Whoa! Wyoming has a lot of wind power!

 


Compared to Europe, the US doesn't have much wind power installations
per person, only 15 watts/person compared to Denmarks leading 540
watts/person. But, Wyoming actually has more wind power than Denmark,
at 568 watts/person and they have another 390 watts/person proposed
installations. Not bad...who would have though?

 

the...@gmail.com  wrote:

See the thread about German wind-power experience further back.

German utility E.ON, who is the largest user of wind-generated
electricity in the world, has concluded that:
"traditional power stations with capacities equal to 90% of the
installed wind power capacity must be permanently on-line in order to
guarantee power supply at all times".

90%!  Why not just forget the wind-power installations and use the
"permanently on-line" conventional backup stations?

 

Why not? You're serious, right? Maybe because the fossil-fuel consumed
per kw-h while they're under load is kinda larger than with a
wind-farm?

Makes sense to me. Easy enough to have gas-turbine sets ready to spin
and switch in. Nukes, especially light-water, take longer. Lots longer.

J

 

LongmuirG wrote:
...

Wind turbines don't require fuel and while they spin, the utility
can shut down some of those other generators.

Anthony

 

Anthony Matonak wrote:

Go back, download the E.ON report on their real-world experience with
wind-power, then read it.

E.ON has invaluable real-world experience actually using large-scale
wind power to meet consumer demands for power.  According to their
report, E.ON handles more wind-power capacity than the entire US.  If
they have found, in meeting real consumer needs, that they need to
cover 90% of the installed wind power capacity with permanently on-line
conventional back-up, we all need to take that experience seriously.
And factor it in to realistic assessments about how/where/when to use
wind power.