U.S. Wind Surpassed Both Coal And Nuclear Power For The First Time Ever

[rebewranger]

U.S. Wind Surpassed Both Coal And Nuclear Power For The First Time Ever
By Charles Kennedy - Apr 14, 2022, 4:30 PM CDT

Power generation from wind turbines was the second-largest source of electricity in the United States on March 29, behind only natural gas and surpassing both coal and nuclear power generation for the first time on record, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said on Thursday. 

On March 29, wind turbines in the Lower 48 states produced 2,017 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity, EIA’s Hourly Electric Grid Monitor showed. Daily wind-powered electricity had surpassed coal-fired and nuclear electricity generation separately on other days earlier this year but had not surpassed both sources on a single day, the administration noted.

The U.S. wind power capacity installation has soared in recent years to the point where wind capacity exceeded nuclear capacity in September 2019.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/US-Wind-Surpassed-Both-Coal-And-Nuclear-Power-For-The-First-Time-Ever.html

[rebewranger]

At first I thought the article was about all the wind coming from politicians which could easily supply energy for the whole country.

[Kamaji]

Telling half-truths is much more effective than simply lying outright.

[Free Vulcan]

Currently, wind power ranks as the third-largest source of generating capacity in the United States, behind natural gas-fired generators and coal-fired generators, the EIA said.

That's capacity, not production.

The average capacity factor of U.S. wind generators was 35 percent in 2021, much lower than the average capacity factor of nuclear generators, 93 percent in 2021. Nuclear generators are designed to run at or near full output, which they typically do.

Puts the exclamation point on why wind is such a boondoggle.

[Kamaji]

That's capacity, not production.

Puts the exclamation point on why wind is such a boondoggle.

[Smokin Joe]

That's capacity, not production.

Puts the exclamation point on why wind is such a boondoggle.

The third largest capacity, operating at 35%, is a lot less than what they are touting. I wonder where that leaves wind compared to all the rest (actual output, not wish in one hand stuff).

[Free Vulcan]

The third largest capacity, operating at 35%, is a lot less than what they are touting. I wonder where that leaves wind compared to all the rest (actual output, not wish in one hand stuff).

I wish they had included more numbers in the article, but it seems wind only outdoes coal or nuclear a few times a year. Not to mention wind has the junkiest curve of all electricity sources and is a highly unreliable input to the grid, even at the '35% average'.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

This seems all fine and dandy to have wind energy power the grid until we consider reliability, which should unquestionably be a central component of our power grid.

Here's a cold hard fact from last year's Texas storm when millions lost power

[Free Vulcan]

This seems all fine and dandy to have wind energy power the grid until we consider reliability, which should unquestionably be a central component of our power grid.

If you at all want a modern industrial base, you need a highly reliable grid. Even brownouts or outages for just a couple of seconds can wreak havoc on a manufacturing facility.

[Fishrrman]

Vulcan observes:
"If you at all want a modern industrial base, you need a highly reliable grid."

But that's the problem.
The green elite DOESN'T WANT "a reliable grid".
And they certainly don't want "an industrial base" to go along with it...

[Smokin Joe]

As Shakespeare noted, "Thereby hangs a tale"

(Othello)

[Kamaji]

This seems all fine and dandy to have wind energy power the grid until we consider reliability, which should unquestionably be a central component of our power grid.

Here's a cold hard fact from last year's Texas storm when millions lost power

Give me some nuclear!