Threatening wind shortage – climate change causes yields of wind turbines to dwindle

[windriverrange]

Drohender Windmangel - Klimawandel lässt Ertrag von Windkraftanlagen schwinden

Neue Studie belegt: Klimawandel könnte die Windgeschwindigkeiten um 15 % senken und den Ertrag von Windkraftanlagen stark mindern

blackout-news.de

"A new study suggests that climate change could significantly impact wind energy in Europe. According to the results, wind speeds could decrease noticeably in the coming decades ( telepolis: 19.02.25 )."

What a load of crap, so now climate change is going to be responsible for decreased winds. These people give husksters a bad name.

 

[Ponca Dan]

If we could capture all the hot air coming from all the nations' capitols we could unleash enough energy to last 100 years.

 

[fairdinkem]

Drohender Windmangel - Klimawandel lässt Ertrag von Windkraftanlagen schwinden

Neue Studie belegt: Klimawandel könnte die Windgeschwindigkeiten um 15 % senken und den Ertrag von Windkraftanlagen stark mindern

blackout-news.de

"A new study suggests that climate change could significantly impact wind energy in Europe. According to the results, wind speeds could decrease noticeably in the coming decades ( telepolis: 19.02.25 )."

What a load of crap, so now climate change is going to be responsible for decreased winds. These people give husksters a bad name.

The physics of wind generated electricity work just fine. You cannot break the laws of physics yet. The economics have and always will be negative. The only wind energy companies that are still operating are doing so with massive subsidies which drive the actual costs of wind generated electricity through the roof. There is also no feasible (economic & environmental) method of disposing the used turbine blades.

Another example of the idiot libs complete ignorance of economics vs. hope & wishes.

 

[skylinepoke]

The biggest complaint that I have with the green energy is why are the tax payers subsidizing it. I heard the Stillwater mayor proclaiming how the cityhas put car chargers around Stillwater. Where are the electric companies or EV companies? This is such a money grab by the elites to use our money to make them money.
I don't remember hearing about the government paying for gas stations or refineries when cars and gasoline became the rage.

 

[aix_xpert]

To be fair, the government historically has provided a number of subsidies to oil companies for "green" purposes as well. As a well depletes itself, it loses pressure and thus output. In the 60s and 70s, once a well was more than 50% depleted, it became cheaper for companies to go drill a new well than it was to try to maximize the output of the remaining well. So the government would provide "environmental" subsidies to companies to entice them to maximize existing wells vs. creating a new well, with a new 2 acre pad site, mud pit, water pit, etc. As the government rarely polices itself, I can only assume those subsidies are still in play even if the underlying justification may no longer be in play (given fracking, injection, horizontal drilling, and other extraction technological advancements).

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

If we could capture all the hot air coming from all the nations' capitols we could unleash enough energy to last 100 years.

Nice Dan, nice. 👍

 

[windriverrange]

To be fair, the government historically has provided a number of subsidies to oil companies for "green" purposes as well. As a well depletes itself, it loses pressure and thus output. In the 60s and 70s, once a well was more than 50% depleted, it became cheaper for companies to go drill a new well than it was to try to maximize the output of the remaining well. So the government would provide "environmental" subsidies to companies to entice them to maximize existing wells vs. creating a new well, with a new 2 acre pad site, mud pit, water pit, etc. As the government rarely polices itself, I can only assume those subsidies are still in play even if the underlying justification may no longer be in play (given fracking, injection, horizontal drilling, and other extraction technological advancements).

Since it is almost impossible to decipher what the government is thinking, the subsidies for oil companies seems to be a decent deal. At least the state & federal governments can tax the crap out of a gallon of gas/diesel, so there is some reimbursement back to the government. Also it is in the governments best interest to keep fuel prices as low as possible which in turn keeps the costs of goods low. No such benefit with EVs.

Green energy is a totally different animal if for no other reason most of these groups who receive billions is subsidies end up going under. I personally hate the wind effort because of the eye pollution the turbines create. Just absolutely hideous looking. The government has also allowed wind/solar to kill millions of song birds and birds of prey with no delitarius s effects on their businesses,while an oil company doing the same would be sued to oblivion for.

My last and maybe biggest complaint is that much of the industry was promulgated on high paying jobs in manufacturing and maintenance. The manufacturing is now done by the G'dam Chinese as far as the maintenance, I can't speak to that but since I don't see commercials about taking wind turbine maintenance classes on the tube, my guess is those jobs probably don't pay as much as they were advertised to pay in the beginning.

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

Now onto "solar panels".

 

[fairdinkem]

To be fair, the government historically has provided a number of subsidies to oil companies for "green" purposes as well. As a well depletes itself, it loses pressure and thus output. In the 60s and 70s, once a well was more than 50% depleted, it became cheaper for companies to go drill a new well than it was to try to maximize the output of the remaining well. So the government would provide "environmental" subsidies to companies to entice them to maximize existing wells vs. creating a new well, with a new 2 acre pad site, mud pit, water pit, etc. As the government rarely polices itself, I can only assume those subsidies are still in play even if the underlying justification may no longer be in play (given fracking, injection, horizontal drilling, and other extraction technological advancements).

As a well depletes itself, it loses pressure and thus output. In the 60s and 70s, once a well was more than 50% depleted, it became cheaper for companies to go drill a new well than it was to try to maximize the output of the remaining well.

My family began drilling wells in the late 1960’s. I joined as a working interest and/or royalty owner in the late 1970’s after I got my geology & petroleum engineering degrees. I don’t understand what you are describing above. A well depletes for several reasons, some objective & some subjective. Why would I drill a new well if I could simply treat the wellbore by cleaning up the tubing, re-perforating or even setting up a water flood. Why would you drill a new well in a location that you deemed “50% depleted”?

So the government would provide "environmental" subsidies to companies to entice them to maximize existing wells vs. creating a new well, with a new 2 acre pad site, mud pit, water pit, etc.

The only government “subsidies” I can recall would be a reduction on taxes for “stripper” wells, those that produced less than 10 BOPD or a break on natural gas prices for gas produced below 15,000 feet.

I can only assume those subsidies are still in play even if the underlying justification may no longer be in play (given fracking, injection, horizontal drilling, and other extraction technological advancements).

Other than you intangible drilling cost deductions and depletion allowances, I am not aware of any of these other “subsidies”. Granted I’ve only participated in wells in OK & TX. Maybe somewhere else had these breaks.