Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
21. I love when nuclear proponents use that foolish claim
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 03:19 PM
Jan 2012

A factory manufacturing wind turbines can put out 2.5GW of wind turbines per year. http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/10/automation-speeds-up-turbine-production?cmpid=WindNL-Wednesday-October19-2011

At the end of ten years this single plant should be responsible for manufacturing about 25 GW of wind turbines.

What's the total amount of electricity produced as the turbines come online over time during that period?
Since the wind doesn't blow all the time, the actual output was calculated using a recognized average that assumes they will produce 33% of their maximum capacity.

At the end of 5 years they would have deployed 5000 wind turbines. By the end of ten years that would be 10,000 turbines and they would have provided a cumulative total of approximately 389.7 terrawatt hours (TWh).

I selected 10 years because it is just under the 11 year average time it takes to plan and build one nuclear plant project, if it doesn't suffer delays - and they are almost behind schedule and over-budget.

At the international average 80% capacity factor, one (on the high-side-of-medium) nuclear plant of one gigawatt size actually produces about 7 TWh each year.

So devoting approximately the same resources to each technology gives us, at the end of 10 years:

10,000 wind turbines producing 72 TWhs of electricity per year

or

one nuclear plant that might be ready to begin to producing 7TWh per year.



Given the standard 20 year life span for the turbines and assuming the plant continued production of the same product, this factory will max out it's contribution to growth of wind power at 50GW when it hits the 20 year/20 20,000 turbine mark and starts to build replacements for those wearing out.



That 50GW of turbines should actually produce approximately 144 TWh of electricity every year and by this time the steadily mounting number of installed turbines will have produced a cumulative total of about 390TWh of electricity, or to put it another way, the total output of our one nuclear plant (at 7TWh/year) for 54 years!




50GW faceplate capacity X .33 capacity factor = 16.5GW of average continuous production. That 16.5GW equals approximately twenty (20) 1GW nuclear reactors operating at the international average capacity factor of about 80%, plus the 54 years worth of production from the nuclear plant that the wind turbines have already cranked out.

That's one factory making what is now a rather small 2.5MW wind turbine...

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

All the big dams have already been built. hunter Jan 2012 #1
Once upon a time Nederland Jan 2012 #2
We're including ethanol added to gasoline as "renewable power", are we? wtmusic Jan 2012 #3
Nukes and ethanol both have externalized social costs and require huge public subsidies Kolesar Jan 2012 #4
Wind subsidies/tax credits, as a proportion of the actual product they deliver wtmusic Jan 2012 #12
Let me show you how to support your claims kristopher Jan 2012 #6
ERROR!! ERROR!! ERROR!!! PamW Jan 2012 #9
classic move Maslo55 Jan 2012 #5
That makes no sense at all. kristopher Jan 2012 #7
This old saw PamW Jan 2012 #10
... Maslo55 Jan 2012 #28
I frequently see wind turbine blades traveling down the highway waddirum Jan 2012 #8
Compare the output power. PamW Jan 2012 #11
Hmmm… OKIsItJustMe Jan 2012 #13
Do you know the difference between a loan guarantee and a loan? wtmusic Jan 2012 #14
It appears that these two projects are about the same order of magnitude OKIsItJustMe Jan 2012 #15
A bit of a stretch. FBaggins Jan 2012 #16
This is one project OKIsItJustMe Jan 2012 #17
What's the next-largest in the US? FBaggins Jan 2012 #18
Why does this matter? OKIsItJustMe Jan 2012 #19
Because it's the relevant comparison. FBaggins Jan 2012 #20
I guess we need a more precise definition of “swamp” and “meager” OKIsItJustMe Jan 2012 #23
Roughly 4-5 times as much is "swamping" in my estimation FBaggins Jan 2012 #24
This demonstrates your false reasoning kristopher Jan 2012 #25
What percentage of the average wind turbine is produced at that plant? FBaggins Jan 2012 #26
Two problems with your take on this. kristopher Jan 2012 #27
Nope Maslo55 Jan 2012 #29
Nuclear Loan Guarantees Aren’t Just Guarantees: They are Actual Taxpayer Loans bananas Jan 2012 #30
No, they aren't. wtmusic Jan 2012 #31
Actually... they are. But why is that a bad thing? FBaggins Jan 2012 #32
IF the loan goes bad. wtmusic Jan 2012 #33
I love when nuclear proponents use that foolish claim kristopher Jan 2012 #21
Lol! And you're still spinning that nonsense. FBaggins Jan 2012 #22
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»America Is Getting More P...»Reply #21