Slashdot Mirror
International Energy Agency Predicts Wind Will Dominate Europe's Grid By 2027 (arstechnica.com)
AmiMoJo shares a report from Ars Technica: Today, roughly 25 percent of the European Union's power currently comes from nuclear sources, with coal and gas each delivering a little above 20 percent. Wind constitutes 10 percent of the European Union's energy mix. But by 2027, IEA's forecasts (PDF) put wind just beating all other electricity sources with a 23-percent share of the energy mix. "Other Renewables" like biomass plants contribute a little over 20 percent, gas adds 20 percent, nuclear contributes just a little below 20 percent, and coal declines to just over 10 percent. Solar energy contributes about six or seven percent in the IEA's 2027 scenario. The European Union has a wealth of wind energy, especially offshore wind energy, a sector in which the EU is the global leader. Offshore wind allows turbines to be built bigger, and coastal winds are often stronger and more consistent than onshore winds. [The IEA forecasts 200 gigawatts (GW) of installed capacity by 2040.]
aka lots of hot air blowing out of Brussels...
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
POTUS knows the truth, Europe is totally dependent upon Russia for it's energy. SAD!
Hasn't anyone heard of this wonderful (albiet expensive) invention called a BATTERY?
We need power when we want it not just when the wind blows. Wind is a nightmare to manage. In Ontario and our neighbouring US states it has been so badly managed that the price of electricity goes negative. (the governments guarantee a price for the wind mill operators regardless to whether or not anyone needs the energy). While during our highest demand the wind often isn't blowing at all.
I hope they are researching and planning for large capacity storage solutions. They are a couple intriguing ones that could be tried. Personally i like hydro storage because it can be done with all existing tech (two reservoirs, pipe, pumps, generators). These already exist but it would be cool to see them on large scale to see if it is practical on a huge scale.
GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
No, Mr. Trump - face the other side of the fan !!
We have met the enemy and he is us - Pogo (Walt Kelly)
And in the heads of their pseudo-humanoid livestock.
No surprise it would dominate in the grid aswell.
but in another 20-30 years we're not gonna have a lot of oil based energy. Cars, even if they don't move to electric, are rapidly becoming unaffordable. And solar, wind and nuclear keep getting better.
It would be interesting to see what the middle east is going to do when the buried treasure that's kept them afloat so long is worth about the same as the rocks that bury it. On the other hand maybe if western countries stopped screwing with them for cheap oil they could modernize. True story, Iran was a secular nation until the US over through their democratically elected government because they weren't gonna give away their oil. The reason it got so crazy religious is that the Mosques were the only place you could plan a revolution since the gov't wasn't allowed there.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Why would heavy industry be any different from any other user of electricity? As long as your sources provide sufficient electricity, there isn't any issue.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
That's a good question lets look.
How Much Does it Cost to Produce One Ton of Aluminum?
Although the newest smelters can be closer to 12,500 kWh per ton, let’s say most smelters are consuming electricity at 14,500-15,000 kWh/ton of ingot produced.
Admittedly Aluminum production is one of the most energy intense industries but the common factor is large scale consumption of power and the need for reliable power. You really don't want to expose a steel mill to a brownout.
Wind is both more expensive and less reliable than conventional sources which is why Germany still operates brown coal power plants for it's steel industry. The more wind you have the more expensive your overall power costs.
GTFO GOP MORONS. You retarded tail-pipe breathers need to GO.
"In Ontario and our neighbouring US states it has been so badly managed that the price of electricity goes negative" - Blaming the entire TYPE OF POWER for bureaucracy and stonewalling by utilities, nice work MORON.
I'm pretty sure mosques are going to dominate Europe by 2027.
Actually some heavy industries love wind power-- they get paid to use energy at times. Wind is a great component of a diversified energy grid, especially when the turbines are geographically dispersed. He challenge for wind is its low capacity factor, which means you need to cover ~35% of its rating with either more (geographically dispersed) wind turbines, or another source of dispatchable power.
When you do it with wind, you run the risk that you end up with over-capacity, and you make the other power sources more expensive because you artificially reduce their capacity factor from ~90% to ~10-20%.
The US is a laughing stock ,and its not the Republics or the president, or the any polictical party. Its the people like the people commenting here about US politics, and the terrible way they do it.
Admittedly Aluminum production is one of the most energy intense industries but the common factor is large scale consumption of power and the need for reliable power. You really don't want to expose a steel mill to a brownout.
Yeah, but the penalty for a brownout when refining bauxite electrolytically is a lot lower than the penalty for a cooldown at a steel mill.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Actually some heavy industries love wind power-- they get paid to use energy at times.
That reads more like other users are forced to subsidize them.
Admittedly Aluminum production is one of the most energy intense industries but the common factor is large scale consumption of power and the need for reliable power. You really don't want to expose a steel mill to a brownout.
Yeah, but the penalty for a brownout when refining bauxite electrolytically is a lot lower than the penalty for a cooldown at a steel mill.
Yes, I was trying to convey the point that any large scale continuous material processor is going to be very averse to random power outages, and using particular instances to illustrate.
Because Europe is not going to take any measures to keep their grid stable?
I sort of suspect that they are going keep that a high priority as wind capacity is installed, just as they do now and have always done. A whole array of measures are available (long distance transmission to even things out, pumped storage, battery storage, having sectors that can shut down or reduce demand when needed, postpone planned maintenance outages, etc.). Even the pessimistic analyses of fossil fuel proponents admit that the stability problems they predict won't start showing up until the penetration reaches about 30%. This forecast has it increasing to only 27%.
Also the emphasis on randomness is odd, since wind patterns are not in fact random at all, and are predictable with very good accuracy several days out. We aren't talking about the wind blowing on your lawn, but across a huge subcontinent.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Don't be a dumbass. Germany is a leading exporter, has high technology and heavy industries and already produces a third of its electricity from renewable sources (mostly wind, followed by biomass, solar and hydro). In extreme situations, wind has produced more than half the electricity in Germany while less than a quarter of the electricity was generated from fossil fuels and nuclear combined. Brown-outs and rolling blackouts like in the US are unknown here. Germany is a net electricity exporter with import and export prices per MWh roughly the same in a given year. Germany is in the process of building ultra high voltage DC links to increase the network capacity for more renewable energy.
The US is a net importer and produces only about 17% of its electricity from renewable sources (mostly hydro and wind).
Because Europe is not going to take any measures to keep their grid stable?
Because that is magically free and granted by renewable power fairy ?
But they are getting cheaper power at all other times. The reason that wind capacity is increasing is that is a less expensive source of power. I guess those other users are also being "forced" to buy cheaper power then?
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Amount of power needed for heavy industry.
24/7 supply that will not stop when the wind stops.
To have the power stop and then start up a heavy industry production line....
A set competitive price so heavy industry can export its products without having to factor in a changing price of power.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
this is why you shouldn't eat so many brussels sprouts
It sounds like wind has some fans in the EU.
If you don't like it, then don't live there, you antisocial blubbering vagina. Or you could quit whining, pull up those bootstraps, make yourself a captain of industry, and slap together your own energy distribution infrastructure that allows you to arbitrarily shut off sections of the power grid in a tantrum if you don't feel like the poors are paying you adequate fealty.
Good god, have you told anyone about this?! You're the first person to consider this! They're going to have to shut...down...EVERYTHING!
It's little more than a whine. If the FUD farms in the wasted expanse of Russia's tundra can't have batteries, then no one can.
Right but its wrong and you picked your example just so to hide the innacuracy.
Now explain why in an age of modern grids and battery storage any one form of electricity production would be inherently more prone to brownouts than any other. Please show your work.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Firstly as far as I know Denmark has the highest capacity in wind power in the world and it ain't 50% but 42%. Nitpick but detail are important, because the reason this is viable is because they use neighbors (Sweden, Norway) country HYDRO power as a storage (look it up) ! Guess how many country could do that ? Not that many. There is a reason traditional baseload plant are required in most countries. Citing EDGE cases as if it could be generalized is stupid.
I'm sorry, could you translate this for native English speakers?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Wind power produced electrons work just the same as coal power produced ones. Wind is more predictable and no less unreliable than any other source.
And why didn't it need power when coal stopped???
Since negative pricing therefore happens all the time, why the fuck is renewable a reason to cry about it?
Oh, and please tell me why the HVDC cables were introduced to the UK.
Hint: nuclear power production.
And that is all that we'll need for renewables, you idiotic blowhard. Why the fuck do you think we have the HVDC? Nuclear. Because when it goes down we need to stabilise the grid from a MASSIVE loss of production.
Or is nuclear power produced magically free by the nuke fairy in your insane world?
Of course he has no REASON for it not to count, just wants it not to.
Yes, I was trying to convey the point that any large scale continuous material processor is going to be very averse to random power outages
That makes no sense at all. There are many different processes, and some are much more tolerant of fluctuating power than others. In addition, some processes can be redesigned to be more robust for power fluctuations. You can't cherry pick a particularly sensitive process, and apply it to a range of different industries.
Because that is magically free and granted by renewable power fairy ?
Who says it needs to be free ? It just needs to be cost effective.
I don't really get the environmentalists' enthusiasm to wind and solar power. Both of these are highly unreliable, and in colder regions do NOT provide highest peak of power when it is most needed, like cold weather in north means no light and extremely low wind. On the other hand nuclear power is not easy to adjust, so they are using coal power-plants to get quickly adjustable energy. The more there is uncertainty the more these environmentally bad power plants need to be available.
In Finland we also have this stupid idea that wind power has certain price they are guaranteed to get from everything they produce. Someone has actually calculated how much it costs http://tuulivahinko.fi/ if you have chrome you can translate the page, but basically for this year it is ~ 149 000 000€ down the drain. IMO this could have waited until these technologies are economically viable on their own. World has plenty of places were solar and wind already make sense, but in a place like Finland it is like growing pineapples on north pole. That money could have spent on more innovative technologies to generate electricity that would not have as much uncertainty and thus having positive impact on environment. I highly doubt current wind power is environmentally positive here, because the coal etc power it needs to support it.
Now all we have to do is make the wind blow and we are set!
Yeah, but the penalty for a brownout when refining bauxite electrolytically is a lot lower than the penalty for a cooldown at a steel mill.
The steel industry existed before most elaborate ways to produce electricity.
You'll find that European steel mills are often close to hydroelectric power plants for historic reasons.
Because Europe is not going to take any measures to keep their grid stable?
Because that is magically free and granted by renewable power fairy ?
No, it isn't free but your sweet coal and nuclear doesn't do jack shit to keep the grid stable so I don't know why you are arguing for them.
In fact, the problem they have is very similar to the ones you get from solar and wind in that the energy production doesn't follow the load. (You can't just ramp up coal and nuclear that quickly.)
That is why you still need a fairly big portion of hydroelectric power plants to deal with the difference between other power sources and the load.
Hydroelectric doesn't care about what the rest of the energy comes from, it just needs supplemental energy sources so that that the dams aren't spent too quickly.
Since the refilling is on a seasonal basis the thing that matters is average output over the year.
Uhuh, we have so many batteries that everyone can have an electric car and charge it from another battery that is charged from a solar panel or a windmill. Wait what, that's not the reality we live in? Well, not today though and not quite yet tomorrow, maybe few decades down the line. World battery production is several orders of magnitude short of such an utopia, if it wasn't batteries would not be so expensive. It's not that we can't make them cheaply enough, it's that we can't make enough, period.
Admittedly Aluminum production is one of the most energy intense industries but the common factor is large scale consumption of power and the need for reliable power. You really don't want to expose a steel mill to a brownout.
And smelters in Europe go bankrupt when they can't secure connection to German power. So much for your "expensive overall power costs"...
Ezekiel 23:20
why does people do FUD with wind? maybe they don't really understand it... nobody talks about 100% wind, if there is no wind, you still have all other energy sources, like gas, nuclear, hydric.
There are ALWAYS redundant power sources, even nuclear... if one fails, all other will have to fill the hole... yes, wind may fail more, but it works most of the time and it is CHEAPER than other sources. If there is need for more energy, pump the nuclear, gas, hydric power stagings. During the night, make the wind pump the hydric energy storage systems (ie: pump water back to the higher dams so you can recover that energy later when needed)
Higuita