Talk:Wind power in the United States
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wind power in the United States article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Not used to doing metric wattage conversions, but in the summary, it states "For the 2012 months the electricity produced from wind power in the United States amounted to 140,089 terawatt-hours, or 3.46% of all generated electrical energy." When I looked at the cited document (#3), table ES1.B has the unit of measure of "Thousand Megawatthours", with 140,089. Am I mistaken that "Thousand megawatt hours" is gigawatthours? Jeremy Vyska (talk) 01:53, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
- You are correct. Someone has already corrected the article, though, to 140.089. --Aflafla1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Offshore section getting dated
It seems that the Offshore section of the article is getting a bit rusty. I'm planning to revise this section sometime in the next several of months. One thing in particular is that the cost of offshore installations is now estimated to be 2 to 3 times that of onshore installations rather than 1.5 x. Suggestions on things to do to improve the section are welcomed. --Aflafla1 (talk) 05:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Wind power in the United States
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Wind power in the United States's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "EWEA 2013":
- From Wind power in Romania: EWEA: "Wind in power: 2012 European statistics", February 2013
- From Wind power in the European Union: EWEA: "Wind in power: 2012 European statistics", February 2013
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:05, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Meteorolgy section - temp removal for editing discussion
==Wind energy meteorology==
The boundary layer wind, e.g. 100 m wind, is controlled by the wind condition in free atmosphere, perturbed by fast varying turbulence in the boundary layer. Strong winds in the free atmosphere lead to strong boundary layer winds near the surface, and consequently high instantaneous values for the capacity factors of wind turbines. The problem with the output from a single wind farm located in any particular region is that it is variable on time scales ranging from minutes to days posing difficulties for incorporating relevant outputs into an integrated power system. The high frequency variability of contributions from individual wind farms is determined mainly by locally generated small scale boundary layer. The low frequency variability is associated with the passage of transient waves in the atmosphere with a characteristic time scale of several days. Moreover, the Central Plains region of US is under the influence of the large scale metrological transient waves. Electricity generated by one wind farm located in the Central Plains region is not independent of the electricity output from another wind facility in the same region.
First of all, to my knowledge, there is no such thing as instantaneous capacity factors. This does not make sense. [EDIT: Actually it does, now that I've thought about it more.] Secondly, the phenomena which is being discussed doesn't appear to be specific to the United States. Hence the information may be better suited to the more general article Wind Power. Thirdly - the information in the paragraph(and possibly the article) seems merely to say that the output from wind farms in a region is correlated and not independent. This is not new info. and is mentioned in the Wind power article. It could be mentined in this article as well. Aflafla1 (talk) 04:27, 24 October 2014 (UTC
- Ok, the following is my proposed revised text:
- Winds in the Central plains region of the U.S. are variable on both short (minutes) and long (days) time scales. Variations in wind speed result in variations in power output from wind farms, which poses difficulties incorporating wind power into an integrated power system. Wind turbies are driven by boundary layer winds, those that occur near the surface of the earth, at around 300 feet. Boundry layer winds are controlled by wind in the higher free atmosphere and have turbulence due to interaction with surface features such as trees, hills, and buildings. Short term or high frequency variations are due to this turbulence in the boundary layer. Long term variations are due to the passage of transient waves in the atmosphere, with a characteristic time scale of several days.
- The transient waves ar that influence wind in the Central U.S. are large scale and this results in the power output from wind farms in the region being correlated and not independent.
Sentence about the EU in lead paragraph
The article's lead paragraph includes the sentence:
- "The EU wind industry has had an average annual growth of 15.6% over the last 17 years (1995-2011)."
While an interesting fact, it is out of place in this article, especially in the lead. We are not told if the cited EU annual growth is larger or smaller than growth of wind power in the US over the same period. Unless this statistic is stated in the context of a comparison to growth of US wind power, I don't see the purpose of including it. Plazak (talk) 04:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- Junling Huang and Michael B. McElroy (2014). "Meteorologically defined limits to reduction in the variability of outputs from a coupled wind farm system in the Central US". Renewable Energy 62: 331–340.