Rockport Missouri wind power produces 123% of town needs

[Spytheweb]

That's not a typo in the headline. The meters are running backwards and they're exporting the 23% extra.

Rock Port, Missouri, is a small city of 1,300 people, and they just made history by being the first city in the US to be 100% powered by the wind, also making them #1 in the US for percentage of renewable energy. The Loess Hills Wind Farm, built by the Wind Capital Group, employing 500 workers from 20 states for about a year, is expected to produce about 16 million kilowatt hours annually, while Rock Port only uses 13 million. The excess wind power will be sold to other communities in the area.


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008...t-missouri.php

 

[Bluemyboy]

good stuff.

 

[Mistermj]

Where do they get their power when the wind isn't blowing?

Oops...still get it from the same old dirty place we all get it.

So in fact...this is less efficient.

They need to be hooked up to two grids...with a coal, nuke or gas power plants as a back up.

If this wasn't subsidized by the government...they couldn't afford it.

Sorry...but this no great triumph for energy production.:howdy:

 

[Mistermj]

The wind doesn't always blow.

A simple question for jamboy...where do they get their power when the wind stops?

 

[punter]

They are hooked into the power grid. When they produce a excess they are paid for it when there is a deficiency the power comes from the same place that it would of come from had they not had wind power.

 

[Mistermj]

They are hooked into the power grid. When they produce a excess they are paid for it when there is a deficiency the power comes from the same place that it would of come from had they not had wind power.

Right..so there is no savings here.

You need all the same infrastructure for conventional means of power as a backup for wind power...because it is not dependable 24-7 -365.

And you need all the subsidized wind infastructure.

Bottom line...this actually costs much much more.

Got it!

 

[punter]

You know of course that the railroads were subsidised?

Just got back from West Texas, thousands of wind turbines. Talk about a renewable enviro-friendly power source. They are still adding power lines to transport the electricity.

I grew up with wind power. A windmill pumped our water, a wooden water tower was storage and supplied the pressure.

Wind blows most of the time out there.

 

[punter]

He is referring to the subsidies granted the wind generator constructors.

 

[punter]

I'm not sure that conservative and common sense are spelled with the same "c".

 

[Mistermj]

You know of course that the railroads were subsidised?

Just got back from West Texas, thousands of wind turbines. Talk about a renewable enviro-friendly power source. They are still adding power lines to transport the electricity.

I grew up with wind power. A windmill pumped our water, a wooden water tower was storage and supplied the pressure.

Wind blows most of the time out there.

Most of the time just doesn't cut it...thats why wind power will never be a cost effective solution. Libs just get excited over it because they haven't done the math...and don't understand the economics of power distrubution.

Even the momentary loss of wind can be a problem. Reuters Feb. 27, "Loss of wind causes Texas power grid emergency."

The electric grid operator was forced to curtail 1,100 megawatts of power to customers within 10 minutes. Wind isn't a standalone power source. It needs a Plan B for when the wind "just don't blow." Which makes it MORE EXPENSIVE.

Coal- or gas-fired electrical power can be produced on demand and as needed. A great benefit of modern technology is that it liberates us from Mother Nature's unpredictability.

Windmills are like a 12th Century technology...again...only greeny Libs would consider such a ridiculous option for modern society.
:noheadower generation isn't a problem...we already have cheap efficient technology to do it...just get the stupid greenies out of the way.

It's happening...the politics are changing...because people are getting pinched.

The Dems have a huge problem...they are the ones stonewalling on energy...the American people are about to get very very angry.

 

[punter]

I think that is pretty myopic.

for every hour that a gas operated power plant does not have to run that is one more hour of gas that we still have.

 

[Romanowski]

MJ why wouldnt you use the existing grid? bottomline the ROI on the Wind grid will be (-) delta on the existing Power Grid.

Nobody said it would be a one day ROI. I dont see how you can think this is a bad thing. One thing is for sure you better learn to get used to the idea coming to your town soon.

 

[RobFunk]

That's not a typo in the headline. The meters are running backwards and they're exporting the 23% extra.

Rock Port, Missouri, is a small city of 1,300 people, and they just made history by being the first city in the US to be 100% powered by the wind, also making them #1 in the US for percentage of renewable energy. The Loess Hills Wind Farm, built by the Wind Capital Group, employing 500 workers from 20 states for about a year, is expected to produce about 16 million kilowatt hours annually, while Rock Port only uses 13 million. The excess wind power will be sold to other communities in the area.


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008...t-missouri.php

That's absolutely incredible. I watched a special a few weeks ago on completely green homes, it's amazing some of the stuff people are doing these days.

 

[RobFunk]

Its really easy actually, when the wind mills which are powered by "free" wind are running, there is no need to burn coal or gas. That same coal or gas you didnt burn shall be available to you on the rare occassions your power load drops that badly. Hence you end up using fossil fuels less and less. Its a simple matter of planning..

Exactly! Better to be paying an electric bill maybe once or twice a year rather than 12 times.

 

[Mistermj]

MJ why wouldnt you use the existing grid? bottomline the ROI on the Wind grid will be (-) delta on the existing Power Grid.

Nobody said it would be a one day ROI. I dont see how you can think this is a bad thing. One thing is for sure you better learn to get used to the idea coming to your town soon.

Thats my point...you still have to use the existing grid...wind power replaces nothing. People just don't seem to understand the workings of our power grid. It doesn't just come from nothing...and you can't just shut it off. If wind isn't 100% efficient...which it isn't...by a long shot...you still need all the same power generation...on line and ready to meet peak demand...all the time.

The reality of wind power...is that it replaces nothing...in fact it is more expensive...because you waste investment and resources building something that doesn't replace what we already have.

If you don't believe me...read the in depth analysis and studies on the matter. It's all a scam ...the power companies do it for the goodwill and subsidies...and the greens push it because it "feels" good.

===================
Here is Wind Power in a Real World application...It Doesn't Work!

Although the United States and Germany generate more wind power in absolute terms, Denmark boasts the world's greatest "wind density" - wind power per capita. With 19 per cent of its electricity now generated by more than 6,000 wind turbines, Denmark produces 80 times as much wind power per capita as Britain.

Why, then, does Denmark export almost all of its wind power - at a revenue loss? Why, then, does Denmark still operate all of its conventional coal-fired power plants? In a phrase, Mr. Sharman says, the reason is Denmark's "wildly fluctuating wind power."

It turns out that Denmark's vast array of turbines often produce minimal electricity when demand is high, maximum electricity when demand is low. Basing his analysis on data from a single year (2002), Mr. Sharman reported that wind power produced less than 1 per cent of the country's electricity supply on 54 different days. On one of these 54 days, the wind turbines took more power from the grid than they produced. (Wind turbines consume considerable electricity whether winds are blowing or not blowing.)

British author and energy analyst Tony Lodge makes the same point in a report by the Centre for Policy Studies, a London think tank. "Not a single conventional power plant has been closed in the period that Danish wind farms have been developed," he says. "Because of the intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants have had to be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for electricity and to provide backup."

Mr. Lodge says it is not practical to turn coal-fired plants off and on as winds rise and fall - because ramping them up consumes more fuel (and emits more carbon dioxide) than running them at a constant rate. Thus Denmark relies almost exclusively on coal-fired plants for its own consumption and exports its wind power at whatever off-peak price it can get.

Only 3.3 per cent of Denmark's wind power gets "accepted" on the grid for domestic consumption. In 2003, Denmark exported 84 per cent of its wind-generated electricity at money-losing rates. And CO{-2}? In 2006, Denmark produced 36 per cent more carbon emissions than the year before.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/GAM.20080711.RREYNOLDS11/TPStory/TPComment

 

[roadreeler57]

I think wind power is great.... I cant believe theres guys here putting it down...They must work for a coal fired plant.

 

[punter]

Thats "guy" Roadie, there is only one.

 

[Mistermj]

Wind power DOES NOT replace anything we have now.

I wish it did too...but it doesn't.

Why is that so hard to understand? :think2:

Anyone?

 

[punter]

Wind power DOES NOT replace anything we have now.

I wish it did too...but it doesn't.

Why is that so hard to understand? :think2:

Anyone?

Use the link to your article then the index to Boone Pickens article.

T Boone isn't one of my favorite people but he has a nasty habit of being right.

 

[Mistermj]

Use the link to your article then the index to Boone Pickens article.

T Boone isn't one of my favorite people but he has a nasty habit of being right.

Give me something real punter...you are just dodging.

Again...what part of this real world example do you not get?

"Not a single conventional power plant has been closed in the period that Danish wind farms have been developed," he says. "Because of the intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants have had to be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for electricity and to provide backup."

Mr. Lodge says it is not practical to turn coal-fired plants off and on as winds rise and fall - because ramping them up consumes more fuel (and emits more carbon dioxide) than running them at a constant rate. Thus Denmark relies almost exclusively on coal-fired plants for its own consumption and exports its wind power at whatever off-peak price it can get.