The global consumption is >20,000TW and at the moment wind accounts for about 0.16TW (depending on where you get your info.)

the website should be up in a few weeks its http://www.thought4energy.com

Total wind in system (say 2,000 mw) – Equal amount of conventional plant needed to back up wind = capacity credit for wind only. To find the total saving in the entire sytem, multiply this by the % wind penetration.

Example: Windyland: wind 2,000 – 1500 needed to keep running = 500/ wind (2,000) = 25% If wind forms 10% then 25% x 10% = 2.5%.

The figure is about 1.6 for Europe, which means that there is a saving of 1.6% on emmissons in Denmark and Germany. Wind energy Association often give the contribution for wind @ the actual outut (load factor). They appar to get paid for the total output while consummers pay for the thermal plant to back it up.

The Magnox plant in combria England was intended to produce 120 tons of re-cycled nuclear fuel per year. It only even succeeded in producing 6 tones.

I dont know about fusion. But there is a huge problem with neclear waste. Many do not agree. But the stores are there with a half life time of 500,000,000 years or so. (subject to correction) Low level waste is the worst. It would seem prausable that some high level waste could be launched into space and cast into the sun. It is a ready made nuclear waste disposal unit and completely green. I would think the danger of getting up there would be a problem. My knowledge of nuclear is limited because I cannot experiment, its easy to make generation models with alternators, water turbines and small wind turbines. So more up to speed with them.

V

You can store energy. The most useful is to pump water from one resevour to a higher one. The advantage is that the intensity of the outflow which drives a turbine is roughly the same from full to near empty. The problem is that all the molevules of water must be pumped up while only about one third can be made work on the way down. In practice for every unit put in only about a quarter is got back out. Good sites are rare and volume is low. Pumping air into caves suffers from the problem of sealing the caves which will fill up with water over time. Air will escape. The second problem is that the intensity of the air presure decreases as the cave empties. Also air is a very un-dense (forgive grammer) medium and trapping its power is difficult. The problem with all storage is volume. Massive amount of ground is needed. People are tricked into thinking positive about easy clean energy. Remember wind power was around for many thousands of years before modern thermal engines and it was there when electricity became popular but was never used to generate power except for novelty schemes. I ‘m sorry to say, that the notion that mother nature is willing and ready to provide us with sufficeint clean renewable energy is fancyful. She has no intention of doing so. We must consider also that if we succeed in harnessing wind, wave, tidal and anything else that moves, we will slow down that medium, as it slows down it will impart less power. Just like if you overload a donkey, hes going to slow down. Something which is never mentioned by the green lobby is going back to sailing ships for see transport, that would cut carbon emmissions at a flash. No bet that brings a touch of reality to you.

Val

We are trying to either (a) phase out coal because of its high CO2 emissions or (b) make it clean by developing carbon capture and sequestering systems. So far we do not have (b) and no one knows with any certainty whether we ever will. If we do find such a safe and reliable system, then we can all go back to sleep.

Natural gas also emits C02 but not as much as coal so it is a better choice. But we will have to use tar sands or shale gas which raises other environmental issues.

Fission nuclear has the waste problem which hopefully be sorted out….but we haven’t yet as no one wants it in their backyard. Just ask Senator Reid in Nevada.

There is hope for another source of electrical power…….hopefully as early as mid- century…and that is nuclear fusion. It is safe, clean, reliable and does not have the waste problem of fission nuclear. It can power the planet for centuries using only water. Right now there are a couple of major experiments going on with it…ITER in France which is expected to start up as an experimental reactor in 2018 and the National Ignition Facility
in California. Scientists are watching these experiments very closely. If successful, we may well have solved our “electricity crisis.”

So are goal is to find the cheapest green technologies to get us to a fusion world…if that is possible.