Comments on: An ill wind for baseload generation http://www.energytoday.com.au/blog/2007/10/11/an-ill-wind-for-baseload-generation/ Commentary on energy news Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:47:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: engineer http://www.energytoday.com.au/blog/2007/10/11/an-ill-wind-for-baseload-generation/#comment-303 engineer Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:42:07 +0000 http://www.energytoday.com.au/blog/2007/10/11/an-ill-wind-for-baseload-generation/#comment-303 I admire the technical literacy of this effort, but a few points need addressing: 1. Denmark is not an isolated little country, but is connected to the huge German/Euro grid, so to mention that its capacity is say, 25% of total national electrical supply is to ignore the enormous Euro backup. i.e. it can import all its needs, if necessary. 2. The issue of back-up plant should not be glossed over. It is fraught with complexity, however. Issues such as: - who pays for the backup plant. - whether pricing of grid supply is regulated or free-market. - who carries the risk for supply disruption - geographic variation in wind reliability - network stability and quality of service all affect the conclusion. 3. all the above concerns grow with increase in connected wind capacity. 4. Connected wind capacity should never be allowed to approach baseload demand on any one network, unless it is cheap enough to dump power when demand drops. If such a situation eventuated, it would definitely require a large amount of backup plant with appropriate characteristics. This ceiling on wind's potential is not discussed often enough. 5. comparisons with large central plants should be cognisant of the potential to use cycle waste heat piped for district heating supplementation. This under-utilised energy resource is propitious in cold countries, though less so in Australia. As for analogies with IT, I am skeptical. Personal computers needed no government subsidies to proliferate. Falling costs enabled new applications and methods to be sold to expanded markets not open to megacomputers. Information functionality is a different market from computing. Redefinition of the computer as an information appliance created major new market sectors, distinct from the original markets of large computers. I admire the technical literacy of this effort, but a few points need addressing:
1. Denmark is not an isolated little country, but is connected to the huge German/Euro grid, so to mention that its capacity is say, 25% of total national electrical supply is to ignore the enormous Euro backup. i.e. it can import all its needs, if necessary.
2. The issue of back-up plant should not be glossed over. It is fraught with complexity, however. Issues such as:
- who pays for the backup plant.
- whether pricing of grid supply is regulated or free-market.
- who carries the risk for supply disruption
- geographic variation in wind reliability
- network stability and quality of service
all affect the conclusion.
3. all the above concerns grow with increase in connected wind capacity.
4. Connected wind capacity should never be allowed to approach baseload demand on any one network, unless it is cheap enough to dump power when demand drops. If such a situation eventuated, it would definitely require a large amount of backup plant with appropriate characteristics. This ceiling on wind’s potential is not discussed often enough.
5. comparisons with large central plants should be cognisant of the potential to use cycle waste heat piped for district heating supplementation. This under-utilised energy resource is propitious in cold countries, though less so in Australia.

As for analogies with IT, I am skeptical. Personal computers needed no government subsidies to proliferate. Falling costs enabled new applications and methods to be sold to expanded markets not open to megacomputers. Information functionality is a different market from computing. Redefinition of the computer as an information appliance created major new market sectors, distinct from the original markets of large computers.

]]>