Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday August 31 2020, @09:54AM   Printer-friendly
from the fans-help-the-earth-turn dept.

Nine gigawatts of wind turbines were added last year in the US:

Earlier this year in the US, energy generation from wind, solar, and hydroelectric dams combined to top coal generation for over two months straight. This was the product of spring peaks in renewable generation and reduced electrical demand during lockdowns, but those events were layered on top of coal's continuing decline and the long-term growth of renewables. A new report from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory looks back at 2019—what is now known as the Before Times—to tally up year-end totals for the wind industry.

[...] a little over nine gigawatts of wind capacity was added last year—slightly more than in each of the four previous years. Wind accounts for about one-third of all new generation added in 2019, and it ticked up to seven percent of all electricity generated in the US.

[...] The trend toward bigger wind turbines continued, with the average capacity of a turbine built last year reaching 2.55 megawatts. The height of the tower on which the turbine sits has risen over time—now averaging 90 meters—but the bigger factor is longer blades. Average rotor diameter was 120 meters, up from closer to 80 meters a decade ago.

[...] Costs, meanwhile, continue to tick down from a 2010 peak, reaching about $850 per kilowatt for turbines and $1,400 per kilowatt on the project scale. That brings the average cost of electricity produced from wind to $36 per megawatt-hour. Wind has maintained its cost lead over natural gas electricity, although solar electricity has caught up in the last few years.


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This discussion has been archived.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 bart on Monday August 31 2020, @04:23PM (8 children)

    by bart (2844) on Monday August 31 2020, @04:23PM (#1044632)

    And it becomes ca 2GW, or about 2 nuclear plants. On top of that, we still need the conventional plants in case the wind doesn't blow (or blows too hard). And for that we mess up the landscape on a massive scale.

    No, I don't like wind energy. It's a 17th century solution to a 21st century problem.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jimtheowl on Monday August 31 2020, @04:32PM (6 children)

    by jimtheowl (5929) on Monday August 31 2020, @04:32PM (#1044635)
    It is obviously not a solution in itself, but established energy interests do not like their profit margins to be cut into. And for that, silly argument such as 'we don't like the look of them' are common.

    As for the century, what do you make of the wheel as an invention?
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2020, @05:28PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2020, @05:28PM (#1044652)

      You are bad at arithmetic. As a matter of fact, I'll bet you have never even DONE the arithmetic.
      Wind power is but a mousefart compared to what nuclear, gas, or coal can produce. You need vast areas covered by windmills to still not equal what one good traditional power plant provides. Even then, you still have the issue that sometimes the wind doesn't blow. What then? Either people are without power, or else they rely on gas, nuke, or coal plants to take up the slack.

      You don't have to take my word for it: look at California and their rolling blackouts. You might bring up Germany as a counterexample, but when their green power quits on them, they buy power from the neighboring countries who are generating with traditional power sources. We can't be completely solar and wind. Traditional power sources are dependable and necessary to do the job when green quits.

      • (Score: 3, Touché) by jimtheowl on Monday August 31 2020, @09:03PM (4 children)

        by jimtheowl (5929) on Monday August 31 2020, @09:03PM (#1044709)
        "We can't be completely solar and wind."

        You are arguing statements that I did not make, so you are bad at honesty.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2020, @11:25PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2020, @11:25PM (#1044748)

          OK, so we agree on the point that we will need some non-renewable energy sources in the mix. On to your other point then about established energy producers not liking lowered profits from the new renewable sources. Are you going to deny that renewables got their start (profitability) because of govt subsidies compared to the incumbents? I hear now that some renewables may be cheap enough that they no longer need the subsudies that have kept them competitive. Well, there would still be the laws that require X percentage of electricity be generated by renewables, and also the lack of reliability guarantees on renewable electrical generation because it is impossible for renewables to meet them. No, I don't think liberal economics is responsible for the success of renewables *generally speaking.*

          • (Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday September 01 2020, @12:39AM (1 child)

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday September 01 2020, @12:39AM (#1044776)

            The oil industry receives about $20 billion in subsidies per year. Subsidies are not what is making renewables competitive.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 01 2020, @02:07AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 01 2020, @02:07AM (#1044796)

              $1,020B more like when you factor in geopolitical overheads.

          • (Score: 2) by jimtheowl on Tuesday September 01 2020, @01:06PM

            by jimtheowl (5929) on Tuesday September 01 2020, @01:06PM (#1044885)
            You are whining about the existence of some law in some region that you only know about for the sake of what exactly? Fairness?

            You are arguing with yourself about a bunch of bullshit. No one cares about the role of "liberal economics" in the success of renewable... *generally speaking*.
  • (Score: 1) by chr on Monday August 31 2020, @08:45PM

    by chr (4123) on Monday August 31 2020, @08:45PM (#1044704)

    Do you have a reference for the 20% capacity factor?

    For US wind in 2019, it's more like 34.8% according to [1]. A wind farm can certainly have a higher capacity factor than that, e.g. 48% for the danish wind farm Horns Rev 2 (measured over seven years).

    [1] https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_6_07_b, [eia.gov] accessed 2020-08-31
    [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor#Wind_farm, [wikipedia.org] accessed 2020-08-31