Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The best year for wind power peaked in 2012. What the article goes onto say is that the low hanging fruit of placing wind power near their consumers has been the first to be built out, while the larger transmission lines to run to distant locations adds dramatically to the cost of wind power.
In the end it’s almost never technology that’s the problem, but the market itself.
Take a good look at that chart. It looks reasonably obvious where it is going...and it sure did not drop dead January 1, 2013 as your article projected.
Take a good look at that chart. It looks reasonably obvious where it is going...and it sure did not drop dead January 1, 2013 as your article projected.
The article didn’t necessarily claim 2012 would be the end, that was just the end of the tax credit, (which since then has been extended several times) and the beginning of wind energy cost rising and becoming less competitive. Total wind power plants may continue to be created and subsidized via state incentives long after federal incentives expire, which doesn’t necessarily mean it became more competitive and sustainable.
An interesting note they make on the efficiency of wind power, is that it takes 200,000 acres of wind turbines to create the power of a nuclear power plant sitting on 1000 acres. Adding a 200,000 acre forest of concrete towers that kill birds and blight the landscape seems like a terrible “green” energy source.
It still comes back to a storage problem. Currently wind power’s storage system is simply a gas turbine plant somewhere running on standby. As we all know, a gas turbine plant not running at full capacity is not as cost effective as one that is. Natural gas already burns much cleaner than coal and more efficiently, so adding wind power as a supplement isn’t as much of a benefit as it would replacing a coal plant, especially when the use wind power drives up the cost of the gas turbine plant through reduced capacity.
It might work on some high density freeways, some private company could make enough in electric charges to make it feasible. But electric vehicles will still need batteries.
I have an astounding newsflash for you... when a new solar farm is built, they don't go building a coal plant along with it. Whatever the existing energy infrastructure was continues on just the same. THAT is what is meeting the energy demands you are talking about.
I have a news flash for you, that existing infrastructure has a lifespan and will have to be replaced. Furthermore the cost per kWh is dictated is by how often it is running. Supplementing it with solar and wind drives up it's cost.
If it were so great, then why do we still have Diesel locomotives?
Most cities of a certain size have an electrified small rail network, and have for 100 years or more...Yet, if it were all that and a bag of chips, why isn't the entirety of the US or international Rail networks running on electricity?
About a century ago, in the heyday of railroads, some lines were electrified. But that requires a heavy volume of traffic to be economic. In Russia they have done it to increase capacity.
For highways you would need a high penetration of EVs, and most of them buying power from the highway. If I had the option, I suppose I would choose it rather than run down the battery, as long as the highway power cost was reasonable.
About a century ago, in the heyday of railroads, some lines were electrified. But that requires a heavy volume of traffic to be economic. In Russia they have done it to increase capacity.
For highways you would need a high penetration of EVs, and most of them buying power from the highway. If I had the option, I suppose I would choose it rather than run down the battery, as long as the highway power cost was reasonable.
I think it’s a viable option to lugging around a giant battery. Just use a battery to get you to and from the highway and rely on the highway to power the car over long distances. However a much more simplified solution to the range anxiety and large battery issue is to just have an onboard generator like the Chevy Volt has. I never understood why everybody insist on the “all electric” approach to EV’s when the grid itself is largely powered by fossil fuels anyway.
I think it’s a viable option to lugging around a giant battery.
I'm all for innovation but I simply do not see this working well especially in northern climates. You have the freeze/thaw cycle so the road and whatever they are using to conduct the electricity will need to move together. New points for potential water penetration into the road surface and then there is the salt and the plow itself running over it.... Here in PA they have enough troubles keeping the roads in good shape let alone adding something like this.
Quote:
I never understood why everybody insist on the “all electric” approach to EV’s when the grid itself is largely powered by fossil fuels anyway.
They have a place in the mix and their usage will expand quite a bit in urban areas where they are most suitable. There is other things to consider here. In an urban area a single charge overnight should suffice for most people. If people are charging them at night when we have surplus capacity you may not need increased capacity and that could actually drive the cost of electric down.
I think it’s a viable option to lugging around a giant battery. Just use a battery to get you to and from the highway and rely on the highway to power the car over long distances. However a much more simplified solution to the range anxiety and large battery issue is to just have an onboard generator like the Chevy Volt has. I never understood why everybody insist on the “all electric” approach to EV’s when the grid itself is largely powered by fossil fuels anyway.
If they could take the Volt’s technology, and put it in a small SUV, and make the generator usable for other things, it would sell. Maybe put some outlets in the back so people could power tools, camping equipment, etc.
I'm all for innovation but I simply do not see this working well especially in northern climates. You have the freeze/thaw cycle so the road and whatever they are using to conduct the electricity will need to move together. New points for potential water penetration into the road surface and then there is the salt and the plow itself running over it.... Here in PA they have enough troubles keeping the roads in good shape let alone adding something like this.
They have a place in the mix and their usage will expand quite a bit in urban areas where they are most suitable. There is other things to consider here. In an urban area a single charge overnight should suffice for most people. If people are charging them at night when we have surplus capacity you may not need increased capacity and that could actually drive the cost of electric down.
For an urban area a 300 mile range battery is not needed. The majority of battery usage, cost, manufacturing, resource consumption, and disposal cost are tied up in curing range anxiety. The majority of people only need less than a 100 mile range. An onboard generator is the perfect solution to the EV’s downsides.
If they could take the Volt’s technology, and put it in a small SUV, and make the generator usable for other things, it would sell. Maybe put some outlets in the back so people could power tools, camping equipment, etc.
I think that’s true theoretically. The problem with the Volt’s technology is that non EV fans think it’s an EV and EV fans don’t think it’s “green enough”. There no reason a Bolt should ever be outselling a Volt as a Volt has all of the EV’s advantages and none of its drawbacks.
The pure EV crowd needs to get over the fact the Volt’s engine might kick in for 10 minutes or so to get them home and stop demanding replacing the entire world’s energy infrastructure with batteries and supercharging stations. That’s just impractical.
But I agree, the concept you’re talking about could be better marketed toward the non EV market. They could sell it as improving towing capabilities, low end torque for off-road use, a backup generator for the home, camping, etc, and not worry so much about selling the reduced CO2 aspect. The average buyer doesn’t care about that anyway and attempts to paint it as a green-mobile will just turn off most customers. The government should heavily tax any large battery over a certain capacity to discourage it’s use as a crutch for range anxiety. Sort of like a gas guzzler tax, but call it “excessive battery” tax.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
