Windfarms & Energy capacity

[rbt]

You don't even have to go that far out; just day-trip out NW of Shelburne, or along the Erie shore around Port Burwell...

There are lots (60 to 100?) a touch south-east of Kincardine a bit inland from Lake Huron.

The only complaint I could have is the red light one top of each of them for pilots.

 

[doady]

Probably it is good idea for windmills near Toronto, instead of very far away liek the examples mentioned above. I don't know exactly what the transmission grid looks like, but I do know there are two nuclear power plants on the east side of the GTA (Pickering and Darlington), and Lakeview on the west side recently got decommissioned. For that reason, any wind farm should probably on the west side to replace Lakeview and so not overload the transmission lines on the east side. So probably Scarborough is not a good location. Offshore wind farms have a high chance to cause overloading of transmission lines because of high fluctuation in energy production and high concentration, so it is something that should be considered.

Is there any particular reason not build onshore windfarms first? Is there less wind? Onshore wind plants can be more spread out than offshore and so they would put less strain on the transmission grid so they could be better, even if less electricty is generated. And since they are on land they would probably be less expensive too.

 

[Whoaccio]

Offshore windfarms are supposedly cheaper per kw/h (bigger turbines, economies of scale, higher windspeeds).

 

[kEiThZ]

Transmission capacity is not an issue. It's fairly cheap to build. The main concern is always getting the right location so as to maximize the energy produced by the turbine.

In the long run though wind is not a solution. It's counter-cyclical to demand, and does not run consistently (same time of day, same production, etc.) That's about as unreliable as you can get.... Probably the most practical way to do wind energy is to buy those mini-turbines at CT and get everybody to set one up in their backyard. On a large scale though, I have my doubts.

 

[afransen]

Keith, I don't share your pessimism. Some portfolio optimization, effective energy storage, and solar willl make renewables more reliable.

 

[kEiThZ]

Keith, I don't share your pessimism. Some portfolio optimization, effective energy storage, and solar willl make renewables more reliable.

All buzz words by non-engineers who fail to understand some of the real challenges associated with power generation....namely that it's all about generating at the right time to meet demand. Portfolio optimization using renewables is extremely expensive because you essentially need to consider the reduced capacity mode of each mode of generation. ie you need to build for cloudy days and not windy days if you are using wind and solar.

Nobody is proposing that type of build-out en masse. And I suspect the cost of doing so is what's driving a lot of the conservation first pitch by government and environmentalists....not that conservation is not a worthwhile effort.

When it comes to wind though, there is nothing that can fix mother nature's tendency to blow a breeze when she feels like it, and not necessarily when the extra power is not needed. And global experience shows the havoc that wind farms can wreak on grid stability. When it comes to batteries, the best we have are the mechanical kind (pumping water up hill). Sadly, those are rather prohibitive to build. And when it comes to batteries, it gets damn hard to build batteries that can economically store power from wind farms. The type of deep cycles that power consumption activities demand would make battery life design challenges for hybrid cars seem like a grade 3 maths problem.

So are we prepared to take on the cost of building a system to compensate for cloudy days, low wind days, sunny days and windy days, all while incorporating significant storage capacity and the ability to near-instantly correct for a generation-demand mismatch? I'll love to put that question in a survey to be included in next month's electric bill....

Ultimately, the most effective form of power generation is hydro. But we have lost our penchant for small scale hydro and environmentalists have a disdain for large scale hydro. I hold more hope for solar (pro-cyclical in generation), geothermal, tidal power, and biomass in the long run. Large scale wind power is just a passing fad at best.

 

[doady]

Transmission capacity is not an issue. It's fairly cheap to build. The main concern is always getting the right location so as to maximize the energy produced by the turbine.

Is that why Germany is spending over 1 billion euros to upgrade its transmission grid and old turbines just to accomodate a lot of offshore wind? Yes, that's right, Germany has to upgrade old turbines just so the transmission grid can handle newer ones. For those that don't know, Germany currently has more than half of the world's supply of wind power.

All buzz words by non-engineers who fail to understand some of the real challenges associated with power generation....namely that it's all about generating at the right time to meet demand. Portfolio optimization using renewables is extremely expensive because you essentially need to consider the reduced capacity mode of each mode of generation. ie you need to build for cloudy days and not windy days if you are using wind and solar.

This is exactly part of what causes the strain on the transmission system: fluctuating electricity production. The output from renewables must be properly monitored and predicted, and electricity from other sources must be adjusted accordingly. Problem is not all conventional power plants can easily have their output adjusted. Coal power plants for example become very inefficient when they have their output reduced and that causes more carbon emissions. Germany is mostly coal powered, so it is probably going to have a lot of problems in the future. Ontario on the other hand is replacing or has replaced its coal plants with gas, which is much more flexible than coal, and so the system can better handle wind power. But problem is, natural gas reserves will not last long...

 

[afransen]

All buzz words by non-engineers who fail to understand some of the real challenges associated with power generation....namely that it's all about generating at the right time to meet demand. Portfolio optimization using renewables is extremely expensive because you essentially need to consider the reduced capacity mode of each mode of generation. ie you need to build for cloudy days and not windy days if you are using wind and solar.

I think you'll need to justify that to me a little more. Why exactly is portfolio optimization 'extremely expensive'? It is about strategically selecting sites so that the aggregate power output is less variable than its components, while still achieving a high electricity yield per dollar invested. Nothing mysterious, and math is cheap. I didn't suggest that we could or should replace the rest of the energy mix with renewables, but we can certainly reduce the need for gas and coal plants as a part of baseline power needs.

And I suspect the cost of doing so is what's driving a lot of the conservation first pitch by government and environmentalists....not that conservation is not a worthwhile effort.

... and business. Conservation has the highest return on investment, and is rightly the area that should be most emphasized.

When it comes to wind though, there is nothing that can fix mother nature's tendency to blow a breeze when she feels like it, and not necessarily when the extra power is not needed. And global experience shows the havoc that wind farms can wreak on grid stability.

For the first part, I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. For your second point, I'm not convinced that that is due to anything other than poor implementation.

When it comes to batteries, the best we have are the mechanical kind (pumping water up hill). Sadly, those are rather prohibitive to build. And when it comes to batteries, it gets damn hard to build batteries that can economically store power from wind farms. The type of deep cycles that power consumption activities demand would make battery life design challenges for hybrid cars seem like a grade 3 maths problem.

It seems like the best storage mode absent any handy reservoirs are flow batteries. However, there is plenty of reason to be hopeful that battery technology will improve significantly in the next decade. R&D spending in battery technology has grown exponentially in recent years. If EEStor manages to deliver what it promises (and Lockheed Martin seems to think the technology has enough promise to buy exclusive defense industry rights to the technology), electrical storage will rapidly improve in cost and reliability. If not, there are many other avenues in battery technology being explored.

So are we prepared to take on the cost of building a system to compensate for cloudy days, low wind days, sunny days and windy days, all while incorporating significant storage capacity and the ability to near-instantly correct for a generation-demand mismatch? I'll love to put that question in a survey to be included in next month's electric bill....

There is no need to instantly correct for significant variations in generation and demand. Over a short time frame, both demand and supply can be forecasted quite accurately. Wind and sun forecasts tend to be quite reliable over a forecast period of a few days, leaving plenty of time to ramp up gas or coal fired plants if necessary. I don't think renewables would be any less reliable than our aged nuclear fleet.

Ultimately, the most effective form of power generation is hydro. But we have lost our penchant for small scale hydro and environmentalists have a disdain for large scale hydro. I hold more hope for solar (pro-cyclical in generation), geothermal, tidal power, and biomass in the long run. Large scale wind power is just a passing fad at best.

I rather doubt that Keith, given wind is currently the cheapest in kW/$ capital and the impending hybrid fleet is going to cause a significant increase in electrical demand overnight. Solar is great, and something that will likely be relied on more heavily worldwide. Canada isn't the best suited climate for solar, and I expect our mix will feature a larger wind component. But you're mostly right--we'll need all of them.