Wind turbines are extraordinarily unreliable because wind speeds are so inconsistent; the average output of a turbine is only about a quarter of its capacity (known as the ‘load factor’). Also, due to the vagaries of the wind, wind turbines are unpredictable. This means that, in order to guarantee a continuous supply of electricity, alternative sources of power have to be kept permanently on standby or ‘spinning reserve’, ready to step in at a moment’s notice to make up for the lack of supply from the wind farms.
Even when the wind is blowing, these backup power stations, usually coal-fired, have to be kept running, using fuel, generating steam, emitting carbon dioxide, ready to ramp up their turbines the moment the supply from the wind machines stopped coming. As Christopher Booker and Richard North report, “This remained one of the best kept secrets of the wind power lobby, because what it meant was that the wind turbines were not saving anything like the amount of carbon dioxide they liked to claim.” (1)
A recent report by think-tank Civitas adds to this statement, concluding that besides being expensive, wind power is ineffective at cutting CO2 emissions. “Wind power actually produces more CO2 than gas and increases domestic fuel bills because of the need for the ‘back-up’ power stations.” Civitas’ overall assessment shows that the most cost effective technologies were nuclear power stations and modern high-efficiency gas-fired turbines. (2)
In reality, the contribution made by wind power in terms of both the electricity it generates and its ‘carbon savings’ are misleading. Denmark’s embrace of wind power has repeatedly been lauded as a model for other countries. But according to data from the International Energy Agency, Denmark’s overall carbon emissions have remained relatively unchanged over the past two decades. In 1990, Denmark emitted a total of 50.7 million tons of carbon dioxide. In 2007, the country’s emissions totaled 50.6 million tons, a reduction of just 0.1 percent. (3)
In 2004, although turbines nominally represented 20 percent of Denmark’s electricity production, the wind blew so inconsistently that it in fact provided only 6 percent of the power the country consumed. (1)
Denmark and Germany have not decommissioned any fossil fuel plants. The fossil generators are kept in ‘spinning reserve’, burning fossil fuels to keep lights on in the schools, factories, and hospitals when the wind dies. (4)
Over the past decade, California’s 1,500 MW of windmills have averaged 25 percent of their ‘nameplate’ capacity. During peak summer demand it was only 9 percent. Germany has found its windmills producing only 6 percent of its installed capacity. (5)
In January 2010, Britain’s wind turbines supplied virtually no power on most days. (4) On December 21, 2010, wind’s contribution to total electricity was, according to the BBC, 0.04%. (2) Wind-farms effectively took a day off because it was bitterly cold.
By contrast, late in 2011, the gales battering Britain were so strong that many turbines had to be shut down for safety reasons and the National Grid forced to increase output from gas and coal fired power stations to make up the shortfall. On other occasions, often during periods when the wind was still strong but slightly less gusty, operators were asked to turn off their turbines, because they were flooding the network with more electricity than was needed. Wind farm operators were paid more than 1 million pounds since Christmas Eve to turn off their turbines. The so-called ‘constant payments’, ultimately passed on to household bills, are paid to suppliers a times when the network is unable to absorb excess power being generated. (6)
Is it any wonder why more than 100 British politicians are mounting a rebellion over the government’s plan to introduce more wind farms? (7)
Reality is not what has typically been presented. As the Civitas report concludes, wind power is a major folly. (2)
References
Christopher Booker and Richard North, Scared to Death, (New York, Continum US, 2007), 369
Ruth Lea, “Electricity costs: The folly of wind power,” Civitas, January 2012
Jack Dini is author of Challenging Environmental Mythology. He has also written for American Council on Science and Health, Environment & Climate News, and Hawaii Reporter.
