User avatar
ksnogas2112
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:56 pm
Delivery Date: 23 Jun 2012
Leaf Number: 021881
Location: Lenexa KS (Kansas City)
Contact: Website

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 12:30 pm

I can believe it's idle since a large number of the turbines in the central ks farms (c. 2009) weren't even connected to the grid because "it's too expensive to connect them".

I'll dig up the article if I can find it.
Tom in KS
100 Mile Club-#57
http://ksnogas.blogspot.com/
Try reading a book, it's a novel experience
MY 2012 - Cayenne Red-55,000+ miles

Reddy
Posts: 1544
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:09 pm
Delivery Date: 18 Aug 2011
Leaf Number: 006828
Location: Pasco, WA

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 1:43 pm

drees wrote:Ran across this article today:

BPA orders NW wind farms to curtail production
The Bonneville Power Administration has ordered Pacific Northwest wind farms to cut production twice in recent days because it has a surplus of power from hydroelectric dams.


This article says: Bonneville Power calls for first wind shutdown of the season
In all 10,100 megawatt hours of wind energy was curtailed over the two-day.
That article also says that they are turning down nuclear power to help avoid further shutdowns.

Would be nice to get some credible numbers on how much wind exactly sits idle because of overcapacity and lack of transmission. I know it's a large problem in Texas right now.

Edit: This article says that 824,000 MWh were curtailed in the midwest in 2010: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/ ... s-turning/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edit 2: One also has to wonder how much hydro power is lost due to overcapacity - after all - if the grid could suck down more power they'd be able to run more power through the turbines instead of spilling it... The reason wind has to be idled is so that the hydro guys can run more water through the turbines instead of spilling it...
drees, I haven't read all of those links, but thanks for finding this article http://sustainablebusinessoregon.com/ar ... -wind.html which pretty much confirms my skepticism of the titled OP. The article says 97,557 MWh curtailed last season. Assuming d/24h x yr/365 d x 1/0.35 capacity, that works out to about 31.8 MW curtailed out of about 4000 MW total in the BPA area. That's only 0.8% curtailment for the PNW, nowhere near the 21% required to curtail 25 TWh nationally. Hey, I like to see us using clean energy, but losing less than 1% isn't bad.

As for this past Sun/Mon curtailment, I am guessing the BPA could do it because the forecast didn't call for much wind. I checked this before the weekend because I planned to bicycle about 75 miles. Saturday was beautiful, just as predicted, but Sunday was WINDY. I am guessing that BPA said, hey wind guys you are scheduled for "only" x amount of power because of the wind forecast, so that's all you get to supply. Tough deal that your forecast didn't work out, try again tomorrow.

Well, I did my best. I charged fully on Sunday night, then drove an extra 30 miles Monday, and charged to 100% again over night. Now if we could only get another million EVs on the roads doing the same. :P

Reddy.
Reddy
2011 SL; 9 bar, 45.80 AHr; 45,000 mi; rcv'd Aug 18, 2011
Long: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... al#p226115"
Cold: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... 60#p243033"

GRA
Posts: 11065
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 3:08 pm

drees wrote:
GRA wrote:I don't think that's the reason, I'd think it's more likely a cost issue. Hydro is cheaper than wind.
Hydro isn't cheaper than wind when you have to pay the wind farms to stop producing. It must be cheaper than dumping too much water over the falls of hydro plants (which is illegal since too much spillover dirties up the water and harms fish) since they are shutting down wind farms to avoid spilling too much water.
Sure, but that assumes that you are _required_ to take the wind power, which apparently isn't the case with Denmark and Norway/Sweden. If you don't have (or don't need) an RPS, you can just say "thanks but no thanks, we'll use our cheaper hydro." AIUI, the deal in the Scandinavian countries is that their hydro acts as baseload backup for Denmark when the wind isn't producing, so Denmark is willing to pay them what amounts to a subsidy.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11065
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 3:12 pm

Reddy wrote:
drees wrote:Ran across this article today:

BPA orders NW wind farms to curtail production
The Bonneville Power Administration has ordered Pacific Northwest wind farms to cut production twice in recent days because it has a surplus of power from hydroelectric dams.


This article says: Bonneville Power calls for first wind shutdown of the season
In all 10,100 megawatt hours of wind energy was curtailed over the two-day.
That article also says that they are turning down nuclear power to help avoid further shutdowns.

Would be nice to get some credible numbers on how much wind exactly sits idle because of overcapacity and lack of transmission. I know it's a large problem in Texas right now.

Edit: This article says that 824,000 MWh were curtailed in the midwest in 2010: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/ ... s-turning/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edit 2: One also has to wonder how much hydro power is lost due to overcapacity - after all - if the grid could suck down more power they'd be able to run more power through the turbines instead of spilling it... The reason wind has to be idled is so that the hydro guys can run more water through the turbines instead of spilling it...
drees, I haven't read all of those links, but thanks for finding this article http://sustainablebusinessoregon.com/ar ... -wind.html which pretty much confirms my skepticism of the titled OP. The article says 97,557 MWh curtailed last season. Assuming d/24h x yr/365 d x 1/0.35 capacity, that works out to about 31.8 MW curtailed out of about 4000 MW total in the BPA area. That's only 0.8% curtailment for the PNW, nowhere near the 21% required to curtail 25 TWh nationally. Hey, I like to see us using clean energy, but losing less than 1% isn't bad.

As for this past Sun/Mon curtailment, I am guessing the BPA could do it because the forecast didn't call for much wind. I checked this before the weekend because I planned to bicycle about 75 miles. Saturday was beautiful, just as predicted, but Sunday was WINDY. I am guessing that BPA said, hey wind guys you are scheduled for "only" x amount of power because of the wind forecast, so that's all you get to supply. Tough deal that your forecast didn't work out, try again tomorrow.

Well, I did my best. I charged fully on Sunday night, then drove an extra 30 miles Monday, and charged to 100% again over night. Now if we could only get another million EVs on the roads doing the same. :P

Reddy.
Yeah, lacking any cheap way to store electricity at utility scales, EVs and Wind/PV are a necessary synergy. Either that or pumped storage will be required, but you can't do the latter just anywhere even when NIMBYism isn't a factor.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

padamson1
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:58 pm
Delivery Date: 27 Oct 2011
Leaf Number: 9240
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 3:23 pm

Reddy wrote:That's only 0.8% curtailment for the PNW, nowhere near the 21% required to curtail 25 TWh nationally. Hey, I like to see us using clean energy, but losing less than 1% isn't bad.
Kind of funny the article doesn't mention that isn't it? Also some irony in the title for the original calling for more grid storage. Isn't that what the reservoir behind a dam does: store energy?

In the case of the PNW, BPA has been saying that they can't spill all of the water from the excess snow melt b/c it will kill salmon (http://ecotrope.opb.org/2011/05/bpa-shu ... for-hydro/) even though most Salmon advocate associations say that's bunk (scroll to bottom of: http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-pacific ... 0781.story). My guess is that that it is cheaper for the PG&E to get hydro power than wind power so they take what BPA gives them first. I am also pretty sure that reimbursing the wind farms doesn't come out of PG&E's pocket b/c the wind farms say they lose money when they aren't spinning and the articles above use the word 'taxpayer' and not 'ratepayer' is used when reimbursements are mentioned.

To me this sounds more like a grid management problem than a generation issue. There is always a need for electricity somewhere, why can't we get it there? I mean Oregon sells hydro power to California all the time, can't BPA sell the power at a discount? Can't the coal/gas/nuclear baseload generators can't throttle down enough? This particular problem is caused by unusual runoff, it won't happen all the time or even every year, certainly the articles should mention this as well as what a small percentage of power we are dealing with.

I wish reporters still did actual work instead of just calling two sides of an issue on the phone and parroting whatever they heard (from sources with a clear conflict of interest). Whatever happened to thinking about the big picture, checking the facts, and distilling what is correct for the public interest?

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1170
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 4:26 pm

padamson1 wrote:I wish reporters still did actual work instead of just calling two sides of an issue on the phone and parroting whatever they heard (from sources with a clear conflict of interest). Whatever happened to thinking about the big picture, checking the facts, and distilling what is correct for the public interest?
If I had my preference, I'd take reporting of what all sides of an issue are saying versus the editorialized and possibly censored output that some media outlets deliver. Just be sure they let us know what the credentials and possible motivations of the sources are so I can judge for myself how much weight to assign to each viewpoint.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

Reddy
Posts: 1544
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:09 pm
Delivery Date: 18 Aug 2011
Leaf Number: 006828
Location: Pasco, WA

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 4:41 pm

padamson1 wrote:To me this sounds more like a grid management problem than a generation issue. There is always a need for electricity somewhere, why can't we get it there?
Agreed. When I look at http://transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Op ... ltwg3.aspx for Sunday and Monday (midnight to 4am or so), you can really see the wind curtailments. But what is also interesting, is that the "interchange" (purple) drops DRAMATICALLY (>2-3 GW) during this same time. So now you can't say that the grid is overloaded! They just didn't send as much power to other areas. Hmmm, smells fishy to me. There must be a fossil fueled power plant somewhere that could have been turned off instead. From the graph, there was at least 1500 MW thermal running (1100 MW is probably the Columbia Generating Station (WPPSS, Wooopps for those that remember). Last year we had the nuclear plant off-line all summer and we still had too much power. This year may be a bit more contentious.

Reddy
Reddy
2011 SL; 9 bar, 45.80 AHr; 45,000 mi; rcv'd Aug 18, 2011
Long: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... al#p226115"
Cold: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... 60#p243033"

camasleaf
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 5:20 am
Delivery Date: 17 Jun 2011
Location: Camas, WA

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 6:56 pm

Hydro needs to be ON because when spilling water the the nitrogen content of the water is increased and kills the fish. When the water goes through turbines the nitrogen does not increases. Some turbines have oxygen injection.
Most of the dams on the lower Columbia are "run of the river", they have very limited storage capacity. When the snow starts to melt the water needs to go, also the fish is waiting for the increase water flow to start migration upstream.
Last week at Bonneville dam, all units were running and the spillway was open. The flow was over to 400000 cubic feet a second. They CANNOT stop the turbines unless they open the spillway more and kill the fish.
2011 SLe 06/17/11 Over 89000 miles 61%SOH 13.8kWh
2018 Honda Clarity PHEV
2014 Model S P85 77888 miles 256mile range
5.7kW DC Solar System

User avatar
JeremyW
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:53 am
Delivery Date: 23 Jun 2012
Leaf Number: 19136
Location: San Gabriel, CA

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 8:57 pm

camasleaf wrote:Most of the dams on the lower Columbia are "run of the river", they have very limited storage capacity.
We're not so nice to the Colorado here in the west.

Image

-Wikipedia

On the bright side, the power is more easily dispatched. We also desperately need that water for drinking and farming so not much gets to the ocean. Seems like electricity is only a side benefit sometimes...

Jeremy
Former 2012 SL leasee 6/23/12 - 9/23/15
Former Fit EV leasee.
Now driving Spark EV and Model 3.

padamson1
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:58 pm
Delivery Date: 27 Oct 2011
Leaf Number: 9240
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Charge at night! - 25 TWh of Wind Power Idled in 2010

Tue May 01, 2012 10:05 pm

camasleaf wrote:Hydro needs to be ON because when spilling water the the nitrogen content of the water is increased and kills the fish. When the water goes through turbines the nitrogen does not increases. Some turbines have oxygen injection.
Most of the dams on the lower Columbia are "run of the river", they have very limited storage capacity. When the snow starts to melt the water needs to go, also the fish is waiting for the increase water flow to start migration upstream.
Last week at Bonneville dam, all units were running and the spillway was open. The flow was over to 400000 cubic feet a second. They CANNOT stop the turbines unless they open the spillway more and kill the fish.
That's what BPA says, but the scientists working for Save Our Salmon, etc contend that's not true. That's why I cited the 2nd article in my post. Here is another that is more one point http://www.sustainablebusinessoregon.co ... lling.html

As with other things the truth is probably somewhere in between. Myself, I find it a little too convenient that hydro is prioritized over (the more expensive) wind power, especially since ratepayers who green source their power are paying a couple of cents extra per kWh, adding to the profit incentive.

Return to “Environmental Issues”