3 ms·

> 5x overbuild won't be enough, as I mentioned elsewhere at least in TX its not unusual for the wind to be producing at less than 15% of rated capacity. Partic

by phh 4y ago

> 5x overbuild won't be enough, as I mentioned elsewhere at least in TX its not unusual for the wind to be producing at less than 15% of rated capacity. Particularly in the winter/summer when the energy load is at its highest. Unless TX has a median load factor of 100% (in which case, wow), 5x overbuilding on top of median load factor definitely works in the case you describe. As far as I know, the typical wind average load factor is 33%. So over-scaling by 5x of that would mean that 7% is still enough to provide. Granted, that's not a very large margin to the 8% you mention, but Europe is bigger than Texas, so it's less likely to have such a low-wind event.

StillBored 4y ago
Your just restating (or not understanding) what I said, the average is misleading because its seasonal, which isn't even clear unless you look for it in the graphs (because they swing). edit: (and I should be clear, its still swinging when the daily average is 5%, it might say produce 8% during the evening but only 2% during the day). Here look at whats going on: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/custom/pending/GenerationByEnergySource-a3afc546-5aea-44bd-8740-d02ea9fd63ec/edit https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/cu... You will have to tweak the graph because I didn't spend the time to figure out how to create a link to a graph which isolates just wind, and then expands the time-frame out to an entire year. If you do that, what you see is during the summer the lulls are much lower and last for much longer. AKA it might go for a week or two basically not producing anything. It happens at other times of the year too, but during the spring/fall the weather is changing faster (aka its less stable) and the running average goes up. This is what the wind/solar people seem to refuse to understand, its not a simple averaged calculation over a year because the worse case is much much worse for storage and capacity. The wind blows at 5% nameplate for two weeks, and the amount of storage and overbuild required to bridge that makes it an order of magnitude more expensive than pretty much every other source. Made massively worse because in say TX, that is also when energy consumption peaks.

by phh 4y ago

StillBored 4y ago

Your just restating (or not understanding) what I said, the average is misleading because its seasonal, which isn't even clear unless you look for it in the graphs (because they swing). edit: (and I should be clear, its still swinging when the daily average is 5%, it might say produce 8% during the evening but only 2% during the day). Here look at whats going on: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/custom/pending/GenerationByEnergySource-a3afc546-5aea-44bd-8740-d02ea9fd63ec/edit https://www.eia.gov/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/cu... You will have to tweak the graph because I didn't spend the time to figure out how to create a link to a graph which isolates just wind, and then expands the time-frame out to an entire year. If you do that, what you see is during the summer the lulls are much lower and last for much longer. AKA it might go for a week or two basically not producing anything. It happens at other times of the year too, but during the spring/fall the weather is changing faster (aka its less stable) and the running average goes up. This is what the wind/solar people seem to refuse to understand, its not a simple averaged calculation over a year because the worse case is much much worse for storage and capacity. The wind blows at 5% nameplate for two weeks, and the amount of storage and overbuild required to bridge that makes it an order of magnitude more expensive than pretty much every other source. Made massively worse because in say TX, that is also when energy consumption peaks.