Stomv,
Appreciate your interest and the analytical mindset you bring. We try
to keep it not just truthy, but outright truthful and accurate here, so it's a
(mainly) happy day when a reader spots inconsistencies. After seeing your comment I
talked again with the developers and here's what I got per your two primary
critiques:
1. "Forbes claims on their web site that the
turbine is 600 kW, not 1 MW. I don't know if their site is out of date
or the blog post is inaccurate."
Response: Looks like the latter. The current wind energy component
from the installed turbine is estimated to be 1MWh annually; this is different
than the rating number assigned by the manufacturer. The Forbes web page was accurate (my post was not): the turbine has a 600 kW nominal peak capacity, so it is a 600 kW turbine. From a lead engineer on the project: "We predicted a net capacity factor of
15.8%, so total annual net kWh production will be 833,116 kWh (or 600 kW * 8760
hours * 15.8%, with some rounding). The confusion might have been the
turbine will produce approximately 1 MWh (not 1 MW) per year."
You may also find this helpful from Wikipedia on Wind turbines' so called Carrying Capacity: "Since wind speed is not constant, a wind farms"annual energy production is never as much as the sum of the generator
nameplate ratings multiplied by the total hours in a year. The ratio of actual
productivity in a year to this theoretical maximum is called the capacity factor. Typical capacity factors are
20-40%, with values at the upper end of the range in particularly favorable
sites."
2. "Not installing individual meters on the units is just
plain foolish from an energy conservation standpoint. It remains to be
seen if it makes economic sense [due to bulk metering], but the reality
is that individuals will have almost no financial incentive to install
CFs or even turn off their lights, put their electronics on a rocker
switch, set back their AC, and so forth since they will only see less
than 1/68th of the savings."
Response: I was off on the statement
about no meters in the individual units. Forbes
confirms they will purchase electricity in bulk, but then sub meter it out to
each unit. Clearly they anticipated some of the concerns you expressed from not
having the metered feed-back loop for each unit. In terms of total renewable
capacity, the first phase will enjoy excess energy production and it is expected that phase two will do better than break even as well. By
the end of development, with wind and solar power generation and energy
conservation measures, they expect that roughly half of the total site's
requirements will be powered from Forbes' own
renewable sources. And depending on up-coming energy legislation they may be
able to receive a higher resale value for the energy sold back to the grid
which could significantly amplify the benefits.
Again, appreciate your interest and attention to detail; please keep those cards and letters coming !!!
Recent Comments