Comments on: Wind Integration: Incremental Emissions from Back-Up Generation Cycling (Part II)

By: Emissions Savings References - Wind Farm Realities

Emissions Savings References - Wind Farm Realities — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:24:11 +0000

[...] Part 2 [...]

By: Jack Ellis

Jack Ellis — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:56:53 +0000

Several agencies in California are currently running a series of computer simulations to examine the operational impacts of a 33% Renewable Portfolio Standard and one of the questions they expect to answer more definitively is the extent of any reductions in gas consumption and CO2 emissions. Mr. Hawkins certainly raises a good point, but if more detailed studies support his point, the alternative is likely to be addition of very expensive storage that will raise the cost of renewable energy even further rather than any meaningful scaling back of renewable energy development.

By: Mark Pruitt

Mark Pruitt — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:34:58 +0000

Excellent analysis – quite refreshing. I would appreciate any additional information you are willing to provide on the calculator.

Best regards.

By: Kent Hawkins

Kent Hawkins — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:29:08 +0000

Patrice,

I have tried to reach you unsuccessfully at the email address you provided. Please contact me at kenth@kos.net

Kent

By: Patrice d'Oultremont

Patrice d'Oultremont — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 16:31:44 +0000

Dear Mr Hawkins,

as indicated i the message that I left yesterday (4 Dec 2009) in your blog (under Part I of your work on Wind Integration), I am part of a group in Belgium who is intended to build a Calculator similar as the one you have now developped. Our objective is, naturally, the same as yours. Now, since you have already set the foundations for such work and since you offer (In part II) to share some of your experience, I would very much like to get in touch with you asap to discuss futher the matter. You can reach me through e-mail (patrice.doultremont@gmail.com) or by phone (0032 475 700 077).
I thank you in advance,
P.O.

By: Reduced air emissions due to wind power: Not as much as you might think « Knowledge Problem

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:34:51 +0000

[...] pair of posts at Master Resource (part I, part II) explore the degree to which variable wind power leads to lower efficiency and increased air [...]

By: Jon Boone

Jon Boone — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:15:35 +0000

Part II continues Hawkins’ rationale for developing a means–a calculator–for studying all the thermal implications involved in wind integration. Essentially, what he calls for is a chronological load dispatch analysis sufficiently fine-grained to observe the behavior of all the generating/regulating units necessary to accommodate wind volatility. He focuses on natural gas units because, on most grids, this would provide the rapidly responsive generation necessary to follow and balance wind flux–which is in addition to load flux and even more desultory, since it’s completely random. However, his calculator could also factor coal units, particularly for grids like the PJM that have so much coal generation. There are coal plants that, with inefficient ramping, producing heat rate penalties approaching 40%.

As I said in another post, Hawkins poses a method for examining wind’s ability to offset carbon emissions throughout a grid’s entire cycle. Presently, for a variety of not very good reasons, there exists no systematic realtime load dispatch measurement of carbon emissions offsets. Consequently, any statement about them bears the same level of reality as the BCS college football polls. And none of the federal subsidies for wind are indexed to actual measured reductions in CO2.

I hope others will build upon Hawkins’ work here by at least insisting that the bedrock claims for wind–that it will reduce substantial amounts of CO2 and back down the fossil-fuel industry–be supported by actual evidence.