OT: Wind Generation Follow-up

Page 5 of 5  
George wrote:

That's what I'm saying--as far as I recall that was his position.
I did a quick search and there's so much junk out there I couldn't find quickly an actual transcript that was directly applicable quickly and certainly am not going to waste any more time over it.
I do know he did quite a lot of satirical stuff and that often gets taken out of context and quoted as the actual position instead of the satire instead.
I'll not claim anything specific on what actual comment was as I don't listen enough to have any clear recollections that are certain. In general though I don't necessarily agree on all his positions I think his position is generally pretty much consistent.

I just finished saying it _will_ get fixed to a certain extent (at least for some definition of "fixed" :) ). That's certainly not a statement there should be no changes or for additional regulation.
OTOH, the fact is that all the world's industrial economies are so strongly managed that for the US to unilaterally change grossly in some of these areas would be self-defeating in spades as the playing field rules would tilt markedly in favor of the other players.
Where the US needs restraint is mostly in the continued increase in additional oversight rules and regulations (EPA/OSHA/etc. come most easily to mind) that drive costs up and productivity down.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/17/2011 3:36 PM, Jeff Thies wrote:

Which people?
Liberal moon bats, I seen em with my own eyes. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've read that Holland isn't doing so well lately with it's wind generation.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

Holland is indeed behind. Denmark is much, much better. If memory serves right. Not going to look it up.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

Han, your query/comment regarding that Gray County might be limited in production for other than wind availability spurred me to look at whether could find more amenable wind data than had had access to previously -- what thinketh thou on this? (I'm still amazed it's so strongly correlated even w/ the previous observations on the cyclic nature.)
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I haven't been following the whole discussion (sorry). I really like the idea of wind energy, but, as has been pointed out before, storage is the big problem. Of course, more wind should indeed correlate with more wind energy being produced, if the demand is there.
Am watching the solar/wind/nuclear energy debate intensely. Need a good discussion of what is most efficient as baseline production vs supplying peak demand needs. With the climate going to be more extreme - both hot and cold - that'll be more and more necessary.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

The former was the point -- even though the facility (in one of the most favorable practical locations on earth) only generates 40% of nameplate capacity on an annual basis, these data indicate it is wind limited that causes that, not an external factor (in which case there would be weak, if any correlation).
As far as what is most efficient as baseline again there's no question--any conventional source is owing to there not being the vagaries of the fuel source that plagues solar or wind.
None are of particular value for peaking; one needs a rapid response rate load-following source for that.
The best the alternatives can do is some conventional replacement, but there they still have the reliability issue that the conventional has to be around when they don't produce. Add to that that it took 2.5X the installed generation capacity of what is produced in wind and expenses are high on a per MWe basis even if the fuel cost is negligible.
As for the presumption of global climate, that is, imo, going to follow whatever natural cycle and variation has been going on for millennia.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because of the source "reliability" issue, to be competitive the operational PLUS capital costs of wind or solar must be less than just the operational costs of conventionally fueled power plants (they have to be in place anyway).

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/16/2011 10:13 PM, dpb wrote:

Unfortunately few believe that actuarial data and the laws of physics apply to the "green" fantasy world.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

...or economics.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 17, 8:03am, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

I see, you're thinking that fossil fuels will get cheaper.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jamesgangnc wrote:

Uh, yeah.
In inflation-adjusted dollars, gasoline (for example) is cheaper - with a couple of exceptions - since it was in 1918 .
Here's a sample:
1918 - $3.61 ... 1958 - $2.26 1968 - $2.13 1978 - $2.17 1988 - $1.77 2008 - $3.26 2010 - $2.73
http://www.inflationdata.com/inflation/images/charts/Oil/Gasoline_inflation_chart.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Inflation will always track energy cost because the cost of energy controls the cost of everything else.
Jimmie
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What total rubish. Explain if energy controls the cost of everything else, why we have computers, TVs, all kinds of electronics that are cheaper today, both outright and shockingly so in inflation adjusted dollars, than they were 10 or 20 years ago. And how it is that I can buy a hammer at Walmart today for a few bucks. Clearly it takes energy to make and deliver all those things.
Yeah, energy is one component of the price of most items, but it surely doesn't control the price.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Silly. If what you say were true, energy prices don't matter at all.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/17/2011 8:08 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:

Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. I am all for doing stuff to conserve energy. But not for feel good throwing boxes of money at stuff "just because".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He arrived at that conclusion because he's a typical watermellon (or perhaps just another useful idiot).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I see. You're stupid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Trouble with that is we would have lengthy blackouts every 2 years while they were out campaigning for re-election.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.