New wind farm in Minnesota: 150 MW capacity, 62 turbines, priced at 100% efficiency. Promoters expect 40% efficiency. Is 40% efficiency likely? One of the best wind farms in the US is near Baker, MT (USA), operated by MDU, and boasts an efficiency of 42%.
It's been my experience that most wind farms run about 30% efficient. So, we'll see.
More background on this story when it was is its planning stages can be found here.
North Dakota is looking at regulating such wind farms.
Southwest Minnesota, especially Buffallo Ridge have some of the best inland wind profiles in the US. The entire Mid-America longitudinal "spine" does have a good wind prifile.
ReplyDeleteThat said the Minnesota windmills depend on government "alternative energy" production mandates and government subsidies of more than a penny per kilowatt hour.
Western Minnesota is a lot like Western Texas. There over very long periods like a decade wind generators have been lucky to deliver 10% of "nameplate" power 24/7/365. That is basically "reading the meter". Windmills are very prone to breakdown. If you can find a wind farm video note the ones not running. That is usually breakdown when others are working.
They are getting better but I don't expect windmills to be an unsubsidized energy for a long time.
The "Pickens Plan" required subsidies and was alleged to be a scheme to get right of way for water mining from the Ogila (sp) aquifer. The Pickens Plan has been abandoned.
A surprising fact of Texas is that it gets a very large percentage of it's electricity from natural gas. This is a legacy from when a lot of natural gas had to be flared off but it makes for pricey "juice" now. By contrast North Dakota gets most of it's electricity from mine-mouth coal or hydro. Big wind will not be competitive with this without a big subsidy.
I browse http://junkscience.com every workday. They do a good job of covering the flaws in "alternative" energy.
Thank you for your comments. On my old blog, I had an entire section on wind farms, and everything you say is accurate. I have been amazed the number of times I take Amtrak across the northern tier, or drive US Highway 2 along the same route, and see all wind turbines completely stopped.
ReplyDeleteWind will always need to be subsidized (or assisted through "cap and trade" policies). But if folks are willing to pay more for their energy; want to see more transmission lines along the migratory bird routes; want to have turbines interrupting their "Big Sky Country," that's why we have elections.
I used to worry about these things. No more; just note them, and invest as wisely as possible.
By the way, you are also correct about Pickens. I had numerous blogs about the Pickens scheme, but they were deleted when I deleted my old blog. I was not aware of the "water" angle, but that makes sense. And yes, he took a huge "haircut" on that debacle. Original estimates were $6 billion for the west Texas wind farm; he finally pulled out when estimates went to $12 billion (it was the London Times that broke the story).
Thanks for the feedback. The Picken's Plan involved a scheme to get water pipe right of ways to two different cities which would then bid for the water. The Mesa area is on the Southern tip of the Ogala aquifer. Migration of water in an aquifer is obviously a lot slower than with a lake. (think of a well replenishing).
ReplyDeleteThat said, T Boone Pickens had some good ideas. On CNBC I heard Picken say that an urban garbage truck using natural gas would be the equivalent to more than 200 cars. Good idea.
That said most of the so-called "green" stuff is for show or subsidy. I live in the city of Minneapolis, MN but my main vehicle is a Ford Ranger four-cylinder standard transmission. The "four and stick" saves a solid 10+% of gas and it has a California emissions engine standard. I have never heard any of the "save the planet" types advocate a stick tranny. It's half of hybrid savings or more and cheaper than an automatic.