The New York Times and the Boston Globe each contained an item that immediately suggested an obvious reply.
Times: '"I like George Bush because he is God fearing," said Delia Randall, 22, of Provo, Utah.' He has very good reason to be.
Globe: 'Killing of civilians in Iraq highlights stress on troops.' Not to mention the stress on Iraqi civilians.
June 4, 2006
Wind farm requires purchase of extra energy
Surprise: Reality doesn't live up to the sales claims. From the Helena (Mont.) Independent Record, June 4, 2006:
New Judith Gap wind farm causing headaches on the gridwind power, wind energy, wind farms
The clean, green power from the Judith Gap Wind Farm that debuted last fall has been more intermittent than anticipated.
And that is causing problems for NorthWestern Energy, the utility that must balance supply and demand on its transmission lines. ...
In April, the Western Electricity Coordinating Council [WECC] in Salt Lake City sent a letter to NorthWestern saying that its transmission system may have fallen 3 percent short of its minimum control performance standards of 90 percent. ...
"This is unconfirmed and ordinarily this information isn't even made public," he said. ...
Joel Schroeder worked as project manager for Invenergy Wind LLC's Judith Gap project, the largest of the company's four wind farms. Reached at company headquarters in Chicago, Schroeder said wind is by nature intermittent.
"If you have a storm move in and the wind picks up, that will boost production, or if you have the opposite and the wind drops out, you'll lose power," Schroeder said. "It's completely dependent upon the wind."
Everyone knows wind power is variable and that other backup power from coal or hydro or natural gas is needed to fill in the calm times.
However, the hourly ups and downs are harder to manage than expected, [vice president of wholesale operations at NorthWestern Energy David] Gates said.
"The wind's blowing and in that hour, the output goes from 20 MW (megawatts) to 80 MW," he said. "The average is 50 MW, but as control operator we have to manage that move from 20 to 80 MW (on the transmission lines)." ...
You can store water behind a dam. But you cannot store electricity, and that fact creates lots of challenges for delivering power and pricing power.
Engineers may have more elegant explanations, but you can think of a power transmission line as a teeter-totter.
To keep the board level, the supply of power sitting on one side must balance the demand sitting on the other side.
When there is too much supply, the utility has to sell power right now. When demand outweighs supply, the utility must buy more power right now.
Long-range power contracts that run for years are relatively inexpensive. But, like shopping at a convenience store, buying power on the spot market costs more, often far more.
So variability at the Judith Gap project is costing NorthWestern's consumers more, they just don't know how much yet.
... On May 7, more than 30 energy developers, power company representatives and rural electric cooperative executives met in Helena with Gov. Brian Schweitzer's staff to discuss Montana's energy future.
One topic was how to build more wind farms, yet keep the transmission lines balanced.
Dave Wheelihan, chief executive of the Montana Electric Cooperatives Association, said the gist of that part of the conversation was that NorthWestern has had to buy more short-term power than expected to balance Judith Gap.
"You can go out and contract for it, but the pricing will be interesting," Wheelihan said.
He said the utility has purchased another 15 megawatts of incremental power from Avista Energy to balance the load. ...
June 3, 2006
Wind turbine burns 900 acres
A wind turbine in California caused the Tehachapi area's first large-scale fire of the season last Friday (May 26), according to a June 2 report from the Tehachapi News.
A malfunction in the wind turbine started a fire in the machine, and burning debris fell and caught surrounding brush and grass, eventually burning about 900 acres in Oak Creek Pass before it was brought under control, which took two days and 241 firefighters.
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
A malfunction in the wind turbine started a fire in the machine, and burning debris fell and caught surrounding brush and grass, eventually burning about 900 acres in Oak Creek Pass before it was brought under control, which took two days and 241 firefighters.
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
June 2, 2006
"Houses for Weekend Cooks"
Featured in today's New York Times "Escapes" section, page D4: "Houses for Weekend Cooks":
Vermont
WHERE Kirby, Vt. [near Burke]
WHAT 3-bedroom house
HOW MUCH $285,000
Built-in hoosiers, exposed beams with pot racks and a wood-burning cook stove exist side by side with more modern amenities in the kitchen of this 1,800-square-foor renovated farmhouse [built in the 1850s]. It has one bathroom, original wood floors and covered porch. The property is 31 acres in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont with views from Camel's Hump to Willoughby Gap. The property includes established herb and vegetable gardens, a barn and a two-car garage. Agent: Annette Dalley, Peter D. Watson Agency, 802-467-3939; www.northernvtrealestate.com.
Vermont
June 1, 2006
Model wind energy ordinance (1)
From the Town Code of the Town of Malone (N.Y.) (enacted May 24, 2006, by unanimous vote):
Wind Energy Facilities
Article I
§ 80–2. Purpose. ... to promote the effective and efficient use of the Town's wind energy resource through wind energy conversion systems (WECS), whithout harming public health and safety, and to avoid jeopardizing the welfare of the residents.
§ 80–4. Findings
A. The Town Board of the Town of Malone finds and declares that:
1. ... the potential benefits must be balanced against potential impacts.
2. The generation of electricity from properly sited small wind turbines can be a cost efffective mechanism for reducing on-site electric costs, with a minimum of environmental impacts.
3. Regulation of the siting and installation of wind turbines is necessary for protecting the health, safety, and welfare of neighboring property owners and the general public.
4. Large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities represent significant potential aesthetic impacts because of their large size, lighting, and shadow flicker effects.
5. Installation of large-scalee multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can create drainage problems through erosion and lack of sediment control for facility and access road sites and harm farmlands through improper construction methods.
6. Large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities may present risks to the property values of adjoining property owners.
7. Large-scale Wind Energy Facilities may be significant sources of noise, which, if unregulated, can negatively impact adjoining properties, particularly in areas of low ambient noise levels.
8. Construction of large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can create traffic problems and damage local roads.
9. If improperly sited, large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can interfere with various types of communications.
10. The Town has many scenic viewsheds which would be negatively impacted by large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities.
§ 80–5. Permits Required
B. No WECS other than a Small WECS shall be constructed, reconstructed, modified, or operated in the Town of Malone. No Wind Measurement Tower shall be constructed, reconstructed, modified, or operated in the Town of Malone, except in conjunction with and as part of an application for a Small WECS.
E. Exemptions. No permit or other approval shall be required under this Chapter for WECS utilized solely for agricultural operations in a state or county agricultural district, as long as the facility is set back at least one and a half times its total height from a property line and does not exceed 120 feet in [total] height.
G. Notwithstanding the requirements of the Section, replacement in kind or modification of a Small WECS may occur without Town Board approval when there will be: (1) no increase in total height; (2) no change in the location of the Small WECS; (3) no additional lighting or change in facility color; and (4) no increase in noise produced by the Small WECS.
Article III. Miscellaneous
§ 80–14. Variances
B. If (1) a court of competent jurisdiction orders the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider a use variance for any Wind Energy Facility other than a Small WECS ... or (2) the prohibition on any Wind Energy Facility other than a Small WECS is invalidated, no Wind Energy Facility shall be allowed except upon issuance of a Special Use Permit ... which shall require a Decommissioning Plan and Removal Bond, a Public Improvement Bond to protect public roads, and compliance with the following minimum setbacks:
a. The statistical sound pressure level generated by a WECS shall not exceed L10-45 dBA [i.e., shall not exceed 45 dBA for more than 6 minutes (10%) of any hour] measured at the nearest off-site dwelling existing at the time of application. If the ambient sound pressure level exceeds 45 dBa, the standard shall be ambient dBA plus 5 dBA.
b. 1,500 feet from the nearest site boundary property line.
c. 1,500 feet from the nearest public road.
d. 1,500 feet from the nearest off-site residence existing at the time of application.
e. One and a half times the total height of the WECS from any non-WECS structure or any above-ground utilities.
f. 250 feet from federal or state-identified wetlands, to protect bird and bat populations. This distance may be adjusted to be greater or less at the discretion of the reviewing body, based on topography, land cover, land uses, and other factors that influence the flight patterns of resident birds.
[Click here for Article II: Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems]
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
Article I
§ 80–2. Purpose. ... to promote the effective and efficient use of the Town's wind energy resource through wind energy conversion systems (WECS), whithout harming public health and safety, and to avoid jeopardizing the welfare of the residents.
§ 80–4. Findings
A. The Town Board of the Town of Malone finds and declares that:
1. ... the potential benefits must be balanced against potential impacts.
2. The generation of electricity from properly sited small wind turbines can be a cost efffective mechanism for reducing on-site electric costs, with a minimum of environmental impacts.
3. Regulation of the siting and installation of wind turbines is necessary for protecting the health, safety, and welfare of neighboring property owners and the general public.
4. Large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities represent significant potential aesthetic impacts because of their large size, lighting, and shadow flicker effects.
5. Installation of large-scalee multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can create drainage problems through erosion and lack of sediment control for facility and access road sites and harm farmlands through improper construction methods.
6. Large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities may present risks to the property values of adjoining property owners.
7. Large-scale Wind Energy Facilities may be significant sources of noise, which, if unregulated, can negatively impact adjoining properties, particularly in areas of low ambient noise levels.
8. Construction of large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can create traffic problems and damage local roads.
9. If improperly sited, large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities can interfere with various types of communications.
10. The Town has many scenic viewsheds which would be negatively impacted by large-scale multiple-tower Wind Energy Facilities.
§ 80–5. Permits Required
B. No WECS other than a Small WECS shall be constructed, reconstructed, modified, or operated in the Town of Malone. No Wind Measurement Tower shall be constructed, reconstructed, modified, or operated in the Town of Malone, except in conjunction with and as part of an application for a Small WECS.
E. Exemptions. No permit or other approval shall be required under this Chapter for WECS utilized solely for agricultural operations in a state or county agricultural district, as long as the facility is set back at least one and a half times its total height from a property line and does not exceed 120 feet in [total] height.
G. Notwithstanding the requirements of the Section, replacement in kind or modification of a Small WECS may occur without Town Board approval when there will be: (1) no increase in total height; (2) no change in the location of the Small WECS; (3) no additional lighting or change in facility color; and (4) no increase in noise produced by the Small WECS.
§ 80–14. Variances
B. If (1) a court of competent jurisdiction orders the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider a use variance for any Wind Energy Facility other than a Small WECS ... or (2) the prohibition on any Wind Energy Facility other than a Small WECS is invalidated, no Wind Energy Facility shall be allowed except upon issuance of a Special Use Permit ... which shall require a Decommissioning Plan and Removal Bond, a Public Improvement Bond to protect public roads, and compliance with the following minimum setbacks:
a. The statistical sound pressure level generated by a WECS shall not exceed L10-45 dBA [i.e., shall not exceed 45 dBA for more than 6 minutes (10%) of any hour] measured at the nearest off-site dwelling existing at the time of application. If the ambient sound pressure level exceeds 45 dBa, the standard shall be ambient dBA plus 5 dBA.
b. 1,500 feet from the nearest site boundary property line.
c. 1,500 feet from the nearest public road.
d. 1,500 feet from the nearest off-site residence existing at the time of application.
e. One and a half times the total height of the WECS from any non-WECS structure or any above-ground utilities.
f. 250 feet from federal or state-identified wetlands, to protect bird and bat populations. This distance may be adjusted to be greater or less at the discretion of the reviewing body, based on topography, land cover, land uses, and other factors that influence the flight patterns of resident birds.
[Click here for Article II: Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems]
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
Model wind energy ordinance (2)
From the Town Code of the Town of Malone (N.Y.) (enacted May 24, 2006, by unanimous vote):
Wind Energy Facilities
Article II. Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems [WECS]
§ 80–11. Development Standards
1. A system shall be located on a lot a minimum of one acre in size. However, this requirment can be met by multiple owners submitting a joint application, where the aggregate size of their lots is at leaste one acre.
2. Only one Small WECS (plus, where authorized, a temporary wind measurement tower) per legal lot shall be allowed.
3. Small WECS shall be used primarily to reduce the on-site consumption of utility-provided electricity.
4. Tower heights shall be limited as follows:
a. 65 feet or less on parcels between one and five acres.
b. 80 feet or less on parcels of five or more acres.
5. The maximum turbine power output is limited to 10 KW.
6. The system's tower and blades shall be painted a non-reflective, unobtrusive color that blends the system and its components into the surrounding landscape to the greatest extent possible and incorporate non-reflective surfaces to minimize and visual disruption.
7. The system shall be designed and located in such a manner to minimize adverse visual impacts from public viewing areas (e.g., public parks, roads, trails). Facilities shall not exceed the ridgeline level, where the the ridgeline is defined as the average height of the summer-time vegetation on the parcel.
8. Exterior lighting on any structure associated with the system shall not be allowed except that which is specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration.
9. All on-site electrical wires associated with the system shall be installed underground except for "tie-ins" to a public utility company and public utility company transmission poles, towers, and lines.
10. The system shall be operated such that no disruptive electromagnetic interference is caused. If it has been demonstrated that a system is causing harmful interference, the system operator shall promptyl mitigate the harmful interference or cease operation of the system.
11. At least one sign shall be posted on the tower at a height of five feet warning of electrical shock or high voltage and harm from revolving machinery. No brand names, logo, or advertising shall be placed or painted on the tower, rotor, generator, or tail vane where it would be visible from the ground ...
14. Construction of on-site access roadways shall be minimized. Temporary access roads utilized for initial instllation shall be re-graded and re-vegetated to the pre-existing natural condition after completion of installation.
§ 80–12. Standards
1. Setback requirements. A Small WECS shall not be located closer to a property line than one and a half times the total height of the facility.
2. Noise. Except during short-term events including utility outages and severe wind storms, a Small WECS shall be designed, installed, and operated so that noise generated by the system shall not exceed [L10-]50 decibels (dBA), as measured by an unweighted meter at the closest property line.
§ 80–13. Abandonment of Use
A. A Small WECS which is not used for twelve (12) successive months shall be deemed abandoned and shall be dismantled and removed from the property within 24 additional months at the expense of the property owner.
B. All Small WECS shall be maintained in good condition and in accordance with all requirements of this section.
[Click here for Articles I (Findings and Permits Required) and III (Variances)]
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
Article II. Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems [WECS]
§ 80–11. Development Standards
1. A system shall be located on a lot a minimum of one acre in size. However, this requirment can be met by multiple owners submitting a joint application, where the aggregate size of their lots is at leaste one acre.
2. Only one Small WECS (plus, where authorized, a temporary wind measurement tower) per legal lot shall be allowed.
3. Small WECS shall be used primarily to reduce the on-site consumption of utility-provided electricity.
4. Tower heights shall be limited as follows:
a. 65 feet or less on parcels between one and five acres.
b. 80 feet or less on parcels of five or more acres.
5. The maximum turbine power output is limited to 10 KW.
6. The system's tower and blades shall be painted a non-reflective, unobtrusive color that blends the system and its components into the surrounding landscape to the greatest extent possible and incorporate non-reflective surfaces to minimize and visual disruption.
7. The system shall be designed and located in such a manner to minimize adverse visual impacts from public viewing areas (e.g., public parks, roads, trails). Facilities shall not exceed the ridgeline level, where the the ridgeline is defined as the average height of the summer-time vegetation on the parcel.
8. Exterior lighting on any structure associated with the system shall not be allowed except that which is specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration.
9. All on-site electrical wires associated with the system shall be installed underground except for "tie-ins" to a public utility company and public utility company transmission poles, towers, and lines.
10. The system shall be operated such that no disruptive electromagnetic interference is caused. If it has been demonstrated that a system is causing harmful interference, the system operator shall promptyl mitigate the harmful interference or cease operation of the system.
11. At least one sign shall be posted on the tower at a height of five feet warning of electrical shock or high voltage and harm from revolving machinery. No brand names, logo, or advertising shall be placed or painted on the tower, rotor, generator, or tail vane where it would be visible from the ground ...
14. Construction of on-site access roadways shall be minimized. Temporary access roads utilized for initial instllation shall be re-graded and re-vegetated to the pre-existing natural condition after completion of installation.
§ 80–12. Standards
1. Setback requirements. A Small WECS shall not be located closer to a property line than one and a half times the total height of the facility.
2. Noise. Except during short-term events including utility outages and severe wind storms, a Small WECS shall be designed, installed, and operated so that noise generated by the system shall not exceed [L10-]50 decibels (dBA), as measured by an unweighted meter at the closest property line.
§ 80–13. Abandonment of Use
A. A Small WECS which is not used for twelve (12) successive months shall be deemed abandoned and shall be dismantled and removed from the property within 24 additional months at the expense of the property owner.
B. All Small WECS shall be maintained in good condition and in accordance with all requirements of this section.
[Click here for Articles I (Findings and Permits Required) and III (Variances)]
wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
May 31, 2006
Wind integration follies
At the end of 2005, the Power Engineering Society (PES) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) published a special issue of its Power & Energy Magazine (Volume 3, Number 6, November/December 2005) focused on integrating wind into the power system. This document provides a brief summary of many of the salient points from that special issue about the current state of knowledge regarding utility wind integration issues.The May 2006 report ("Utility Wind Integration State of the Art") prepared by the Utility Wind Integration Group (UWIG) has been frequently cited recently as showing that wind power can easily provide 20% of our electricity. In fact it doesn't say that at all. Even their own press release misrepresents the report in that way.
The report does constructively address some of the market structures that complicate integrating a variable and intermittent source of energy such as that from the wind, but it glosses over the fact that such integration has little effect on the use of other sources. Even as it notes that wind is an energy, not a capacity, source -- that is, it can't replace any other source of electricity on the grid, it disregards the costs of keeping that excess capacity on line and using it all that less efficiently, nor does it consider the madness of, for example, calling for building excess, redundant, wind facilities in the dim hope that somewhere the wind will be blowing and for more transmission lines to deliver this marginally useful energy -- instead of spending that money to better use what we already have (or even, damn your eyes, to use less energy).
It also inconveniently declines to provide the sources it refers to ("two major recent studies," "have been shown," "one major study"), instead simply referring to the P&E Magazine. So one reads the UWIG summary with no idea of the reliability of its sources. Here are some extracts, with commentary in brackets.
On the cost side, at wind penetrations of up to 20% of system peak demand, system operating cost increases arising from wind variability and uncertainty amounted to about 10% or less of the wholesale value of the wind energy.Besides obviously ignoring the cost of the wind plant itself and its supporting transmission infrastructure, it should be noted that this is about cost only. As noted above, the publicizers of the UWIG report have misread this to say that the problems of integrating that amount of wind energy are minimal and even that there are corresponding benefits. But nothing in the UWIG report says that.
Since wind is primarily an energy -- not a capacity -- source, no additional generation needs to be added to provide back-up capability provided that wind capacity is properly discounted in the determination of generation capacity adequacy. However, wind generation penetration may affect the mix and dispatch of other generation on the system over time, since non-wind generation is needed to maintain system reliability when winds are low. [That is, wind does not need new back-up capacity, because it should be generally ignored in capacity planning, anyway (since the wind will be low so often).]And there's the crux of the matter. What is "limited penetration"? It certainly isn't 20% of peak demand. As long as wind penetration is low enough so that its variability can be accommodated as easily as demand fluctuations, it doesn't present a problem. And that limits the possible contribution wind power can make to meeting our electricity needs.
Wind generation will also provide some additional load carrying capability to meet forecasted increases in system demand. This contribution is likely to be up to 40% of a typical project’s nameplate rating, depending on local wind characteristics and coincidence with the system load profile. [Utter fudge. First, typical generation reported to the EIA is 27%. Second, that "depending on" is the starting point of the problem not a minor sideshow.] Wind generation may require system operators to carry additional operating reserves. [Just don't call it new back-up!]
In areas with limited penetration, modern wind plants can be added without degrading system performance.
Because of spatial variations of wind from turbine to turbine in a wind plant -- and to a greater degree from plant to plant -- a sudden loss of all wind power on a system simultaneously due to a loss of wind is not a credible event. [Hogwash. It is wishful thinking (and more madness: to build more wind turbines to back up other wind turbines, further diminishing their usefulness) and it is not at all borne out by actual experience.]This contradicts the earlier statement that "[w]ind generation will also provide some additional load carrying capability to meet forecasted increases in system demand." It states that wind has no -- zero -- capacity credit. In other words, it is not a choice between wind turbines and smokestacks or cooling towers. Erect and connect all the wind turbines you can, and you'll still need the same amount of "conventional" plants.
The addition of a wind plant to a power system does not require the addition of any backup conventional generation since wind is used primarily as an energy resource. In this case, when the wind is not blowing, the system must rely on existing dispatchable generation to meet the system demand.
The addition of a wind plant to a power system increases the amount of variability and uncertainty of the net load. This may introduce measurable changes in the amount of operating reserves required for regulation, ramping and load-following. Operating reserves may consist of both spinning and non-spinning reserves.For more information on the actual contributions of wind power and its effect on other sources, see "The Low Benefit of Industrial Wind."
Wind’s variability cannot be treated in isolation from the load variability inherent in the system. Because wind and load variability are statistically uncorrelated, the net increase of variability due to the addition of wind is less than the variability of the wind generation alone. [Nonsense: The addition of times of high wind generation during low demand (and, to a lesser extent, since wind has zero capacity credit, vice versa) obviously increases load variability.]
Upgrades or additions to transmission facilities may be needed to access locations with large wind-energy potential.
wind power, wind energy, environment, environmentalism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)