New Wind Farms Cheaper Than Even Existing Coal Plants

[Phil Hobbs]

On 6/12/19 2:09 PM, pfjw@aol.com wrote:

I believe that's "You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make
her think."

I believe Ms. Parker did, in fact, use both versions. We lived in NYC
in my youth, and my father was in publishing, editing and
translating. Ms. Parker was an infrequent, but not rare, dinner
visitor, and even to my young mind, a bit of a verbal dazzler.

Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

Fun!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[George Cornelius]

In article <d9d2d4dd-cba9-4beb-9bc5-385cb6c8afe7@googlegroups.com>, "pfjw@aol.com" <peterwieck33@gmail.com> writes:

https://en.wind-turbine-models.com/turbines/428-gamesa-g114-2.0mw

https://en.wind-turbine-models.com/turbines/548-gamesa-g87

You can lead a whore to Vassar, but you can't make her think. (Dorothy Parker)

You would be that whore.

If you don't have an argument, resort to ad hominems.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

On Thursday, 6 June 2019 19:24:28 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Jeff:

I am pointing to 'right now' CREE shoebox fixtures for parking lots, as one application. I have installed several thousand in my day- here are specific links:

https://www.rablighting.com/feature/ez-site

https://lighting.cree.com/products/outdoor/area/clite-area

https://lighting.cree.com/products/outdoor/area/noctura-area

We are in the process of re-lamping/refixturing about 1,000,000 gsf of medical office building and medical school, using LEDs. Our average LPM, net, after retrofitting, is a tad over 100 lm/watt. With the screw-in stuff around 80, the replaced 2x2 and 2x4 fixtures being about 120.

Here is one of those, from a 'regular' supplier accessible by you and I any day, any time. Note that purchased in bulk, the priced goes under $50.

https://www.1000bulbs.com/product/207639/PLT-11204.html

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

And you expect the same lpw from domestic lightbulbs?


NT

 

On Thursday, 6 June 2019 19:56:26 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

And, I may as well rub it in some:

https://www.1000bulbs.com/product/201937/LED-8038E40-A.html 142.8 lm/w.

$37.82 per lightbulb lol. A different animal to domestic lights.
Not worth looking at the rest.

 

On Friday, 7 June 2019 14:32:54 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Once again, laboring under the burden of theory rather than practice.

Wind turbines have variable vanes. They rotate at their base from very roughly 60 degrees to the wind to 0 degrees to the wind. At 0, they do not turn, and typically this state is when the wind speeds are too high (exceedingly rare), or the unit is being serviced (and the rotor is locked when under service). At 60 degrees, and with the design minimum wind velocity, it will make the design rotational speed.

Wind turbines do not pretend to use all the energy available. They use a very small fraction of it - but it is essentially "free" energy.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

Free energy eh. No, it's expensive energy. Wind is free, but capturing it & making electricity is not by any stretch of the imagination free. I wish it were, but it isn't.


NT

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

What do you do? Sit around and stew, the explode into meaningless rambles?

Cost (installed) per watt, commercial scale:

Solar: $2.30
Wind: $1.63
Natural Gas: $0.89
Nuclear: $5.00 - $8.00
Coal: $5.30 ("Clean" technology)

On reliability (Add emphasis is mine):

Reliability of wind turbines has improved with time and has achieved an availability of---> 98%,<--- but wind turbines fail at least once per year, on average, with larger wind turbines failing relatively more frequently. A recent study of US wind turbines found that when all sources of downtime are accounted for, the average wind turbine actively generates power for 1.5 days between downtime events and that the average downtime is 1.6 hours.

Point being that a wind "farm" does not rely on a single turbine, but multiples, often many dozens of turbines. So, a single reactor event may take a nuclear plant down for a month, or a single turbine issue may take a coal or gas plant down for a week. But a single wind turbine event, for even two days, is hardly a blip on the radar.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

On Wednesday, 10 July 2019 13:32:28 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

What do you do? Sit around and stew, the explode into meaningless rambles?

Cost (installed) per watt, commercial scale:

Solar: $2.30
Wind: $1.63
Natural Gas: $0.89
Nuclear: $5.00 - $8.00
Coal: $5.30 ("Clean" technology)

On reliability (Add emphasis is mine):

Reliability of wind turbines has improved with time and has achieved an availability of---> 98%,<--- but wind turbines fail at least once per year, on average, with larger wind turbines failing relatively more frequently. A recent study of US wind turbines found that when all sources of downtime are accounted for, the average wind turbine actively generates power for 1.5 days between downtime events and that the average downtime is 1.6 hours.

Point being that a wind "farm" does not rely on a single turbine, but multiples, often many dozens of turbines. So, a single reactor event may take a nuclear plant down for a month, or a single turbine issue may take a coal or gas plant down for a week. But a single wind turbine event, for even two days, is hardly a blip on the radar.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

Reliability of course is not the key issue in comparing intermittent with controlled gen techs. It's been explained enough times, you don't get it. End of story.


NT

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 7/10/19 8:04 AM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

Reliability of course is not the key issue in comparing
intermittent with controlled gen techs. It's been explained
enough times, you don't get it. End of story.

NT

You remind me of my mother.
I'd ask her a question, and if she didn't know the answer,
she'd make something up. Then defend it to the death.


--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

On Wednesday, 10 July 2019 14:21:03 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 7/10/19 8:04 AM, tabbypurr wrote:

Reliability of course is not the key issue in comparing
intermittent with controlled gen techs. It's been explained
enough times, you don't get it. End of story.

NT

You remind me of my mother.
I'd ask her a question, and if she didn't know the answer,
she'd make something up. Then defend it to the death.

You're an ignorant troll. Short term plonk.

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 7/11/19 2:33 PM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, 10 July 2019 14:21:03 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 7/10/19 8:04 AM, tabbypurr wrote:

Reliability of course is not the key issue in comparing
intermittent with controlled gen techs. It's been explained
enough times, you don't get it. End of story.

NT

You remind me of my mother.
I'd ask her a question, and if she didn't know the answer,
she'd make something up. Then defend it to the death.

You're an ignorant troll. Short term plonk.

You just proved my point.

--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

[Phil Allison]

Fox's Mercantile wrote:

NT

You remind me of my mother.
I'd ask her a question, and if she didn't know the answer,
she'd make something up. Then defend it to the death.

** Same goes for a great many folk, men and women.

Their philosophy is that: "if it feels right, it is right" - a denial of the need for good evidence.

Another famous saying pointing to the same fact is: "you cannot reason a person out of a position that reason never got them into in the first place".



..... Phil