This accusation that wind power is actually a rubbish source of renewable energy seems to never go away, so while not a full rebuttal, the figures for both Denmark and the UK are given blow plus the links to the original Government source documents.
Capacity (in MW) is maximum peak power output that could be obtained if the plant is operational.
Generation (in GWh) is the actual amount of electricity produced.
Official Government figures from Denmark for 2008:
2008 Total Capacity 13,153 MW
Wind 3,166 MW (24%)
2008 Total Generation 131,011 GWh
Wind 24,940 GWh (19%)
Official Government figures from UK 2009:
Total Capacity 85,337 MW
Wind 1,860 MW (2.1%)
Fossil 66,589 MW (78%)
Nuclear 10,858 MW (12%)
Total Generation 371,978 GWh
Wind 9,324 GWh (2.5%)
Fossil 274,458 GWh (74%)
Nuclear 69,098 GWh (18.5%)
source: http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Statistics/publications/dukes/311-dukes-2010-ch5.pdf
Rather surprisingly, the UK currently gets 2.5% of its electricity from wind projects that make up only 2.1% of its total generating capacity. Inefficient – really?
What these figures tell us is that, sure enough, as you depend more on wind (like Denmark) you have to build in over-capacity to deal with variable weather conditions. This is also true with solar, wave energy and to some extent tidal. Thats’ life. It is afterall, the reason why renewable power (horse, wind, water) was replaced by coal during the Industrial Revolution.
What is often overlooked is that on-shore locally generated community scale generation:
- Co-locates generator and consumer
- Overcomes inefficiencies associated with line loss across long stretches of cable
- Slots into the local grid (often re-enforcing it) without the need for major grid upgrades