Global wind capacity additions surged to a record high of 118GW in 2023

They shouldn’t be changing titles period - that’s one of the many reasons why they are rated so poorly

 

1. The post references the NYT article but was written by the cited author, and carries his title. That's not only common, it's a requirement of copyright law. Your objection is both silly and uninformed.

 

New Zealand is backtracking to keep the lights on.
New Zealand to revoke oil drilling ban amid fears of blackouts
By Paul Homewood
The country’s coalition government is preparing to invite energy companies to resume exploration in the three major offshore fields that supply most of its gas. . . .

 

YAWN. More Cherrypicking. New Zealand is committed to renewables, and they help to keep the electric costs low.

https://www.ea.govt.nz/news/eye-on-...ctricity-future-generation-and-future-prices/

Despite the building of more renewable generation plants, future prices1 for winter 2024, 2025 and 2026 remain high (see figure 1). However, more renewable generation should act to depress spot prices in the long run, as it is generally cheaper to produce.

 

And yet drilling resumes.

 

Brilliant As if there’s some deep meaning behind that

 

Indeed.
"The country’s coalition government is preparing to invite energy companies to resume exploration in the three major offshore fields that supply most of its gas.

It comes after National Grid operator Transpower was last month forced to warn families to limit their electricity usage to avoid a shutdown during a cold snap.

The decision to reverse the ban, made by resources minister Shane Jones, will be a setback for green activists . . . "

 

So little New Zealand is going to affect that 118 GWatts of wind power that was installed in 2023? And despite the fact that little New Zealand has declared that they are pursuing more wind, their “gas exploration” will somehow reduce global wind numbers in 2024? Or perhaps you just post everything even remotely negative about renewables, regardless of the tiny impact?

 

The word of the day is "harbinger."

 

Deleted.

 

If it weren't for wood chips imported from the US, Germany wouldn't have much electricity at all.
Catching Up To Germany, The "Climate Leader"
June 15, 2024/ Francis Menton

• 
  Here in New York, our leaders fancy us to be the “climate leader.” After all, our legislature has enacted the “Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act” of 2019, setting out the most aggressive mandatory emissions-reduction targets of all the U.S. states. Allegedly, 70% of our electricity will come from “renewables” by 2030. Nobody can top us!
  
  
• But can we really catch up to Germany?
  
  
• Germany was in the “climate leadership” game before almost anybody else had even heard of it. It was all the way back in 1990 that Germany adopted its first emissions-reduction target — 25 to 30 percent fewer CO₂ emissions by 2005, compared to 1987 levels. In 2000, while New York was still in its climate diapers, Germany passed its Renewable Energy Act, granting large subsidies for the development of wind farms. In 2010 Germany adopted its “Energiewende” legislation with mandatory emissions-reductions targets of 80-95% by 2050. All along, the country has been on a crash program to build wind turbines and solar panels for well over 30 years.
  
  
• So sorry, New York. Germany is the true “climate leader.”
  
  
• Perhaps we should check in on how it is going over there.
  

READ MORE

 

Germany is definitely a leader, and may be the world leader on a per capita basis. China has the most installed capacity.

https://www.statista.com/statistics...place, had a capacity of around 388 gigawatts.


Leading countries in installed renewable energy capacity worldwide in 2023 (in gigawatts)
“
The leading countries for installed renewable energy in 2023 were China, the U.S., Brazil. China was the leader in renewable energy installations, with a capacity of around 1,453 gigawatts. The U.S., in second place, had a capacity of around 388 gigawatts. Renewable “

 

". . . Somehow, great “climate leader” Germany has the very highest consumer electricity prices in all the EU. . . ."

 

Somehow? Historical Reliance on Russian fossil fuels is the biggest factor, and increased cost of alternative fossil fuel sources.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/new...ces-electricity-and-gas-will-remain-high-2024

“The price level is higher than before Russia’s war of aggression [on Ukraine]. And this will not change any time soon,” Müller said. As long as Germany continued to use a significant share of fossil fuels in its energy mix, this was unlikely to change, he argued. “I don’t think we will see the [high] prices from 2022 again, but I also don’t think that we will return to the pre-crisis level.””
…
“While producing electricity with wind and solar power is relatively cheap, precautionary measures for times of little renewable power output meant that costs increase overall, Birnbaum said. However, the E.ON CEO argued that this did not mean at all that returning to nuclear power is an option for the country. “By now, this has become impossible from a technical point of view,” Birnbaum said. “The story of nuclear power in Germany is over.””

 

Germany is paying twice: once for intermittent renewables and once for fossil fuel baseload back-up.

 

"Stupid is as stupid does."
Floating Wind Madness in Maine
David Wojick
The people of Maine are unlikely to accept these onerous conditions, nor should they. This whole nutty project needs to be reconsidered.

The Government of Maine has really big plans for floating wind, a floating net zero fantasy, in fact. Since floating wind power is the next big green thing, it is worth taking a close look at this ruinous vision.

Floating wind is a fad, not an established technology. It has yet to be built at utility scale or tested in a hurricane. The world’s biggest grid-connected system is a tiny 50 MW and just came online off Scotland.

The cost of floating wind is necessarily much greater than fixed wind. A fixed wind tower sits on a simple monopile, while a floating tower sits on a huge complex structure called a floater. We are talking about massive 500-foot towers with 500-ton turbines on top and 300-foot blades catching the wind.

The floater has to be large enough to keep this monster tower from blowing over. Then, it has to be even bigger to contain enough air to be buoyant. It also has to be anchored to the ocean floor in ways that require a lot of different mooring lines.

The small existing floating generator systems cost around three times what fixed wind costs per MW, but the big and hurricane-proof generators might cost even more. Over a hundred designs have been proposed, which shows just how immature Floating wind technology is.

Which brings us to Maine’s floating green dream, a costly nightmare for its people. When it comes to electricity use, Maine is a small state with average generation of just around 1,500 MW. But in an act of madness, they passed a law saying they will buy 3,000 MW of floating wind. Fixed wind is not an option because the Gulf of Maine is too deep.

How do they justify buying so much floating wind? Simple, it is a net zero fantasy. They have a 115-page “Maine Offshore Wind Roadmap” that explains it. . . .

 

Baseload backup is NOT “paying twice”. Turbines simply run at reduced outputs when wind generation is high. The baseload backup is burning substantially less fuel.

 

The systems must still be maintained and used to remain viable. For someone who constantly calls for respect for expertise, you seem curiously immune to the views of business economists and electrical power engineers.

 

Those systems were already in place, so there's no added expense. However, they will get a lot of FREE power from the wind!

And you're being short-sited. If they hadn't installed the wind turbines, they would have probably had to build another power plant to satisfy demand., That would require construction expense, full-time manpower and management, maintenance and Utilities. For an economist it seems strange you wouldn't think of this.

 

I'm not an economist. My academic training was as a historian.
Meanwhile:
Important New Report Explores The Futility Of Wind Power
April 01, 2023/ Francis Menton


Important New Report Explores The Futility Of Wind Power … approximately 25% of the total wind power capacity. Ponton’s Figure 1 shows the actual pattern of … Capacity.” Here, Ponton investigates what happens when the amount of wind power generation in the UK … Cost of Increasing UK Wind Power Capacity: A Reality Check.” Ponton’s Report follows and builds on … currently has 28 GW wind power capacity, 14 GW of onshore and 14 GW of offshore, with the potential … (and solar) are actually cheaper today than generation from fossil fuels. But then, wind power is …

 

EXTREME Right biased website. As extreme as it gets. Questionable source. Poor sourcing and false claims.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-manhattan-bias/

 

You're just denying again. The data have no ideology.

 

Nope - sorry but that is their BIAS rating.

 

You're still denying. Data are data.

 

Yep - "data are data". It can be true or bogus. And based on their rating, you have no idea what is truth and what is fiction.