How Much CO2 is REALLY reduced by wind and solar? 30-40% at BEST

Here is more evidence for brother Nanobrewer that wind power doesn't work as well as advertised. This time, on environmental and not merely ("merely" - sheesh) economic terms.

Co-written by former Secretary of Energy James Schlesinger, under whose leadership the National Renewable Energy Laboratory was established in Golden, CO, this Washington Post article explains that "the sun doesn't always shine and that the wind doesn't always blow." (Stay with me here.)

The climate change benefits that accrue from solar and wind power with 100 percent fossil fuel backup are associated with the fossil fuels not used at the standby power plants. Because solar and wind have the capacity to deliver only 30 to 40 percent of their full power ratings in even the best locations, they provide a carbon dioxide reduction of less than 30 to 40 percent, considering the fossil fuels needed for the "spinning reserve." That's far less than the 100 percent that many people believe, and it all comes with a high cost premium.

The economic disadvantages are mentioned too, if you care to read the article, but I figured you're already tired of reading about those.

NB, I'd be happy to discuss if you care to. Either in the comments, in person or via email.

Oil and Energy Posted by JohnGalt at April 27, 2009 2:09 PM