Rock Port, Missouri - The First 100% Wind Powered City

[Besoeker]

[quote=LMagic007;239413]I had expected that too, however your remarks failed to meet my reasonable expectation of sensibility.[quote]
And that is the justification for your "childsly pedantic" comment?
Bear in mind that you are a moderator.

Originally Posted by LMagic007

In the context of my remarks, clearly Rockport expects to be 100% wind powered, be because I used the word annual and they haven't had the Wind farm for one year yet. Thus it was appropriate for me to use that word "expect", in reference to the future. However in terms of the more immediate context, it's evident that on net balance estimates, Rockport is 100% wind powered for all intensive purposes, based on the numbers they presented in the articles being accurate and of course also assuming thus far, their expectations have been met. The rest really is just being unnecessarily pedantic.

The first line in the first link is:
"Rock Port, Missouri is the first 100% wind powered city in the US"
Is is stated as fact. Not an expectation.
Let's just see how it works out over the next couple of years.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

I think it's reasonable to say, if up to this very day, Rockport is net positive in terms of electricity generated from their wind plant since it began operation, as opposed to electricity they have consumed from the grid, then for all practical purposes, Rock Port MO is 100% wind powered in net electrical quantitative terms. Tomorrow is another day and of course who knows what tomorrow may bring.

I think to be fair to the articles, they do acknowledge they will still be grid dependant. Deductively this in effect implies that what the articles mean by 100% is net electrical terms and if their figures are reliable, and to this date if they have produced more electricity from wind than they have consumed, that would be the case, up to this day. It's fairly clear they are speaking in net electrical terms, even if they haven't spelt it out Ad infinitum. I think you are judging the articles rather unfairly. I agree though, let's see how things work out over a reasonable time period.

[Besoeker]

There are a couple of points I would add to the above discussion before leaving it.
The thrust of the various articles is that Rock Port expects to be self sufficient in energy and that’s a laudable aim that they may well achieve. But note that it’s energy, not power.
We discussed high and low points in the context of “up to 16GWh”.
I commented that the “low point” might not be enough which you acknowledged and suggested that’s why they accept that the need a grid connection.
They need a grid connection whether or not that’s the case. It is the distinction between energy and power.
Even if the average energy output from the wind turbines comfortably exceeded the 13GWh use, a grid connection would still be required.
The grid connection is required to accommodate fluctuations in power use. It is needed to sink or source power on a continuous basis from a variable supply regardless of any excess energy generated.
As I said, it is an important distinction.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

There are a couple of points I would add to the above discussion before leaving it.
The thrust of the various articles is that Rock Port expects to be self sufficient in energy and that’s a laudable aim that they may well achieve. But note that it’s energy, not power.
We discussed high and low points in the context of “up to 16GWh”.
I commented that the “low point” might not be enough which you acknowledged and suggested that’s why they accept that the need a grid connection.
They need a grid connection whether or not that’s the case. It is the distinction between energy and power.
Even if the average energy output from the wind turbines comfortably exceeded the 13GWh use, a grid connection would still be required.
The grid connection is required to accommodate fluctuations in power use. It is needed to sink or source power on a continuous basis from a variable supply regardless of any excess energy generated.
As I said, it is an important distinction.

Indeed the articles makes the distinction itself. The articles clearly indicate grid connection is required. Nothing is hidden there, it's complete acknowledgement in the articles that grid connectivity is required. Energy or many units of power over time, it all washes up the same. Rock Port needs grid connection for obvious reasons of insufficient wind to allow them to generate the electricity they require all the time. As indicated though, in net electricity terms, if the figures are reliable and if up to this very day Rock Port has generated more electricity from its wind farm, than it has consumed electricity from the grid, then for all practical purposes in net electrical terms, Rock Port can be said in effect, to have been 100% powered by wind, given the fact that the wind farm is grid connected and excess electricity generated from the wind farm, is fed back into the grid.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Energy or many units of power over time, it all washes up the same.

Ah....obviously I didn't make my point clear.
Energy and, if you prefer it units of power multiplied by time is also energy. Not power.
The Rock Port could wind farm could well provide all the energy it needs.
The 16GWh maximum production may meet the 13GWh energy
requirement.
But, even if it was a guaranteed 26GWh pa, a grid connection would still be required. To meet instantaneous power demands.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Ah....obviously I didn't make my point clear.
Energy and, if you prefer it units of power multiplied by time is also energy. Not power.
The Rock Port could wind farm could well provide all the energy it needs.
The 16GWh maximum production may meet the 13GWh energy
requirement.
But, even if it was a guaranteed 26GWh pa, a grid connection would still be required. To meet instantaneous power demands.

For the umpteenth time, the articles acknowledge grid connection is required. It can be clearly seen in the articles, that power is spoken about in the broad context of time i.e. annually ( thus seen as units of power over time ). By talking about power annually, they are implying the context of time. The articles also highlight that Rock Port expects to produce more electricity than it consumes annually. The articles are correctly written. The rest is just petty.

[Wobs]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

For the umpteenth time, the articles acknowledge grid connection is required. It can be clearly seen in the articles, that power is spoken about in the broad context of time i.e. annually ( thus seen as units of power over time ). By talking about power annually, they are implying the context of time. The articles also highlight that Rock Port expects to produce more electricity than it consumes annually. The articles are correctly written. The rest is just petty.

Perhaps we know people who will partially read it and take it the wrong way. Not implying you BTW, but people we know. Its one of those stories that can get twisted down the line thanks to some journalistic hype.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

Perhaps we know people who will partially read it and take it the wrong way. Not implying you BTW, but people we know. Its one of those stories that can get twisted down the line thanks to some journalistic hype.

As can many stories of varying kinds which is a reality of journalism and is not unique to any single topic of public interest. That's nothing unusual. However I think most reasonable minds can appreciate the articles intended meaning. I don't think it's worth being overly concerned and there are many other matters of more than equal importance that deserve more attention.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

For the umpteenth time, the articles acknowledge grid connection is required.

But not for the reason you suggested.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

But not for the reason you suggested.

False and misleading and therefore wrong. In actual fact, the reason I indicated is the reason outlined in the articles. I have mentioned that the articles acknowledge that grid connection is required in several places, but the reason I gave, is as is quoted from my posts. i.e. I stated that;

Rock Port needs grid connection for obvious reasons of insufficient wind to allow them to generate the electricity they require all the time.

Also;

Backup.

My other discussions about the grid are about feeding electricity to the grid and taking electricity from the grid, from a net metering perspective, but these were not reasons given for grid connection. However it makes no difference even if they were additional reasons for Rock Port, but simply not mentioned, because the intended meaning of the articles is clear and most reasonable thinking people would appreciate that.