Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 367

That makes no mathematical sense; the capacity factor is the ratio of average power generated to peak power capability, it's always less than 100%.
No it is not.
First of all it is not peak but nameplate
Secondly, the long running example plants of enbw.com BALTIC1 and BALTIC2 (both in the balktic see) are close to 200% nameplate production. So their CF is nearly 200% The average over the last ten years was somewhere around 140% IIRC. (It is published in EnBWs web site in german and english)

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 1) 367

My opinion aubout CF is: it is a useless metric.
I was surprised when one /. poster once posted a link to a government document (in the USA) where CF is actually "defined" and there where examples where plant owners did actually report their CFs per plant to an gov agency.

My argument always was that e.g. in Germany no power company is using that "metric" as it is not relevant for daily use/planning of power plants.

Your explanation goes into the same direction as the US definition I remember simply was: actual-energy / max-energy-if-run-at100%-fulltime. Not sure if it was adjusted in any way regarding the actual runtime ... that document specified a set of variations of CFs.

Yeah, actually a nuclear plant has a quite high power consumption.

I just checked a german nuclear plant, its yield is 1468MW, but it consumes 66MW so the efficiency of converting thermal energy to electricity is only 35.3% (This is per turbine/block, so a plant with 4 blocks, which is cut from landlines and has to emergency shut down, would need 4 x ~ 70MW emergency power Generation)

Comment Re: FUCK OFF DICE (Score 1) 664

Even the simplest program flow control with nothing but a few if then else statements is logic, yes indeed.

Thought about that, after I was finsihed writing. We don't call that logic, but control flow. With logic we usually mean boolean algebra, horn logic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horn_clause) or predicate logic.

I'm not arguing that _everybody_ can code, or should learn coding. However the majourity could. The question is where to draw the line. What is actually coding/programming?

Writing a socket based program that does http request is not really a challange, but tedious. I guess I would Need a few hours (if I want to do more than simply write "get URL" to the socket).

However using an HTTP library from Python, or curl in a Shell script is easy.

My favourite teaching languahe still is Pascal.

A Pascal programm looks like a cooking recipe.

Ingrediences: types and consts
Tools: variables
ToDo's: procedures
Fitting all together: the main program

I agree with most of the stuff you write ... about abstraction, level of detail etc.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 367

And you'd go bankrupt that way
No I would not ... because I would buy and resell power from other sources to my customers.

How do you think the market works in Europe? Why is no wind power producer bancrupt? Why do people like you, who have no clue about energy production, always come up with such idiotic scenarios?

My scenario in the previous post was completely clear: I woulkd only sell wind power on the market. How I do that is my business. If you want to compete it is your business if you only use gas, only wind or both or any other mixture.

customers only use them for backup for your wind power plant
My wind plants don't need back up. You simply don't grasp how the eneregy production market works. An off shore wind plant has a capacity factor between 80% to 130%. I contract out 70% of that expected power production (about half of the expected 130% in total). NO DAMN BACK UP NEEDED The variation above that 70% I sell on the spot market, undercutting your fossile fuel plant all the time.
In the rare case where my production drops below the "expected 70%" I buy the missing power. Actually I'm oblieged to do that, after all I have a contract to fulfill. The customer does not even notice that the power "I deliever to him" does not really come from me. Well, depending if he explicitely ordered "green energy", I have to regenerate or buy an adequate amount of green energy. As my plants are planned to only sell half of their production in fix price contracts, I have enough reserves to regenerate the green energy in time.
gas turbine competitors are going to write contracts with customers that underbid
Physically impossible. Gas turbines are the most expensive power generation plants. Owners avoid as hell to even use them. You likely mean combined cycle gas plants which consist of a turbine part and a normal "boiler" part.

Now you will come and tell me that my wind park will have no wind at some time.
Yes, and? My other park has wind. And my third and fourth and all up to my 11th ...

The nice thing about off shore wind parks is: they have wind 99.99% all the time.

Comment Re:Not the total cost! (Score 1) 367

If you have a dam, you have a lock.

There is no: adding locks.

No idea about what you are talking.

I already said in my first post regarding dams in rivers that locks are a problem/costs for ships ... why you now bring that as an counter argument is beyond me.

If you wanted more hydro power you easily could install it. The "mantra": 'all good places are gone' is simply wrong.

Why don't you google for it? There are plenty initiatives to build more flow driven power plants in the USA, minimum 10 regarding e.g. Mississippi.

There are plenty of research projects and calculations for funding.

I live in Europe and now that! You live over there and have no clue at all what is going on!

Why don't you READ about stuff and gain KNOWLEDGE instead of stating your WRONG OPINIONS?

Comment Re:Not the total cost! (Score 1) 367

Sorry, how do you explain then that everywhere we jn Germany have a lock we also have a hundred years old power plant? Hu?
Ofc the turbine pays for itself (facepalm)
The only little difference are your artificially low end consumer prices for power. But I bet you would still make a profit.
And no one prevents you from building more locks, dams and plants anyway: that was the point of the discussion.

Comment Re:100% BULLSHIT (Score 1) 367

Germany will produce all its base load in 15 years by wind.
No idea how you come to the brain dead idea that base load is produced by dispatch able plants. It is not.
Base load is produced by plants that never change their output (because historically, that was the cheapest plant thinkable). In future you use wind for that. The load following plants don't care if they follow the changing demand (with fixed load nuclear/brown coal plants) or changing base load wind plants or both. It is the same 'problem'.
With enough wind plants distributed over the whole country and the use of forecasts/prognosis there is no additional problem involved.
However, perhaps you live in a different universe and your /. comment came into ours via a worm hole or a tunnel effect?
Pfft ... learn som physics and get a clue.

Comment Re:This is easy to evaluate (Score 1) 367

This will be ridiculously easy to evaluate.
Indeed it is. ... then it will attract private investment money and a lot of it. Investments in wind will far outpace investments in other kinds of power generation (coal, nat gas, nuke, etc).
That is happening since 30 years now ... or did you think the wind power installed was gifted to Germany by aliens?

Comment Re:Cost per kwh in Germany is 5.3x higher than our (Score 1) 367

You are mixing up the 'well known' prices for citizens/households with those for the industry.
Do you really believe a german steel mill pays 28cents per kWh? You cant be so dumb, can you?
I bet the prices for industrial consumers in the USA and Europe are more or less the same.

Comment Re: Time to drop the prices? (Score 2) 367

Perhaps it is not predictable for you, as you obviously never really dug into the matter.
My prediction for germany next year is: same amount of wind as this year (+/- 5%), my bet for solar is: same amount as this year (+/- 10%).
What is your bet for your country?
That you have this year a value of X and next year +/- 100%? 50%? 25%?

For all practical means of power production renewables are quite perfectly predictable.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 367

Well, it is your parents fault, but this is wrong:Well, but then you have to add the cost of the gas power plant to the cost of the wind power plant in order to calculate the actual cost of wind power.

No you have not.
You treat both plants separately. Or do you want to add the costs of the wind plant to the gas plant, too?
Whether you want two plants, is your business decision.
If you want to compete with your self, only selling wind power when you have lots of wind (and no gas power then) or if you want to sell gas power when there is no wind, is up too you.
In the end of the year you will have sold SUM power. X% of that SUM will be produced by wind. SUM - X% will be produced by gas. For the first one you calculate the price per produced kW/h, the same you do for the second.
There is no: we need to to assess the second to get the real price for the first.
I for my part would only build up wind pants. If you want to compete with either wind, or gas or both: that is your business decision.
I don't have to take into account how you do run your business, nor have you to take mine into account, except: when I produce power, you can't beat my price. But that is a simple business decision for you. Can you at a certain time in the year (or day or month) produce power and make money? Fair and simple.

Retirement means that when someone says "Have a nice day", you actually have a shot at it.