But anyway, where does the 20% figure come from? Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
But surely, some grid operator must know these things.
Anyone happen to know one?
One possible explanation is that wind is 15-20 % of all power in Denmark (no. 1 wind country), and I read somewhere (can't find the source) that they had to build new coal plants to deal with all the wind (or really to free up gas power from baseload duty to use the gas for load balancing).
Still, the 20 % number derived from Denmark doesn't make much sense as some magic rule of maximum windpower share as the Danish situation is very special, with acess to massive amounts of highly flexible Nordic hydropower.
It's all rather foggy I'm afraid. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
The 20% figure always seemed to me to be a target not yet reached.
The 20% for wind has been reached in Denmark and northern Germany. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Warren Frost, vice-president for operations and reliability at the Alberta Electric System Operator, said studies done over the past couple of years showed there can be problems when wind contributes more than about 10 per cent of the province's electricity -- about 900 MW -- because of the chance the wind could stop at any time. [...] There are a number of ways to allow wind power to make up a greater proportion of the electricity supply, but they require more study, Mr. Frost said. First, he said, the province can develop more sophisticated ways of forecasting the wind so the power it generates is more predictable. The province could also build more plants that can quickly respond if the wind dies down during a peak period, for example. But building new gas-powered plants merely to help handle the variability of wind is certain to raise the ire of environmentalists. The province could also increase its connections to other jurisdictions, where it would buy surplus power when needed. Alberta is already looking at links with some northwestern U.S. states, including Montana. [...] Mr. Frost, of the Alberta system operator, said European countries such as Denmark and Germany have been able to maintain a high proportion of wind power in their electricity systems mainly because they have multiple connections to other countries' power grids. That gives them substantial flexibility to import or export power to compensate for wind fluctuation. Germany, for example, has 39 international interconnections, he said, making variable wind conditions much easier to manage.
[...]
There are a number of ways to allow wind power to make up a greater proportion of the electricity supply, but they require more study, Mr. Frost said. First, he said, the province can develop more sophisticated ways of forecasting the wind so the power it generates is more predictable.
The province could also build more plants that can quickly respond if the wind dies down during a peak period, for example. But building new gas-powered plants merely to help handle the variability of wind is certain to raise the ire of environmentalists.
The province could also increase its connections to other jurisdictions, where it would buy surplus power when needed. Alberta is already looking at links with some northwestern U.S. states, including Montana.
Mr. Frost, of the Alberta system operator, said European countries such as Denmark and Germany have been able to maintain a high proportion of wind power in their electricity systems mainly because they have multiple connections to other countries' power grids. That gives them substantial flexibility to import or export power to compensate for wind fluctuation.
Germany, for example, has 39 international interconnections, he said, making variable wind conditions much easier to manage.
And even if we could install all that fancy metering equipment people wouldn't like it and buy fixed price contracts anyway. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
By the way, if we start forcing energy intensive industry to pay for power depending on demand they'll just build their own power plants to avoid the hassle and volatility.
Or well, it's not really long term supply contracts is it? Isn't it more like owning the shares gives you a certain power quota? 10 % of the shares gives 10 % of the generated power (about 1,3 TWh) and any power not consumed by the shareholder is sold on the market. And the big industries own all the shares of this in effect not-for-profit nuclear plant.
By the way, it would be great if it would be open to small investors. What a great way to hedge against rising power prices, just buy one millionth of the shares of the new reactor and get power for free, so to speak. Any surplus power is sold on the market.
A one time payment of maybe €3000 (=13 MWh per year as long as you hold the shares) and no more power bills for me. And then you also get value if shares prices rise, as they are bound to do due to peak oil. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
