HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Sustaining the Wind, Part... » Reply #16
In the discussion thread: Sustaining the Wind, Part I... [View all]

Response to NNadir (Reply #14)

Fri Aug 14, 2015, 07:54 AM

16. Thanks for your reply. But before I stick my head in my fossil fueled oven, (because if what you

present here is absolute truth, we have no hope) I have to ask if you are considering recent studies & advancements in wind energy? Without question, you are more knowledgeable on the subject than I, but do you not think the advances being made will help make wind energy in the near future a viable source and even necessary to facilitate transitioning away from fossil fuels? Same for solar, many advances being made....

EIA Analysis: Wind Energy Is The Lowest-Cost Option For Reducing Carbon Emissions

Two reports suggest that wind is being installed at a rapid rate, that its costs are plummeting, that its technologies are advancing, and that it is creating a growing number of jobs.

Also see~

Can we afford storage? A dynamic net energy analysis of renewable electricity generation supported by energy storage†

Michael Carbajales-Dale *a, Charles J. Barnhart a and Sally M. Benson b
aGlobal Climate and Energy Project, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. E-mail: mikdale@stanford.edu; Fax: +1-650-723-9190; Tel: +1-650-725-8579
bDepartment of Energy Resources Engineering, Stanford University, USA
Received 25th June 2013 , Accepted 5th February 2014

First published on the web 5th February 2014

....5 Discussion
The results clearly demonstrate the advantages of technologies (both generation and storage) with low CEeD, as well as generation technologies with high capacity factors. Combining low CEeD generation and storage technologies allows a greater proportion of the electrical output to be available to society, rather than being consumed by the industry to fuel its own growth. On-shore wind can support 72 hours of geologic storage while maintaining its current growth rate and still consume only around 10–20% of its own output. In fact, this combination could support growth rates of 100% per year (i.e. double in size each year) and still maintain an energy surplus.

Combining sc-Si at its current growth rate with 24 hours of battery storage would entail the technology consuming around 150% of its own electrical output in deploying new capacity. While this is clearly manageable when PV provides only a small fraction of global electricity supply, it would be difficult to sustain when PV penetration rates increase.

I'll not be looking forward to your next installment, but I'll read it. lol, sorry, its just so depressing... I'm hoping you might present evidence that the renewable industry can find other less toxic or endangered components for their operations.

My mind is open, but heavily skewed against apocalyptic reasoning which doesn't allow for changing technologies.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
NNadir Jul 2015 OP
GliderGuider Jul 2015 #1
NNadir Jul 2015 #3
phantom power Jul 2015 #2
hunter Jul 2015 #4
GliderGuider Jul 2015 #5
NNadir Aug 2015 #6
RiverLover Aug 2015 #7
GliderGuider Aug 2015 #8
RiverLover Aug 2015 #9
GliderGuider Aug 2015 #10
Finishline42 Aug 2015 #11
NNadir Aug 2015 #12
RiverLover Aug 2015 #13
NNadir Aug 2015 #14
LineLineLineNew Reply Thanks for your reply. But before I stick my head in my fossil fueled oven, (because if what you
RiverLover Aug 2015 #16
kristopher Aug 2015 #17
NNadir Aug 2015 #18
kristopher Aug 2015 #19
NNadir Aug 2015 #20
kristopher Aug 2015 #21
NNadir Aug 2015 #22
kristopher Aug 2015 #23
NNadir Aug 2015 #24
kristopher Aug 2015 #15
Please login to view edit histories.