Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 196 posts

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#51

Post by pedroma »

garbageman wrote: post #33
pedroma wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My answer applies to both cases actually. For example, if one wanted to maximize profits, energy wise, there are better options than wind turbines and batteries. The choice to go with wind seems politically motivated due to optics of the alternatives.

Maybe 20 years ago. On-shore wind and solar are currently the cheapest practical way to make electricity based on LCOE. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/electricity_generation/pdf/...

I'm not familiar with this metric but does it at least account for the cost that non-wind sources must incur to keep their facilities running? For example, if you have a wind farm you will prioritize using that energy when available, but the natural gas facility still needs to employ people for low wind situations right?

So the natural gas facility is not generating very much most of the year, but still needs quite a bit of people with the expertise to keep it operational despite that in addition to land lease costs, equipment maintenance etc. Does LCOE turn the cost of the natural gas facility cost into $0 during those situations to be fair?

-

Edit: Just glanced at the Wikipedia article and the variables involved in the LCOE equation. Seems to unfairly benefit wind and solar.

"One of the most important potential limitations of LCOE is that it may not control for time effects associated with matching electricity production to demand."

"In particular, if the costs of matching grid energy storage are not included in projects for variable renewable energy sources such as solar and wind, they may produce electricity when it is not needed in the grid without storage. The value of this electricity may be lower than if it was produced at another time, or even negative."

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#52

Post by verall »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #39
Alupis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scotland is microscopic in relation to the landmass and population that is the US. Yet... look at the sheer volume of wind turbines Scotland has to operate to get anywhere between 10% - 80% of their power generation, depending on the day and wind conditions. You cannot build a reliable grid based on wind. It requires other non-temperamental energy sources to be available when the wind isn't blowing. Solar? What if it…

Yet... look at the sheer volume of wind turbines Scotland has to operate What 'sheer volume'? You didn't give any numbers or sources. Here is some actual information: https://www.gov.scot/publications/renewables-and-wind-power-... " In 2022, almost 28 TWh of zero carbon electricity was generated by renewable wind in Scotland, representing 35% of all wind generation in the UK. This could power the equivalent of approx…

> What does this mean?

The powers that be are hiding our most renewable resource - ourselves. We just someone to make a tiktok dance out of jumping into the bioreactor and then we won't need any evil wind turbines or PVs anymore.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#53

Post by xenonite »

ggm wrote: post #49

A conversation about second order effects against first order deliverables. This is proof of the obvious because very few people seriously believed their emission cost inputs exceeded their energy production, it's been necessary to prove it because of politics, not serious scientific questions to their aggregate burden. During early years on lower efficiency sure, it's possible wind and solar had higher input costs a…

Massive amounts of carbon fiber used in wind blades is coming from … oil. So same problem here. And it becomes unusable toxic waste.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#54

Post by phero_cnstrcts »

xenonite wrote: post #53
ggm wrote: post #49

A conversation about second order effects against first order deliverables. This is proof of the obvious because very few people seriously believed their emission cost inputs exceeded their energy production, it's been necessary to prove it because of politics, not serious scientific questions to their aggregate burden. During early years on lower efficiency sure, it's possible wind and solar had higher input costs a…

Massive amounts of carbon fiber used in wind blades is coming from … oil. So same problem here. And it becomes unusable toxic waste.

These studies are funded by the companies anyway. Can’t ever trust them.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#55

Post by XorNot »

xenonite wrote: post #53
ggm wrote: post #49

A conversation about second order effects against first order deliverables. This is proof of the obvious because very few people seriously believed their emission cost inputs exceeded their energy production, it's been necessary to prove it because of politics, not serious scientific questions to their aggregate burden. During early years on lower efficiency sure, it's possible wind and solar had higher input costs a…

Massive amounts of carbon fiber used in wind blades is coming from … oil. So same problem here. And it becomes unusable toxic waste.

We don't burn the wind turbine blades when we use them, nor when they break.

The scale of issue in dealing with a bunch of solid waste you can just bury compared to climate change is insignificant.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#56

Post by pounderstanding »

Alupis wrote: post #17
thebruce87m wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wind farms appear as ridiculous as they are. What do you mean by this? My country is mostly powered by wind. Edit: https://electricityproduction.uk/in/scotland/

Scotland is microscopic in relation to the landmass and population that is the US. Yet... look at the sheer volume of wind turbines Scotland has to operate to get anywhere between 10% - 80% of their power generation, depending on the day and wind conditions. You cannot build a reliable grid based on wind. It requires other non-temperamental energy sources to be available when the wind isn't blowing. Solar? What if it…

Uranium deposits are relatively small. It will last 200 years or so.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#57

Post by XorNot »

mattmaroon wrote: post #48
MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to be considering the impact of any big changes we make in regards to our energy. But the thing is, we already know the answers to most of these "but what about" questions and they've been answered time and time again, yet they keep being brought up and used in an effort to slow progress. Which is worse, the __________ caused by technology Z or the airborne carbon dioxide they prevent? THE CARBON DIOXIDE IS W…

This is actually why I tell people recycling is mostly bad. The impact of some plastic in the landfill is less than the extra carbon emissions.

I straight up do not care a about plastic use at all anymore.

Specifically: provided the plastic is going to well-managed landfill, and not being washed into the oceans or waterways, then really, what is the problem? Once in landfill it's CO2 which won't end up in the atmosphere, or water, or really doing much of anything while it just sits there.

And every bit of it is oil production which won't be burned.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#59

Post by xcskier56 »

XorNot wrote: post #55
xenonite wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Massive amounts of carbon fiber used in wind blades is coming from … oil. So same problem here. And it becomes unusable toxic waste.

We don't burn the wind turbine blades when we use them, nor when they break. The scale of issue in dealing with a bunch of solid waste you can just bury compared to climate change is insignificant.

Well... technically... some people are starting to https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/articles/carbon-rivers-make... but this also produces energy and compared to the amount of electricity they produce during their lifetime this carebon can only be incredibly negligible

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#60

Post by Tagbert »

xenonite wrote: post #53
ggm wrote: post #49

A conversation about second order effects against first order deliverables. This is proof of the obvious because very few people seriously believed their emission cost inputs exceeded their energy production, it's been necessary to prove it because of politics, not serious scientific questions to their aggregate burden. During early years on lower efficiency sure, it's possible wind and solar had higher input costs a…

Massive amounts of carbon fiber used in wind blades is coming from … oil. So same problem here. And it becomes unusable toxic waste.

Massive on a personal scale but miniscule compared to the scale of oil production and combustion.

So many people are worried about small scale downsides to technologies that are trying to address truly massive problems.

Post reply on HN