Arthur,

I didn't write the paragraph above my name at the bottom, you did. About
swiftboater Pickens, he expected the public to finance the grid required for his
windmills.

The story says "He'd hoped to build his own transmission lines but he said there
were technical problems."

No, I think the problems were financial or legal. Anyway, even if he looses
money, the wind turbines will be put to good use somewhere.

Bob


-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "ardoucette" <adoucette@...>
>
> Update on this discussion:
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090707/ap_on_bi_ge/us_pickens_wind_energy
>
> Plans for the world's largest wind farm in the Texas Panhandle have been
> scrapped, energy baron T. Boone Pickens said Tuesday, and he's looking for a
> home for 687 giant wind turbines.
>
> Arthur
>
>
> --- In climatechangedebate@yahoogroups.com, "ardoucette" <adoucette@...>
wrote:
> >
> > Bob, my comments preceeded by ==>
> >
> > --- In climatechangedebate@yahoogroups.com, bobmagi@ wrote:
> > >
> > > To Arthur,
> > >
> > > > ////Although not in Pickens plan, my plan for efficiency would
> > > reduce the consumption of electricity.
> > >
> > > ==> Yeah? What's your plan to reduce electricity growth in the face
> > > of a rapidly growing US population?
> > >
> > > Arthur, as a refrigeration technician, I have seen lots of energy
> > waste of the cheapest first cost equipment. While energy was cheap,
> > it was cheaper to waste energy than spend money on more expensive
> > efficienct equipment. Refrigerators blow hot air into air
> > conditioned spaces instead of outside. Fan motors in walkins heat
> > the refrigerated space and should be the new 90% efficient motors.
> > California has shown some leadership in lowering increases, has
> > reduced per capita electrical consumption but not total consumption
> > yet:
> > >
> > > http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007_energypolicy/
> > >
> > http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/old_electricity/consumption_by_sector.html
> > >
> > ==> Well Bob, you must have looked at those numbers quickly.
> > California (and the US) population is growing LESS on a percentage
> > basis then its electrical use.
> >
> > See http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
> >
> > Which shows that California's pop is growing (00 - 06) at a rate of
> > 1.3% but looking at electrical growth for the last 10 years
> > (residential) shows a 1.7% annual average growth rate and an overall
> > electrical growth rate of 1.4%
> >
> >
> > > But we need to spend about 10% of our energy expense on energy
> > efficiency instead of maybe the present 2%.
> > >
> > > Arthur wrote "But NG has been available (and once
> > > cheap) for decades and yet there are less than 1 million vehicles
> > in
> > > the US powered by NG.
> > > So if NG was going to catch on it WOULD HAVE."
> > >
> > > Bob writes: There was no reason to switch to NG when oil was so
> > cheap. Now even with NG being 5 times as expensive than before, it
> > is about one third the cost of pretax gasoline or diesel.
> >
> > ==> Not really (see calcs below), but the key is that is the price
> > TODAY when we don't use NG for transportation. You get 10% of our
> > transportation energy from NG and if you don't displace NG for
> > electrical production then the increase in demand will also push the
> > price of NG up. There is NOTHING in Picken's plan which LINKS the
> > increase in NG for transportation to the decrease in NG for
> > electrical generation except for wishful thinking. Of course if I was
> > BIG in the NG business I'd be pushing that plan as well.
> >
> > As to the reason we haven't converted, a little looking shows the
> > higher costs and size of the NG fuel tank are both major factors. A
> > decade ago Honda, Ford, GM and Crysler all made NGVs. Today the ONLY
> > NGV you can buy is from Honda and you can only buy the Honda Civic GX
> > if you live in CA or NY. But, the suggested retail for the Civic GX
> > is $24,590 plus $635 for freight. A comparably equipped Civic LX
> > lists for $17,760.
> > http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-gx/faq.aspx
> > That's a HUGE price difference that will take a LOT of driving to get
> > ahead of, particlarly since they say in their FAQ's about the range:
> > Q: How far can the GX go on a full tank of natural gas?
> > A: The GX can go approximately 170 miles before it runs out of fuel,
> > according to the EPA.
> >
> > Or the trunk space, given the HUGE NG tank, you are left with SIX
> > CUBIC FEET of space.
> >
> > But back to the cost/savings. At a $7,000 premium for the GX you
> > could drive your LX 16,000 miles per year for 5 years (44 miles per
> > day) paying $4.00 gallon and you still would be ~$1,000 ahead of the
> > GX driver paying $1.30 per gallon equiv of NG (~$2,000 ahead if you
> > include the NPV cost of the higher initial capital outlay).
> >
> > Sheesh.
> > .
> > >
> > > A: "Too bad the
> > > plains are a very low population density area of the US."
> > >
> > > B: Pickens calls for $200 billion worth of grid to distribute it.
> >
> > ==> Well, that's a major pricing issue then since currently the cost
> > of electricity is so low that without the PTC the building of Wind
> > Farms drops precipitously, and that's for projects with relatively
> > low interconnect costs.
> >
> > See http://images.vertmarkets.com/CRLive/files/images/8c73892d-91f0-
> > 4155-96af-ec01f9cb9336/wind.jpg
> >
> > Again, Wind has to compete with Nuclear and Coal and both have low
> > per KwH costs and neither are affected by the price of oil and
> > neither require the higher distribution costs and each produce with
> > well over three times the Capacity factor of Wind.
> > >
> > > A: "==> Oh please. We are not in a world war with hundreds of
> > thousands
> > > of our men fighting and dying in a global battle for our survival
> > and
> > > without that kind of motivation people & thus Congress will NOT
> > make
> > > those kind of sacrifices."
> > >
> > > B: We are in a war for our survival, not the hyped up Zionist 'war
> > on terror,' but our economic survival with our trade deficit caused
> > in part by our imported oil habit.
> >
> > ==> Well good luck with that arguement. I think people know that
> > there is a substantial difference between WW2 and higher Gas prices.
> > >
> > > A: Here's what is happening to the price of NG.
> > >
> > > http://www.oilnergy.com/hpix/4usanatg.gif
> > >
> > > B: One MCF of 1000 btu/ft3 gas would be about 8 gallons of
> > gasoline, wouldn't it? So we have wellhead NG at about $0.90 per
> > gallon equivalent or something like $50/barrel oil equivalent.
> > > http://www.cgcu.com/pdf/EnergyConversion.pdf
> >
> > ==> Not quite.
> >
> > See: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/ngw/ngupdate.asp
> >
> > This results in a well head price equal to $83 a barrel, but you
> > can't play this game, like I said you drive up demand for NG you
> > drive up the price. You think Picken's plan makes sense then show me
> > how you are going to get the Electical producers to mothball their
> > very efficient Combined Cycle Gas generators and what they will
> > replace them with?
> >
> > Note: Power companies love Combined Cycle Gas Generators because of
> > their low construction costs of ~ $600 per kW, low fixed costs per
> > year of ~ $6 per kW and the fact that they can go from a cold start
> > to full power in 3 hours or run efficiently at as low as 40% of
> > capacity and then ramp up at a rate of 7% per minute to meet demands.
> > All this and then routinely post availablity rates in the mid 90s.
> > Its NOT just about the cost of fuel. Providing a STABLE, RELIABLE
> > power supply is KEY to the successful operation of a power grid and
> > Gas currently plays a HUGE role in this. Something that Wind Turbines
> > are not likely to change.
> >
> > > A: "In fact, the industry right now considers that only 1/3 of the
> > ACTUAL
> > > generation of a wind turbine can be used in Base load planning. Of
> > > course Wind plants only generate at 25% of RATED capacity, so the
> > > NET to a grid of increased base capacity is a paltry 8% of a
> > > turbine's
> > > rated capacity."
> > >
> > > B: You are using the worst condition, not considering what a
> > multistate grid interconnection can do, and of course, we can have
> > smart load control instead of dumb brute force generation.
> >
> > ==> No, I'm not. Grid planners don't have the luxury of planning for
> > AVERAGE conditions. And while its true, the larger the grid, the
> > lower the fluctations, the electical producers still have to produce
> > PEAK power in the middle of the summer and that is when wind is
> > typically at its lowest (April is typically our highest month for
> > average wind speed). It hardly helps to show graphs of AVERAGE ANNUAL
> > wind conditions to make your case.
> >
> > See here for the DRASTIC difference between Spring (low electrical
> > demand, high avg wind) and Summer (High electrical demand, low avg
> > wind)
> >
> > http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-14m.html
> >
> > http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-13m.html
> >
> > I'm not against wind, but its unlikely to have much impact on our
> > near term energy future even if we increased our rate of new
> > installations significantly. Even with substantially more wind power
> > being installed each year its still not likely to have an impact on
> > Oil use since there still remains only a very tiny linkage between
> > electricity rates/use and oil rates/use. The most likely result would
> > be a slight slow down in the number/size of new coal plants. Let's
> > put it this way, talk about how wind will make a substantial impact
> > is hardly justified until the amount of new wind power installed each
> > year can simply keep up with our growing annual demand for
> > electricity.
> > >
> > > Bob Maginnis
> > >
> >
>
>
>