Sun
Jan 18 2009
05:59 pm


Smoky Hills Wind Farm, photo by R. Neal

Wind power doesn't work, but don't tell that to the folks up in Kansas. The Smoky Hills Wind Farm is a 250 megawatt project, about 1/3rd the capacity of a smallish coal-fired power plant.

It will offset 750,000 tons of CO2 emissions, 2500 tons of NOx, and 3400 tons of SO2 per year. It will power approx. 75,000 Kansas homes, and pay landowners anywhere from $750,000 to $1.25 million in "wind royalties" per year.

The Smoky Hills project covers about 26,000 acres, 95%+ of which is still usable for agriculture. That's a lot of land, but so is the land used by a hydroelectric dam. TVA's Norris reservoir covers about 34,000 acres and has a capacity of about 130 megawatts (if my math is correct).

A coal-fired power plant occupies a much smaller land footprint and generates a lot more power, but the undesirable effects on the surrounding regions are well known.

The Smoky Hills wind farm project has power contracts with three Kansas utilities, and was recently purchased by an Italian company which has a portfolio of nearly 20,000 megawats of renewable hydro, geothermal, wind, solar and biomass energy resources around the world.

Anyway, wind won't supply all our energy needs, and nobody ever said it would. And it's not suitable for every location, but it wouldn't be prudent to just to blow it off, so to speak.

(Numbers gathered from various google sources, please feel free to fact check.)

JaHu's picture

I wonder what the formula is

I wonder what the formula is that they use for the spacing between generators? Just from the pictures one would think they could be spaced closer together.

Brian A.'s picture

Good question

Apparently they need a lot of space between them for maximum efficiency. I'm not sure why.

Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.

BoB W.'s picture

Power Production Measurements

A specific megawatt rating may be misleading. Megawatts is a measurement of power, & is instantaneous in nature. If the megawatt rating is a peak rating, that means the output will rarely be that high. Megawatt-hours (megawatts x hours) during a specified time period is the measurement that matters in this case. This measurement relates to energy expended over a certain amount of time (which translates to work). Utility companies charge consumers $x per kilowatt-hour during a month's time. Magawatt-hours per month, year, etc. is the best way to compare outputs of power production facilities, as time is factored into the picture. Clear as mud?

R. Neal's picture

Yes, the nameplate rated

Yes, the nameplate rated capacity is the maximum output capacity of the turbines at any given point in time.

I read that wind farms run overall somewhere around 35% "efficiency" v. 75% or so as compared to other sources such as coal-fired power plants in terms of rated K/MW v. K/MWH, because of the variability of wind and the lack of storage capability v. the pour-on-more-coal-to-crank-it-up whenever you want nature of coal.

EricLykins's picture

What about tennessee?

Tennessee does not have the potential for large scale cost-effective wind or solar, so I think the first thing we are going to have to do is to get our legislators to get us a net metering law so we can contribute to the power grid as individuals. We are one of only 8 states in which you are not able to sell power back to your utility at the same price they sell it to you. Until this happens, the TVA and coal have total control of our electricity supply.

New coal-fired power plants aren't being built and TVA doesn't currently have much of a plan to meet future demand outside of rate increases and conservation advocacy. We are probably going to have to help with many diverse small-scale efforts.

What can we build here?

art by Katie Walberg

Charles's picture

TVA Pays MORE

Under TVA's Green Power initiative, which KUB does participate in, they pay you MORE for power you generate than they charge for power you use. A Net Metering system, while much simpler for the utility to administer, would result in a REDUCTION in what TVA will pay you.

R. Neal's picture

I think the first thing we

I think the first thing we are going to have to do is to get our legislators to get us a net metering law so we can contribute to the power grid as individuals.

I agree wholeheartedly. But I was told that the TVA Green Power Partners program, in which most local utilities participate including KUB, requires net metering?

EricLykins's picture

Looks like I missed the

Looks like I missed the nearly 16 million kWh already generated by the Green Power Switch
Generation Partners® in the first quarter of their program - (without involving legislation, although the program is limited to wind and solar.)Cool.

gonzone's picture

Not Net Metering

Net metering requires only one meter. What the Partners program does requires two meters. But as a result you do get a higher price for what you sell TVA than you would through net metering. This works for TVA because this way they can claim the green power you generate as a part of their Green Power program generation.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson

EricLykins's picture

The funky funky meters & interconnection standards

Interconnection
Whereas the federal government generally has jurisdiction over non-utility generating
systems that are connected to electric transmission lines, individual states regulate the
process whereby a small-scale, renewable energy system is connected to the electric
distribution grid. These policies, commonly known as interconnection standards, seek
to maintain the stability of the grid and the safety of those who use and maintain it.
However, if not designed fairly or implemented properly, these policies can pose a barrier
to the development of customer-sited renewable energy and other forms of distributed
generation (DG).
Customers who seek to generate their own electricity with a grid-tied photovoltaic (PV)
system, a wind turbine or another form of DG must first apply to interconnect the system.
Many encounter unworkable interconnection requirements employed by utilities—
especially in states without uniform standards designed to encourage DG. In some cases,
the interconnection process is so lengthy, arduous and/or expensive that it thwarts the
development of customer-sited DG. Historically, this has been highly problematic for many
would-be owners of small DG systems.
Today, a significant number of states have simplified and streamlined the interconnection
process for customer-sited DG systems. Customers considering grid-tied renewables in
states with well-designed interconnection standards have the advantage of a process
that is transparent and equitable, and that often involves separate tiers of analysis
depending on a system’s size and complexity. These tiers often involve a “fast track” for
interconnecting well-understood systems, such as Photovoltaic (PV) systems sized 2MW
or less.
Net Metering
Net metering has been described as “providing the most significant boost of any
policy tool at any level of government…to decentralize and ‘green’ American energy
sources
.”3 Commonly referred to as the policy that lets your meter spin backwards, net
metering programs are powerful, market-based incentives that states use to encourage
energy independence.
from: FREEING THE GRID (click and scroll down to TN)
Best and worst practices in
state net metering policies and
interconnection standards, 2008 Edition

"The truth is pretty simple; it's the mechanics of making it work that breaks men down."
Hunter S. Thompson

BoB W.'s picture

Food for thought

While working for a local company involved in data collection at various power producing facilities, I spent a little time at a site that purchased power from other utilities at night when rates were less expensive. This power fueled giant electrical air compressors & the compressed air was stored in a cavernous hole in the ground until daytime, whereupon the air was piped into turbines which were coupled to electrical generators, & the power was resold at the significantly higher daytime rate! Pretty clever huh? Methods of storing power could prove to be a part of the solution to our voracious demand for electricity.

JaHu's picture

I have often wondered if it

I have often wondered if it were possible to launch wire leads connected to large underground capacitors into thunder storms to attract lightning strikes. Then turn the power from these strikes into some kind of usable form.

Justin's picture

Found this from the DOE: Q:

Found this from the DOE:

Q: Can we harness lightning as an energy source?
A: Lightning is very powerful and very dangerous. But lightning strikes are very brief and infrequent, and therefore the amount of energy that could be gained (and theoretically stored) would be small in comparison to overall electrical needs.

One lightning strike has enough energy (~1500 MJ) to power a 100W light bulb for almost half a year. However, you would need to harness over 58,000 lightning strikes each day to equal the electricity production capability of a large (1GW) power plant.

JaHu's picture

and you believe the

and you believe the department of energy after this administration had control of them for the past 8 years?

gonzone's picture

Definitely

Power storage (via such means as you mention) will definitely have to be a part of the mix for a Green Power Solution. Other storage methods for off-peak power might be hydrogen generation (for transportation?) Pumped storage of water is a current method for doing this.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson

sugarfatpie's picture

Nice royalties! Wonder if

Nice royalties!
Wonder if land suitable for wind power in Kansas or elsewhere is taking the same price hit as land everywhere is in this recession.
A

-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)

"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin

Factchecker's picture

Here's an interesting wind

Here's an interesting wind vs. nuclear cost comparison. Good discussion in comments following too.

Nobody's picture

Operating costs

The author didn't compare the operating costs of wind vs. nuclear. It would show a big difference.

lovable liberal's picture

Strip-mining coal has a

Strip-mining coal has a substantial footprint, too.

Liberty and justice for all.

My home

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives