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)
19. Still making shit up, eh?
Fri Aug 14, 2015, 08:39 PM
Aug 2015
New NREL Data Suggests Wind Could Replace Coal as Nation’s Primary Generation Source
The new report finds wind is poised to become a dominant and possibly the primary source of electricity in the U.S.

Clayton Handleman
August 13, 2015


The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) recently released data showing that the capacity factor (CF) for wind power can reach 65 percent -- comparable to the CF of fossil-fuel-based generation.

While the headlines aren’t as sexy as Tesla’s "Ludicrous mode," the transformative implications for climate change dwarf Elon Musk’s latest accomplishment. Increasing a generator’s CF can increase its value in a variety of ways, including: reduced cost of energy, improved transmission-line utilization, and often, reducing stress on the grid by providing more power at times of peak demand. It will also likely reduce the amount of storage and natural gas needed to manage the grid under scenarios of high renewables penetration. Implicitly, NREL’s new report positions wind to become a dominant and possibly the primary source of electricity in the U.S.

Figure 1: Areas of the U.S. With Various Gross Capacity Factors for Differing Wind Technologies

Wind Potential Chart US 072015

Source: NREL

Note: The curve to the left shows the historical data, the middle (red) curve shows the data for state-of-the-art turbines, and the blue shows the anticipated performance of "near-future" turbines.

CF is the ratio of a generator’s average power output over a year to its nameplate rating. A CF of 100 percent would indicate that the generation source was always on and operating at its full rated power. Simply stated, a higher capacity factor means a generator of a given size will produce more energy over the year. CF sets a lower bound on the amount of time that a generator operates. If a generator is not operating at its full nameplate rating all the time, then it will produce power for a percentage of time that exceeds its CF.

With little fanfare, NREL released updated data showing that, with current technology, wind turbines could generate more than enough energy at 55 percent CF to power the entire U.S. However, the real stunner is that near-future turbine technology (i.e., 140-meter towers) could boost that to 65 percent CF. With the current national average wind CF (see page 34) at about 33 percent, this represents a near doubling. According to NREL, using current technology and siting it in prime locations, wind power CF can already exceed that of natural gas. Using "near-future" technology, wind power’s CF will exceed the CFs of both coal (61 percent) and natural gas (48 percent) achieved nationwide in recent years....

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/new-nrel-data-suggests-wind-could-replace-coal-as-nations-primary-generatio?utm_source=Daily&utm_medium=Headline&utm_campaign=GTMDaily

Recommendations

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

Excellent! GliderGuider Jul 2015 #1
Thanks for your kind words. Regrettably anything I might do to fight magical thinking... NNadir Jul 2015 #3
Jeb Bush assures me that some garage tinker is going to solve all this phantom power Jul 2015 #2
For now wind energy is simply digging the hole deeper. hunter Jul 2015 #4
^^^ That GliderGuider Jul 2015 #5
The main technical advantage - and it's huge - that fossil fuel have over so called... NNadir Aug 2015 #6
So, I guess you would disagree, then, with this from Nat'l Geographic~ RiverLover Aug 2015 #7
I certainly would. GliderGuider Aug 2015 #8
Thanks for the link. You just busted my beliefs, as I google EROI, so there's that. RiverLover Aug 2015 #9
Despite what some here suspect, I have nothing against renewable energy. GliderGuider Aug 2015 #10
Forgive me if I missed it but water about the water needed for cooling power plants? Finishline42 Aug 2015 #11
Funny you should mention it... NNadir Aug 2015 #12
What do you think of this author's take, basically a rebuttal of a German study...and it seems RiverLover Aug 2015 #13
I didn't catch this comment for a while... NNadir Aug 2015 #14
Thanks for your reply. But before I stick my head in my fossil fueled oven, (because if what you RiverLover Aug 2015 #16
nnadir has one objective on DU kristopher Aug 2015 #17
Well...if you have no hope because so called "renewable energy" is an expensive failure... NNadir Aug 2015 #18
Still making shit up, eh? kristopher Aug 2015 #19
I've provided lots of references from the primary scientific literature, for the... NNadir Aug 2015 #20
You embrace deception and thrive on decrepit logic kristopher Aug 2015 #21
Whatever. I think it's pretty clear what we think of one another. NNadir Aug 2015 #22
It isn't what people think of you that you should heed, it is what they think of your reasoning. kristopher Aug 2015 #23
Just as a broken clock is right twice a day, one of you sentences is actually right. NNadir Aug 2015 #24
Coal and nuclear, two sides of the same coin kristopher Aug 2015 #15
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Sustaining the Wind, Part...»Reply #19