Wind power touted at hearing on state energy plan

NEWARK -- Public comment began Thursday on the draft version of Gov. Jon S. Corzine's energy master plan, a widely critiqued road map for sourcing and husbanding power amid global warming for the next two ...

[LessHypeMoreFact]

Spain has, for a period, supplied over 38% of its electical power from wind. Wind is one of the most mature and cost effective technologies and certainly New Jersey is not without enough steady winds offshore to power them.

[MDJ]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

Spain has, for a period, supplied over 38% of its electical power from wind. Wind is one of the most mature and cost effective technologies and certainly New Jersey is not without enough steady winds offshore to power them.

38%, are you sure of this. What is your source. Sounds awfully high.

[tina anne]

Spain has been having problems with brown outs from wind power just like they had in Texas/Oklahoma. Spain solved the problem on the short term by importing power from France who has been using more nuclear power.

If NJ keeps it as more as a add on to help with peak power periods they may be able to make it a vialable option considering that offshore would have little transmission loss. Then again it is going to have larger maintance costs from corrosion and stresses on the structure.

Sierra Club's Jeff Tittel is dreaming if he thinks that they can provide 40% he talking about.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

MDJ wrote:

<quoted text>38%, are you sure of this. What is your source. Sounds awfully high.

It IS awfully high. Their target was 20% but improvements in load levelling and prediction of wind output allowed them to keep the system stable with a large percentage of wind.

Source was one of American Scientist, Scientific American, Discover or New Scientist. I can't remember which one had the article.

Note that this was NOT long term. It was a peak value under 'optimal' conditions with a steady wind and relatively low overall demand.

The point is that normally wind is assumed to be unworkable at levels above 20% or so (due to varibility of output).

It has been noted that combinations of solar and wind tend to be more stable than either alone since their 'optimal conditions' tend to be the opposite of each other.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

tina anne wrote:

Spain has been having problems with brown outs from wind power just like they had in Texas/Oklahoma. Spain solved the problem on the short term by importing power from France who has been using more nuclear power.

Having 'base load' from whatever is just part and parcel of the total transmission grid. It has nothing to do with 'brownouts from wind'. That is nonsense hype. It is no different than blackouts, just not to the point of shutdown.

Nor does it matter which country generates the base load. That is not an 'emergency fix' for wind power. Electricity generated by nuclear, wind, or coal is the same. Wind power only introduces more variabiltiy in output so requiring the control systems to be more adaptable.

[slack]

NJ should be able to make out real good with wind power, lord knows there is ALLOT of hot air in this state. they should put the windmills near Trenton State house.. We could supply the world with electricity with all the hot air coming from there..

[tina anne]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
Having 'base load' from whatever is just part and parcel of the total transmission grid. It has nothing to do with 'brownouts from wind'. That is nonsense hype. It is no different than blackouts, just not to the point of shutdown.
Nor does it matter which country generates the base load. That is not an 'emergency fix' for wind power. Electricity generated by nuclear, wind, or coal is the same. Wind power only introduces more variabiltiy in output so requiring the control systems to be more adaptable.

No amount of variable control will help when the wind stops.
Also while it dosn't matter how you supply the power for the base load it does matter that it is supplied. The modern world needs a reliable power source and that is where wind and solar fail. It isn't something that can supply power at a reliable level 24/365. As a way to help with peak it has some promise. Espically in this case where transmission distances would be short. On the other hand they are going to need more maintence not less for offshore systems. Both to counter the effects of salt water and the pounding that the ocean can dish out at times.

[LuckyinNC]

The biggest problem with wind and solar energy is the unreliability of this resource. Because of that, you still have to have traditional power plants on hand to absorb the load when the wind stops blowing or when the sun is not shining. So in effect, it will cost ratepayers much-much more for their electric energy since the utilities have to build and maintain both wind and traditional generating plants to meet our energy needs.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

LuckyinNC wrote:

The biggest problem with wind and solar energy is the unreliability of this resource.

Too some degree, but generally they are sited where winds almost never fall below the 'minimum' needed. And with many sites it evens out. Using some sort of compensation such as solar ( strongest when winds are weakest) or pumped storage can level it out enough to support about 20% minimum in the mix, and as Spain showed, even more if the winds are steady. Base load can be shifted in or out as needed, saving coal and emissions. No big deal.

[LuckyinNC]

There are few places where the wind almost never falls below the minimum needed. Look at the wind maps for NJ..not that impressive except for off-shore. Coastal land areas are rated "fair" and will surely be scrutinized and held up by land owners. Adding solar just adds to the cost. No big deal except for the impact on ratepayers.

[tina anne]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
Too some degree, but generally they are sited where winds almost never fall below the 'minimum' needed. And with many sites it evens out. Using some sort of compensation such as solar ( strongest when winds are weakest) or pumped storage can level it out enough to support about 20% minimum in the mix, and as Spain showed, even more if the winds are steady. Base load can be shifted in or out as needed, saving coal and emissions. No big deal.

Actually it is when your talking econmics. Business and indurty will base decisions on where to build as much on energy and transportation as much as they will on the regulatory enviroment. If your building widgets and your factory looses power for more than just a few seconds then you have to do a restart on the lines. That is time when your widgets are not rolling off the line and into the market place. Same goes with others like retail outlets. Loss of power for more than a minute can have a major effect on the bottom line with customers leaving without purchasing products.

[MDJ]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually it is when your talking econmics. Business and indurty will base decisions on where to build as much on energy and transportation as much as they will on the regulatory enviroment. If your building widgets and your factory looses power for more than just a few seconds then you have to do a restart on the lines. That is time when your widgets are not rolling off the line and into the market place. Same goes with others like retail outlets. Loss of power for more than a minute can have a major effect on the bottom line with customers leaving without purchasing products.

I've suted plants strictly on energy concerns due to a sweetheart deal on energy. Examples are siteing a plant next to a landfill to get the gas cheap and going where it is .06/khw vrs 9 - 12. there is also the env. regs. Why site where they restrict co2 when you can site where they don't? one less headache/cost. If you can site in mexico where they will not be regulating co2,(nor much of anything else), or the US where they will, which way do you go? It is pretty much a no brainer. You go where the coast is low and the reliability is good.

[LessHypeMoreFact]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually it is when your talking econmics. Business and indurty will base decisions on where to build as much on energy and transportation as much as they will on the regulatory enviroment.

There is NO, repeat NO problem with load levelling. Using wind power does NOT force unpredictable outages if properly regulated and making up about 20% of the power. Nor does it relate to siting. You are truly on an irrational rant, trying 'fear mongering' to make your argument which just shows how clueless you really are.

In 2005, wind machines in the United States generated a total of 17.8 billion kWh per year of electricity, installed in 25 different states. None of these states suddenly had problems with blackouts. Nor is Spain or Germany with major wind investments finding any problem regulating them.

[tina anne]

MDJ wrote:

<quoted text>I've suted plants strictly on energy concerns due to a sweetheart deal on energy. Examples are siteing a plant next to a landfill to get the gas cheap and going where it is .06/khw vrs 9 - 12. there is also the env. regs. Why site where they restrict co2 when you can site where they don't? one less headache/cost. If you can site in mexico where they will not be regulating co2,(nor much of anything else), or the US where they will, which way do you go? It is pretty much a no brainer. You go where the coast is low and the reliability is good.

Actually I would not be surprised if they wern't already. I would not be surprised if Mexico starts selling us electricity. I would be a great deal for someone who had the money. So would building refineries in Mexico if they were not state owned or controlled like they currently are. That is why Mexico can sell Diesel at $2.50 a galleon.

[tina anne]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
There is NO, repeat NO problem with load levelling. Using wind power does NOT force unpredictable outages if properly regulated and making up about 20% of the power. Nor does it relate to siting. You are truly on an irrational rant, trying 'fear mongering' to make your argument which just shows how clueless you really are.
In 2005, wind machines in the United States generated a total of 17.8 billion kWh per year of electricity, installed in 25 different states. None of these states suddenly had problems with blackouts. Nor is Spain or Germany with major wind investments finding any problem regulating them.

Check again, the Texas Oklahoma area wind generation dropped off suddenly when they had a unexpected calm period. Washington had a surge when they had higher than predicted winds.

http://lonestartimes.com/2008/02/28/calm-weat...

http://www.kgw.com/business/stories/kgw_07060...

Just because your not hearing about the problems dosn't mean that they don't exist. In many cases the majority of the media is ignoring it for stories on which celib just sold thier baby pics for how many millions of dollars.

[mr Giblets]

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
There is NO, repeat NO problem with load levelling. Using wind power does NOT force unpredictable outages if properly regulated and making up about 20% of the power. Nor does it relate to siting. You are truly on an irrational rant, trying 'fear mongering' to make your argument which just shows how clueless you really are.
In 2005, wind machines in the United States generated a total of 17.8 billion kWh per year of electricity, installed in 25 different states. None of these states suddenly had problems with blackouts. Nor is Spain or Germany with major wind investments finding any problem regulating them.

I admire the way you warmies all suddenly like wind and solar power, the moment Fat Al endorsed it (or discovered it as he will soon say). You all wanted ecofuels like ethanol until that all went wrong, and the tried to blame Bush!

PS. I doubt very much that 38% of Spain's electricity is from wind. Show us a Spanish source for this.(an OFFICIAL one)

[pedro_einstein]

Awesome, keep the discussion going. Hey wait I need to check my MRE supply and my deisel power generator. This is more fun then nuclear explosion drills in the 1950's.
It would be great to see 14 mpg ford explorers laying by the side of the road or at car dealerships sitting with an owner wanted sign. Hey ,that's already happening ,cool!!!!!!!!
What urban city dwelling person would want to be seen in one of those anyway. What an embarrassment for their simple glutonous, spoiled mentality. They deserve to lose THOUSANDS of dollars in car payments or gas bills for buying one in the first place. Good riddance.

[pedro_einstein]

O.k. I'm on a roll. Maybe we could send all the people who think there is no energy crises AND who buy gas guzzling vehicles to a central spot in Utah and unleash our new Army weaponry on them. Not the lethal stuff, just the sonic
crowd controller. Oh , and give them a garden spade and make them dig for oil to feed their huge "Jabba the Hut" mental appetites.

[mememine69]

pedro_einstein wrote:

O.k. I'm on a roll. Maybe we could send all the people who think there is no energy crises AND who buy gas guzzling vehicles to a central spot in Utah and unleash our new Army weaponry on them. Not the lethal stuff, just the sonic
crowd controller. Oh , and give them a garden spade and make them dig for oil to feed their huge "Jabba the Hut" mental appetites.

Oh I feel that liberal love!

[MDJ]

tina anne wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually I would not be surprised if they wern't already. I would not be surprised if Mexico starts selling us electricity. I would be a great deal for someone who had the money. So would building refineries in Mexico if they were not state owned or controlled like they currently are. That is why Mexico can sell Diesel at $2.50 a galleon.

There is a power plant near tiajuana that was built 10 miles over the border with a tranamission line straight to the CA grid. The environmentalists sued the US company who built it to make them fit it with US style,(CA style), pollution controls. It is still in court last i heard. There basic premis is that if the power is going to CA then the plant generating it must meet CA regs. Should be a summary judgement due to jurisdictional, MEX???, and just plain stupidity.