Forums

Windmills and Tesla sign contract

Windmills and Tesla sign contract

Actually Vestas which makes windmills. I love windmills.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-01/vestas-joins-with-tes...

Rocky_H | September 1, 2017

Oh yeah, windmills...I'm a big fan. :)

El Mirio | September 1, 2017

Ooh we have ourselves another Don Quijote :o)

Mike83 | September 1, 2017

It's just blowing the wind. ;-)

reed_lewis | September 1, 2017

I visited this thread to verify that this was not another 'windmills on the car' to create energy out of thin air post...

Rocky_H | September 1, 2017

@reed, Yeah, dodged a bullet this time.

Al1 | September 2, 2017

Energy storage and wind can go together very well. Typical real-world output of a wind turbine is 15-30% of capacity.

The reason for that is, output of turbine depends very much on speed of the wind. Turbines produce at maximum capacity when wind speed is around 30 to 55 mph. But then if the speed decreases by half, power production decreases by a factor of eight.

That's the main reason grid operators prefer to rely on gas and even coal power stations for so called base load. On the other end if there is too much energy in the grid which is not uncommon these days wind turbines are the first to be ordered to shut down, "curtailed", because ... it is more "difficult" to shut down gas or coal plant.

Energy storage can easily fix these issues. You wouldn't need to "curtail" wind turbine but merely store the energy, when grid doesn't take it. And then supply it to the grid when wind is down.

This could be a game changer. Because if turning off gas plant is so "difficult" why are we building them in first place? Like solar and unlike fossil fuels wind is free and as storage gets cheaper it can dramatically improve turbine productivity.

Mike83 | September 2, 2017

Al1 +100

jdonovan | September 2, 2017

The main impediment to building wind/solar farms is the up relatively large front investment required. Yes over the lifetime of these renewable energy plants they pay off well, but they require larger initial investment before return on investment is possible than gas/coal plants where the fuel costs are not paid up front.

Of course this short term return on investment mindset does not include societal costs from fossil fuel emissions.

Ross1 | September 2, 2017

@jdonovan:

gas/coal plants where the fuel costs are not paid up front.

I have a large supply of wind to sell on easy terms. Please email me for a deal.

Al1 | September 2, 2017

There are plenty of scenarios that require relatively large upfront investment.

On the other hand there are lots of organisations that have plenty of cash. Their main problem - where to invest so that they can get steady long term source of income.

Solar and Wind are increasingly popular with institutional investors. Apple gets into energy generation and sales, Berkshire Hathaway Energy invested 6 billion into solar farms in 2016 alone, JPMorgan Chase just recently announced they'll be investing 200 billion into clean energy.

Mike83 | September 3, 2017

Cutting down on distribution, transportation and maintenance and in the process reduction of green house gases seems like a no=brainier. Having put Solar on two homes and after about 5 years not only is the investment paid off in full but we are saving about $4000/year on energy which we sock away for our next Tesla.