I have had a number of people ask me about a statement in my wife’s (Mary Jo Hoes) op-ed piece, “Wind power isn’t right for Yolo,” published Oct. 9. The statement in question is, “… when it (wind power) makes up a significant percentage of the utility power it may not result in significant reductions in CO2 emissions or the use of nonrenewable energy sources.”

It is counterintuitive that these huge wind machines might not be effective at reducing the use of fossil fuels or reduce emissions of CO2, but it seems to be true.

The problem has to do with the facts that wind power is highly variable, and the utility has to balance the amount of power being produced with the amount of power being used. To accomplish this, the other generators on the utility grid have to be nimble enough to offset the rapid variations in wind power production.

Most generators on the grid respond far too slowly to keep up with the changes caused by wind power variations. Special, highly variable gas turbines are required for this purpose. These power plants are not nearly as efficient as traditional sources. In addition, they are often kept running at all times, even when producing no power, in order to have adequate “spinning reserves” to respond when needed.

Once the percentage of wind is high enough (possibly as little as twice of what is currently produced in California), the net result will be a marked decrease in grid efficiency and associated increase in CO2 emissions.

The best current technologies to address the need for renewable energy are small-scale, distributed systems where the power is mainly used where it is created. Examples are rooftop (or parking lot) solar arrays; here, there is much less impact upon the grid because only a small percentage of the power reaches the grid.

Charles Hoes

Zamora

Comments

comments