Where is the model of wind power? Denmark?

If this is such a good idea, we should be able to look at others who have used wind power as an example of success. The most intensive wind energy system is in Denmark, and as this article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/GAM.20080711.RREYNOLDS...
explains, Denmark's experience is really a complete failure.
So if their program has failed, why should any of us promote this plan?

Tags: Denmark, failure

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by ittybitty on July 11, 2008 at 11:11am

Um....Denmark's program is... a huge success...

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_kolbert

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skeptic on July 11, 2008 at 11:52am

I think the article in The New Yorker describes an anomaly situation of a small community on an island that is not connected to the grid. This is not representative of the Danish system as a whole.
So that little corner, because their previous system was so terrible, is a success. That type of example is not relevant to the vast majority of the world, or even Denmark.
Please read the article I cited which talks about the overall experience of wind power in the country, where they have not reduced coal fired power plants and are selling what little power the wind farms make at a loss.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by bill713 on July 11, 2008 at 12:35pm

From Sweetwater to Ozona Texas thousand of wind turbines sre doing the job now even if they did precede the "profitable" range of operation.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gail on July 11, 2008 at 12:37pm

You need to read more dear.................There was no failure, just an incomplete article. It works as it is supposed to work, read more and then join in an effort. Just flinging out an argument does nothing to start a process of improvement...just keeps ya stuck in the problem. As in if you are not part of the solution ... You are the problem!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Glenn Salisbury Jr. on July 11, 2008 at 1:01pm

Let's see, some information is missing from the article that Skeptic cited. Has Denmark's demand increased in the past few years ? If it has and they haven't had to build more conventional generation plants, then I would call that a plus. You also have to consider the source of the article.
Glenn Jr.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ittybitty on July 11, 2008 at 1:25pm

Skeptic,

Try reading the article. I know it's nine pages and that might take you a while....

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ittybitty on July 11, 2008 at 1:49pm

We have two articles against, one for. Personally, I am a solar proponent. But I also think wind is perfectly viable if the turbine is sited properly. Mt. Washington, NH has wind speeds in excess of 100 MPH so I am sure you could generate a lot of juice there. The Island noted in the New Yorker article has high and constant wind speeds. Solar and wind generating in tandem would smooth out power deliver.

But with both - solar and wind - there is no burning, no emissions and with solar, no moving parts. Fossil fuel backup would be necessary regardless but integrating smaller fossil plants into a wind/solar system might produce better results than trying to tie wind into a fossil system that is designed to run continuously.

I am sure there is still plenty of work to be done and since we are just at the beginning, vast improvements will be made.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William M. (Butch) Green, P.E. on July 11, 2008 at 1:55pm

The site is EVERYTHING with either.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Glenn Scott on July 11, 2008 at 2:04pm

Look no further than the USA. Florida Power & Light currently operates 47 wind farms with 4,000 megawatts of generation capacity. T. Boone is building his 4,000 megawatt farm on 200,000 acres in West Texas. Lots of other capacity is under construction.

Also, look what NOT to do ... go to California. There you will find the skeletal remains of Carter's idiotic PURPA alt energy plan (the last time we had a Leftist government, read Obama). Crappy low tech, economically unviable alt energy was built and its cost stranded on Cali utility rate payers (this contributed to the Cali Utility Bankrupcy Debacle, and Cali's high electric power rates). You see these monstrocities of unefficiency all over the high wind passes of Cali. If you hate subsidized Ethanol you should also hate the 1980s PURPA subsidized 1st generation, low tech, unviable wind and water-solar.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Larkin on July 11, 2008 at 3:13pm

The island's population is 4300. Denmark's population is 5.5 million. Not a good comparison ittybitty. As a whole, they wind program in Denmark is failing:

http://www.moneyweek.com/file/49881/wind-power-is-it-a-realistic-op....
html