One of the false claims made by “wind energy” advocates is that greater use of wind energy would reduce US dependence on oil, including oil imports.
In fact, adding more wind turbines will have no significant impact on US oil consumption.
Unfortunately, many well-meaning people (including reporters) and some regulators and political leaders have accepted – and repeated -- the wind advocates’ false claims about reductions in oil use. This brief paper explains why the reduced oil use claim is false.
(The claim about reduced oil dependence is only one of many false and misleading claims made by the wind industry, US Department of Energy (DOE), DOE’s National Renewable Energy “Laboratory” (NREL) and other wind advocates. Other such claims are discussed elsewhere.1)
Facts about oil use in electric generation in the US
1. The only potential use of wind turbines is to produce electricity.
2. Very little oil is used in the US to produce electricity. In 2005, only 3.0% of the electricity generated in the US was produced by using oil.2 Oil use was up slightly in 2004 and 2005 from 2003 because of high natural gas prices which made it more economical for some generating companies to use oil. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects that the share of electricity generated by oil will drop to 1.85% by 2030.3
3. Most of the use of oil in the US for electricity generation occurs in a few states. As shown in the attached table, in 2005, 3 states (Florida, New York and Hawaii) accounted for more than 57% of all the electricity in the US generated by using oil.
4. Oil accounted for more than 5% of electric generation in only 11 states and the District of Columbia. Those states are Hawaii, Florida, New York, Massachusetts, Delaware, Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, and Virginia.
5. Oil accounted for less than 1% of electric generation in 29 states. Twenty-four of those were less than ½ of 1%.
Reasons why wind energy will have no significant impact on oil use for electric generation
6. Even in those few states where oil accounts for more than 1% of electricity generation, adding wind turbines would have very little, if any, impact on oil consumption. The facts supporting this conclusion are complex and many of those who have believed the false claims might be forgiven for their errors. However, the complexity does not excuse officials from DOE, NREL or the wind industry who should know better. But, in any case, here is why wind energy is highly unlikely to reduce to reduce oil use in electric generation:
a. About 9.7% of the oil used in electric generation in 2005 was “distillate” oil4
used in combustion turbine and internal combustion electric generating units.5
The cost of this oil is high and such units are used almost exclusively in times when electricity demand is at its highest level (e.g., during hot weekday afternoons in July and August). Little if any wind generated electricity is available during those times.
b. Most of the remaining 90% of the oil used in electric generation was “residual oil” (#4 & #5) that is used in older, oil-fired steam-electric generating units (oil is burned to heat water and create steam to drive a turbine).
c. These older oil-fired steam-electric units are quite unlikely to be the units that are backed down or ramped up to adjust for the intermittent, highly volatile (output often varies widely minute to minute) and largely unpredictable output from wind turbines – which produce electricity only when the wind is blowing in the right speed range.6
d. Instead, the generating units that are likely to be used to “back up” the intermittent wind turbines will be units that are either:
1) Designed and designated to serve in an Automatic Generation Control (AGC) mode to keep an electric grid in balance (i.e., frequency and voltage),
2) Producing at less than full capacity and capable of ramping up or down on short notice, or
3) Operating in a “spinning reserve” mode.7
Electricity supply and demand must be kept in balance. Electricity production is constantly adjusted to meet electricity demand. The generating units that serve best in backing up intermittent, volatile wind turbines are hydropower units because the output from these units can be increased or decreased almost instantaneously. The next best alternatives are gas-fired turbine-based generating units (e.g., combined-cycle or larger simple cycle). Oil-fired units are less likely to be used in the required balancing role for wind turbines because (a) the oil-fired combustion turbine and internal combustion units are unlikely to be running except in times of peak demand, and (b) the oil-fired steamelectric units are likely to have slower response times than is necessary to back up wind turbines.
e. The generating units used to “back up” intermittent and volatile wind generation will depend on the generating mix and other conditions in the grid control area that is receiving the electricity from wind turbines. In the Pacific-Northwest, for example, hydro power would likely serve in the balancing role – with no savings in oil. In New England, with its heavy dependence on natural gas and a significant amount of newer gas-fired generating capacity, a gas-fired unit would likely serve in the balancing role, again with little or no savings in oil use.
7. In summary, there is very little likelihood that any oil use in electric generation would be reduced by adding wind turbines. This would certainly be true in the states with only small shares of their electric generation from oil.
The electric industry officials who will have the exact data on the generating units that are run to balance the intermittent and volatile output from wind turbines are those who handle the day to day management and control of electric grids and transmission systems; i.e., depending on the region of the US, electric utility, the power pool, the independent system operator (ISO), or the regional transmission organization (RTO). Where is most oil used in the US?
During 2005, US oil use8 averaged 20,802,000 barrels per day.9 The shares of US oil consumption by sector were as follows:10
• Transportation. - 67.5%
• Industrial - 23.8%
• Residential - 3.7%
• Electric Generation - 3.0%
• Commercial - 1.9%
Total - 100%
As the above table suggests, those seeking a reduction in US oil consumption will need to focus primarily on oil use in transportation.
Glenn R. Schleede *
Round Hill, VA 20141-2574
Attachment: 2005 Electric Generation by State & US Total – All energy sources & petroleum
Endnotes:
1 For facts about other false and misleading claims, see my paper entitled: “Facing up to the true costs and benefits of
wind energy,” June 24, 2004, and others that can be found at http://www.windaction.org/, or http://www.windwatch.
org/ or www.tsaugust.org .
2 US Energy Information Administration, Electricity Data Base, Generation.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sprdshts.html
3 US Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2007, Table A8.
4 US Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Table 7.3b.
5 A small amount of distillate oil may be used as a start up fuel in oil or coal-fired steam electric generating units or
occasionally to assist in flame stabilization.
6 Larger wind turbines now being installed begin producing electricity when wind is around 6 miles per hour, reach
rated capacity at around 33 MPH and are shut down to avoid equipment damage around 56 MPH.
7 That is, running and synchronized with the grid but not inputting electricity.
8 Technically, “products delivered.”
9 US Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Table 3.1b.
10 US Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Tables 2.2 – 2.6.
______________________________________________
* GLENN R. SCHLEEDE is semi-retired after working on energy and related matters in government and the private
sector for over 30 years. He now devotes a significant portion of his time to self-financed analysis of and writing about
(a) government policies, programs and regulations that are detrimental to the interests of consumers and taxpayers, and
(b) government or private sector programs and projects that are presented to the media, public and government
officials in a false or misleading way. “Wind energy” is a frequent topic.
2005 Electric Generation by State and US Total*
All Energy Sources & Petroleum in Kilowatt-hours & Percent Petroleum
Kilowatt-hours Kilowatt-hours % of State's State Share of
Generated -- generated by using Electric Generation US oil-fired electric
All Energy Sources Petroleum from Petroleum Generation
State
FL 220,256,412,000 37,229,508,000 16.90% 30.39%
NY 146,887,419,000 24,044,258,000 16.37% 19.62%
HI 11,522,805,000 9,076,427,000 78.77% 7.41%
MA 47,515,443,000 7,119,369,000 14.98% 5.81%
PA 218,091,125,000 4,965,387,000 2.28% 4.05%
VA 78,943,045,000 4,276,268,000 5.42% 3.49%
MD 52,661,600,000 3,817,584,000 7.25% 3.12%
KY 97,822,419,000 3,680,685,000 3.76% 3.00%
LA 92,616,878,000 3,485,935,000 3.76% 2.85%
CT 33,549,747,000 3,156,048,000 9.41% 2.58%
CA 200,292,818,000 2,576,322,000 1.29% 2.10%
TX 396,668,722,000 1,613,248,000 0.41% 1.32%
ME 18,843,978,000 1,611,697,000 8.55% 1.32%
MS 45,067,453,000 1,444,848,000 3.21% 1.18%
OH 156,976,323,000 1,390,649,000 0.89% 1.14%
NH 23,735,290,000 1,357,142,000 5.72% 1.11%
DE 8,136,568,000 1,216,423,000 14.95% 0.99%
NJ 60,549,583,000 1,106,561,000 1.83% 0.90%
GA 136,667,892,000 1,019,233,000 0.75% 0.83%
KS 45,862,696,000 986,408,000 2.15% 0.81%
MI 121,619,771,000 897,881,000 0.74% 0.73%
MN 53,018,995,000 783,358,000 1.48% 0.64%
AK 6,576,659,000 760,118,000 11.56% 0.62%
WI 61,824,664,000 724,230,000 1.17% 0.59%
SC 102,514,665,000 672,803,000 0.66% 0.55%
NC 129,748,578,000 485,079,000 0.37% 0.40%
MT 27,938,778,000 413,991,000 1.48% 0.34%
IL 194,120,146,000 326,024,000 0.17% 0.27%
IN 130,371,573,000 279,038,000 0.21% 0.23%
AL 137,948,581,000 234,880,000 0.17% 0.19%
TN 97,117,165,000 230,527,000 0.24% 0.19%
DC 226,042,000 226,042,000 100.00% 0.18%
WV 93,626,285,000 223,552,000 0.24% 0.18%
AR 47,794,509,000 206,675,000 0.43% 0.17%
MO 90,828,230,000 168,418,000 0.19% 0.14%
IA 44,156,160,000 149,537,000 0.34% 0.12%
OR 49,325,003,000 78,191,000 0.16% 0.06%
OK 68,607,827,000 70,333,000 0.10% 0.06%
WA 101,965,850,000 64,181,000 0.06% 0.05%
RI 6,053,294,000 55,814,000 0.92% 0.05%
AZ 101,478,654,000 43,208,000 0.04% 0.04%
WY 45,567,307,000 42,295,000 0.09% 0.03%
UT 38,165,131,000 40,909,000 0.11% 0.03%
NM 35,135,642,000 36,909,000 0.11% 0.03%
ND 31,932,615,000 34,207,000 0.11% 0.03%
NE 31,464,734,000 31,234,000 0.10% 0.03%
SD 6,520,769,000 20,785,000 0.32% 0.02%
NV 40,213,752,000 20,500,000 0.05% 0.02%
CO 49,616,694,000 17,046,000 0.03% 0.01%
VT 5,716,755,000 10,179,000 0.18% 0.01%
ID 10,824,984,000 5,000 0.00% 0.00%
US-TOTAL 4,054,688,028,000 122,521,949,000 3.02% 100.00%
Data Source: US Energy Information administration, Electricity Data Base, Generation
* All electric generation including utilities, non-utility generators & combined heat & power.
No comments:
Post a Comment