- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Wind Power Production Drops Despite 6.2GW of Added Capacity
Posted on 5/1/24 at 6:55 am
Posted on 5/1/24 at 6:55 am
LINK
Note that “capacity factor” is the percentage of actual power produced compared to the nameplate or rating. For example, nuclear and natural gas power plants can consistently operate at capacity factors over 90%.
quote:
But what happens when you build massive amounts of wind energy capacity and it doesn’t deliver — not for a day or a week, but for six months, or even an entire year? That question is germane because, on Wednesday, the Energy Information Administration published a report showing that U.S. wind energy production declined by 2.1% last year. Even more shocking: that decline occurred even though the wind sector added 6.2 GW of new capacity!
quote:
The EIA also explained that the capacity factor for America’s wind energy fleet, also known as the average utilization rate, “fell to an eight-year low of 33.5%.” That compares to 35.9% capacity factor in 2022 which was the all-time high.
Note that “capacity factor” is the percentage of actual power produced compared to the nameplate or rating. For example, nuclear and natural gas power plants can consistently operate at capacity factors over 90%.
quote:
Imagine if the U.S. had spent that same $300 billion on a weather-resilient form of generation, like, say, nuclear power. That’s relevant because Unit 4 at Plant Vogtle in Georgia came online on Monday. With that same $300 billion, the U.S. could have built 20, 30, or maybe even 40 GW of new nuclear reactors with a 92% capacity factor that wouldn’t rely on the whims of the wind.
quote:
If climate change means we will face more extreme weather in the years ahead — hotter, colder, and/or more severe temperatures for extended periods — it’s Total Bonkers CrazytownTM to make our electric grid dependent on the weather. But by lavishing staggering amounts of money on wind and solar energy, and in many cases, mandating wind and solar, that’s precisely what we are doing.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 6:57 am to bapple
Does wind ever even produce more value than what it costs to implement? Of all the renewable snakeoil it just seems like it's the oiliest.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:00 am to Huey Lewis
Because it is all bullshite.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:00 am to Huey Lewis
quote:idk about oiliest but its definitely the most murderous
Of all the renewable snakeoil it just seems like it's the oiliest.
just ask the birds
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:01 am to bapple
Take your obvious bait to the PoliBoard.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:08 am to Locoguan0
quote:
Take your obvious bait to the PoliBoard.
It’s nice to admit that the wind energy push is nothing but politics
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:20 am to bapple
Global warming. It's gotta be global warming doing it!
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:23 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
Does wind ever even produce more value than what it costs to implement?
Don’t worry it is helping out someone’s bank account.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:24 am to bapple
Who knew production would depend on something like....wind blowing a lot
Posted on 5/1/24 at 7:50 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
Does wind ever even produce more value than what it costs to implement?
Not since the invention of steam and petroleum fuel.
Building a large clipper, especially if you were doing it just out of wood (you know, to be more "environmentally friendly" rather than pump out all that nasty gas from smelting ore) would likely cost well into the tens of millions (the Götheborg replica was built nearly 20 years ago and cost $40M then). The load limit (~500-1k tons, I think) means it would take quite a few hauls for it to ever pay for itself.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:01 am to Chad504boy
quote:
It’s nice to admit that the wind energy push is nothing but politics
Wrong answer. Posting the article was obviously political, and it was bait for confirmation-biased replies. Someone was fishing for multiple thumbs-up (the butt).
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:04 am to bapple
So, cut off power 2/3 of the time to all the Green New Deal proponents (especially Congress) and let them enjoy their “green” energy.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:06 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
It’s the oiliest
Idk, ethanol is almost a higher hoax bc the sheeple have bought into that hook, line and sinker.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:10 am to Locoguan0
quote:
Wrong answer. Posting the article was obviously political, and it was bait for confirmation-biased replies. Someone was fishing for multiple thumbs-up (the butt).
Wrong answer.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:13 am to bapple
quote:FIFY, Biff
Even more shocking: that decline occurred even though the wind sector added 1.21 JW of new capacity!
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:13 am to Icansee4miles
quote:explain this if u dont mind.
ethanol is almost a higher hoax bc the sheeple have bought into that hook, line and sinker.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:18 am to bapple
quote:
Wind Power Production Drops Despite 6.2GW of Added Capacity
To put this in layman's terms, this is enough power to travel in time 5 times.
Posted on 5/1/24 at 8:20 am to Locoguan0
quote:
Posting the article was obviously political
Wut? How does wind farm capacity have anything to do with politics? It's merely a discussion.
You sound like someone who is against St. George.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News