• 6 hours PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 8 hours Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 10 hours Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 11 hours Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 12 hours Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 13 hours Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 14 hours Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 16 hours New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 17 hours Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 18 hours Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 1 day Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 1 day British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 1 day Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 1 day Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 2 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 2 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 2 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 2 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 2 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 2 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 2 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 2 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 3 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 3 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 3 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 3 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 4 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 4 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 4 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 4 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 4 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 4 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 4 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 4 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 4 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 4 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 5 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 5 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 5 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 5 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
Alt Text

Chinese EV Boom Could Crash Oil Prices

Most oil majors acknowledge that…

Alt Text

Is Hydrogen Fuel As Dumb As Musk Thinks?

Hydrogen fuel cells have been…

Alt Text

Who’s Winning The Electric Vehicle Race?

Automakers and suppliers of automotive…

Why Sunny States are not the Best for Wind and Solar Plants

Why Sunny States are not the Best for Wind and Solar Plants

Wind and solar plants do the most good where they can reduce pollution and carbon dioxide emissions, so the best place to build them might not be where you think.

New research shows it’s not the Southwest and California where plants should be built. Ohio, West Virginia, and western Pennsylvania are a much better bet, because wind and solar power in those locations replace electricity generated by coal plants.

Related article: Scientists Produce Cheap Hydrogen from Rust and Sunlight

“A wind turbine in West Virginia displaces twice as much carbon dioxide and seven times as much health damage as the same turbine in California,” says Kyle Siler-Evans, a researcher in the department of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University. “The benefits of solar plants are greatest in the cloudy East as opposed to the sunny Southwest.”

Federal subsidies for wind and power plants are the same across the country. But Ines Lima Azevedo, an assistant professor of engineering and public policy and executive director of the Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making, argues “that while there is of course some uncertainty about the magnitude of the health and environmental damages avoided, if we are going to justify the added cost of wind and solar on the basis of the health and climate benefits that they bring, it is time to think about a subsidy program that encourages operators to build plants in places where they will yield the most health and climate benefits.”

The power generated by wind and solar is highly variable and intermittent.

Related article: New Engineless Planes could Fly on Ionic Winds

“There are significant costs associated with deploying and integrating wind and solar plants into the grid, so it would be best to do it in places where we can get the greatest health and climate benefits,” says Jay Apt, director of the Electricity Industry Center.

The research was supported by Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making, through a cooperative agreement between the National Science Foundation and Carnegie Mellon, and by the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center.

By. Chriss Swaney




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Jack on July 11 2013 said:
    The abominable intermittency of large wind and large solar make them unworkable for any expansive industrial grid. No amount of wishful thinking or structured ignorance will change that fact.

    It is a tossup as to which are the least informed of the workings of the real world: journalists or academics. Politicians stagger in a weak third place.
  • ChuckD3 on July 12 2013 said:
    If solar/wind generation is placed where it's most efficient (rather than where it's most needed), maybe some suitable users will locate around them (such as data centers). Hmmm... Is Utah a good place for solar and/or wind? As for the intermittency, can a data-center modulate its demand in response to supply conditions? All that web-crawling and indexing the Google does, for example, could be done when the power is plentiful.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News