Why Does Dominion Fear a Wind Output Promise?

SG 14-222 DD test installation at a Siemens Gamesa land facility. Company photo. Click for closer view and perspective of this giant machine we’re buying.

By Steve Haner

While we await a decision by the State Corporation Commission on competing approaches for protecting consumers from unexpected offshore wind costs, some additional relevant information is worthy of notice. Two items call into question Dominion Energy Virginia’s refusal to assume financial risk for poor turbine performance.

Both items ought to make it easy for the utility to comply with an SCC-imposed performance standard of a 42% capacity factor. Yet it continues to balk. Since Dominion is not highlighting these items, here they are.

A few weeks back wind turbine manufacturer Siemens Gamesa announced test results for the 15-megawatt machine it is selling to Dominion for use off Virginia; it is among the largest now being built.

The press release claimed a record 24-hour power output of 359 megawatt hours, obviously for a period of optimal wind speed. Optimal wind speed doesn’t happen every day, of course, and some days there is no wind at all to produce power. But this new machine is capable of at least occasional 100% capacity output, which should make 42% capacity over time easy to promise.

The SG 14-222 DD turbine model has a 14 MW capacity, reaching up to 15 MW using the company’s Power Boost function. The model features a 222-meter (728-foot) diameter rotor assembly with three 108-meter (354-foot) blades, and a 39,000 square meter swept area. One blade is the length of a football field with end zones.

The second piece of positive data is continued steady performance from the two 6-megawatt offshore wind turbines Dominion installed two years ago. They achieved just under a 50% capacity factor through 2021 and the first nine months of 2022, based on reports to federal authorities.

Of course, two 6-megawatt turbines could not produce more than 8,640 megawatt hours in a 30-day month (8,928 in a 31-day month). That is their “100 percent.” The best performance months so far were February 2021 (74% output) and January 2021 (64% output.)  The worst were the two months of August (22% in August 2021, 23% in August 2022.)


As the attached chart shows, the wind is best in the winter and least productive in summer, when the utility usually has its peak demand. The far larger full project, with 176 turbines capable of about 2,600 megawatts per hour (versus 12 in the pilot) is expected to follow that pattern. Of course, solar power peaks in the summer.  (It is never intermittent, right?)

But again, having achieved 47% output in the first year and 48% during nine months of the second, what is the problem with a 42% performance standard on the full-size project?

David Stevenson of Delaware’s Caesar Rodney Institute compiled the chart and has also noted that when Dominion advocated for the two test turbines, it made broad promises about piles of relevant data they would produce. He can’t find it, especially hourly output data he’d like to see. But in a 350-page federal filing Dominion promised much, much more in exchange for federal taxpayer funding.

Or was research really the point? Perhaps not. Perhaps that 350-page document issued before the turbines were built was the extent of research in question, all we get. Perhaps more detail would provide some insight into why Dominion is not touting the Siemens Gamesa test data and the first 21 months of output from the two test turbines. There must be some reason Dominion has refused so far to accept a performance floor.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

69 responses to “Why Does Dominion Fear a Wind Output Promise?”

  1. Deckplates Avatar
    Deckplates

    The data is indeed difficult to obtain. We can get automobile fuel usage, life cycle cost for electric transformers, and even output stats & lifecycle cost for nuclear reactors.

    We know all of the above due to measurements and accumulated data. What about long-term operations? We don’t have good data for the windmills. And so many are eager to sell us those towers – right now.

    Lest we forget, there several “Single Points of Failure” for these large structures. Some of the obvious are bad weather, connectivity to the grid & the simple fact of gravity with these huge towers. The ocean is not forgiving.

    We should put a complete hold on this project until everything is obviated with believable data. Then restart, plunging into what was overlooked in the beginning – Business Case Analysis & Engineering Case Analysis.

  2. Bubba1855 Avatar

    Folks…you’re not going to wind…oops, I should have said ‘win’…this damn thing will end up being done and it will be a disaster financially for VA’s.
    ..but not for Dominion…

    I have been watching the pjm’s daily output of renewables…for 6 months.

    https://dataviewer.pjm.com/dataviewer/pages/public/windpower.jsf

    Some days it’s great…other days it’s in the ‘you know what’. In the end we will need either/and or batteries (God forbid) and gas generating units.
    Sadly, gas generating units that only run part time will cost a great deal. Aka,
    the overhead/fixed costs of gas generators will exceed the variable costs to run the units.
    Also, keep in mind that Youngkin will not be around forever. The libs in NVA/Richmond/Norfolk will find a way to win and all of your efforts and logic will go down the tube…sadly.
    Good luck on changing things.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      The gas plants , like the nukes and like the hydro are all already sunk costs.

      A diverse generating capacity that allows the selection of lowest cost fuels when they are available makes perfect economic sense.

      We’re not going to stop using gas anytime soon. It’s an essential fuel. But over time, we’d use less and less of it and that’s not a bad thing no worse than using gas to burn less and less coal.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        They want to kill the gas plants ASAP. The coal plants killed already were still viable and we ratepayers will cover about $1 billion in sunk costs. You are a shill, Larry, preaching moderation and calm while the barbarians steal us blind. Wake up.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Not a luddite Haner. We STILL burn coal. We still burn gas. We just burn wind/solar when they are available. It’s plain old commons sense.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/67b91be26d9469d27f896b6e807b7fb63a2c445ecccb84ac7eef62263512d68a.jpg

          Those “sunk costs” , did you include the coal ash cleanup and putting tops back on mountain tops?

          1. Stephen Haner Avatar
            Stephen Haner

            As you know well, I’m no fan of coal and support its rapid retirement. But you make up positions for me, so why do I bother?

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            Like you don’t for me?

            lord!

            I don’t know your position on coal and don’t think I ever accused you of supporting coal – I just point out that coal is still a major supplier of power to the grid and I’d choose wind/solar over coal as long as Dominion can use it reliably and use backup gas when it’s not available.

            So, not a gas vs solar/wind argument but a coal vs solar/wind argument.

            would you replace coal with solar wind?

      2. Bubba1855 Avatar

        I agree with you LarrytheG…but we need a ‘plan’…
        something that makes sense…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Well, they’re going to leave some of them up and “hot”, actually just like we still have some coal plants up and running at times.

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      https://windeurope.org/

      Check that out, Bubba. Daily report on capacity factor by country, and daily report on Europe-wide total energy by source. Wind very inconsistent.

      https://windeurope.org/about-wind/daily-wind/electricity-mix

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        Wasn’t it Bob Dylan who said, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?”

        The modern incarnation might be, “You don’t need a climate change alarmist to know that the wind don’t always blow.”

        Your column is mislabeled. Dominion has no reason on Earth to make a wind output promise. The better headline would be, “Why doesn’t the General Assembly demand a wind output promise from Dominion?”

        The answer? $$$$$

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          I think the real “alarmists” are the OSW skeptics… 😉

  3. Bubba1855 Avatar

    We need a backup / Plan B when the wind doesn’t blow…sorry, just my ranting and raving…good luck VA…
    Bubba (BS Math/Physics/Chemistry and Ivy League MBA…now fully retired)

  4. LarrytheG Avatar

    Here’s the other side of this – why we’re going to burn less gas also:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1bd2bdfd7819f4d096fa415ebf09cc4f1dc7bd16315ee136e50c95a00ac4cc8d.jpg

    Heat pumps have dramatically improved in the last few years.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/world/europe/germany-heat-pumps.html

  5. Interesting data, Steve. Even if the numbers hold up over time, a 46% “average” capacity factor is meaningless if the capacity ranges from 22% in August to 74% in February. You can’t build an electric grid around a major power source that varies so widely from month to month (to say nothing of daily highs and lows in output).

    If the solution to variability is building battery storage, it doesn’t work to build enough batteries to handle 46% capacity from the wind farm. You have to build enough to handle 22% — or suffer severe electricity shortages through the month of August.

    There’s another problem. When the wind turbines are cranking out electricity at 74% capacity, where does the electricity go? Can the grid absorb it all? If it can, what other facilities will the wind power render redundant and uneconomical?

    The data, as limited as it is, seems devastating to the economics of the project.

  6. Bubba1855 Avatar

    Larry…all good points…but it takes time, like a generation or more for homes and businesses to move to heat pumps…look at the NE…they are one of the largest consumers of fuel oil for home heating. Are these homeowners going to spend millions/billions to convert to heat pumps? duh…not likely.
    Regarding heat pumps…just an anecdotal/personal item…yes, you can laugh
    …we owned a home 30 years ago that had a heat pump…when it got cold in the winter my wife said “it’s not hot”…and it wasn’t…she wanted ‘heat’…
    then the electric strip heaters kicked in and she was happy until we got the power bill. Again, you can laugh..

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Bubba – I agree. It’s going to take years, probably decades….. but let some things go quicker, like LED lights and TVs …

      And agree, people are not going to replace with heat pumps but if they get a good tax credit, some will sooner than later.

      I had heat strips then a heat pump that was not “warm”. This year, after 20, it gave out and we replaced it. It’s AMAZING! it puts out HOT air!

      between newer technology heat pumps, LEDs, and other, we will cut down demand – over time.

      None of this will happen overnight and no one is going to shut down the gas plants anytime soon. That’s all boogeyman fear and loathing from “alarmists”!

  7. Bubba1855 Avatar

    I’m telling you, the issue isn’t ‘average’ it’s reliable power…like for day to day or week to week. Batteries work great for minute to minute or hour to hour but they don’t work for day to day.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      I agree. And I have little faith in battery technology in the short term , But think of the grid as a giant hybrid machine that automatically uses the most available, least costly power,

      This is evolving technology, something most folks embraced… just like LEDs …. not everyone but plenty and I’ll include nukes in that. We’re evolving to modern nukes that are safer and won’t melt down – a good thing and they’ll come online also.

  8. Bubba1855 Avatar

    Ok Larry…correct me if I’m wrong…
    The ‘transition’ will take time…like 20-40 years. Of course I wont’ be around for that but that’s not the point. We need a Plan B for the transition period.
    I don’t like coal nor nuke (I don’t want to store spent nuclear fuel for 10,000 years…hey, I’m a physics major). I just want ‘the powers that be’ to admit
    that they need to have a Plan B during this transition period…so far I have not seen that…
    Bubba

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      You might be expecting more than reality. It’s an evolving thing mostly private sector. And
      the old two steps forward, one step back , normal.

      Look back at the fits and starts with automobiles over the last 50 years.

      You’d ask – what was the “plan”…

      or wastewater treatment, or GPS or NOAA satellites or autonomous vehicles, drones, etc

      LEDs – what was the “plan”?

      You’re a Physics guy, you KNOW this!

      All I can tell you is that SOMEONE is out there designing a hybrid car that gets 1000 miles to a charge… that’s the “plan”. When is a different issue!

      Hells Bells… some day , someone is going to figure out how to get hydrogen by cracking H20 in a cost-effective process – JUST LIKE we found how to use catalytic converters to reduce emissions!

      😉

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        1000 miles on a charge? Why? Who drives 24 hrs straight through?

        1. DJRippert Avatar

          Autonomous trucks.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            that automatically know where the refuel places are and go get refueled.

            Yep.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Yikes! Although, given that there are drivers out there hopped on low grade speed, sleepless, and forging logs, the autopilot is as good at hour 15 as at hour 1. Doubt many humans can claim the same.

  9. LarrytheG Avatar

    Dominion is doing what Dominion has done all along whether it’s about earthquake faults at nuke sites, coal-ash cleanup, or rebating excess profits and taxes or for that matter their bogus pipeline that they initially said was for electricity in the initial permitting.

    They play hardball across the board to keep their investors feeling good about their Dominion shares.

    Youngkin wants them to start considering SMRs.

    Does anyone think they’re going to be any more forthcoming about them or that Youngkin will insist
    on “full transparency” of any such SMR development? ha ha.

    The current folks who are asking the “questions”, as far as I know, they never weighed in before on these other issues – they have no standing record or history of dogging Dominion about their transparency with regard to prior issues.

    Basically they feel more climate deniers and windmill deniers than much of anything.

  10. James Kiser Avatar
    James Kiser

    Because they can’t meet the requirements and they know it. Just like none of the cars or electric trucks being sold can’t come close to equaling a gasoline or diesel powered vehicle.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      They’re BOTH in their infancy and getting better and better. Think about how many years it took for the internal combustion engine to get optimized. Do you really think in 25 years both won’t be much more advanced than now?

      Why the opposition to an emerging technology that has significant promise?

      In 25 years, we may well have electric cars that have a 1000 mile range ! Turbine design will have evolved into better and better operation and capacity.

      For that matter SMR nukes will have also so why oppose ANY of it moving forward?

      1. James Kiser Avatar
        James Kiser

        First off you as have many others have swallowed hook,line and sinker. Physics states a limit on how much electricity can be stored in a battery and there is no way to get around that. I hear all these glowing reports by media paid by the car companies and the government to lie about the capacities and capabilities of electric vehicles. I will give you an example when you drive a car or a truck that car or truck will go 60 mph with a full tank or even a 1/8 of a tank of fuel. An electric car/truck when its battery drops to an 1/8 charge will just stop dead. Gasoline has 5000 times the energy storage of an electric battery the same size.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Batteries are going to get better over time… they’re in their infancy. Compare them to the original internal combustion engines which were pretty crude compared to todays evolved versions.

          Until they get to an optimal state , cars will have a gasoline engine also.

          Isn’t Volvo producing EV 18 wheelers right now in Virginia?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b338c55473b7a52f61e6533da65f04651872afdcfa38591cec4c9f08919582d5.jpg

          https://www.volvotrucks.us/trucks/vnr-electric/

          auto companies:

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5e173fbc07cda217ddb96936a8dfb236de054328aa94200ee28e1e5f120d6373.jpg

          https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-automakers-double-spending-evs-batteries-12-trillion-by-2030-2022-10-21/#:~:text=BMW%20(BMWG.DE)%2C,four%20plants%20in%20North%20America.

          Are all of these companies wrong?

          1. James Kiser Avatar
            James Kiser

            yes they are ignoring physics.

  11. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    It’s only money.

    “Cutty Sark was the fastest ship on the wool trade for ten years. In July 1889 the log of the modern passenger steamship SS Britannia recorded that when steaming at 15–16 knots she was overtaken in the night by a sailing ship doing 17 knots, which proved to be Cutty Sark.”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutty_Sark

    On the other hand, Northrop is building a fleet of 100 B-21s as the third leg of the Nuclear Triad. Triad? Wind, solar, nuclear?

  12. An interesting take on wind and solar from the land down under.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/12/07/submission-to-the-senate-inquiry-into-australias-transition-to-a-green-energy-superpower/

    “Senators should be aware that energy from solar panels and wind turbines is only as cheap as it is because the solar panels and wind turbines are made using energy from fossil fuels, predominantly coal. Solar panels are made in China using electric power costing US$0.04/kWh. Under ideal conditions in the West Australian desert those same panels produce power at a price equivalent to power produced from diesel generators at $0.21/kWh.

    If you used power from solar panels to make more solar panels, the cost of power from the second generation of solar panels would be of the order of $1.00/kWh. The same is true of wind turbines. If you tried to carry on the process of replacing solar panels and wind turbines as they wore out with solar panels and wind turbines made from power produced from the ones being replaced, the cost would become infinite and the economy would collapse. The situation is that simple, and that obvious.

    As such solar panels and wind turbines are neither renewaable or sustainable. The solar panels and wind turbines we have installed in Australia at the moment are an artefact of cheap coal power.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      “If you tried to carry on the process of replacing solar panels and wind turbines as they wore out with solar panels and wind turbines made from power produced from the ones being replaced, the cost would become infinite and the economy would collapse.”

      Hahahaha!

      Extending that logic, the economy would collapse with an infinite supply of power.

      1. Obviously, the numbers involved have exceeded your mental capacity.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Try working the problem without using cost in dollars, but with energy.

          It works this way. A 200W solar panel with a 20-year lifespan will nominally produce 200W*5hours/day*365days/year*20years = 7.3Megawatts.

          Now, determine the cost in Watts to make the panel regardless of how the energy is produced. If it’s less than 7.3Mw, then the economy will not collapse.

          Hint: the answer is out there. Benson & Dale. BTW, using current mining, transportation, and manufacturing methods, I believe the total energy cost is around 100Kw for that panel.

          Just for the fun of it, assume the price of a watt is $0.05, and that the cost increases at 4% per year. How much money will that panel produce over 20 years? Now, how is the economy going to collapse?

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Hey Tom,
      As an aside. There once were three traveling salemen driving across Kansas on a stormy night. Rather than risk a fiery car crash, they chose to get a room and stopped at a Motel6.

      “How much for a room?”
      “$30,” replied the clerk, and they each paid him $10.

      Later, the clerk felt guilty for overcharging them and called the bellhop saying, “Take this $5 to room 201.”

      The bellhop, seeing no profit for him pocketed $2, gave the men $3, which they promptly divvied, and thus each man paid $9 for the room.

      That’s $27 plus the $2 the bellhop kept is $29.

      What happened to the 30th dollar?

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        The 30 the 30th dollar was taken by Dominion and then donated to a member of the Imperial Clown Show in Richmond in order to secure his vote on the wind farm?

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          3%! Oh no. Those clowns cost waaaay more than that.

      2. After the discount there is no 30th dollar any more.

        At $25 for the room, The men are now paying $8.33 each to the motel for the room. Add +/-$0.66 from each guy to account for the $2 the bellhop kept, and the total is $27, or $9 out of pocket from each man.

        The original $30 is accounted for as follows:

        $25 in the Cash Register.
        $ 1 refunded o Man#1
        $ 1 refunded to Man #2
        $1 refunded to man #3
        $2 kept by the bellhop
        Total = $30

      3. After the discount there is no 30th dollar any more.

        At $25 for the room, The men are now paying $8.33 each to the motel for the room. Add +/-$0.66 from each guy to account for the $2 the bellhop kept, and the total is $27, or $9 out of pocket from each man.

        The original $30 is accounted for as follows:

        $25 in the Cash Register.
        $ 1 refunded o Man#1
        $ 1 refunded to Man #2
        $1 refunded to man #3
        $2 kept by the bellhop
        Total = $30

  13. William O'Keefe Avatar
    William O’Keefe

    Dominion’s money making boondoggle is a Mugs Game. It can not solve wind powers biggest liability which is intermittency. This scheme needs to be examined within the context of system cost effectiveness.
    Consumers want and pay for a reliable source of electric power that is reasonably priced. Dominion needs to demonstrate that its wind farm’s contribution can help achieve that. Germany’s experience should make us doubtful.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      The intermittency makes it not dispatchable and not baseload power but that does not mean it’s not potentially a very valuable fuel if it can be used when it is available and it is much cheaper than other fuels.

      As long as Dominion and other utility companies “mix and match” fuels in generation, customers won’t even know where the power is actually coming from which is the case right now, Hardly anyone knows with any certainty if their power is coming specifically from nukes or gas or coal.

      I live 10 miles from North Anna and 5 miles from a 5000 acre solar farm and I get my power from REC. I have no idea what fuel is generating my electricity and really as long as it is reliable that’s fine.

      When North Anna goes down as it does periodically, the grid does not become unreliable… we don’t even know it has.
      And I STILL don’t know if my power is coming from a coal plant or a gas plant or a solar farm.

      All this “stuff” which borders on disinformation is basically coming from climate deniers who really don’t give a rat’s behind about the power and it’s sources just that the “greens” believe in climate change and support renewables.

      1. William O'Keefe Avatar
        William O’Keefe

        Larry, as usual you miss my point which has nothing to do with climate or denying reality. I’m sure that your view is a response to something; just not the issue I raised. Intermittency creates problems for grid reliability and cost. Have you looked at the actual experience of European nations that are making big investments in wind? Do you know how much German electricity is compared to what we pay?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Bill – if the power company “mixes” power from different sources, then how does intermittency make it more unreliable as long as the power company can easily switch in other sources when needed?

          In terms of Europe and Germany even BEFORE wind power, they had expensive electricity (but cheaper heating fuel because of Russian gas).

          I agree, they DO have a problem now but is wind the real issue? It’s the loss of the cheap Russian gas isn’t it?

          In terms of the generalized opposition to solar and wind, it seems to me it primarily comes from folks who also do not believe that climate change is a threat. It walks and talks the same and I simply do not know of many, if any “anti” wind and solar folks who oppose purely because it’s not dispatchable.

          If wind/solar could be used to help islands reduce the need for burning diesel fuel at 30+ cents a KWH, why not as long as they can back it up with diesel when need be but overall, they use less because of wind/solar when available? What is the argument against that?

          1. William O'Keefe Avatar
            William O’Keefe

            Larry, we’re talking about Dominion and not niche areas where solar and wind make sense. Take a look at this study–https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306261917308346. Europe in my opinion is the canary in the coal mine. I have a bias and it’s natural gas and nuclear.
            Dominion ought to be able to make it case through open and transparent analyses. As far as I know it hasn’t and that should trouble all of us.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            Some of Europe, at least initially went away from Nukes (not France), before Ukraine happened and their plan was to use wind and back it up with gas – like we are.

            When the gas went away, they were in trouble, I understand, Germany is re-thinking the Nukes now and I think Poland is actually building a new nuke.

            To reiterate for me, I’ve never opposed nukes or gas per se, It think both are needed, I don’t like the 6oyr old designs of the nukes and think they are a risk especially if we factor in terrorists and drones and such.

            I consider gas a vital fuel that we must continue to rely on , likely for decades while we continue to work on wind, solar and batteries

            Part of our problem is both sides on the issue look to the extremes on the other side and make that their argument.

            The vast majority of folks on the left are like me not like the ones that are often portrayed by opponents who claim they want to stop all gas right now. Just not the truth!

            I support SMRs also but everything I hear is that the electricity they produce will be very expensive in comparison with current fuels. Even then, I’d support SMRs if they can reduce the use of gas and be stand-by for renewables.

            The deal with Dominion and OSW is IMO, little different than the deal with Dominion on other issues whether it be “faults” at North Anna, coal ash cleanup, rebates from excess profits and tax rebates from the Feds.

            Simply speaking, they play hardball and are exceptionally skilled at politics and they really don’t care about about the fuel, but their control and profits.

            We’ve had decades to deal with them and I just don’t see much difference today other than the issue today is OSW.

            Even the enviros are “caught” on it.

  14. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    FWIW: Apparently, your comfort and warmth this winter depends less on power source, e.g., fossil or renewable, and more on your substation’s location relative to a blind.

    1. how_it_works Avatar
      how_it_works

      The simpletons around my neighborhood seem to be content with shooting up street signs.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        Moore county is essentially Pinehurst and there is a slew of upscale gated golfing and retirement communities in the region.

        1. how_it_works Avatar
          how_it_works

          And according to Google Maps there’s at least two trailer parks there.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            Oh yes. All those fancy houses need service workers…

          2. how_it_works Avatar
            how_it_works

            They should get rid of those trailer parks, move them to the next county over, and put HOT lanes on the interstate connecting the two.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            not Moore. but Charlotte , yes.

  15. Why Does Dominion Fear a Wind Output Promise?

    Possibly because they know there is no way on God’s green earth they will be able to meet the energy production levels they have been claiming they can meet.

  16. Ruckweiler Avatar
    Ruckweiler

    The reason for Dominion’s hesitation is the baloney knows the meat grinder.

  17. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    Part of the offshore wind issue is maintenance issues, including blade erosion, reducing efficiency as the years of service march forward. I am not sure if we are asking for a life performance or year#1 performance.

    It would be nice to know real world offshore wind performance of 14MW turbines, but I suspect there is none, and perhaps not much real-world experience with offshore turbines much over 3MW?

    This is part of the issue: uncharted territory. What size are the turbines for the New England wind farm in construction, assuming that project is still going forward?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      similar issues with Nuke plants, no? Why are we so focused on only one kind of power issues?

      Did we obsess over North Anna and Surry when they were built about such “issues”?

      The coal plants? Did we worry about coal ash or mountain top removal?

      why the double standard?

      1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
        energyNOW_Fan

        Scale-up is a huge issue in commercial plants, I do not think Lake Anna was as much of a step-out as this proposal is.

        The only reason this step-out makes sense, is because it is not a private industry. It is state of Virginia subsidized, financial backing via captive rate payers. We ratepayers have essentially become venture capitalists.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          it sits on an active earthquake fault, right?

          1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
            energyNOW_Fan

            well that information was withheld from the public by Dominion and Virginia elected officials, so we did have to worry about it until approval and City Hall demanded the plant be built anyways. You see what happened? Lucky we are that the quake was not just slightly worse.

          2. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
            energyNOW_Fan

            well that information was withheld from the public by Dominion and Virginia elected officials, so we did have to worry about it until approval and City Hall demanded the plant be built anyways. You see what happened? Lucky we are that the quake was not just slightly worse.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            so we leave it there? Sounds riskier than OSW, no?

  18. DJRippert Avatar

    This will end up being one of the all-time most expensive exercises in virtue signaling.

    Our power costs will go up (for the foreseeable future) after this project comes online.

    The reduction in greenhouse gasses from this project will be too small to measure.

    Our economy will be hurt while the economies of other states and countries which don’t do this will not be hurt.

    I guess we will be able to stick out our chests and scream, “We have virtue!”

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      That would be Youngkin when he announces Virginia will produce commercial SMRs, right before the company goes belly up.

  19. LarrytheG Avatar

    So if we had REAL transparency, we’d also know and want to know how much it costs to generate power at North Anna, Surry and other Dominion plants, as well as how much Dominion pays for PJM power……….

    right?

  20. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    OMG! A totally random and highly unpredictable event! How could anyone foresee this horrible thing?!
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nTXq1d_grFA

  21. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    OMG! Now who could have predicted this?
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/department-of-energy-to-announce-holy-grail-nuclear-fusion-breakthrough

    OTOH, net positive energy has already been achieved with solar.

  22. Turbocohen Avatar

    Economies of scale and % reliability of Nuke never looked better.

Leave a Reply