Canadian MSM report on wind power prospects

[GliderGuider]

From the Globe and Mail:

The winds of change in our energy consumption could still be light years away

When it comes to beating our oil addiction, more and more people believe the answer is blowing in the wind.

In the global conversation taking place around clean, renewable power, wind is the It source of the moment. No less than T. Boone Pickens, the legendary 80-year-old Texan who made billions in the oil industry, is betting it will provide the gushers of tomorrow. He's spending $10-billion to build the largest wind farm in the world.

As much as there's been lots of talk about wind addressing our energy needs in the future, that future would appear to be a long way off yet. Wind accounts for less than 1 per cent of the energy produced in Canada (Ontario is the wind-farm leader). The Canadian Wind Energy Association believes it can be 5 per cent by 2010.

The European Wind Energy Association is predicting that 28 per cent of the European Union's electrical consumption will be supplied by wind turbines by 2030; currently, it's about 3 per cent. In the U.S., they're talking about a target of 20 per cent in 20 years. Now, it's less than 1 per cent.

There's no shortage of people, including green enthusiasts, who believe the forecasts are wildly optimistic. While wind certainly offers us hope and will be a weapon in our collective fight for energy independence, it's also a technology that poses huge challenges.

A recent report in The New York Times suggests all is not well in the wind-power capital of the world - Denmark. The building of turbines there has slowed to a less-than-steady drip since government subsidies were cut back. The turbines at some of the country's offshore wind farms, meantime, have been damaged by storms and salt water. Fixing them has cost tens of millions of dollars, scaring off some companies looking at offshore projects themselves.

As the demand for wind power increases, the cost of turbines is getting pricier. According to The Wall Street Journal, turbine costs have risen by 74 per cent in the last three years alone. The few companies making them can't keep pace. The world's biggest turbine maker, Vestas of Denmark, has a $10-billion order book for its product.

There is no question that wind power will assume an expanded role in the ever-unfolding drama that is the world's energy dilemma. Even T. Boone Pickens can see that.

But in our lifetime it's not likely to be handed the leading part that many are predicting.

[phantom power]

1. I'm continually fascinated...

at the logic gap that surrounds wind power. People say "we're going to break out dependence on foreign oil -- with wind!" My father-in-law goes on and on about this all the time. No matter how many times I remind him that wind turbines produce electricity, not oil.

[depakid]

2. but there'll be electric cars

so problem solved.

[phantom power]

3. Be that as it may...

the equation is something like "A few million wind turbines plus we each have to purchase a new car == reduced dependence on oil" Or alternatively "A few million wind turbines plus we rebuild a national electrified rail system, plus we all use public transit == reduced dependence on oil." Or some linear combination of the two. Anyway, you see my point. Building a bunch of wind turbines is only part of the equation, and not necessarily the largest part.

E/E readers get that, because we talk about such things all the time. Thanks to Bad Science And Technology Reporting, I don't think the full equation is well publicized.

[depakid]

4. Linear thinking is easy

Kinda like crocodile blessings. :o

[kristopher]

5. What is really amazing

What is really amazing is how the proponents of nuclear power descend to such ridiculous criticisms in their attempts to badmouth the primary competition to their chosen technology.

I mean, WOW! It is such a vast leap to understand that
1) the personal vehicle fleet rotates almost completely every 10 years so buying an EV when you are due a new car isn't a special purchase,
2) EVs are much, much more efficient than ICEs so it is a massive nationwide efficiency gain,
3) EVs with V2G enable large scale penetration of wind through economic storage aimed at grid stability.

Yes, it takes an effin genius to put all that together and conclude wind is a good deal.

As to the original article, it could have been written by Nnadir, for all the actual content it has.

[GliderGuider]

6. Where do you get "proponent of nuclear power" from that article?

There is no mention of nuclear power or any other energy source in the article (other than a context-setting mention that Pickens made his fortune in the oil industry). It's just a look at some opf the reported difficulties in developing wind power.

I really don't understand the nature of your objection. It was a piece of MSM "journalism". As such it feeds the framing of the public discourse, but it's not exactly a policy paper. Does any criticism, however mild, of any aspect of wind power automatically imply a pro-nuclear agenda?

[phantom power]

8. He meant me, I think.

[GliderGuider]

10. Oops, you're right. Darn, I wasted some perfectly good umbrage. n/t

:dunce:

[phantom power]

11. If umbrage were an energy source...

The internet would disappear into a Kugelblitz

[phantom power]

9. My post applies equally well to nuclear.

Building nuclear plants doesn't produce oil either. I mentioned wind because the OP was about wind, and also because I've seen the "wind for oil" meme before. The general point pertains to any source of electricity.

We've tread this ground before, but I don't share your confidence that car ownership for the masses is going to continue much longer. Electric or otherwise. So, maybe it will be electrified mass transit more than automobiles. Assuming that a country 10 trillion dollars in debt has the economic resources to rebuild a mass transit system.

[kristopher]

12. The future of individual mobility is dictated by two things,

The future of individual mobility is dictated by our population distribution and density; which still argue against being able to effectively bring online mass transit as a viable alternative to automobiles.

IF there were no alternative to the ICE, then something like the plan Pickens proposes would probably be implemented while high energy prices restructured our population distribution. And I agree there would be considerable pain involved in that transition. However, when you look at that as a probability you need to consider the enormous cost (not just in restructuring mass transit but housing, policing, sewage etc) of such an inflow into our urban areas and compare that with the cost of mass produced EVs.

I don't think it is even close, and I see no reason at all that individual car ownership will (or should) disappear.

[ElectricGrid]

7. most people have the sense enough to realize that it's

going to take more than one thing to fix our problem. That there is not silver bullet. Some will continue to jump onto any small thread of a terrible arguement in order to make their position look tennable.