News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by sandworm101 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @12:56PM (#12345218)
Fact check on those numbers:

(1) This is a 30megawatt plant. An average household consumes 2500watts (including heating). 30,000,000 / 2500 = 12,000 homes ... it's in the same ballpark. But only when the wind farm is operating at 100% capacity. That may be only 25% of the time, with lesser being the norm and zero being a thing at some times.

(2) Homes are not the only energy consumers. US electricity consumption per person = 13,246.27kwh / 2088 hours per year = 6300watts per person. 30,000,000/6300 = 4750. ... These five mills can produce enough power for around 4750 people. But that is only the electricity and doesn't include non-electrical energy such as hydrocarbons burnt for transport/heat. If we all start driving teslas, or switch to electric heat, those five turbines will cover far less than 4750 people.

But let's say this plant does cover 5000 people. 320,000,000/5000 = we need 64000 of these plants, or 320,000 turbines[1]. And again, only when running at capacity. The real number is perhaps triple.

[1]Thanks to dmoy for correcting my decimal error.

Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by beat on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @04:37PM (#12347369)
This sort of calculation is missing the forest for the trees. Right now, wind is providing 5% of the US power supply. Plants are becoming substantially less expensive as technology improves and economies of scale come to the fore. That's mostly Midwestern ground power. Sea-based wind plants are more efficient due to more consistent wind.

Nuclear power provides about 20% of the US consumption, and there's no need to shut down existing nuclear plants as wind comes online. So just increasing wind output by 15x would more or less cover America's needs. With lots of untapped shoreline and lots of untapped Midwestern plains (not to mention new tech making previously unviable locations viable), it doesn't seem outrageous.

The missing key here is energy storage, not energy generation. Storage is how you optimize utilization. When plants produce excess power, capture and store, and release when the wind isn't blowing. Even with thermal losses, this gets us in the ballpark of 100% utilization. And there's a ton of investment in this field right now.

As for this plant, it wasn't built to make money on electricity. It was built to learn how to build offshore wind in the US, to deal with the technology and political pressures. The goal is to be able to build a thousand times this capacity, or more.

Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by sandworm101 on Wednesday August 24, 2016 @12:58PM (#12353423)
>> When plants produce excess power, capture and store ... this gets us in the ballpark of 100% utilization.

No. That is getting to 100% by changing the measurements. I was talking about utilization of the turbines, total power production, not how the plant regulated its power output. A plant with storage will still generate more or less power as the wind changes. That they use storage to regulate their output doesn't alter the fact that the turbines are not running at capacity 100% of the time. So the math as to how many turbines are needed to generate a specific amount of power holds.

Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by beat on Thursday August 25, 2016 @11:20AM (#12359680)
And how is this fundamentally different from partial dial-down of coal or nuclear plants for routine maintenance?
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by imaginenore on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @05:16PM (#12347730)
Your math is wrong, because you assume a household consumes 2500 watts 24/7. That's a pretty insane figure. The only things running constantly in our house are the fridge and the modem. Even if you add computer, laptop, lights it's still an order of magnitude less than 2500w.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by evgen on Wednesday August 24, 2016 @01:30AM (#12349881)
In vast swaths of the US electricity is used for climate control on a 24/7 basis, and in these locations it is often the largest single energy usage point in the home or office building.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by overcast on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @01:23PM (#12345474)
Even triple, that seems like nothing in the grand scheme of something as large as power generation.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by mfringel on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:02PM (#12345904)
Citations requested for:

* "2500watts (including heating)"

* "That may be only 25% of the time, with the lesser being the norm"

* "US electricity consumption per person = 13,246.27kwh"

* "The real number is perhaps triple."

Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by sandworm101 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:09PM (#12345968)
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_energy_consumption (2) Google "US electricity consumption per person" (3) My personal knowledge of wind, that it doesn't blow 24/7. (I've done several off-grid houses and each time have rejected wind in favour of spending the money on more solar panels.) (4) See 3.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by SamBam on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @03:16PM (#12346615)
...but the Wikipedia article you site says 2kW, not 2.5kW, and adding heating seems irrelevant, because the vast majority of homes in New England do not use electricity for heating. The 17,000 homes figure that you're fact-checking is referring to 17,000 homes with today's actual electrical use, not energy use in general.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by sandworm101 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @03:44PM (#12346861)
If you add up the numbers in the wikipedia chart, it's actually 2310, which I round up to 2500 to simplify the math. Either way, these are "household" numbers more dependant on the definition of household. I'd stick to the more solid numbers per capita for the entire country.
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by mfringel on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:29PM (#12346186)
Is it reasonable to expect that on-shore wind turbine efficiency is identical to off-shore wind turbine efficiency?
Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by mikeyouse on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:53PM (#12346419)
Not even remotely, off shore turbines are much, much more efficient. Newer turbines already have capacity factors of over 40%, newer off shore turbines can exceed 50%.

http://rameznaam.com/2015/08/30/how-steady-can-the-wind-blow...

Re:America’s First Offshore Wind Farm by dmoy on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @01:35PM (#12345600)
320,000 not 32,000?