by kublikhan » Thu 12 Nov 2020, 15:17:16
Speaking of facts, there was alot of BS in this thread recently. Lets return to facts shall we?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mustang19', 'I') dont know if this has been said but wind and solar dont actually... work. Say steel costs 1mwh per ton, and glass costs 100x more. A 40 ton 1gwh per year turbine costs 5gwh.
In less than a year a wind turbine will pay back it's entire lifetime energy costs:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he entire lifecycle consumption of energy for a 2 MW wind turbine is equivalent to 3,625 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity: an amount of electricity sufficient to power 300 average American homes. Their analysis further noted that a standard 2 MW wind turbine would generate 5,650 MWh of electricity annually and consequently would have an energy payback of 7.7 months.
However their calculations assumed a relatively low wind speed – specifically an average turbine capacity factor of 29%. While this is more usual in the lower wind speed European environment; average U.S. capacity factors are higher. For turbines installed in the U.S. in 2014-2015, the average capacity factor achieved in 2016 was 42.5%. If one uses this higher number, a 2 MW machine would generate 7,450 MWh of electricity annually. In other words it would achieve energy payback in less than 6 months.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mustang19', 'T')he high eroi estimates for wind assume blades are long lived, but we know from landfills they arent.