| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
I can't find the reference for:But first factor in that electrical energy demand may be only 20-30% of total energy demand and also that on a low wind day virtually none of the energy will come from wind--requiring that there be a dual system in place (expensive to maintain such). This ultimately is more of a problem for smaller countries trying to be energy independent of others since the wind really can be nil over the whole country. In time larger countries might have large enough networks to smooth out regions where the wind stops. Even there though, if one envisions wind as a major player, the summer doldrums include little wind but large electrical demands. Hard to see how one can rely on wind without MAJOR backup systems--again possible but expensive to say have an almost full capacity set of say natural gas fired plants that sit idle when the wind blows but fire up when it doesn't. Also understand that moving to renewables to replace fossil fuels means moving more and more demand to electrical--to the extreme of being nearly 100% electrical in our demands. That's a factor often misunderstood--it is not just replacing coal plants to produce fossil free electricity, it is replacing all the natural gas use for heating and of course the petroleum use for transportation. Replacing coal with renewables is 'easy', replacing the other fossil uses is not.
Recently for one unusually windy day the the maximum e. power source in
Denmark was wind. This source averages about 20% of their total output.
bc, reasonable certain this time.