dpb wrote:

max wrote:
...

That's why i call it dishonest. Because the limitations of windmill
technology do not require us to build more fossil fuel plants, and
because it's "relatively" trivial to built energy storage systems to
buffer their output, should we deem it helpful to do so.


The key word here is "relatively"... relative to what? We as yet don't
have a single large-scale energy storage system that I'm aware of.


Google "Ludington pumped storage"

Also, I didn't say wind "requires" more fossil and it can replace a
fraction of peak demand.

My point was (and still is) that one cannot build a 100(say) MWe wind
farm and expect to get 100 MWe from it in the same sense one can build
an equivalent 100 MWe of conventional (fossil or nuclear) generation.
Hence, the idea many promote that simply building wind farms eliminates
the need for conventional generation is imo even more intellectually
dishonest.

--




--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form .