Jones Beene wrote:
And only recently has reliable actual results from the larger wind
farms been available without some glossing over the problems of
mechanical failure - which has been severe up to 2000.
No one is "glossing over" mechanical failures in wind turbines. EPRI,
the DoE and the insurance industry have written thousands of pages of
analysis of equipment failure and maintenance costs. These costs have
been taken into account. These institutions have also carefully
studied worker accidents and fatalities, which are mainly from
falling and electrocution.
"Analysis of Load Factors at Nuclear Power Plants" by Michael T.
Maloney is one of several articles which has looked at this -
followed by an "truth" site about wind costing:
http://www.truthaboutenergy.com/Wind.htm
This web site is full of nonsense, such as:
"The cost of energy generated by the machines is inversely to the
capacity factor. Thus the advertised cost of wind energy will be
about twice the advertised price."
As I said, the advertised cost of wind energy is based on actual
performance, not projected performance. Obviously, the actual cost
takes into account the ratio of actual to nameplate performance.
Note that computer controls have improved the output from wind
turbines even more than from nuclear plants. (By a larger percent.)
- Jed
