind-hits-a-new-high-setting-record-generation-rates-in-texas/

Wind hits a new high — setting record generation rates in Texas

March 5, 2010 | Camille Ricketts

Wind is generally considered the front-runner when it comes to renewable sources of energy — both cheaper and more reliable than solar. The government certainly prioritized it last year when it doled out millions in grants, mostly to wind firms. http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/setting-wind-power-records-in-texas/">Now news of record-setting wind generation out of Texas confirms that turbines are probably the best bet.

Apparently, early this morning, about 19 percent of the power on the major Texan grid came from wind installations (about 6,272 megawatts) — that’s an incredible amount considering that green-minded states like California are hoping to hit 33 percent from renewable power in general ten years from now. This is also significant given that not all of Texas’ turbines participated — the state’s Panhandle is actually on a different grid.

On a regular basis, Texas derives about 6 percent of its electricity on the grid from wind, http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/setting-wind-power-records-in-texas/">reports the New York Times. That’s not very much for a state that is far and away the leader in wind development. Interestingly, however, not all of the wind power generated in Texas is actually transmitted. The necessary infrastructure doesn’t yet exist to deliver it all to consumers. So who knows what could be achieved if this missing link were fixed?

Not that the problem has been neglected. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50S7IL20090129">The state is already investing $5 billion in transmission repairs and expansions. The goal is to string many more cables between the wind-heavy western region of Texas and the biggest cities, Houston, Austin and Dallas.

...

[Skink]

1. You'd think the electric charges would go down but no...

CPS is promising another rate hike.

[kristopher]

2. Anything to do with that South Texas Project nuclear fiasco?

The regulators have emerged from that episode with a distinct need to re-establish their credibility. At least, that's the way it looks from the outside...

[NNadir]

5. Actually, speaking of bull, the 5 billion dollar infrastructure requirement to keep the

unreliable trash - which will not last even 20 years - running is typical of the selective attention of the gas greenwashing industry for which wind is a fig leaf.

There is NOT ONE "wind will save us" line of anti-environmental hand waving selective attention that doesn't point to some 20 minute peak while ignoring the frequent zeros during which the wind nirvana in question burns dangerous natural gas.

Not one.

South Texas nuclear plant, according to the DOE, operated at 96% of capacity utilization in 2008.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/reactors/southtexas.html

There is not a wind facility on the entire planet that operates at 40% of capacity utilization, which is why the wind industry always reports its fraudulent figures in peak capacity, rather than energy.

The energy produced by each unit - contained not spread out over brazillions of square miles in the pathway of the whooping crane, but in a single building was more than 10,000 kilowatt-hours.

The, um, "hour" means - for anyone who knows physics, something not prone to being observed among "renewable save us" mentality types - makes it a unit of energy and not "peak" power.

The Comanche Peak plants in Texas operate with similar reliability.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/states/statestx.html

These plants produce more energy than all of the solar facilities in the entire United States, and unlike the solar facilities - which are distributed energy point source pollution hell holes - sort of like the dangerous CAR culture junk - they contain all of their by products on their property and can do so indefinitely without producing a single loss of human life.

In 2008, nuclear power produced 40,727,370 megawatt-hours - note the unit of energy and not some stupid scam reporting a 20 minute peak power figure. This is the equivalent, assuming that one can do math of 146 petajoules of energy, or 0.146 exajoules, all generated in 4 relatively small buildings.

The same year the gas figleaf greenwashing enterprise put forth by Conoco-Phillips/Sun Oil/Chevron/BP executive Amory Lovins produced 17,639,094 megawatt-hours.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/sept05tx.xls

By way of contrast, the entire nation of Denmark about which all of the oblivious anti-nukes love to prattle endlessly - Denmark being a dangerous fossil fuel exporter and greenwashing nation - produced 26 petajoules (0.026 exajoules) of wind energy, according to their own energy agency:

http://www.ens.dk/en-US/Info/FactsAndFigures/Energy_statistics_and_indicators/Annual%20Statistics/Documents/Figures2008.xls#Renewable!A4

Note that the 5 billion dollar "investment" in wind infrastructure does not include the unreliable short lived grease sticks in the sky themselves - most of which will not last 20 years as South Texas already has done, despite direct hits by several major hurricanes - but will blow apart well before then.

Have a nice denialist evening.

[Fledermaus]

3. CPS just lost 400 million in a nuclear money pit.

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. I wonder where the money to pay for that bill will come from...

(Obviously, it won't be coming out the the CEO's pocket.)