See above
27,000 just to meet 15% of Ontario's needs.
Where will all that copper come from? Each uses around 1000lbs.
27,000 just to meet 15% of Ontario's needs.
Where will all that copper come from? Each uses around 1000lbs.
Another day, another wind-power let down in Ontario
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
petros, your calculations are based on assumptions that shouldn't hold true if we are to transform to a sustainable society, with a sustainable energy production system. There is every reason to think that we can cut back on our use through conservation and efficiency improvements so that we are only using half the power we are using now, 15 years from now. In fact it is the most sensible alternative.
That leaves us with a 15 percent wind load of 13,500 MW, or about 2000 MW. The data you referred us to was from 2007 and there has been changes since, for example the same source now also quotes April 2009 as giving a 41% capacity factor to wind, and at the other end of the spectrum, June only gave 14%. If that gives us a factor of 27% or .405 from a 1.5 mw machine you only need 5000 turbines. That is quite a difference.
You don't build turbines even on that scale in the middle of dense Urban centers. You build them where there is the best wind. That also makes quite a difference to the output. As the IESO is saying, they will be putting together a wind prediction center to be able to make better use of wind from different regions as the wind blows through them. That will make quite a difference. But even if the windmills were all built in one block, the actual land used would be trivial compared to your estimates because the land between turbines is still usable for highways, farming, industrial use, etc.
As to the financial/economic argument in the comparison of nukes vs windpower, we also have to factor in the cost of nuclear waste disposal, nuclear plant decommissioning, accidents, and health problems.
That leaves us with a 15 percent wind load of 13,500 MW, or about 2000 MW. The data you referred us to was from 2007 and there has been changes since, for example the same source now also quotes April 2009 as giving a 41% capacity factor to wind, and at the other end of the spectrum, June only gave 14%. If that gives us a factor of 27% or .405 from a 1.5 mw machine you only need 5000 turbines. That is quite a difference.
You don't build turbines even on that scale in the middle of dense Urban centers. You build them where there is the best wind. That also makes quite a difference to the output. As the IESO is saying, they will be putting together a wind prediction center to be able to make better use of wind from different regions as the wind blows through them. That will make quite a difference. But even if the windmills were all built in one block, the actual land used would be trivial compared to your estimates because the land between turbines is still usable for highways, farming, industrial use, etc.
As to the financial/economic argument in the comparison of nukes vs windpower, we also have to factor in the cost of nuclear waste disposal, nuclear plant decommissioning, accidents, and health problems.
I drove from Coronation Alberta to the pass tonight,I was surprised at the new windmills going up around Halkirk and Castor.
These are the big ones with blades the size of 747 wings.If Alberta does not have the most windmills in Canada yet then they soon will.
Other then farming or working in the patch there's not many jobs in these rural areas so I think this is a good thing.From the highyway I saw 20 structures built with the lower stage of the tower set up and about a dozen huge cranes,at each structure the huge blades and generator were waiting on the ground for assembly.
Next will be the ROW and new powerlines to move all that electricity.
As I drove past the small town of Halkirk I saw a sign that said you could sign a blade on one of these behemoths so they are also very happy about this new wind farm.
Too bad we are not building the components here ourselves.
These are the big ones with blades the size of 747 wings.If Alberta does not have the most windmills in Canada yet then they soon will.
Other then farming or working in the patch there's not many jobs in these rural areas so I think this is a good thing.From the highyway I saw 20 structures built with the lower stage of the tower set up and about a dozen huge cranes,at each structure the huge blades and generator were waiting on the ground for assembly.
Next will be the ROW and new powerlines to move all that electricity.
As I drove past the small town of Halkirk I saw a sign that said you could sign a blade on one of these behemoths so they are also very happy about this new wind farm.
Too bad we are not building the components here ourselves.
Where did you hear that?
In Alberta and B.C. the power flows between both provinces depending on who needs it the most and the surplus is sold mainly in the USA.
Here is the wind farm I drove by yesterday,it will be the biggest in Alberta.
Alberta's largest windfarm inches closer to construction – Journal of Commerce
On a side note,in Alberta if you make power from your own wind or solar project they have to buy the surplus off you.
Making the meter run backwards is my next goal via solar if I can find enough cells.
Thankfully in the oil patch they have lots of used ones that wont be reused on new buildings so I may have a line on some for cheap.
I only worked about 4 years on and off with Altalink and Fortis here in Alberta but the old timers told me that folks cant get enough electricity and demand will just increase as will the price.
Deregulation also made us go from the cheapest power in Canada to the most expensive.
Last edited:
Why would you even want to piss around with wind when we have an abundance of hydro power? Once the dams are built it is cheap power plus the associated benifits of controlling runoff and the availability of lakes for recreation.
Hydro is great until it's your house being flooded out and left for dead in an underwater ghost town.
That is the truth, and there are other concerns depending on the river and the valley and the geographic region. Steep little canyons without much resource value for sustainability might be a good place to put a hydro facility. In BC though a good percentage of those are salmon streams and the states has had to remove some of their dams because salmon were disappearing from their rivers. There are a lot of implications not the least of which is the option that rivers are pretty good recreation sites on their own.
It is possible to build hydroelectric installations without dams. In fact there are a number of projects along this line. The really nice thing about them is that they can be daisy-chained down the river. The limiting factor is that such plants should be build only in rivers that do not have extreme seasonal fluctuations.
Run-of-the-river hydroelectricity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's a matter of terminology. What happens to potential energy if no-one uses it? Suppose you can produce 5 GW of energy and only 4.5 of it is used and that 500MW of potential energy can't be stored.
In order for wind power to work there have to be a lot more wind generators that there are at present. Wind power can do work simply by pushing on something. All generators do is convert that kinetic energy to electric energy. Wind does not need a generator to do work.
I suppose society should not build so many windmills that the output from that generating force is not excess to the minimum requirements. Since we are a long way from that I hope that the powers that be are paying attention.
With an integrated grid using a variety of renewable sources it is possible that there would be waste if storage is not included. As one of the costs of a sustainable energy system it will by definition be included though.
Taxslave, did you look at the link provided in the post you are responding to? Do you know what a wide range of projects can be called run of river? Have you talked to environmentalists to find out what they like? Or are you just once again telling other people what they like and believe? Does that strike you as being just a bit arrogant?
I live in an area where the environmentalists didn't oppose the Site one dam on the Peace River, a big 700mw megaproject that created the eupheistically named Dinosaur Lake, becuase it flooded out some good paleontology sites. And they didn't object because the reasoning was that this was a fairly small area, a steep canyon in most places, and so a relatively low impact on the environment. To be fair to those early environmentalists, many of them had just gone through the horror that was WAC Bennett Dam and Williston Reservoir, so relatively speaking site one was small.
The point is that environmentalists can make mistakes too, ,,, no I didn't mean to say that. The point is that there are a lot of hydro-electric sites that some environmentalists are happy with. At one time I even suggested that environmentalists take out a water license and apply to build a dam on the Fraser, just from Whiterock across to North Vancouver. But some people said that the nimbys would just start whining about it.
Okay, it doesn't run through North Van either. But from a practical and conscientiously efficient engineering point of view I was just trying to maximize storage so that BCs customers would get the most value for the dollar. Biggest bang for the buck, that's my motto.
Doesn't matter. Hydro dams just shut down a generator in low-demand (or when something needs fixing) leaving the turbine spinning. Haven't got to that point with wind generation. Doubt we will in the near future either.I suppose society should not build so many windmills that the output from that generating force is not excess to the minimum requirements. Since we are a long way from that I hope that the powers that be are paying attention.
Anyway, I have no problem not using potential energy when it isn't needed even if it does seem liike a waste. Loads of sunlight goes to waste, Same for pretty much any other resource we have and don't use. The potential is still there, though.
That's not to say that we shouldn't use what we do get wisely.
