Separating Facts from Spin

I want to like wind energy, I really do. The Mike Smith Enterprises web site used to have a prominently-displayed photo of the Beaumont, KS wind farm against majestic cumulus clouds. The facts that it is domestic, clean, etc., were all going for it.

But, over the last two to three years, as more and more data about the many shortcomings of wind energy, especially its reliability, became apparent, I have lost my enthusiasm and, in a posting in May, 2010, dubbed wind power, "Not ready for prime time." I've always allowed that new technology could restore the value of the wind power equation as I see it.

When I was reading Texas newspapers Wednesday, the stories about the blackouts and the contributions made by wind power didn't add up (literally, the numbers were incorrect from an arithmetic standpoint). I later learned that some of the stories were based on a press release, issued that morning, by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). The release touted wind energy's contribution to mitigating the shortage of energy. As I stated, I never doubted the veracity of the press release as it pertained to wind power output Wednesday morning. In spite of this contribution from wind energy, the crisis continued (per the news media) with the threat of more blackouts Wednesday night during what was forecast to be the coldest night, statewide, in 15 years.

Wednesday evening, I posted this article about wind energy guessing (and I used that word) that wind was part of the problem rather than part of the solution in the ongoing crisis. Because of the extreme cold and little wind occurring or forecast Wednesday night and Thursday morning, I didn't see how wind power could play a significant positive role in this situation. I also pointed to similar situations in other geographic areas where wind energy wasn't available during extreme cold. My conclusion was that if the money spent on wind had been spent on new coal or nuclear plants, the immediate crisis could have been avoided.

I was treated to numerous comments, pro and con, about wind energy. Several commenters told me I was wrong and that there was significant wind energy being generated Wednesday night. I requested the figures and said I would be happy to correct the record if I was indeed incorrect.

Yesterday afternoon, we heard from Michael Goggin, twice, who represents the American Wind Energy Association. He twice requested a "retraction." Out of a sense of fair play, I prominently displayed his comments, unedited, and said I would retract if he would provide the data that showed I was wrong. In spite of multiple requests, he has not done so. I told him earlier this morning that if he did not provide this data by 10am Central, I was going to write this response I had promised my readers on the assumption that I was correct. As of this moment, no one has provided data showing significant energy was generated from the wind farms located in the State of Texas from 9pm Wednesday (2nd) to 7am Thursday (3rd).

So, here is where we stand:

Mr. Goggin wrote yesterday:

Wind energy output was extremely high throughout the period when ERCOT implemented rolling blackouts

According to Mr. Goggin's figures, only 36 to 39% of the installed wind energy in Texas was available even though it was a crisis and they had been requested to provide as much as possible,

"grid operators call for maximum production". 

This means that 61 to 64% of wind power was not available at a peak time of year. And, wind conditions were optimal at that time. To quote Mr. Goggin,
Throughout that time period, wind speeds on the ground were also very high across the parts of the state with the bulk of the installed wind capacity, with many areas under high wind warnings.

So, in spite of optimal winds and a request for maximum production, the best wind could do was 39% of installed wind capacity at the time of the blackouts.

It is asserted by Mr. Goggin and other commenters that I was incorrect about turbines failing. This news story states that they did in fact fail during the period of the blackouts:
Wind generators also appeared to be having problems, said Fraser; he had received reports of some turbines shutting down because of issues with ice on the blades. "The wind was blowing yesterday, but I'm not sure wind generation was available because they had problems with ice," he said. 

Finally, there is the ongoing mystery of the amount of wind electricity generated Wednesday night and Thursday morning, the source of my initial concern and my reason for writing the original article. In spite of asking Mr. Goggin and several commenters for those numbers, we still do not have them. Please note that they were able to get those numbers within a matter of hours for a press release Wednesday when they thought the numbers would cast the industry in a favorable light. I believe that if the numbers showed major amounts of electricity generated Wednesday night and Thursday morning, we would have had them quite a while ago.

I'm offering an opinion here: When compared to the reliability of other forms of electricity generation, nuclear, coal, natural gas, and hydro, touting a situation where 61% or more of generating capability was not available as a success would, at best raise eyebrows and, at worst, get you laughed out of the room. It appears the AWEA was attempting to spin a less than optimal situation into a success which, as a trade association, is perhaps their job.

I see my job as providing quality commentary on weather and science issues to our blog's readers. I believe we have done just that.