See our most recent Debate Digest article: Bosnia and Herzegovina membership in the EU
Argument: Wind can't generate enough energy to impact global warming
From Debatepedia
]Parent debate
]Supporting quotations
J. R. Etherington. "The Case against Wind 'Farms'." 2006 - Saving of CO2 emission - country wide target
Government's own figure for saving of the UK's CO2 emission by renewable power generation , mainly wind, is just 9.2 million tonnes per year by 2010 (DEFRA 2004 and DTI Myths).
This is less than the emission from a medium sized coal fired power station and more to the point is less than four ten-thousandths (0.0004) of global total CO2 emission (OECD 2005) and stands no chance of altering atmospheric CO2 concentration, still less deflecting climate change as suggested in DTI Myths.
"Wind farms, hot air and spin". Telegraph. 14 Aug. 2008 - As we report today, an investigation by the Renewable Energy Foundation casts doubt on the idea that wind turbines are the solution to the problem of how to generate Britain's electricity in a reliable but "clean" way.
That a substantial portion of Britain's energy needs can be generated by wind turbines is now the received wisdom. So much so, indeed, that in order to ensure that wind turbines are built, the Government - which is to say, every taxpayer - subsidises the cost of the electricity that wind turbines produce to the tune of almost 100 per cent.
There is, however, one major problem with wind power: wind. Because the wind does not blow reliably or constantly, there are inevitably long periods when it is not strong enough to generate electricity. It means that wind turbines cannot solve Britain's energy needs, for there is no way to store the electricity produced when high winds are blowing so that it can be used when they are not.
Russel Mesler. "Wind won’t solve energy crisis". 2 Aug. 2008 - The legendary oil entrepreneur T. Boone Pickens and Nobel Laureate Al Gore have announced bold plans to radically reduce America’s use of fossil fuels. Both Pickens and Gore want our country to rely much more on wind energy for electricity production. Pickens envisions wind generators across the Midwest, from the Texas Panhandle to the Canadian border. But despite the attraction of wind as a nearly pollution-free energy source, its performance is disappointing.
Even with heavy subsidies from ratepayers and taxpayers over the last two decades, wind supplies only about 1 percent of America’s electricity and 2.3 percent in Kansas. A study by the National Center for Policy Analysis determined that wind energy and other renewables and conservation received between $30 billion and $50 billion over the last 20 years. This represents the largest governmental peacetime energy expenditure in U.S. history, outranking the Strategic Petroleum Reserve program as well as spending on the synthetic fuels program during the mid-1970s.
"Impact ofWind Power Generation in Ireland on the Operation of Conventional Plant and the Economic Implications”. ESB National Grid. February 2004 - This section summarises the broad conclusions of the study. Diversity of siting of wind farms has been confirmed to be effective in reducing the intermittency of wind powered generation (WPG). In this regard locating relatively small on-shore wind farms in the south and south-east of the country would be beneficial in reducing the intermittency of wind power as seen by system generation. The opposite effect would result from the construction of a very large wind farm on a single site, whether on-shore or off-shore.
The capacity credit of WPG capacity has been confirmed to be considerably less than that of conventional thermal plant, and declines incrementally to saturation. Therefore as WPG increases additional or ‘surplus’ generation capacity is required if security of supply is to be maintained. There are significant costs associated with having ‘excess’ capacity on the system. Therefore the capacity surplus that results from WPG adds to the total generation costs.
The effect of WPG on the thermal plant on the system has been quantified. Mid-merit and high-merit plant are the categories most affected. Low-merit plant (OCGTs) is minimally affected. If high levels of WPG are to be accommodated in the future, existing plant may need to be modified and new plant selected so that they can cope with this type of operation.
The adverse effect of wind on thermal plant increases as the wind energy penetration rises. Plant operates less efficiently and with increasing volatility. There is a financial premium to be paid for WPG. We estimate that for a system with a peak of 6,500MW, and a generation portfolio comprising of combined and open cycle gas turbines, and no WPG, that the total annual generation costs would be €1.28bn. When WPG is increased to 1,500MW the total generation costs increases by €196m per annum to €1.48bn. For a system with a peak demand of 6,500 MW, 1500 MW of WPG represents a wind energy penetration level of 11.7%. The EU target for Ireland, from all renewable sources, is 13.2%. Therefore it can be estimated that, in the long term, using WPG to comply with the EU target will increase electricity generation costs by 15% (€196m as a percentage of €1.28bn). This translates to a CO2 abatement cost in excess of €120/tonne.
The cost of CO2 abatement arising from using large levels of wind energy penetration appears high relative to other alternatives.