DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Renewable Revolution
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Renewables
*****************************************************
#Post#: 735--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: January 28, 2014, 9:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Some news about WIND POWER that Gail Tverberg may have missed...
;)
[quote]This is certainly an interesting initiative, and I’m
happy we had the chance to dig into it in more detail than we
did when the initiative was unveiled in November.
It does help bring electricity to people without electricity or
who are using dirty, expensive, health-damaging fossil fuels for
electricity generation — 50 million such people is the target.
It also provides revenue to Vestas and other initiative
partners. In other words, it helps the environment, it helps
individuals financially, it helps individuals to improve their
quality of life a great deal, and it brings revenue to Vestas.
Win-win-win-win.
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/26/wind-prosperity-charity-pr-campaign-business/#29kJyi2ruKHhK0Yz.99[/quote]
HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIsZmoz6LHY&feature=player_embedded<br
/>
CHEAP renewable energy for up to 1.3 BILLION people by taking
old turbines being replaced by new, bigger turbines in Europe,
refurbishing them and them putting them in proven high wind
areas in third world areas in cooperation with governments
providing incentives GIVES INVESTORS over 50% LOW RISK RETURN ON
INVESTMENT! As the speaker says, "You don't get any better than
THAT for a business venture.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif
[img width=100
height=70]
HTML http://www.nhclc.org/files/nhclc/u38/fl-church-translators-20120622-001.jpg[/img]
So WHY doesn't Gail Tverberg recognize this and support it? Why
does she spend time poo pooing wind power? You KNOW why. She is
biased for fossil fuels, period. She is urging people to throw
away a tremendous opportunity for clean, environmentally
friendly profits that actually help third world countries,
unlike dirty polluting energy, in order to safeguard fossil fuel
corporation interests.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif
This is anathema to what an objective actuarial energy expert
should be doing for the business community. She is giving bad
investment advice, PERIOD. [img width=30
height=30]
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png[/img]
Several more short videos and story at link: [img width=40
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png[/img]<br
/>
Wind For Prosperity Is No Charity Or PR Campaign — This Is About
Business (Exclusive Videos)
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/26/wind-prosperity-charity-pr-campaign-business/
#Post#: 756--------------------------------------------------
Japan's Fukushima Commits to 100% Renewable Energy
By: AGelbert Date: February 7, 2014, 2:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
02/05/2014 12:39 PM
Japan's Fukushima Commits to 100% Renewable Energy
SustainableBusiness.com News
by Rona Fried
Three years after Japan's nuclear meltdown, Fukushima Prefecture
announced it will transition to 100% renewable energy by 2040.
The region, which has a population of about two million people,
doesn't want to return to nuclear power even as the national
government remains committed to getting the reactors back
online. A recent survey shows that 53% of Japan's citizens want
nuclear power phased out and 23% want it shut down now.
Currently, Fukushima gets 22% of its energy from renewable
sources. One of Japan's biggest solar projects could be located
there, but residents also want to bring back small farming
communities.
Called "Solar Sharing," farmers are growing crops underneath
solar panels. They are growing crops like canola - which absorbs
radiation - in an effort to decontaminate their farmland and
their abandoned livelihoods. Solar panels are designed on a
pergola-type structure that lets in enough sun to grow crops
below.
They are also planning 1 GW of offshore wind off Fukushima's
coast by 2020, where a $226 million floating offshore wind farm
project is already in motion.
Nagano, the Japanese prefecture which hosted the Winter Olympics
in 1998, has pledged to switch to 100% renewable energy by 2050.
The nuclear disaster has changed the way people think about
energy, Tetsunari Iida, director of the Institute for
Sustainable Energy Policies in Japan, told Responding to Climate
Change (RTCC). On the other hand, community power development
offers a sense of "local ownership and participation."
In Germany, 74 regions and municipalities have already reached
100% renewable energy, according to the newly established Global
100% Renewable Energy Campaign.
At the Warsaw Climate Summit last November, delegates were
stunned when the Japanese national government rolled back its
long-held target of cutting emissions 25% below 1990 levels by
2020. The new target is 3.8% below 2005 levels by 2020.
Japan's Growing Pains
After implementing the world's most generous feed-in tariff two
years ago, Japan is now the world's second-largest solar PV
market, installing 7 gigawatts in 2013 (the country has 10.5 GW
installed in total). Developers turned more to solar than wind
or geothermal because it's cheaper and quicker to develop.
The government target for solar is 28 GW by 2020 - and 40%
renewable energy by 2030 - and corporations from Softbank to
First Solar have been rushing to fulfill it, with 22.4 GW
already approved.
Japan Solar
But developers are running into a raft of barriers, most
notably limits to grid capacity, but also finding available
land, waiting lists for components and a shortage of qualified
technicians.
For example, Softbank's 180-plus GW solar project - three large
projects on the island of Hokkaido - has been put on hold
because the utility hasn't decided which projects will be able
to connect to the grid.
About a quarter of all solar projects are being built on
Hokkaido, Japan's second largest island, because it's one of few
areas with relatively large pieces of inexpensive land. But the
grid can't handle all those projects. About 20% are being denied
access to the grid altogether and 37% have been told they will
have limited access, according to survey by the Japan Renewable
Energy Foundation.
To deal with that, the government is building the world's
largest battery bank in Hokkaido (the northern part of Japan)
and another, much smaller, 2 MW bank in Okinawa (the southern
part) to stabilize the flow of solar energy. It will invest $33
billion on grid modernization and development over the next 10
years, particularly to spur growth of wind energy.
Meanwhile, Panasonic's work around to the situation is to focus
on small rooftop solar. "Rooftops don't require the purchase of
land, and there are transmission lines already available nearby.
"Rooftops are going to be more popular," Kazuhiro Yoshida, who
heads the solar division, told Bloomberg.
Kyocera is supplying solar panels for installations that spread
across 80 farms in Japan.
Learn more about the Global 100% Renewable Energy Campaign:
Website: www.go100re.net
HTML http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25496
#Post#: 758--------------------------------------------------
Denmark: 99% Wind on 25th Jan
By: AGelbert Date: February 7, 2014, 2:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Denmark: 99% Wind on 25th Jan
by Anna
January 29, 2014
Category:
News
Denmark is not only the birthplace of the modern wind industry
and the original FIT policy concept, but also the pioneer of a
bold national target to achieve 100% RE by 2050 in the power,
heating, and transportation sectors. And they are well on their
way. The screenshot shows that the country is well on its way.
On 25th Jan, 99% electricity in Denmark came from wind turbines:
4.112 MW wind production and 4.156 MW electricity consumption.
As one can see from this website of current power production
(
HTML http://energinet.dk/Flash/Forside/UK/index.html),
the Danes
publish a real-time overview of their power sector broken down
into the categories of central power stations, cogeneration
(local CHP), and wind turbines. Add those three together and
subtract electricity consumption, and you get the net power
exchange.
#Post#: 892--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: April 5, 2014, 1:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
US Senate Committee Votes to Extend Tax Breaks for Wind Farms
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif
Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press
April 04, 2014 | 2 Comments
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. wind farms would keep their treasured
tax breaks as part of an $85 billion package of temporary tax
cuts passed by a key Senate committee Thursday.
Some U.S. firms with foreign income would be winners too after
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., backed off
plans to significantly trim the package.
Congress routinely passes the package of more than 50 temporary
tax breaks for businesses and individuals, but they were allowed
to expire at the start of the year. The Senate Finance Committee
voted Thursday to extend all but two of them through 2015.
The bill passed on a voice vote, with support from both
Democrats and Republicans.
Congress is expected to pass the tax package by the end of the
year, so businesses and individuals can continue to claim the
tax breaks when they file their 2014 taxes next year.
Wyden acknowledged that periodically extending temporary tax
breaks makes it difficult for businesses and families to plan.
He said he hopes to work on a comprehensive overhaul of the tax
system, making some of the tax breaks permanent while
eliminating others.
"Many of these extenders are well-intentioned and ought to be
permanent," Wyden said. "Their stop-and-go nature obviously
contributes to the lack of certainty."
But Wyden's inability to scale back the package shows how
difficult it can be to cut cherished tax breaks.
"The challenge on taxes is to always try to find the common
ground where you can move ahead," Wyden said after the vote.
Wyden's initial draft of the bill would have eliminated a
generous tax credit for using wind farms and other renewable
energy sources to produce electricity. But the credit was
restored, at a cost of $13.3 billion.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, claimed credit for saving it.
"Renewable energy supports thousands of jobs and generates
billions of dollars in investment across the country," Grassley
said. "It's good news for the economy and for energy diversity
to restore these provisions."
Democratic leaders haven’t scheduled the measure for
consideration by the full Senate. In the Republican-led House of
Representatives,
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/pirates5B15D_th.gif
lawmakers
are focused on making some provisions permanent and repealing
others.
2 Comments
Add Your Comment
ANONYMOUS
HTML http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif[img<br
/>width=160
height=095]
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg[/img]
April 5, 2014
After 20 years of tax breaks for wind that have cost a 100
billion dollars we have an industry that is dependent upon the
taxpayers as much as any Pentagon contractor. About half the
cost of any wind turbine is paid for with federal subsidies. On
top of this there are state mandates and various backdoor
subsidies to expand the grid at other people's expense rather
than the wind farm paying for this like other power generators.
At the same time the wind quality at new sites is decreasing
that implies we have used up most of the really good sites when
considering both wind conditions and transmission costs.
HTML http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/12962/noway.gif
This raises questions. Should the taxpayer rather than the
ratepayer pay for electricity bills in the U.S. That is what
this level of subsidy implies. Should the political
establishment make technology choices? It is a fundamental
policy shift in the U.S. Historically the role of government has
included R&D and subsidies to help commercialize new
technologies. That is to address risks considered too large for
the private sector to bear. However, today it is a subsidy
program so large that it would make American agriculture blink
in disbelief. It is state planning that matches the old Soviet
Union--with every indication that it is working about as well.
This experiment as been done in Germany where it has managed to
double electricity costs within a decade and increase carbon
dioxide emissions while only producing 24% of the total
electricity demand.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif
A. G. Gelbert
April 5, 2014
Dear ANONYMOUS Koch Brothers/Big Oil Shill/Liar/Mens Rea/Actus
Reus (you get the idea....):
After 100 years of forced subsidies for fossil fuels including
contrived shocks, cheap land and ocean use rights compliments of
we-the-people, wars for MORE fossil fuel profits, wars for
protection of Big Oil resources, not U.S. national security
(It's always been about Big Oil greed security but the PR is
ALWAYS flag waving scare mongering), I praise your amazing
ability to totally ignore truth, ethics, mathematics, reality
and the laws of thermodynamics in your never ending quest to get
more profit over planet. Mephistopheles is proud of you. You are
a walking, talking example of an ethics free human. Have a nice
day. [img width=50
height=50]
HTML http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg[/img]<br
/>
For those, unlike the above ANONYMOUS(E) (as in "hidden rat")
master of mendacity who holds a doctorate in doubletalk, who
want read about how the U.S. was PREVENTED from transitioning to
100% renewable energy by the year 2000, go here.
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/fossil-fuel-folly/fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-the-u-s/
#Post#: 893--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: April 5, 2014, 1:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
US Wind Energy Output Breaks Records ;D
Michael Goggin, AWEA
April 04, 2014
Wind energy is breaking records across the U.S., thanks to
long-needed transmission upgrades that are relieving congestion
on the power grid and allowing more clean energy to reach
consumers.
Last week, a new record was set on the main Texas grid, the
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), reaching over
10,000 MW of wind. This was the most ever for a U.S. power
system, the equivalent of powering more than five million
average Texas homes. In two previously unreported records, wind
energy supplied a record 39.7 percent of total ERCOT electricity
demand this past Monday, March 31, and two weeks ago the
Southwest Power Pool region just to the north of Texas set a new
wind record with 7,202 MW of wind production.
Full story here:
HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/04/us-wind-energy-output-breaks-records
#Post#: 1153--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: May 19, 2014, 12:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Siemens Inks $2.1 Billion Deal for 600-MW Dutch Offshore Wind
Project [img width=45
height=100]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]<br
/>[img width=150
height=100]
HTML http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg[/img]<br
/>
The O&M contract was an important part of sealing the deal for
project Gemini, which should begin generating wind power in
early 2017.
Alex Webb, Bloomberg
May 15, 2014
The O&M contract was an important part of sealing the deal for
project Gemini, which should begin generating wind power in
early 2017.
Alex Webb, Bloomberg
May 15, 2014
MUNICH and LONDON -- Siemens AG won a 1.5 billion-euro ($2.1
billion) contract for a Dutch offshore wind park that will also
give Europe’s largest engineering company its biggest-ever
energy service contract.
The order for the Gemini wind park, 85 kilometers (53 miles)
offshore from Groningen, Netherlands, comprises 150 wind
turbines with a capacity of four megawatts apiece, the
Munich-based company said today in an e-mailed statement.
“We have considerably improved our service approach for this
wind park,” Markus Tacke, the head of the wind-power division at
Siemens, said in a telephone interview. The provision of
equipment accounts for about half of the contract’s value, he
said.
Siemens has tempered its willingness to bid for big-ticket work
since Joe Kaeser became chief executive officer in August.
Delays to projects connecting offshore wind farms to the grid
have led to charges topping 1.1 billion euros since 2011,
prompting Kaeser to promise investors that the company would be
more circumspect in future contract tenders.
Lenient Conditions
The company signed a power transmission contract last month with
TenneT Holding BV under more lenient conditions, intended to
avoid a repeat of such charges, which have also burdened
earnings at Zurich-based competitor ABB Ltd.
Siemens is also building a 160 million-pound ($268 million) wind
turbine factory in northern England to improve its ability to
serve the North Sea offshore wind market. Britain’s 3,689
megawatts of installed offshore wind capacity represent more
than half of the 6,930-megawatts global total, according to
Bloomberg New Energy Finance. A thousand megawatts is almost as
much as a nuclear reactor produces.
Tacke expects Siemens wind power operations as a whole --
including onshore turbines -- to increase revenue by 5 percent
to 6 percent annually in the next two to three years. Siemens
has set the division, with sales of 5.2 billion euros last year,
a profit margin target of 5 percent to 8 percent of revenue.
That compares with a 6 percent margin last year, when charges
for faulty onshore turbines held back profitability.
Still, offshore wind projects have been canceled as developers
better understand the costs of the projects. Utilities have
negated as much as 5,760 megawatts of planned capacity since
Nov. 26, when RWE AG dropped its 1,200-megawatt Atlantic Array.
German Costs
German offshore wind costs may fall as much as 39 percent by
2023, the Stiftung Offshore-Windenergie lobby group estimated in
August. The cost at that time was 0.13 euros to 0.14 euros per
kilowatt-hour.
The service element of the Siemens deal will last 15 years and
includes a dedicated ship and helicopter.
“Service is an important element of the offshore wind industry’s
commitment to bring costs below 0.10 euros per kilowatt-hour by
2020,” Tacke said.
The Gemini wind park is due to start operations in early 2017.
[img width=60
height=50]
HTML http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg[/img]<br
/>
“Overall, it will almost triple the Dutch wind energy output
that is currently there,” Gemini Chief Executive Officer
Matthias Haag told reporters in Amsterdam today.
Stake Share
Investment in the Dutch offshore wind farm, in which Siemens’s
financing arm holds a 20 percent stake, will total almost 3
billion euros. Canada’s Northland Power Inc. owns 60 percent of
the group, with Dutch offshore engineering specialist Van Oord
NV holding 10 percent and Dutch public authorities the remaining
shares.
About 70 percent of the project’s funds were provided in the
form of secured construction and term-debt financing from 12
banks, three export-credit agencies and the European Investment
Bank, according to a statement yesterday from Northland. The
debt has been hedged to give an effective interest rate of about
4.75 percent, it said.
The lenders include ABN AMRO Bank NV, BNP Paribas SA, Bank of
Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd., Deutsche Bank AG, Export Development
Canada, Natixis, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp., Bank of
Montreal, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Bank Nederlandse
Gemeenten, Banco Santander SA and CaixaBank SA, Northland said.
The three export credit insurers are Denmark’s Eksport Kredit
Fonden, Germany’s Euler Hermes SA and Ducroire-Delcredere SA
from Belgium.
This article was written with assistance from Fred Pals in
Amsterdam and Alex Morales in London.
HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/05/siemens-inks-2-1-billion-deal-for-600-mw-dutch-offshore-wind-project
#Post#: 1175--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: May 21, 2014, 3:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
DEFINITIONS: AWT = AXIS WIND TURBUNE
HAWT = HORIZONTAL AWT
VAWT = VERTICAL AWT
Digging Deeper Into The UGE
Earlier this month, UGE launched its latest vertical axis wind
turbine – VisionAIR3. Tina Casey’s coverage on Clean Technica
sparked some lively discussion about the small wind industry,
both in the comments on the article and in a separate article by
Mike Barnard.
[img width=640
height=780]
HTML http://i2.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2014/04/Screen-Shot-2014-04-23-at-2.12.38-PM.png[/img]<br
/>
Barnard and UGE CEO Nick Blitterswyk recently engaged in a
point/counterpoint on some of these areas of contention, and I
was Cc’d on all of that. We decided that it would be worthwhile
to publish this for a broader audience. An edited version of
their conversation appears below.
Nick: First off, Mike, thank you for your article and for the
opportunity to have this discussion. Your article provided a
good analysis of where the technology is at, and you have every
right to be skeptical given the industry’s past.
We’ve tried to be very honest over the years, even when it’s
been difficult in an industry that has had a lot of
unsubstantiated hype. Like any company, we’ve of course tried to
draw interest to our products, but always try to stay within the
bounds of reality. We appreciate you keeping things in check.
Mike: I’m glad you reached out.
[img width=640
height=580]
HTML http://i2.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2014/04/VIsionAIR5-micro-wind-turbine.jpg[/img]
VIsionAIR5 micro wind turbine.
Nick: One thing you mentioned in your article is the rated sound
level. To clarify, 38dBA is the number that Intertek certified
the VisionAIR5 unit at, which is the lowest that we know of for
any wind turbine. Given the logarithmic nature of the measure,
this is significantly less than one rated at 42dBA. To make two
other points, first, our units’ RPM decreases as the unit size
increases, and this does result in a lower sound level [img
width=40
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png[/img]<br
/> , so the UGE-9M measure of 38dBA we note is correct (as is th
e
higher measure for our smaller VisionAIR3 unit). And second, I
thought I would draw attention to the fact that in the
certification process Intertek could not discern any measurable
volume of noise below 8 m/s, something we also found impressive.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/8.gif
Mike: On the noise issue, please understand that I have read
virtually every acoustics study related to wind turbines, as
well as all the health studies, and interact with acousticians
such as Dr. Geoff Leventh all globally every week in my efforts
around dismissing the noise and health myths related to
utility-scale wind turbines. I write on acoustics regularly and
am even occasionally asked to peer review studies in the space.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif
The difference of noise is certainly there but is a fairly
irrelevant differentiation unless the device is positioned right
on top of people’s bedrooms. You can certainly highlight it as a
marketing differentiator but from an empirical perspective it’s
a trivial amount of noise easily mitigated. In industrial
settings it’s even less relevant. And highlighting it as a
marketing differentiation for VAWTS tends to tick me off because
it feeds a certain class of anti-wind hysteria
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif
[img
width=30
height=30]
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png[/img]<br
/>
HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif
which
impacts utility-scale wind deployments.
Thanks for pointing out the slower revolutions resulting in less
noise. I look forward to certified results on that as well.
Nick: Understanding where you come from on the noise issue helps
me understand your point; it’s not one we’d want to muddle for
sure. Like you said in your article, there is a class of
customer to which this point is important, though, and that is
primarily who we are targeting when we mention it is quiet. We
meant no harm to the industry; our intent was not to state that
a typical HAWT is loud, per se.
[img width=640
height=580]
HTML http://i1.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2014/04/605_uge1k1s_1274802346.jpg[/img]
Mike: People have overly heightened concerns regarding noise.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif
As my assessment
of acoustic attenuation pointed out, any sensible siting will
mean virtually no difference between the UGE VAWT and an
equivalent HAWT. And outside of a tiny niche of acoustically
sensitive commercial sites, once again there will be no
appreciable noise from either device. I understand that it’s
useful marketing, and that the UGE VAWT is quieter, but it’s
going from really quiet to really really quiet, or to put it
another way from an irrelevant level of noise to an irrelevant
level of noise, for the majority of your customers. But this is
a place where people are irrational, and noise is a deeply
complex space that’s poorly understood and poorly explained. I’d
undoubtedly be using it as a differentiator in your shoes as
well.
Nick: Thanks for the clarification. On to the naming issue you
raised — the “5″ in VisionAIR5 is named with respect to
the height (roughly 5 meters). This is in line with what
utility-scale wind turbines most commonly use. Within
distributed wind, Southwest for years sold the Skystream 3.7,
where 3.7 was the diameter in meters of its rotor. By no means
are we trying to confuse anyone into thinking it is rated at
5kW.
Mike: There isn’t a standard per se, just some observable
patterns and some potential for confusion. Regarding the number
5 and the impression it leaves, I have looked at specs on a lot
of wind generation devices and the majority have output as a
numerical qualifier on the name, especially in utility-scale
wind. It might be different in the small wind category,
especially historically, but that’s more the observed reality
that I see. Point taken that it’s not intended to imply output,
but I trust you see why it could be misconstrued as well.
Nick: Interestingly enough, when we used to use the kW rating it
actually caused a lot more confusion, as 1) people just didn’t
understand what it meant, and 2) you’d find companies using any
range of rated wind speeds to, in essence, cheat the system.
When speaking with our customers we stress the kWh output
according to the SWCC certification, which we find a much more
useful measure for both ourselves and our customers.
Mike: Fair point. I’m working up more material on real
innovation in the wind industry. I’m interested in more
information on the levelized energy agreement and your focus on
developing nations. Can you share more on that?
Nick: We launched our Levelized Energy Agreement Program last
August. Similar to the United Wind model you referenced in your
article, it involves project financing, though our fund is
dedicated to the telecoms industry in developing countries. The
problems of course are well known — expensive, variable, and
unreliable diesel, without really any good alternative. What we
do is look at the operator’s current costs and lock in the same
rate for a 10-year contract. We then upgrade the power equipment
on the site (including RE), thereby lowering its OPEX and
benefiting over the project lifetime. Because we’re making the
primary energy source, diesel, the back-up, and adding RE and
batteries, it’s clearly a more resilient solution as well,
addressing another key concern.
[img width=640
height=420]
HTML http://i0.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2013/12/whole-foods-brooklyn-cleantech.jpg[/img]
Whole Foods Brooklyn
Mike: The part that appeals to me is the business model
innovation of going after developing countries as a market. It
will be interesting to see how that plays out as many countries
have small wind generation manufacturing shops of their own,
with folks reverse engineering the common designs to create
adequate, local and usually very cheap offerings. As adequate
eggbeater VAWT blades can be made with pretty much aluminum
siding and some wire, it will be interesting to see how that
plays out.
Nick: Part of how we’ve been able to raise financing for this
market is to separate the country risk as much as we can by
targeting large telecom operators with a safe parent, often one
based outside of the country our project is in. I’m sure you’ve
looked at this too, but the economic returns of DRE projects in
developing countries is often very strong, so it’s a nut we’ve
at least partially cracked, for one (sizeable but somewhat
niche) market.
Mike: Once again, I continue to like UGE as a business and wish
you every success. Given your model of multiple technologies as
a system, it’s unclear why you wouldn’t offer a horizontal axis
device as a component to people who want more output for less
footprint as well as your vertical-axis device but I’m sure
that’s a debate you’ve had internally many times. At least right
now UGE is differentiated in part by offering the VAWT, but I
suggest to you that business model and channel differentiation
are now more important to your future than adherence to a
singular wind generation technology.
Nick: We understand that the Cp of our vertical axis wind
turbines is currently lower than that of leading horizontal axis
wind turbines, though we have been making significant progress
over our company’s history to increasing the efficiency and very
firmly believe we have the most efficient VAWTs available, with
further improvements in the works. Like you said in your
article, we benefit from aesthetic and noise considerations
despite the lower efficiency; we believe there are durability
advantages as well, though admit that is still being proven.
This is where the industry is at, and we’re happy to be able to
lay the facts bare.
You mentioned in your article that we imply someone could or
should place a wind turbine on top of a home. If we say this
anywhere I apologize, though I don’t believe we do and would be
embarrassed if so. The picture you show in the article was from
a very temporary exhibition in Spain, circa 2010, that displayed
the unit not unlike one would install a wind turbine indoors at
a trade show.
Regarding offering a HAWT, we’ve considered it many times, and
we actually offer a 10kW unit in limited volumes. We continue to
consider making it a mainstay of our product offering, but for
two factors. First, we wouldn’t want to design and manufacture
one ourselves unless we felt very confident we could clearly
differentiate ourselves in that market. Maybe we could, but it
would take years and millions of funding, and we don’t think the
pay-off would be there. Which leads me to the second point —
unfortunately, very few of our customers are asking for it. The
way the solar market is going, we are growing very fast on the
solar side, but get very little interest for a horizontal axis
wind turbine. We wish that wasn’t the case, but unfortunately it
is. Most of our customers wouldn’t consider installing a
Bergey-like wind turbine (as solid of a product as it is), but
quite enjoy using our VAWTs, so we continue to focus on making
that technology as strong as possible for those customers, while
also investing additional R&D resources on the rest of the DRE
solution, including our SeamlessGrid line of power electronics,
battery storage, and site optimization software. So while not
married to the VAWT technology, we are happy with how our
business model is evolving, but remain open to considering other
technologies down the road.
Mike: My external response to people not approaching you asking
for HAWTs is that right now your brand is fairly tightly tied to
the helical VAWTs. It’s in practically every picture published,
it’s visually distinctive and the tiniest bit of Googling leads
people to the supposed advantages of VAWTs over HAWTs (and to
Gipe’s and my material on the two as well). Good marketing, but
not necessarily what’s best for all of your customers. I would
bet that if you replaced your graphics stock with 50:50 VAWT and
HAWT instead of 100% VAWT, you would get a lot more people
asking for HAWTs, or about them. After all, your real innovation
isn’t the technology, although you are strongly identified with
it right now. UGE really is a small renewables solutions firm
whose sole wind component happens to be a VAWT. There’s a
chicken-vs-egg thing here, and I think you are ignoring a big
part of your potential market, but I’m also sure you’ve had
these debates a million times.
To your point on solar, while I’m the wind guy, I recommend
solar before wind (and efficiency before either) for most people
and small businesses. Solar does extremely well distributed
virtually everywhere, while wind is much more constrained in
terms of useful wind resources.
To your point about building vs OEMing, I get asked fairly often
about how to become a manufacturer of small wind turbines, and I
invariably answer, “Don’t.” OEM them and build your own
distribution and installation firm, or become part of the
distribution channel of an existing company. Designing a new
small wind turbine in the USA for manufacturing is a route to
bankruptcy, not riches. The products are stable, refined and
mostly commodotized. It’s the business model that differentiates
these days. There are good choices out there. Given your
success, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an outright acquisition
strategy at some point.
Nick: Completely agree. On issues like noise, selling a HAWT,
etc., it’s clear you know the industry extremely well [img
width=30
height=40]
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png[/img]<br
/>as you touch on many of the same points we have mulled (and
continue to) over the years. In terms of what the future may
hold, I look forward to discussing further and keeping you
updated! Thanks again for the opportunity to discuss.
Read more at
HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/05/21/draft-discussion-article/#LhTrqaQxV0LWJcIk.99
HTML http://www.4smileys.com/smileys/seasons-smileys/storm.gif
[img
width=50 height=30]
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/245.gif[/img]
Agelbert NOTE: A HUGE part of the Renewable Energy ANSWER is
BLOWIN' IN THE WIND.
HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif
#Post#: 1176--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: May 21, 2014, 7:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]ERCOT’s initial studies showed that there was upwards of
100 GW of potentially viable wind resources in Texas — more than
enough to meet the 68-GW need in the state. CREZ has been
successful in greatly expanding the reach of the wind resource
in West Texas.[/quote]
[img width=640
height=480]
HTML http://www.broadstarwindsystems.com/images/texas%20average%20wind%20speed%20map.jpg[/img]
HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/05/texas-wind-boosted-with-improved-public-planning
HTML http://csmres.co.uk/cs.public.upd/article-images/Wind_turbine_smiley_shutterstock_28691215.gif
#Post#: 1179--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: May 22, 2014, 1:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
China Boosts Offshore Wind Power Development
HTML http://www.4smileys.com/smileys/seasons-smileys/storm.gif
[img
width=15
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]
<br
/>[img width=15
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]
<br
/>[img width=15
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]
[img width=15
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]<br
/>[img width=15
height=40]
HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/6/7/1/12065737551968208283energie_positive_Wind_Turbine_Green.svg.hi.png[/img]<br
/>
HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-081.gif
Liu Yuanyuan, International Correspondent
May 22, 2014 | 1 Comments
BEIJING -- China has taken steps to accelerate the development
of its offshore wind power industry in a bid to increase the
installed capacity beyond its 428.6 MW installed at the end of
2013.
Some industry analysts expressed pessimism concerning the
offshore wind power sector in China as the industry has
experienced slow progress with only 39 MW in installed capacity
added last year, a year-on-year decline of 69 percent. However,
the China National Renewable Energy Centre (CNREC) said that a
number of new offshore wind farms are scheduled to kick off
within this year, including the 100-MW Phase II expansion
project of Don ghai Bridge in Shanghai and China Lon gyuan Power
Group’ (Lon gyuan) Nanri Island project already under
construction in Fujian province. Two projects are also under
contruction in Jiangsu province: China General Nuclear Power
Group's new offshore project in Rud ong on track to start
construction in the second half of this year and Lon gyuan's
windmill project in Dafeng.
In early 2014, the National Energy Administration (NEA) issued a
Notice on Developing Offshore Wind Power Projects selecting
Shanghai as well as Fujian and Zhejiang provinces as the
locations for the country’s key pilot construction projects for
offshore wind power. The Shanghai government announced in early
May new initiatives to boost support for its new and renewable
energy sectors, providing subsidies of 0.1 yuan per kWh for
onshore wind power projects and 0.2 yuan per kWh for offshore
wind farms. However, some industry analysts expressed concerns
about the impact of regional subsidies on the nationwide feed-in
tariff for offshore wind projects.
The rapid growth of the Chinese offshore wind power sector
requires a rational and clear tariff structure, allowing
offshore wind farm developers to have realistic expectations of
what the return on their offshore wind power investments should
be and in turn, boost the development of the whole sector,
according to analysts.
HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif
The NEA and the pricing department of the National Development
and Reform Commission (NDRC) have been in ongoing discussions
concerning the tariff rates for offshore wind farms and expect
to issue the rates within this year.
An industry expert at NDRC indicated that the combined capacity
of approved offshore wind farms in China, including intertidal
projects, has exceeded 4,000 MW. The combined capacity of
offshore wind projects scheduled to start construction by 2015
will exceed 300 MW, according to data from CNREC.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) said in early May that it
will allocate up to $141 million to three pioneering offshore
wind demonstration projects over the next four years to help
speed up the deployment of more efficient offshore wind power
technologies. Benefiting from the support for offshore wind
projects in the U.S., Fishermen's Energy's 25MW offshore
windmill backed by Xiangtan Electric Manufacturing, a
China-based electrical equipment manufacturer, won a US$4
million grant from the DOE, subject to regulatory approvals.
HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/05/china-boosts-development-of-offshore-wind-power
1 Comment
Add Your Comment
A. G. Gelbert
May 22, 2014
The rapid growth of the Chinese offshore wind power sector
requires a rational and clear tariff structure, something the
Chinese are serious and methodical about because they are clear
eyed about what the future holds if they do not make sure ALL
renewable energy technologies achieve the goal, and achieve it
SOON, of total demand destruction for fossil fuels. That's what
the USA can't seem to understand.
This is NOT about replacing an inferior technology for
harvesting energy with a superior and cheaper technology; this
is about Homo sapiens survival. The Chinese understand this. If
only the USA did. We have, in the USA, the stupidest, most
suicidal energy policy on the planet.
I hope the Chinese pull the plug on the building of coal power
plants, decommission built ones and embrace Amory Lovins'
accurate assessment of industrial civilization that with
efficiency increases in the energy production technology from
power source to consumer, over 90% of the wasted energy can be
eliminated and we can power ALL the needs of present industrial
civilization with only 10% of what we now use. It's called
NEGAWATTS and it is REAL. Why? Because a 5 to 10% efficiency
increase (easily achievable with modern technology) in the
transmission and/or generation of power has a multiplicative
effect when it reaches the consumer. A 5% efficiency increase at
the generation source EQUALS over 70% energy saving at the
consumer. That is why the consumer savings, so far, have had
such a small effect on fossil fuel demand. That HAS to change.
Amory Lovins knows how to do that and has been doing it for
several years.
I think China gets it. Our US (s)elected (by the fossil fuel
oligarchy) "representatives" don't. >:(
#Post#: 1248--------------------------------------------------
Re: Wind Power
By: AGelbert Date: May 29, 2014, 10:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img width=640
height=480]
HTML http://thecreativeactionnetwork.com/u/223397711381820915e44965c76537a09063bc54_1400268938.jpg[/img]
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page