Wind mill farm ends up as hot air

[billvon 3,120]

>all things being equal wind can not come close to the margins of coal

Take away all the incentives, tax breaks and subsidies, and make each power source pay for the damage it does - you bet it can.

How much does wind cost?

>if not for the tax benifits AND the current political climate forced on us by
>those like you, wind generation simply would not be built.

And if not for the agendas of people like yourselves - people who profit from dirty coal - we wouldn't have the current billions in incentives to keep the coal power industry alive.

Every time I've talked to a denier about ending subsidies I get the same story:

"END WIND SUBSIDIES! Wasted money! Tax and spend! Al Gore!"

"OK, let's end all subsidies. Coal company tax breaks, mining company land giveaways, exemptions to the clean air act. Everyone is treated exactly the same."

"Woah - I didn't mean - you can't cut - I mean, they gotta have those, or coal would be really expensive!"

>So, since the Bush tax cut agreement was made, we will see another
>couple of years of wind generation build out. Sad to see capital dollars
>wasted so badly

Wasted dollars generating megawatts for decades - for free. There are worse ways to "waste" dollars - like propping up failing coal plants, for example.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>all things being equal wind can not come close to the margins of coal

Take away all the incentives, tax breaks and subsidies, and make each power source pay for the damage it does - you bet it can.

How much does wind cost?

>if not for the tax benifits AND the current political climate forced on us by
>those like you, wind generation simply would not be built.

And if not for the agendas of people like yourselves - people who profit from dirty coal - we wouldn't have the current billions in incentives to keep the coal power industry alive.

Every time I've talked to a denier about ending subsidies I get the same story:

"END WIND SUBSIDIES! Wasted money! Tax and spend! Al Gore!"

"OK, let's end all subsidies. Coal company tax breaks, mining company land giveaways, exemptions to the clean air act. Everyone is treated exactly the same."

"Woah - I didn't mean - you can't cut - I mean, they gotta have those, or coal would be really expensive!"

>So, since the Bush tax cut agreement was made, we will see another
>couple of years of wind generation build out. Sad to see capital dollars
>wasted so badly

Wasted dollars generating megawatts for decades - for free. There are worse ways to "waste" dollars - like propping up failing coal plants, for example.

I love the for free comment

what a bunch of bull shit


I will take a current tech coal plant eveyday vs these chuncks fo crap

As for how I make money?

Dont matter the the power comes from. My job is to get it where it is going
Wind, coal, nuke, hydo. All the same to me

Next

By the way
I am fine with ending all subs

Let the market take care of it

But wind would not survive that

Coal would

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

>I will take a current tech coal plant eveyday vs these chuncks fo crap

OK. You breathe the exhaust of a coal power plant for a year; I'll breathe the exhaust of a wind turbine. After a year we'll see whether you still prefer them.

>As for how I make money? Dont matter the the power comes from. Wind,
>coal, nuke, hydo. All the same to me

RushMC Oct 2010: "I help to provide delivery of "big coal". "

Which is it? Do you help provide delivery of "big coal" or not?

I can understand your desperation to protect your job; it's not at all unusual to want government policies to protect your own livelihood. But when you do that, it's a bit hypocritical to deride the very subsidies that are protecting your job.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>I will take a current tech coal plant eveyday vs these chuncks fo crap

OK. You breathe the exhaust of a coal power plant for a year; I'll breathe the exhaust of a wind turbine. After a year we'll see whether you still prefer them.

>As for how I make money? Dont matter the the power comes from. Wind,
>coal, nuke, hydo. All the same to me

RushMC Oct 2010: "I help to provide delivery of "big coal". "

Which is it? Do you help provide delivery of "big coal" or not?

I can understand your desperation to protect your job; it's not at all unusual to want government policies to protect your own livelihood. But when you do that, it's a bit hypocritical to deride the very subsidies that are protecting your job.

Exactly
a product of big coal is what?

Electricity!!!

Not protecting my jog all oh wound up one



you do make this easy

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,120]

>Exactly a product of big coal is what? Electricity!!!

So you admit you work on the delivery of big coal, and that your livelihood depends on that delivery.

Thank you; it explains your position perfectly. No one wants to lose their jobs, and you can't deliver wind.

[rushmc 23]

You know what else oh warmist one

I lived within 5 miles of the Southerland Coal Plant in Marshalltown IA for 5 years

I had less problems there than when I live in Cedar Rapids IA with the 2 self run coal plants that ADM ran there

They are not as regulated but guess what, they generated their own electricity to get what they needed more. Know what that was?

Steam

And because of this they disconected from the utlitiy there (oops, there goes the tigher regulations! damn)

You can keep putting out your estimated deaths the crap all you want

They are just a good a guess as the AGW tripe you push and support

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Exactly a product of big coal is what? Electricity!!!

So you admit you work on the delivery of big coal, and that your livelihood depends on that delivery.

Thank you; it explains your position perfectly. No one wants to lose their jobs, and you can't deliver wind.

It is a nice twist but regardless of your squirming, electricity will come from what ever source there is to get it from. We use wind too
We have our own farm here as well

The only difference will be the cost of the product
The cost of the product is what will help this country grow or not cause energy (where ever it comes from) is a necessity correct?

So, with that in mind, of course you want coal plants to die. Why? It supports your agenda. How, by driving up the cost of electricity to a point where maybe, just maybe, wind generation has a chance of being profitable

Shame on you billvon
shame on you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

>all things being equal wind can not come close to the margins of coal

Take away all the incentives, tax breaks and subsidies, and make each power source pay for the damage it does - you bet it can.

How much does wind cost?

>if not for the tax benifits AND the current political climate forced on us by
>those like you, wind generation simply would not be built.

And if not for the agendas of people like yourselves - people who profit from dirty coal - we wouldn't have the current billions in incentives to keep the coal power industry alive.

Every time I've talked to a denier about ending subsidies I get the same story:

"END WIND SUBSIDIES! Wasted money! Tax and spend! Al Gore!"

"OK, let's end all subsidies. Coal company tax breaks, mining company land giveaways, exemptions to the clean air act. Everyone is treated exactly the same."

"Woah - I didn't mean - you can't cut - I mean, they gotta have those, or coal would be really expensive!"

>So, since the Bush tax cut agreement was made, we will see another
>couple of years of wind generation build out. Sad to see capital dollars
>wasted so badly

Wasted dollars generating megawatts for decades - for free. There are worse ways to "waste" dollars - like propping up failing coal plants, for example.

I love the for free comment

what a bunch of bull shit


I will take a current tech coal plant eveyday vs these chuncks fo crap

As for how I make money?

Dont matter the the power comes from. My job is to get it where it is going
Wind, coal, nuke, hydo. All the same to me

Next

By the way
I am fine with ending all subs

Let the market take care of it

But wind would not survive that

Coal would

Not when the cost of mining accidents and deaths, and cleaning up pollution is properly accounted for.

I recall the whining over SO2 cleanup when the coal/power industry was killing the lakes in the northeast some 40 years ago. Cap and trade took care of that.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>all things being equal wind can not come close to the margins of coal

Take away all the incentives, tax breaks and subsidies, and make each power source pay for the damage it does - you bet it can.

How much does wind cost?

>if not for the tax benifits AND the current political climate forced on us by
>those like you, wind generation simply would not be built.

And if not for the agendas of people like yourselves - people who profit from dirty coal - we wouldn't have the current billions in incentives to keep the coal power industry alive.

Every time I've talked to a denier about ending subsidies I get the same story:

"END WIND SUBSIDIES! Wasted money! Tax and spend! Al Gore!"

"OK, let's end all subsidies. Coal company tax breaks, mining company land giveaways, exemptions to the clean air act. Everyone is treated exactly the same."

"Woah - I didn't mean - you can't cut - I mean, they gotta have those, or coal would be really expensive!"

>So, since the Bush tax cut agreement was made, we will see another
>couple of years of wind generation build out. Sad to see capital dollars
>wasted so badly

Wasted dollars generating megawatts for decades - for free. There are worse ways to "waste" dollars - like propping up failing coal plants, for example.

I love the for free comment

what a bunch of bull shit


I will take a current tech coal plant eveyday vs these chuncks fo crap

As for how I make money?

Dont matter the the power comes from. My job is to get it where it is going
Wind, coal, nuke, hydo. All the same to me

Next

By the way
I am fine with ending all subs

Let the market take care of it

But wind would not survive that

Coal would

Not when the cost of mining accidents and deaths, and cleaning up pollution is properly accounted for.

I recall the whining over SO2 cleanup when the coal/power industry was killing the lakes in the northeast some 40 years ago. Cap and trade took care of that.

The company I work for has already started retro fitting enviro systemns on its coal fleet that excede the current epa regs and what they (the operators) think the next levels will be set at

The rate case just settled on those updates and the IUB gave full recovery for those upgrades

Mercury, SO2 and particulates are all being addressed

as it should be

Oh, and for billvon
what I mean by company I work for

I am in the energy deleivery side of the company
not the generations side
they are all under the same holding company

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

More info showing why those like you want/need CO2 controls. So you can push you life style and views and the rest of us because you think you know best

http://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/en/part-3-economics-of-wind-power/chapter-6-wind-power-compared-to-conventional-power-generation/

billvon most likely already knows this but for the rest of you, take a look at the graphs in the link

very interesting

And for the record, I am NOT against wind energy. it can and will have its place. What I am against is a dishonest debate about what it is and why we need it and how affordable it really it. And contrary to you characterization of my job Bill, I make a living regardless of how the power is created cause as I said, I work on the delivery side. But raising prices for stupid reason (or not) is what this debate is really about. That and greenies (not the mods here) pushing an extreme environmental agenda on the rest of us

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

More info showing why those like you want/need CO2 controls. So you can push you life style and views and the rest of us because you think you know best

http://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/en/part-3-economics-of-wind-power/chapter-6-wind-power-compared-to-conventional-power-generation/

billvon most likely already knows this but for the rest of you, take a look at the graphs in the link

very interesting

And for the record, I am NOT against wind energy. it can and will have its place. What I am against is a dishonest debate about what it is and why we need it and how affordable it really it. And contrary to you characterization of my job Bill, I make a living regardless of how the power is created cause as I said, I work on the delivery side. But raising prices for stupid reason (or not) is what this debate is really about. That and greenies (not the mods here) pushing an extreme environmental agenda on the rest of us

Modification to design for weight and durability need to be changed before it will even get close to break-even.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billeisele 130]

I'm not anti-alternative energy but those that want to have and use it should be willing to pay the full cost.

The problems I have are:
1) my money subsidizing the installation that is no way near cost effective (in the southeast);
2) the customer wanting me to buy any excess generation at full retail rates
- a little info for those that don't know how this works, retail rates cover generation, transformation, transmission, distribution and metering, the only cost the alternative generator avoids is the generation
3) the customer not being willing to pay a stand-by fee
- the fee covers the cost to provide all the infrastructure that is needed to provide power when his generator isn't working

If a customer wants to install a generator that is OK. But if they don't want to pay for the grid then they should expect to be disconnected from the grid.

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billvon 3,120]

>1) my money subsidizing the installation that is no way near cost effective (in the southeast);

Agreed. Different forms of energy work best in different places. What works in Phoenix won't work in Nebraska (and vice versa.)

>2) the customer wanting me to buy any excess generation at full retail rates

Also agreed. Avoided cost is a much better metric for that.

>3) the customer not being willing to pay a stand-by fee

This I don't get. A customer connected to the grid should get the same quality of service that anyone else gets, without paying a bunch of extraneous fees.

[brenthutch 444]

Wind is ending up looking like the boondoggle that corn ethanol turned out to be. Needs to be propped up by the tax payer to stand a chance. Once the subsidies are removed, it collapses, leaving a lot of nice BASE sites all around the country. The fact that Pickens is getting out of the wind business is telling. With his billions he has the resources to really tell which way the wind is blowing and is acting accordingly.

[billvon 3,120]

>Wind is ending up looking like the boondoggle that corn ethanol turned out to be.

Hmm. Ethanol has been growing by an average of 30% a year for fifteen years? If so, ethanol worked out a lot better than I thought it had!

>Once the subsidies are removed, it collapses

Wow, so it's just like coal and nuclear!

I'll take the "collapsing" power source that's growing 30% a year over the amazingly awesome coal power industry that's slowly shrinking any day of the week.

[billeisele 130]

Quote

>Wind is ending up looking like the boondoggle that corn ethanol turned out to be.

Hmm. Ethanol has been growing by an average of 30% a year for fifteen years? If so, ethanol worked out a lot better than I thought it had!

>Once the subsidies are removed, it collapses

Wow, so it's just like coal and nuclear!

I'll take the "collapsing" power source that's growing 30% a year over the amazingly awesome coal power industry that's slowly shrinking any day of the week.

BV - you're a smart guy, you know that is comparing apples and oranges

ethanol may be the costliest ongoing gov't screwup, even Al admitted he lied, everyone is paying for it thru lower gas mileage, increased food costs, and higher maintenance costs

wind could grow 100% and it would be less than conventional generation shrinking 1%

agree - dirty coal needs to go, scrub it, filter it and let the consumer pay the true cost, in the SE that cost is still lower than wind or solar

none of the alternative technologies fix the problem of what happens when the source stops

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billvon 3,120]

>wind could grow 100% and it would be less than conventional generation
>shrinking 1%

Not quite. Right now we generate 2% of our power from wind. Double that to 4% and we could shut down another 2% of our conventional generation sources.

>none of the alternative technologies fix the problem of what happens when the
>source stops

Pumped storage does.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>wind could grow 100% and it would be less than conventional generation
>shrinking 1%

Not quite. Right now we generate 2% of our power from wind. Double that to 4% and we could shut down another 2% of our conventional generation sources.

Making the large assumption that it is a constant 2% - I've seen nothing to show that is the case.

Quote

>none of the alternative technologies fix the problem of what happens when the
>source stops

Pumped storage does.

Until the flywheel stops, yes. What then?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>Making the large assumption that it is a constant 2% - I've seen nothing to show
>that is the case.

It was 2% in 2009. It is not a constant; it has been increasing every year since 1999.

>Until the flywheel stops, yes. What then?

Until the water runs out, actually. At that point, you have to wait until the wind starts blowing again.

Let's compare that to a coal plant. When the coal runs out, how long do you have to wait until you have power again?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Making the large assumption that it is a constant 2% - I've seen nothing to show
>that is the case.

It was 2% in 2009. It is not a constant; it has been increasing every year since 1999.

Way to deliberately miss the point, Bill. Wind is variable. If there's no wind, there's no power regardless of how many turbines are in the field.

Quote

>Until the flywheel stops, yes. What then?

Until the water runs out, actually. At that point, you have to wait until the wind starts blowing again.

Let's compare that to a coal plant. When the coal runs out, how long do you have to wait until you have power again?

Until the next truck/train.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,120]

>Wind is variable. If there's no wind, there's no power regardless of how many
>turbines are in the field.

Agreed - which is why I used the actual amount of power generated in 2009, variable wind and all.

>Until the next truck/train.

No coal, no power, regardless of how many trucks or trains you have arriving.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Wind is variable. If there's no wind, there's no power regardless of how many
>turbines are in the field.

Agreed - which is why I used the actual amount of power generated in 2009, variable wind and all.

>Until the next truck/train.

No coal, no power, regardless of how many trucks or trains you have arriving.

Same holds true for wind - no wind, no power. So the 'we can shut down 2% of existing power plants if we increase wind by 2%' statement isn't necessarily true - but you did a nice job of trying to skirt the issue (twice).

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

...Way to deliberately miss the point, Bill. Wind is variable. If there's no wind, there's no power regardless of how many turbines are in the field...

Wind really isn't all that variable in the long term.

They do long term studies of the proposed sites. They make sure that the average wind is strong enough to make the windmill viable.

There are calm days and there are windy days, but the wind is actually pretty dependable, given a large enough area (like several states).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

...Way to deliberately miss the point, Bill. Wind is variable. If there's no wind, there's no power regardless of how many turbines are in the field...

Wind really isn't all that variable in the long term.

They do long term studies of the proposed sites. They make sure that the average wind is strong enough to make the windmill viable.

There are calm days and there are windy days, but the wind is actually pretty dependable, given a large enough area (like several states).

I don't disagree with your summation - however, "given a large enough area" seems to be the critical term.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

That's why more wind turbines makes it a more viable energy source.

There will still be calms that reduce output in various areas.
One of the upgrades to make the grid "smart" is short term storage to allow for it.

I'm going off what I heard on a news story a while back (NPR?) that if they could have 15 minutes of power when the wind died off, they would have time to fire up the "fill in" power (mainly gas fired and rather expensive). Currently there isn't any thing to fill in that gap between when the wind dies and when the other source comes on line.

It's a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo