Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday August 15 2019, @08:21PM   Printer-friendly
from the finally-hookers-and-blow dept.

In an analysis of all suitable sites for onshore wind farms, the new study reveals that Europe has the potential to supply enough energy for the whole world until 2050. The study reveals that if all of Europe's capacity for onshore wind farms was realised, the installed nameplate capacity would 52.5 TW -- equivalent to 1 MW for every 16 European citizens.

Co-author Benjamin Sovacool, Professor of Energy Policy at the University of Sussex, said: "The study is not a blueprint for development but a guide for policymakers indicating the potential of how much more can be done and where the prime opportunities exist.

"Our study suggests that the horizon is bright for the onshore wind sector and that European aspirations for a 100% renewable energy grid are within our collective grasp technologically.

"Obviously, we are not saying that we should install turbines in all the identified sites but the study does show the huge wind power potential right across Europe which needs to be harnessed if we're to avert a climate catastrophe."

Spatial analysis of Geographical Information System (GIS)-based wind atlases allowed the research team to identify around 46% of Europe's territory which would be suitable for siting of onshore wind farms.

The advanced GIS data at sub-national levels provided a far more detailed insight and allowed the team to factor in a far greater range of exclusionary factors including houses, roads, restricted areas due to military or political reasons as well as terrains not suitable for wind power generation.

The greater detail in this approach allowed the research team to identify more than three times the onshore wind potential in Europe than previous studies.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Coward, Anonymous on Friday August 16 2019, @06:14AM (2 children)

    by Coward, Anonymous (7017) on Friday August 16 2019, @06:14AM (#880918) Journal

    I've always been curious how the problem of wind intermittancy scales with area. You still need a big storage option for when there's low wind for many consecutive days. That technology doesn't exist yet.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 16 2019, @10:13AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 16 2019, @10:13AM (#880972)

    The problem being that the most one can sensibly operate is 50% wind / solar.

    One needs to back such systems with at least equal thermal (e.g. coal, nuclear, CCGT, OCGT) capacity in order to have Grid Stability, cope with the variability of supply / demand, and handle days where there is no wind (or too much overcast).

    Witness the recent UK problems where one a day when they (probably for PR and political reasons) pushed > 40% renewables use, a minor drop out then caused frequency drops, and consequent Grid protection measure being automatically instigated.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 16 2019, @05:44PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 16 2019, @05:44PM (#881197)

      hmmmm... but by this logic, when the grid was born many aeons ago the newly installed generator was maybe 200% over capacity? and the grid broke down?
      methinks if you want to go intermittend source all the way you gotta overbuild capacity. you can throttle solar inverters and can probably throttle windmills too ...
      the folly is footing intermittant nameplate capacity on the same as non renewables?
      so sure, a 3500 watt solar inverter with enough pv modules will maximum output 3500 watt. it should be obvious that this depends on how strong the sunlight hitting the panels is ... like non at night.
      apple to apples ... pls?
      cost is a endless debate. so much what we pay for in modern times has energy cost included. even "money" would not work (being digital) without energy. so how do you calculate "cost" of a energy source that is free, unlimited but intermittant?
      money, dollar, rubels etc itself is closely tied to ... "the cost of energy".
      maybe for the programatically inclined, the equation that gives mathematicians a head-ache: x=x+1 might capture the problem of "cost of energy" a little bit?
      theoretical stuff aside (above) what the unwashed masses experiences as "cost of energy" is obviously the sticker price of the inverter and solarpanels at walmart or whatnot ... NOT the price of having to deal with (example) radiation contamination from nuclear powerplant fallout, which is generated in even working nuke plants but "contained"? oil spill? ground water contamination from fraking? price?