Wind Power Milestone Reached!

Why are you deliberately ignoring the OPERATING costs and only focusing on the capital costs?

 

Except that is a ludicrous scenario.

The current grid does not require 100% backup so why is this suddenly a requirement for wind power?

 

Please actually read the links I've provided.

 

Because it is the capital costs as well as the operating costs (including maintenance which is significant for solar and wind) which determine the overall price of electrical energy to the consumer. The costs of wind and solar are not required to supply the grid with 24/7/365 power. Adding their costs to the costs of the 24/7/365 generation costs results in larger energy prices. German consumers pay ~ 3X what other nations do. Econ 101

 

The 24/7/365 grid covers 100% of demand. A grid composed of only intermittent wind and solar would not meet the requirements of the grid. Therefore any capacity provided intermittently by wind and solar must be matched by 24/7/365 sources.

 

I did and they were just spouting the disinformation that I have already debunked.

 

Once again you spout allegations with zero credible sources.

Here is a cost comparison for all power sources and include and exclude taxpayer subsidies.

https://cleantechnica.com/2016/12/2...-cost-of-wind-power-coal-nuclear-natural-gas/



As everyone can see Wind is the lowest cost per KW.

The Germans are not stupid people. They understand that putting in the CAPITAL INVESTMENT now will mean lower prices in the long term. To fallaciously allege that their prices are "3X what other nations" is utter nonsense. They are only slightly higher than other industrialized nations in the EU and actually lower than Italy.

And once they have covered their capital costs Germans will have the benefit of much lower operating costs.

- - - Updated - - -

Your ignorance of Wind Power generation is exposed by your incessant use of the term "intermittent".

 

Funny stuff that ^^ Bloomberg and Scientific American (among other sources) are not credible to alarmists ??

 

This shows ^^ that (regardless of the accuracy of the estimates) that the costs of providing electrical energy to the consumer are greater when intermittent sources (power not available 24/7/365) are incorporated into the grid. Econ 101

 

None of your links were Bloomberg or Scientific American!

Why do you have to be disingenuous about your disinformation sources?

Oh wait, nevermind, rhetorical question!

 

Yet another baseless allegation with nothing to substantiate it since my source does NOT support your allegation.

 

The cost to operate a wind farm over ten years is a question you yourself should answer before you sing it's praises. I know that when I drive through the Columbia gorge only half of them ever seem to be turning while the others are in some stage of maintenance or repair. As for your assertion that wind can be a stand alone power source if there's enough turbines scattered over large enough areas I think you might run out of windy areas before you'd ever produce enough power to send to areas that hadno wind that day. Even if that was possible the resulting cost of infrastructure to send power anywhere anytime would be astronomical and last but not least we are full circle back to redundancy. If any one windy area could power areas where wind stopped that means you would have ten times too many windmills when all areas where windy so most would have to sit idle. Again this is very expensive power and not realistic. Wind power is a great idea and I'm all for perfecting the technology but huge subsidized wind farms as of now is a bad idea. Until we can find a way to store excess power on windy days for days the wind doesn't blow you are quite literally putting the cart ahead of the horse.

 

Didn't ask about worldwide I asked about Scotland. Can one half of Scotland provide power to the other half if their wind stops blowing or do they instead turn to traditional power?

 

The two house scenario is indeed ludicrous just as two power sources are. If house number one is solar and wind powered and house number two is traditionally powered you would be far better off to just own house number two instead of moving back and forth. This is where we are currently at in wind power. The current grid is not dependent on wind or solar as a backup, see the difference?

 

Operating cost is reflected in the price we pay for electricity which is a bargain. If you add an entirely new and redundant grid to the current one as in wind power the operating cost will go up proportionately and that will be reflected in your monthly bill.

 

The sources were. Please read more carefully including the references at the end.

 

But your source does by showing the costs of solar and wind which are added to the total costs of operating the grid system. Econ 101.

 

Which is what is happening in Germany:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/judecle...ricity-policies-are-a-bad-model/#7d2629ff60e6

 

LOL backup systems along with peak power systems had been part of the cost of power networks from day one.

As peak power and backup systems need only be design for short period of running they are no where near as costly as base power systems to build.

Jet power systems for example only need to be design for short periods of running time and their cost per megwatts is a very secondary consideration compare to basic plants and their cost to build is only a fraction of base power plants.

Let see is like having a guest house by a large mansion IE they are not one and the same thing.

 

How can a reduced capacity conventional power plant suddenly supply full power needs when wind stops blowing?

 

Which of course, is the point. Liberals are always looking for legislative ways to increase their rents from the little people.

 

Electricity fed into the grid receives an additional export tariff, currently (June 2013) 4.5p per KWh. Costs for the programme are borne by all British electricity consumers proportionally: all consumers will bear a slight increase in their annual bill, thus allowing electricity utilities to pay the FIT for renewable electricity generated at the rates set by the government. Payments through the mechanism are intended to replace the ROCs available through the Renewables Obligation for small-scale renewable energy generators and is based on a few key elements:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed-in_tariffs_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

The Dutch are running all their electric trains on wind power.

 

https://www.government.nl/latest/ne...fshore-wind-farm-borssele-cheapest-world-wide looks like the price is going down too.

 

But those back up systems cannot be wind or solar. Why is that ?? A complete 24/7/365 system must be provided before any consideration of adding wind and solar to the grid can be implemented.