Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Wind Installations Continue To Break Records Across the Globe

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"These figures speak for themselves: there is huge and growing global demand for emissions-free wind power, which can be installed quickly, virtually everywhere in the world."

-- Steve Sawyer, Secretary General, Global Wind Energy Council
19 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 19
February 4, 2009
It is interesting to note that some of the lowest annual growth rates this year are being reported by some of the nations that made major early pushes into wind power: Germany (+7%), Spain (+11%), and Denmark(+<2% and no significant growth for 3 years in a row now). When we read calls for pell-mell progress in renewable energy development that occasionally occur on this site, we might want to keep this in mind....
Comment
2 of 19
February 4, 2009
You make a good point, Steven,

Wind does have a certain potential in each region. Germany and Denmark seem to have gotten close to their onshore capacity potential. But the good thing for the US and China is that these major energy consumers have the potential to grow more than 20 times their current level. I'm excited to see how they develop...

For details on their race for wind power supremacy, see:

www.setenergy.org
Comment
3 of 19
February 6, 2009
There is quite a potential for wind projects in Africa. It seems we do not have the right regulatory framework for propel us. This has to be looked at.
Comment
4 of 19
February 6, 2009
yes, china has one of the greatest wind resources in the world with large potentials... advanced technology and management as well as funding are needed for wind energy development here.
Comment
5 of 19
February 6, 2009
Denmark have not built an on-shore turbine for a few years now - Germany has slowed right down as they realize that wind doesn't "cut it ". Last I read was that they are in the process of implementing 27GW of coal power -I guess reality has set in.They did talk about shutting down the nuclear stations they had left but realized their CO2 emissions would skyrocket so now maybe new nukes are on the drawing board.
Just like Denmark, Germany now sees that building wind turbines for other countries that are naive and gullible enough to buy them makes better business sense.
Comment
6 of 19
February 6, 2009
We need to find out why investment in wind energy has slowed/stopped in Germany and Denmark. Is it because they have already exploited the best sites, problems with the grid, a need for base load or firm power, operational or maitenance problems with wind turbines, or what? What are the solutions? Finding these answeers is important for the future of wind energy. What agency is responsibile to do this kind of research and analysis? Can GWEC do the kind of analytical research that is needed to support future wind energy investment?
Comment
7 of 19
February 7, 2009
I SUPPORT WIND POWER AND I HOPE IT GOES ON FOR EVER
Comment
8 of 19
February 7, 2009
There is only one way that we will resolve the energy crisis and that is with wind electric generation, wind mechanical power, wind supported shipping, solar thermal, solar pv, passive solar,tidal power, ocean currents, wave power,hydro electric, biomass gas generation, efficient biomass ethenol production,geothermal, deep geothrmal, geothermal raidoactive hot spots, increased efficiency,insulation, that standby that started it all, wood along with some creative human imagination and some good old will power. Should continue our existance for a while longer.
Comment
9 of 19
February 8, 2009
The charts above seem like just a bunch of meaningless fluff to me.

Top ten total installed capacity? What is that? That only has any meaning if you know what their needs are. Comparing the installed capacity for Denmark to the US or China is meaningless. They do not have the same needs as the US or China. So what if they "only" have a little over 3,000 MW installed----maybe that is all they need.
Comment
10 of 19
February 8, 2009
I'm an elctrical engineer from the slide ruler time!... all this new technology is so exiting to me that I feel like a engineering student boy again ... all these solar technological matters are to me as new professional commitment and I'm very glad to be young enough (!) to understand your interesting reports in full. Thanks for the opportunity.
Comment
11 of 19
February 9, 2009
Fred,
Regarding your comment #10:
If you check out the IAEA report for Denmark's electricity generation (http://www.iaea.org/inisnkm/nkm/aws/eedrb/data/DK-elc.html) you will see that they produce ~80% of their electricity from thermal plants (typically coal). At one time Denmark boasted of plans for getting >50% of their electricity from wind power, but progress of late has been very modest, although they are often highlighted in wind energy articles.

Germany generated 6.5% of its electricity from wind last year. Given that they intend to eliminate their nuclear plants, which produce ~28% of their electricity, and also intend to dramatically reduce CO2 emissions, the sluggish increase (7%) in wind capacity this year suggests problems meeting these goals.

A 29% growth rate for wind seems favorable, but if major markets such as Europe saturate at only a ~10% generation this is not a good omen for those wanting to address climate change.
Comment
12 of 19
February 9, 2009
Vertibrates (such as humans) need what to function? No,.. not flagella or cilia. The answer is a skeleton. Our skeleton allows our muscles, tendons, ligaments and neurological components to exist; sheathed, or protected with support attachments.

How can the world keep building it's "attachments" (turbines) without a strong world-wide "skeleton" to support it? As the "super-backbone skeleton" or Power grid is built, all other energy entities will come enmass to present themselves and elleviate the bottlenecks; much like a surgical procedure to eleviate nerve root compression in one's back.

Create a strong backbone (electrical infrastructure), add muscle to protect it, exercise it correctly, and it will transport the "mass" well (electrons), and stay functional for many many years.

Best to all,...
Comment
13 of 19
February 9, 2009
Steve-------why should wind be the only energy source? We don't depend on any single source now----why should we in the future?

It only seems to me to be prudent and reliable to have a mix of sources, of which wind would just be one component.

-------"A 29% growth rate for wind seems favorable, but if major markets such as Europe saturate at only a ~10% generation this is not a good omen for those wanting to address climate change."----------

I'm one of those people who would like to address climate change. I'd also like to address stripmining, water pollution, air pollution, and waste pollution. If I have been watching coal trains with 100 cars go by----then wind turbines take over 10% of electrical needs------and the trains that go by only have 90 cars, I'd be happy about that. The next thing you know, I'd be wanting to see Mr. Peabody's coal trains with only 80 or 75 cars.

I've seen windmills that were over 300 years old still in operation doing the work they were originally built for. The fuel to run them still costs today what it cost the day they were built----exactly 0. I think that has to count for something.
Comment
14 of 19
February 9, 2009
Fred,
Naturally, I agree that a mix of renewable sources is desirable. However, of the near-term renewable solutions, wind generation is one of the few that is economical. Germany still plans to replace it nuclear generation fairly rapidly and if the potential for wind (at least the on-land turbines) will max out at such a low level of production, I don't see how they meet this goal without switching over to coal or importing electricity from elsewhere.

Additionally, if demand in major markets saturates so quickly, it is hard to see how wind's 30% yearly growth rates are sustainable for more than a few years.
Comment
15 of 19
February 10, 2009
-----------"Additionally, if demand in major markets saturates so quickly, it is hard to see how wind's 30% yearly growth rates are sustainable for more than a few years."-------

It won't. It cann't. If you sold 3 units the first year, and sold 4 units the next year---that's a 30% increase. If you sell 5 units the next year,[4 units equals previous year sales, plus one new unit] you've still maintained your sales numbers[increase in sales = 1 unit, same as previous year], but you've only sold 25% of your previous years increase. The higher the numbers go---the lower the percentage will be. It all depends on your ability to increase production, and the ability of the market to absorb your increased production---a feedback system that will each affect the other. If production cann't rise and the market is strong---price will increase and reduce market---if production rises faster than market demand, price will come down and increase market demand.
This creates high demand/prices early on----as markets mature and demand slows---production is still high so prices begin to fall to increase demand. Just like passing on the early introduction of some fancy widget that is new, highly hyped and expensive----then a year later----going ahead and buying the widget because the price has come down dramatically since its introduction.

---------"I don't see how they meet this goal without switching over to coal or importing electricity from elsewhere."------

First----don't necessarily assume increasing demand---demand can also decrease. Heating water uses about 40% residential power demand. Solar thermal uses no expensive PV cells---is cheap, easy to construct, virtually trouble and maintainance free and has been well used and proven over many years. Using flourescent lighting can reduce energy consumption to 1/3 or 1/4 of incandescent and produce the same amount of light---and flourescent bulbs last longer.
Comment
16 of 19
February 10, 2009
Fred,
Regarding some of the points made in your comment #15:

1) Solar thermal, while interesting, has only a very small market niche at present and is still quite expensive. Additionally, Germany is not well situated for solar thermal generation so I don't see this as meeting any significant portion of their near term needs.

2) I'd bet the farm on significant increase in demand for world electricity needs--the developing countries are going to need massive new capacity. Whether wind will be able to meet a significant fraction of that is an open question--indeed, whether any renewable technology will be able to provide a significant fraction of this demand is debatable. Furthermore, even in the developed world, if we are going to get away from fossil fuel uses such as methane for home heating, electricity production will need to markedly increase. All the optimists who think electric cars are in our future also believe electricity demand will increase.... Some high efficiency light bulbs (which already have high adoption rates in businesses and industry anyway) are not going to put a dent into the need for more electricity generation capacity. I don't know anyone who thinks Germany can cut demand by anything close to the 30% that is supplied by nuclear plants now.
Comment
17 of 19
February 11, 2009
Don't believe for one moment their Wind Farm promotion hype.

All they are concerned with is increasing the numbers in their bank accounts. And, keeping alive the centralized powerline control illusion. Instead of empowering the individual to make their own energy from scaled-down wind and solar...on site.

They take no forethought to the repercussions of their mega-watt inventions on the surrounding eco-system. Not to mention the people living by these monstrosities who are subjected to "helicopter sounds" whenever the wind blows.

Bats are dying of barotrauma in record numbers. Farmers are losing entire crops due to downwind "chaos vortices" that are created by wind farms.

If you want to know the truth about this already failing technology, go here and cut through all the "green" wind energy crap:

http://www.wind-watch.org/

Now, what is the solution to the "chaos vortices" pollution? May I share with you a design concept that, once a prototype is built, could make the spinning propeller windpowered generator obsolete?

It has been mathematically-proven by a Russian scientist to be 3X more efficient. And, it is completely benign to living creatures. Plus, this design concept would work just as well underwater in river currents without any harm to swimming creatures.

This windpower energy invention is based upon the tail of the Humpback Whale. Hence, I call it, the "Whale's Tail" windpowered generator!

After reading this webpage, and studying my design drawings (which I have placed into Public Domain) please share with me your valued feedback.

And, if you are so inspired by my design, I will relocate to anywhere that you are living, and use my 20 years of construction experience to build a prototype with you! Thanks!

http://darinselby.1hwy.com/whalestailworkings.html
Comment
18 of 19
February 11, 2009
Steve---"1) Solar thermal, while interesting, has only a very small market niche at present and is still quite expensive. "----

What does market size have to do with anything-----wind power was a very small market niche 15 years ago. Market size can change overnight.
Ten years ago the market niche for Blackberries and iPods was 0.

Solar thermal heating is neither expensive nor resource or labor intensive.
Take a black garden hose--put it in an insulated box with a piece of glass on top and hook the outflow to your water heater---and the inflow to the cold water line. If the sun doesn't shine---your water heater still heats the water the same as always---when the sun does shine the water heater uses less energy to heat the water---or no energy if the water picks up enough energy from the sun---the water heater thermostat just turns off, no matter WHERE the heat comes from, electricity, gas, or the sun. The greater the size of your collectors and storage tank, the greater the amount of solar energy vs. conventional energy you use.
Passive solar engineering can collect and store solar heat to warm buildings----and built right into the building design. Solar heating and storage can not only heat in the winter---it can also cool in the summer. There is nothing complicated or expensive about passive solar heating and cooling----the Anacazi Indians were constructing their cliff dwellings to use passive solar heating and cooling 1,000 years ago.

We could replace incandecent bulbs with flourescent--use solar thermal to heat and cool buildings and wind power to generate electricity. We could EASILY do the same things we do now with 50% less electricity. Look at any large parking lot at night------acres and acres of empty asphalt pavement illuminated by thousands and thousands of lights----for what? It is pure waste. Put timers on them. Use less, spend less.
Comment
19 of 19
February 11, 2009
--------"I'd bet the farm on significant increase in demand for world electricity needs--the developing countries are going to need massive new capacity. Whether wind will be able to meet a significant fraction of that is an open question--indeed, whether any renewable technology will be able to provide a significant fraction of this demand is debatable. "---------

Electricity is electricity. Hairdryers and video games don't care where it comes from---if it is electricity, they will run exactly the same.
Renewable energy can provide any fraction of the power we need. Including 100% of the power we need.
We have no need for fossil fuels or nuclear energy---at all.

-------"Furthermore, even in the developed world, if we are going to get away from fossil fuel uses such as methane for home heating, electricity production will need to markedly increase."-------

Why would we want to do that? Biomethane contains exactly the same methane as natural gas. The only difference is the source--NG is pumped out of the ground. We can mix biomethane with NG in any proportion we want with no loss of performance. We can replace coal with natural gas---and mix in more and more biomethane as it becomes available. NO stripmines, NO watershed pollution, NO ash and cinders to dispose of, and we can mix in as much biomethane as we want when and as it becomes available. Any biomethane we mix with NG at above a 6% level means that we are reducing the GHG effects of the cumbustion gasses produced.

It sounds to me like you want people to keep using more and more fossil fuels and nuclear energy.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

David Appleyard

View David Appleyard's Profile
About: David Appleyard is Chief Editor of Renewable Energy World. He also currently holds the position of Chief Editor for sister publication Hydro Review Worldwide.... more »

Advertise With Us

North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners AWS Truepower, LLC AltEnergyStocks Planet Solar Inc Southwest Windpower Conergy Inc. Nextek Power Systems, Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters