Against the Wind

Sounds like Denmark could use even more wind power to bring the cost down.

Magical...Thanks again. I'm glad you and Green Energy are bringing something to the table for us all vs. the hot air generated by the "Turbine Factory".

Maverick, one big service the hot air provides is a boost! :) And don't worry Anonymous, whoeveryouare, Denmark is cranking those things out and littering their entire country with them... but funny, the cost to their citizen households keep rising.

Maverick,

You buying a Mr Electricity from Green Energy? Let me know how you like and how much it cost. Also, how often you use it.

Great job Magical... Will be interesting to see the most recent figures as well (because that is when the offshore wind farms connected to their grid. As previously noted... We should also look at any information available as to how... if at all the electricity rates vary in areas supplied by their wind farms.

I think Solon may have a way to obtain this info... Solon - you out there?

If not the fella who pulled made all the arrangements for the trip and his wife (from Denmark) should be able to steer us in the right direction.

Magical, There is a lot behind the price of electricity. Grenada has a higher price. They don't use wind. What does that mean?

Posting numbers like this when you don't have any economic facts about each country proves nothing. Is the country communist, socialist, capitalist, etc.

The wind industry in Denmark has grow tremendously in the last 10 years but, the price has remained about the same. Wind has neither hurt or helped the price of electricity. You need to do your homework instead of just doing some cutting and pasting.

Avatar please back up your statement with facts.

You wrote:
"The wind industry in Denmark has grow tremendously in the last 10 years but, the price has remained about the same. Wind has neither hurt or helped the price of electricity"

Magical, look at your own chart for denmark. The price has fluctuated 0.202 +/- 10%. The wind industry in denark has grown much more than 10% in the last 10 years.

The link below shows wind energy production in Denmark. It's grown six fold since 1995. The price of electicity is not increasing a rate proportional to installed wind capacity.


http://www.windpower.org/en/stats/capacityDK.htm

Avatar and Stephen P.

I posted the two links below on the Blogfather's page recently. I'd be interested in any comments you might have.

The articles come directly from the Copenhagen Post online newspaper. You say Avatar, "the wind industry in Denmark has grow tremendously in the last 10 years," but the first story suggests that is not entirely correct.

"Windmill Sales Good, But Not in Denmark"

http://www.cphpost.dk/get/85239.html

"Winds of Change"

http://www.cphpost.dk/get/93432.html

"Wind strength has been decreasing over the past decade, giving wind turbine owners the pinch."

"...Weaker winds mean weaker earnings for the country's wind turbine owners."

"...German and Swedish wind turbine owners have also experienced significant decreases in wind strength".

The point is that the households in Denmark pay the highest electricity rates in the world. Cape Wind states that ours will lower. Fat chance!

Thank you Rhode Islander!

The only problem Peckham will have is with the links. He doesn't know how to copy and paste them into his browser and will repeately ask you for the source in spite of having the links. ;)

Don't worry about the price. I was watching cnnfn this week and coal is making a big come backup. Take a look at coal stocks. The are going up. Trouble in Nigeria and Iran is driving oil up; that's good for coal.

They can build a coal plant somewhere west of the cape to make more power. Enjoy the smoke. You have a chance to make clean power and you fight it.

Magical, I ask you now. Please break down the costs of making electricity in denmark.

You are the one that brought up the 'fact' that the electicity prices in Denmark are high because of wind power. Now prove it. At least give a link (if you can find one).

pretend that Cape Wind is the only answer. After all you know so much more than The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change who stated that mitigation goals for reduction of CO2 can be met at a lower cost and to a greater degree by continuing improvements in general efficiency of buildings, manufacturing and transportation than by wind power.

I didn't say they are high because of wind power. Cape Wind and you proponents of wind power point constantly to Denmark as the state of the art. And you also say our prices will go down because of Cape Wind. And I say BS!

Again, economics. Wind produces power at 3-4 cents per kilowatt. The electric company on the cape needs to make a deal with cape wind to buy all of this cheap power.

You should not be fighting wind technology. You need to force your utility to get the cheap power for your selves. Get a stake like Hull.

The Hull wind turbine has worked well because the local community benefits.

Maybe you need a non-profit group on the cape doing what Cape Wind has proposed.

Once again... why do you ignore the findings of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change who say that mitigation goals for reduction of CO2 can be met at a lower cost and to a greater degree by continuing improvements in general efficiency of buildings, manufacturing and transportation than by wind power? What is your agenda?

Yes Avatar,

You must have an agenda.....certainly Magical doesn't have one.

I have no Agenda. I am simply stating that Hull wind works. The town saves money because they have a stake in the project. Capewind has problems because the people on the cape have no stake. Please have a look at www.hull.org

Avatar, I can't get your link to work. Will you try posting it again?

KMA you are like a heckler.

Magical, It is not being realistic or logical to believe that "continuing improvments in general efficiency of buildings, manufacturing and transportation" and "energy conservation" at home and in industry... Will have enough of an effect to offset the need for more and more energy as time goes on...

It is not practical because of one very important reason: People are inherently lazy... especially when it comes to having to make (in some cases) signifigent changes in their lifestyle. We all are generally creatures of habit (no pun) and like things as they have always been for us. The only way that people will change their habits is when they are forced. As in it costing them much more money for a particular product (such as electricity) or if it becomes a scarcity... which is a distinct possibility again with electricity or oil / gas etc.

I say that the demand for energy is far outpacing the production capability & capacity and there is no way we will see enough of an impact by conservation/efficiency efforts to make a difference before we are in crisis... Very soon.

So Peckham you are more of an authority than the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel? Or in your case is this just an opinion? If not would you care to back your statements up with facts?

here is the link again. http://www.hullwind.org/

I think small wind projects like this are the way to go. The little guy sees the savings this way.

Magical, It is merely my opinion. A personal observation. I speak for human nature and do not presume to know more than the UN Panel.

I will however offer another 'opinion' relative to the UN... They are not a well respected entity by most including the US.

No, not going to back my opinion up with facts dear.

Additionally, I would suggest that by it's mere title: "Intergovernmental Panel" is indicative of just that... a group of people brought together to arrive at an opinion or offering. Convening a panel does not mean that what they "find" is anymore factual than my opinion.

They are not empowered to effect any conservation efforts nor do they have any oversight as to their findings.

My opinion... To coin a (new) phrase: "It is flawed."

I happen to believe that human nature will prevail... based on our own
history in such efforts that fail miserably.

Again... Energy conservation only will happen when someone or some entity is forced to do it by economics... or by legal action which is, another possibility I suppose.

Nite.

Stephen,

It is not being realistic or logical to believe that wind power will have enough of an effect to offset the need for more and more conventional energy production as time goes on. It is not practical because of one very important reason: wind power is unreliable.

You are right- the demand for energy is far outpacing production capability & capacity, but there is no way wind power can make more than a minor contribution.

Rhode Islander,

Minor contribution? Denmark 20% and growing. What's wrong with that.

Magical,

I am "like" a heckler? What are you saying? Remember, not everyone sees the same Rainbow.

Here is what is wrong with that. Denmark is littered with wind turbines yet they can't use the power from them so they sell it cheap and then buy their power from the grid which is expensive and comes from fossil fuels. Clean power out Dirty power in.

Sorry I said like... I take that back. You are a heckler.

Magical,

Fine, that's your opinion. Avatar comes to this site and makes a legitimate argument on the topic. He/She has facts and seemingly accurate information.

Your response "what's your agenda" Do you think that's fair?

If anyone has an agenda it's you. I believe if it wasn't for the birds and birds alone, you'd be mixing cement in your backyard to pour the footings for the turbines. You know, so the toxics produced by our power plants could be eliminated and the birds would have a better life.

Am I wrong?

Yes KMA you are wrong.

No agenda. It's just that the darn price is so hi in Denmark.

Funny, I've never heard you complain about why the electric prices are so high on Cape Cod this year.

No agenda, now that's funny. Not truthful, but very funny.

Oh, and the part about the heckling? Hows this one
"are you a professional jounalist Jack"? How many times you going to heckle him?

I don't see that as heckling... all he needs to do is provide a simple answer yes or no. Don't you wonder why he doesn't?

Magical... Just wondering WHY Denmark "can't use power from them"... the wind turbines?

First off the power... by way of the laws of physics has no choice but to be used at the very first point where the demand exists. That being the case, in reality, it is physicall impossible to import power to a location that doesn't need it.

Now, if Denmarks electrical distribution and purchase agreements are anything like ours... then it comes right back to the SAME opportunity that we have.

That is WE CAN purchase our electricity from Cape Wind with guaranteed rates for 10 years at a minimum. No need to "send" this power off Cape.

If we want to buy OUR power from the "grid"... well, we may have that opportunity if we choose that path. To me why shouldn't we do the logical thing and buy the green?

But me asking you if you have an agenda is heckling? By the way, I don't think I've ever gotten a simple answer from you either!

I know he's a professional jounalism as do you. He wrote for the Cape Cod Times. That makes him a professional. Now, with that solved, what's your point?

My point is that he has a high standard to follow as a professional journalist... there is a code of ethics and he continually violates them. Check out his code of ethics.

Peckham will you please back up your claims with facts and site your sources?

PS Peckham... the site you visited in Denmark had to bring in all of their less than three year old turbines for repair. what will happen to Cape Winds customers under those circumstances? And better yet what will happen if they go bankrupt and have to move all of those enormous structrues our of the Nantucket Sound?

KMA,

The widespread notion that Danish wind turbines provide twenty percent of the country’s electrical power may be the greatest lie of all concerning wind power today.

No doubt this will disturb you and others who believe passionately in the wind power myth, but please read what energy analyst Hugh Sharman, based in Denmark, has to say on the subject. Then tell us where he is wrong.

Letter to the Editor, Financial Times, London, May 24, 2005.
by Hugh Sharman, Hals, Denmark.

”Sir, in your editorial ("Glowing green", May 16) you wrote that "Denmark, which relies on intermittent wind power for nearly 20 per cent of its power, has stability problems on its grid.

Although it is true that the wind power we have creates "stability problems", it is not true that we inhabitants of west Denmark rely on wind power at all. Whenever west Denmark produces a lot of wind power, it simultaneously exports almost equivalent quantities along its strong inter-connections with Norway, Sweden and Germany....

"...In other words, in spite of wind turbines producing a quantity of power equivalent to more than 20 per cent of its domestic consumption, very little of this power is actually consumed in west Denmark. I have calculated that in 2003, more than 80 per cent of wind output was exported, leaving west Denmark to consume about 4 per cent of its power from its enormous capacity of wind turbines.

There is an added irony here. The Danish consumer pays the highest tariffs for electricity in Europe. Much of these are hypothecated for the support of windmill owners. However, the wind power is sold on the spot market at rates that are much lower.

Thus there is a direct transfer of wealth from Danish consumers to consumers in Sweden, Norway and Germany, every time 1kWh of electricity is sold in this way. During 2003, this net transfer of wealth amounted to more than £100m -- or £40 per inhabitant.”

Rhode Islander,

So all the electricity doesn't go to West Denmark. The abundance is going to the grid and used elsewhere? So someone is benefiting from the Wind Power, correct?

Quite simply Rhode Islander & Magical... The power generated by the wind farms in Demark, or for that fact anywhere in the world... has no choice to go to the first point of need.

Once that need is satisfied any excess capacity will flow to the next point of need and so on. If another country is in the area and is part of this same grid and it has a demand (need) for the energy it will flow in that direction.

The actual benifit of who "purchases" this ('green')power is completly dependant on the local utilities or entities so structured to enable them to purchase this specific power.

Generally, they have to be downstream of a green facility in order to be able to intercept its benifit prior to being passed onto the grid at a rate (cost) that is (in our case) set / fixed by a state regulated rate struture.

If regulations PERMIT that power MAY be able to be purchased by another entity further downstream as well. It all is dependent on local regs.

Magical... This info is for the most part Elec 101. & ISO New England determined.

Once again Peckham please back up your statements with facts and sources of those facts so we can see for ourselves.

Peckham you can simply copy and paste or direct us to those statements.

Magical, The problems with the turbines to which you refer is well documented and was promptly corrected.

It was a problem with a component made by a subcontractor who supplied a part of (if memory serves me) the transformer output assembly that did not meet specifications.

These things happen just as they do on your car, your heating/cooling system/refrigeration or any and all mechanical / electrical equipment... all made by man and subject to faults, errors, and wear & tear. No mystery or coverup there either... Um then again!

As far as what happens if they go bankrupt etc... and / or down the road should they become obsolete. Well, it has been well documented time and again by a variety of sources that a decommissioning plan will be in place with moneys set aside PRIOR to construction. And no... I will not tell you what my source is on this. If you really must know get in touch with the d'Alliance because they also harped on it again and again, even after the question was answered by pre-existing documentaion that they asserted otherwise. Sounds familiar.

Magical my source is: "Electricity for Dummies"... Available on line... go for it my dear! :-)

What is your source Peckham? Post it for all to see. It should be on Cape Wind's site no? They are making the statements claims and promises. And you are scrambling around trying to defend them

So peckham you are saying that electricity for dummies sites the cape wind project? but your source definitely suits you!

Isn't it all really very simple? Why doesn't Jim Gordon tell us how much we will pay for our overall electric needs when his wind farm is operating vs how much we will pay without his turbines? So far he has refused to be specific, but continues to make the claim that the Cape will benefit directly (75% of our elctric needs) from his operation. Then again, hje has calimed that New England willl save a few cents per month per household because of his turbines. Which is it?

Has wind power reduced either pollution or energy p[rices in Denmark, or not? Seems a simple question.

GG,
Once Cape Wind receives their permit to construct the facility, and assuming that they are comfortable that weel-funded opposition such as the Alliance will not be able to obtain an injunction on the project while the inevitable lawsuit(s) occur (boy, are the lawyers going to get rich when this is permitted!!), it is my opinion that only then will they be safe to start talking about the cost of the electricity. Every day that goes by without the project permitted is another day that costs escalate, literally. Metals, cement and labor costs escalate on a regular basis, labor usually every 6 months, but materials can be daily. To make a statement now regarding costs will only provide fuel for a future fire, as there simply is no way that they can be assured accurate. And even if they were pin the costs to a certain "snapshot in time", based on what we see in the postings on this blog, anything you say can and will be held against you.

GG, as we can see from the above chart Denmark has not decreased energy prices for its citizens. But it is widely known that they have increased CO2 levels!

Souper5,

You are quite right. All costs associated with the project will rise between now and whenever (if ever) it is built. So too will the price we pay for fossil fuel elctricity. That being said, I would be happy to see as a starting point a definite statement by Gordon of how our electricty costs would be affected if Cape Wind were in full operation now. Since Gordon can (and does) claim that his turbines will generate a quantifiable portion of our overall electric demand on the Cape, he should also be able to state what cost savings we would realize due to his wind power plant's operation.

I do not think these are unreasonable questions. And, if Gordon had answered them in 2004 when they were first asked he might be having easier going now.

EX: If Cape Wind were in full operation now, how much of our 80% rate increase would they save us? Simple question.....SIMPLE QUESTION!

GG,

It's not an unreasonable question. So I went to their web site and this is what I found.

La Capra found that the addition of Cape Wind electricity would exert a downward pressure o n wholesale electricity market prices, leading to a savings of approximately $25 million per year for the New England electricity market.

Sorry Magical... I have been a lost soul today on this blog.

No, I cannot cut / paste or that kind of stuff and there is no one in my office in ACK to show me how. Sorry again.

Again, the simple physics of electricity... as it relates to its supply/demand and use can be easily found in any middle school science book. As well, I am sure there is one for "Dummies" as there is one for seemingly everything else.

Don't mean to disapoint you but I am much too busy to try and give you a web site or such. Another option would be to 'Google' it. Not trying to be fresh or such just practical for me. Yes, I know... "Cut and Paste for Dummies"!

By the way... Not scrambling to defend Cape Wind. I do what I do here and otherwise because (like you do) I believe it is the right thing to do by way of pointing out the "errs" of your ways! Funnin' you now... so take it easy, still tired from this weekend... you wear me out. (Please, no pun intended... really.) (could have been a good one eh?)

Gadfly... Simple answer to your question of "Has wind power reduced pollution (or reduced energy prices) in Denmark..."

If you do not BURN fossil fuel... could you not pretty well take for granted that you are inherently... reducing pollution that would otherwise produced?

Oops - Political answer! The answer is YES... It is not possible to do otherwise. If you don't burn & send particles of combustion into the atmosphere... It stands to reason... you pollute less. If you are a reasoning type guy.

Sound reasonable?

As far as reducing energy costs... I am in the process of investigation the question... as it relates to Magicals finally coming up with a source (that someone else came to her rescue with!)and in particular how it affected the rates of those (if at all) in the areas that are able to purchase that power directly (if they are) and if so / not how have the rates been affected (if at all) or was the wind farm a stabilizing agent.

More to follow when I recieve uptodate and reliable info.

KMA,

That information is far too general to be considered a straight-on answer to a very specific question. For example, is "downward pressure" the same as rate reduction? More to the point, and to RESTATE my original question, how much money will Cape Cod electric customers save as a direct result of Cape Wind's operations, stated in dollars or as a percentage of overall electric charges for the region?

GG... The money we will save is SQUAT on an individual rate payer basis... however, extrapolated to be $25m overall to the entire state annualized.

Keep in mind that we can benefit much more if we are able to contract direct with them... in the works I hear. As well, & duly noted time and again... we could lock in guaranteed rates for many years.

More importantly, in my mind anyway is the reduction in fossil fuel emissions that happen automatically by reducing the need for those facilities. Hence, foreign dependency etc.

Equally as important(if not more so) is the (I forget the word/phrase)
"offset" that NOT burning fossil fuel brings by way reducing the amount of health/enviormental and all the other damage done by breathing this crap raining down on us every day.

Know I sound like a PR guy for them and Magical won't believe it but I am behind this project for only one reason... It is the right thing to do; for all the right reasons.

I will not discount that there are a number of trade offs and mitagation that should / will happen.

I have no vested interest.

STeve P.,

Thank you for an honest comment. BTW the $25 is spread over New England, I believe, not just Mass.

As for the trade-offs and mitigations this project will require, and admitting that I do not have the time to follow every development in this process, I am unaware that cape Wind has ever discussed, and certainly not in any detail, anything like either trade-offs or mitigation. What are they likely to be and how can we be assured that Gordon will step up to the plate?

Gadfly... just got back & now for grub. Will get back after.

You may have me there on the $25... MAYBE! Hey... shoulda checked my SOURCE! eh?

Gotta keep an eye on those locker room fellas!

Hey Gadfly... Maybe will check your BTW at some point. But as said it is still a drop in the bucket and the real gain (in my opinion!) is all the other benefits... including MORE TOURISTS! (go home)

I will suggest to you without naming any source that there will be some sort of mitagation suggested/offered at some point when it makes sense. To have that on the table at so early a stage in the final approval stage would only create another battle of greedy combatants... surely, you can picture all who would want and demand a piece of the pie! And... this thing and that... A bottomless pit of desire.

As far as trade offs go... who knows? If any it most likely will be worked out between MMS and Cape Wind. Jim would like to see it built for a variety of reasons and MMS certainly understands the need for it especially when the need is so critical (which it is... not my opinion) and of course it will be their job to asuage some of the nasayers at least to some degree... maybe install nets to catch the dead birds at the bottom of the turbines per Magicals idea.

Jim will comply.

Peck,

If mitigation is part of his permit, similar to the conditions routinely placed by local conservation commissions on their approvals, Goprdon will have no choice but to comply. But, my point is not that he will deliver the mitigations so much as it is this: what specific problems, damages, disruptions, etc,. will be the subjects of this mitigation? Cape Wind, since its very first public unveiling of this project has insisted that will not be sufficient problems caused by their construction or operation to require mitigation. Negligible effect has been their standard claim all through this process. I did not believe it them and I don't believe it now. If they agree to any mitigation they will be agreeing to a far higher degree of damge than they have previously.

I don't know if anyone will get this far down on a post that's a few days old, but I have a few points to make about electricity price comparisons being made. First, the USA's price is predominantly based on coal, which accounts for roughtly 50% of our electricity nation wide. Thankfully it is less here in New England, because we don't have any coal resources and its heavy to transport. However, we do get a fair amount of emissions from places that do.
Denmark is willing to pay more for cleaner sources, they also have much higher taxes to encourage cleaner energy use and less carbon emissions. If we wanted the cheapest power we would burn more coal. But most of us also want clean air and water, so most of us are willing to pay a bit more for cleaner power, like natural gas (40% of NE power). Also, if you compare Cape Cod's energy prices, 22 cents (compared to the nation-wide average of 10 cents), you'll see that wind power will help to stabilize our prices from the steady increase we can expect. The more of it we can make the better. Just wait till you get your bill for January!!!!

Well, same goes SR, some of us are willimg to pay more to keep the Sound from being taken over by an industrial wind power plant.

GG... Hey there mischievous brethren you ol'sot! Haven't seen your pus about of late - In hiding? ;-)

Didn't mean to confuse re: Mitagation.
I am not personally aware of any specific concerns which will need to be "mitagated".

Needless to say, the installation of the turbines will create a temporary disturbance of the seabed as will the cable installation. Of course, I think we both would agree that this is relativly negligable in even the short term when you consider what the draggers etc do day in day out. Not casting stones just making a point.

Other than some 'possible'? wildlife issues, and leases if required... And, of course the "view" - I honestly don't see what may need mitagation in the traditional definition.

I think I unintentionally, used that comment when I should have used "offset"... to better suggest what 'I' suspect -may- happen down the road as it comes closer to fruition.

By offset, I mean 'quid pro quo'... something for something: He gives something back to the community(s) that are "affected". What, if anything remains to be "seen"!

Self Reliance... Do not fret. Of course you make sense and the project does to a thinking and rational person who has taken the time to look at both sides of the issues and make the logical determination of what is best for the common good. A no brainer.

She is like this all the time. You cannot get thru with a stick of dynamite!

Stick around on her site though if you want to have a little fun! It is hysterical sometimes.

Peck,

No, not hiding, just busy and sort of cooped up.

GG, I am giving serious consideration to using the no comments option on my blog. Will miss hearing your insightful questions and of course those of others but it seems as though people like peckham have made it their business to diminish the posts with their sophomoric jabs and so called 'humor' and I believe it is turning people off. which is, of course, what he and his ilk are want to do. I hope you will consider doing a blog of your own. As I believe you have much good to say and I for one am always interested in hearing from you. Haven't as yet made up my mind on this but for now it does seem like the best thing to do. Like Coleman I would like to have an option of approving the posts (not to keep the opposition out but to keep out the hecklers) but without that I have two options... to have comments or not to. Am seriously thinking of the latter. You have my email if you would like to stay in touch and share information.

PS. GG, perhaps I might have guest bloggers on my "Against the Wind" blog. Would you be willing to be a guest blogger? :)

Magical can't take the heat...talk about hecklers. What is she pushing? Fantasy Land? Everything has a price. We are at war because of oil, kids are dying right at this moment. They will never be the same if they don't get killed or blown apart. Thousands of AMERICAN families are grieving for their dead soldier KIDS and she is worried about birds. We have to do this energy thing ourselves. At least start somewhere! If these machines have whales taking a different route and a few birds die so what? I know magical doesn't think this all ties together but she is in fantasy land guys.

While I appreciate your point of view, the object of this blog is to present information to the public with which they can make up their own minds. I do not believe the constant heckling is serving any purpose other than distraction. Even if I decide not to have comments, I will continue to post information. To me, that is the most important function of this blog.

Magical... Sometimes your postings here are "interesting" and thought provoking; although...

Sometimes, some are quite outdated and TOTALLY unrelated to the project at hand.

AND... Many of your opinions, and or observations...

DESERVE to be discussed and debated... and many times YES, DISCOUNTED...

As they are... as said, time and again:

"Fantasy" OUT OF TOUCH and outright "Bizarre".

So why not be a grownup... Because, if you put yourself out there,(here) and expect to be taken seriously... take the heat, reflect, perhaps reconsider, get off your high horse (or cow) and THINK MORE RATIONALLY.

Then...

Maybe some of us would take you more seriously.

Respectfully.

Thank you for your thoughts Peckham but to me the most important thing is the ability to get the important messages out there without the constant distraction of pointless agrument allowing people to make up their own minds.

Meye,

Glad to be a guest blogger. As for the possibility of not allowing posts...keep the faith. Serious folks will cull out the junk and save their receptors for serious comment. Part of the blogisphere are the extraneous currs who insist on their juvenile banter.

Not a good idea to encourqage them by caving in.