The Wind and CO2 Emissions Argument
The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) fired the latest salvo in the wind and carbon dioxide emissions debate with a recent webinar.
As discussed here recently, AWEA plays offense when challenged in the mainstream press over its claims about wind energy's emissions benefits. Recent article by a wind critic have brought the issue more attention over the past few weeks.
"In recent weeks we've seen a couple misleading attacks," Michael Goggin, manager of transmission policy at AWEA said at the outset.
The first order of business was to dispute the report that started the latest round in the debate. In the spring the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States (IPAMS), a lobby group for oil and natural gas industry, essentially said that wind generation had minimal impact on emissions in Colorado and Texas.
Goggin got in a few jibes - the fossil fuel industry is mimicking the tobacco lobby's tactics of a few years ago, for instance. But most of his time was spent highlighting government studies that tout wind's benefits.
"Recent studies show the impact on emissions is actually quite larger than we thought a couple years ago," he said.
Much of his data was taken from the U.S. Department of Energy and its Energy Information Administration Web sites.
In the disputed time frame in the West, Goggin pointed out the conclusion of one study.
"We can clearly tell that total power generation was increasing during that time, so conclusively can see there wasn't an efficiency or reduction in demand that was driving this decrease in CO2 emissions," he said. "There had to be something else."
He pointed to the clear trend of wind energy growth was occurring simultaneously. The data show that wind energy in Colorado increased from 2.5 percent of electricity needs in 2007 to 6.1 percent in 2008. Carbon dioxide emissions fell by 4.4 percent while coal decreased by 3 percent natural gas by 14 percent.
Similarly in Texas, DOE data show that wind and other renewables' share in Texas increased from 1.3 percent in 2005 to 4.4 percent in 2008 CO2 emissions from the electricity industry decreased by 3.3 percent, even while use increased by 2 percent, Goggin related.
Although it's not the intention here to pile on studies, Goggin did point to a couple worth mentioning.
This year's Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study (EWITS) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) considered reductions in both fossil fuel use and carbon dioxide emissions as wind energy is added to the grid. The study contemplated the impacts of integrating 20 percent or 30 percent wind power into the Eastern Interconnect.
The EWITS study compared the current generation portfolio with scenarios that contemplated increasing amounts of wind. It said that carbon dioxide emissions would decrease by more than 25 percent with 20 percent wind energy and 37 percent with 30 percent wind energy. Coal generation would decrease significantly.
The results mirror those in the DOE's 2008 "20% Wind Energy by 2030" report.
So there you have it. This obviously doesn't end the discussion, but it adds more fuel to the fire.
The editorial staff at RenewablesBiz.com is passionate about exchanging ideas and dedicated to promoting ongoing conversation about renewables and sustainable energy issues. We invite you to join and contribute to our online community. If you have an idea for an article or editorial contribution, please contact me via email, bopalka@energycentral.com, or phone, 860.633.0090.
Comments
CO2 is not warming anything
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis
(Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press, 2001), Figure 3.1, p. 188.
There is a Difference Between Wind Power and Wind Energy
Wind power and wind energy are not equivalent. To have 20 to 30% wind power in a portfolio, the nameplate capacity of the total wind power installed would be one-fourth to one-third of the nameplate capacity of the remaining power sources. Wind energy is a different matter because capacity factor comes into play. From information I have read on the subject, it appears that the capacity factor of wind turbines averages 20% to 30% depending on location. For wind energy to be 20% to 30% of produced electrical energy then requires that the installed wind nameplate capacity be at least as large as the nameplate capacity of the remaining power sources and that there be one heck of an energy storage capacity as well.
Another issue ignored with wind power is that of resource usage. While it is true that fossil-fueled power plants burn up coal or hydrocarbon fuels, it is also true that wind turbines require about 82.3 tonnes/nameplate MW of construction materials, not including foundations, while a high efficiency gas turbine requires only about 3.6 tonnes. If the capacity factor is included, a wind turbine requires about 0.01 tonnes per MWH/year (not including the vast mass of materials required for energy storage nor the foundations) versus 0.00037 tonnes per MWH/year. Producing that material requires ore or scrap metal, energy input to refine and fashion the material, some wastage, plus energy input to haul the material to site and erect it along with energy input and material usage to build the heavy foundations required to prevent toppling.