The Dena Report (wind energy assessed)

 The ABS Wind Power Report concludes that governments, developers and operators should seriously consider their options regarding wind power.

The Wind Power Report is the most important we have produced to date; providing the most comprehensive study of the wind power market today.

We show how the last year has seen marked changes in the national rankings in terms of wind power, both among the wind power market leaders and among the up and coming countries. Sudden activity has pushed some wind power markets forward, others have slowed down as their wind markets matures. With the first real evidence of performance and information on wind power from some of the most authoritative sources in the power industry, the claims for wind power are being called into question; we examine all of these factors in our wind power report.

The Wind Power Report explores the widening of the market to new countries, with many taking their first steps into the market. Wind energy information is provided on the five market leaders of Germany, Spain, the USA, India and Denmark. Significant wind power industry issues are emerging as operational data becomes available from the major wind power operators such as E.ON Netz, Eltra and ESB. Wind power reports have now been published by energy agencies and the network operators in USA, Germany, Spain, Denmark and Ireland, delineating critical problems. Deutsche EnergieAgentur (dena) has published a comprehensive wind power report on German wind power on behalf of the Federal Government, together with the utility and wind and industries. The dena report assessed the capacity credit of wind power in Germany in 2003 as 890-1,230 MW, i.e. 6% of installed wind capacity of 14,603 MW, rising to 1,820-2,300 MW for 36,000 MW installed in 2015, with a reserve capacity requirement of 7,000 MW. The claimed savings in GHG emissions has been questioned. Wind power’s intermittency places a large strain on system balance and where wind power has been promoted for politico/environmental reasons and wind developers have benefited from substantial subsidies, new information on wind energy shows that a reality check is needed.

The ABS Wind Power Report concludes that governments, developers and operators should seriously consider their options regarding wind power.

2 Responses to “The Dena Report (wind energy assessed)”

  1. andy robinson Says:

    I have yet to find a government that believes anything other than what the wind industry tells them.There has been hundreds of reports but the governments are turning a blind eye towards energy companies.

  2. Ron Mattmer Says:

    Alberta power utility Enmax Corp. is building a huge new power station in Southern Alberta fired with natural gas, partly to help boost the provincial grid’s reliability after Alberta’s aggressive expansion into wind energy made it vulnerable to power disruption. The 1,200-megawatt station will cost about $2-billion. “We now have so much windpower generation that we need to fall back on reliable sources of power,” said Peter Hunt, an Enmax spokesman. “The problem with wind power is that the wind doesn’t blow all the time, so the greater percentage of the system depends on wind, the more vulnerable to disruption the system becomes when the wind stops blowing.”

    http://www.windaction.org/news/9093

    In Ontario, the McGuinty Government, in bed with the Industrial Wind Lobby, hires a wind turbine manufacturer (GE) to do a wind study for Ontario.

    “This study was undertaken on behalf of the Ontario Power Authority (OPA), the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), and the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) to assess the implications of large scale wind integration into the Ontario power system.”

    http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/marketdata/windpower.asp

    GE says the average “capacity value” of the wind resource in Ontario ranges from 38% to 42% during the winter months (November to February) and from 16% to 19% during the summer months (June to August).

    GE also did a study for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority examined the impact of 3,300 MW of wind on the New York bulk power system (GE Energy Consulting 2005). The study used simulated wind data from more than 100 sites throughout the state and found capacity values “ranged from 3% to 12%, with an average value of 6%.

    The implications are that Ontario will be burning more natural gas than the McGuinty government is letting on and Ontario’s power consumers will be paying.

    Who is doing the string pulling for whom?

    Robert Hornung, President of Canadian Wind Energy Association used to be Climate Change Program Director for the Pembina Institute.

    “A wind turbine only generates one or two megawatts of energy, but it can be a major contributor to the grid and reduce the need to build expensive nuclear facilities, said Robert Hornung.”

    Jack Gibbons is chair of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance. Glen Estill is president
    of Sky Generation and past President of CanWea.

    “Advocates such as Estill and Gibbons …both say nuclear power can be replaced over time by a combination of energy sources, technologies and approaches, including conservation.”

    “Now is the time for Premier McGuinty to lead the way to a smart, green energy future without coal or nuclear power that will protect Ontario’s health, environment and economy” said Jack Gibbons.

    “Energy efficiency and low-impact renewable energy sources have the realistic potential to provide more than double the amount of electricity needed in worst case projections of Ontario’s future electricity demand. That is the conclusion of a new report released today by a coalition of leading environmental groups, including WWF-Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Pembina Institute, Ontario Clean Air Alliance, the Sierra Club of Canada and Greenpeace.”

    “Thanks for the note from Rod Adams. It is a good one. Jack Gibbons, as you know, is the paid lobbyist of the natural gas industry masquerading as an environmental protector. I wish more experts in the energy industry would respond to Jack’s comments in the print media and on the air in the manner Rod did. It might start members of the media thinking about their universal approval of everything Jack says because it is called “Clean Air”. http://mailman.mcmaster.ca/mailman/private/cdn-nucl-l/0501/msg00042.html

    “Although the Alliance draws three-quarters of its funding from charitable foundations, it has faced some criticism for accepting money from natural gas and wind energy ndustries, which stand to benefit financially from a phase-out of coal.”

    Just got a glossy flier from Union Gas. One of those OUTDOOR fireplaces on the condo’s roof –top sure would impress the guests.

    ” AT QUEEN’S PARK, Dwight Duncan, House Leader and Minister of Energy, explains that the Liberal Party’s policy to shut down coal plants evolved under pressure from environmentalists during the preparation of its 2003 election platform. The previous Conservative government had undertaken to get rid of coal by 2015. “Our guys said we can do better.” Like Gibbons of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance, the Liberal caucus thought the alternative would be more natural gas, not new life for nuclear. “The challenge,” says Duncan, “is the rising commodity price”.

    “I am very proud of this plan. It’s aggressive, but it’s balanced. It’s responsible and it’s flexible. It will double conservation, double renewables, reduce our reliance on nuclear and ensure greater security moving forward. It’s a good plan for the future of Ontario. ” Minister’s Speeches. Notes for remarks By The Honourable Dwight Duncan, Minister of
    Energy, Ottawa Chamber of Commerce Ottawa, Ontario, June 28, 2006″.

    http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/index.cfm?fuseaction=media.speeches&speech=28062006

    The Ontario environmentalists have teamed up to form a SUPER co-coalition for this fall’s provincial election. What was Dwight Duncan thinking trying to appease the green rabble? Dion is snuggling up to Elizabeth May. Greens don’t vote Liberal. Duncan and Dion have managed to alienate middle class voters who are going to bear the cost of these “green” scams.

Leave a Reply to Ron Mattmer Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: