OVERBLOWN: Where’s the Empirical Proof? (Part IV)

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY PROOF

 —Marcello Truzzi

How can an ancient source of energy, which

• continuously destabilizes the balance between supply and demand,
• is highly variable and unresponsive, and
• provides no capacity value while inimical to demand cycles

effectively replace the capacity of modern machines and their fuels, in the process removing significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions that are the by-product of the burning of those fuels?

This final post in our four-part series discusses the nature of the scientific method and shows that there are a number of challenges to the claims wind technology can abate meaningful greenhouse gas emissions–challenges that require access to actual wind performance data showing how wind affects thermal behavior throughout the grid.

Any explanation about causation must honestly and transparently account for all variables at play.…

OVERBLOWN: Further Analyses (Part III)

SCIENCE IS THE DISINTERESTED SEARCH FOR THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH ABOUT THE MATERIAL WORLD.

– Richard Dawkins

This post in our series  looks at how the integration of wind variability affects thermal activity on the grid, favors flexible natural gas generators, and influences economic dispatch and the spot market. It also examines how estimates of carbon emissions are derived and summarizes the limitations of statistically based knowledge. It concludes with a discussion of what Energy Information Administration (EIA) actually says about the causes of carbon emission reductions in the country over the last three years

It is true, as the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) notes, that any wind production must displace some existing generation, but only in terms of electricity–not any of the underlying energy forms transposed into electricity. It is rather due to the stricture that supply match perfectly with demand at all times (and this is another oversimplification of a complicated situation).…

OVERBLOWN: Getting to the Facts on Emissions (Part II)

FACTS ARE STUBBORN, BUT STATISTICS ARE MORE PLIABLE

—Mark Twain

This section reviews the criticism the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) makes about the Bentek report and the evidence the organization offers purporting to prove how wind reduced substantial greenhouse gas emissions in Texas and Colorado. The section concludes with an examination of what the EIA data really show for those states for 2007 versus 2008—and what the official Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports say about causal factors for any CO₂ reductions.

The Bentek study showed that wind volatility in the sampled regions of Colorado and Texas caused more CO₂ emissions than would have been the case with less wind and more efficient coal plants. Using mostly sub-hourly performance data, Bentek was able to “examine in detail how coal, gas and wind interact and the resulting emissions implications.”…

OVERBLOWN: Windpower on the Firing Line (Part I)