15,197 MW Of Wind Power Installed Worldwide In 2006

[jpak]

http://www.nawindpower.com/naw/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.436

The Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) recently released its annual figures for 2006 that reveal 15,197 MW of wind energy was installed in 2006 around the world.

With this figure, the total installed wind energy capacity for over 70 countries is 74,223 MW - up from 59,091 MW in 2005. The countries with the highest total installed capacity are Germany (20,621 MW), Spain (11,615 MW), the U.S. (11,603 MW), India (6,270 MW) and Denmark (3,136). Thirteen countries around the world can now be counted among those with over 1,000 MW of wind capacity, with France and Canada reaching this threshold in 2006.

In terms of new installed capacity in 2006, the U.S. continued to lead with 2,454 MW, followed by Germany (2,233 MW), India (1,840 MW), Spain (1,587 MW), China (1,347 MW) and France (810 MW).

<not much more>

Global Wind Energy Market Grew 32 Percent in 2006 According to German Engineering Federation (VDMA)

http://www.solutions-site.org/artman/publish/article_315.shtml

Worldwide, 15,200 megawatts of new wind generating capacity was installed in 2006, with about 15 billion euros (US$19.5 billion) invested, an increase of 32 percent compared the previous year, VDMA said in a statement.

"We expect to achieve similar growth rates up to at least 2010," said Norbert Giese, head of the wind turbine producers in VDMA. The VDMA represents 3,000 mainly small and medium-size member companies in the engineering industry.

The growth in wind energy capacity last year was mainly driven by the US market, which installed new capacity of 2,454 MW, and by Germany, Spain, India and China.

"Wind energy is not only a German or European but a global growth market," said Thorsten Herdan, head of VDMA Power Systems.

<not much more>

[jpak]

1. A hugh!!1111 trust fund kid kick for magical mystical "mega"watts

Accounting for capacity factors, global additions of wind power in 2006 were more than twice that of net new nuclear additions.

Solar Nirvana will soon be achieved...

:evilgrin:

[phantom power]

2. They should provide about 0.14 exajoules per year. (at 30% loading)

[jpak]

3. and in ten years, wind power *alone* will produce exo-jewels of electricity each year

What will they say then????

[phantom power]

4. I imagine I would say "good start, keep going."

Regardless of our disagreements over the various merits of renewables and nuclear power, I genuinely don't see why we can't agree that the measure "exa-joules per year" is a very good measure for comparing energy sources, and better than watts, or peak-watts, or what-have-you.

Here's why I think that: measuring per-year basically integrates out all the variability that any energy source experiences. Using exa-joules per year is just a choice of scaling, but it's a good one because the world uses 400 exa-joules per year, so we can talk in convenient numbers like "0.14 exajoules/year", instead of annoying numbers like "1.4e+17 joules/year."

It makes the scales easy to understand. If somebody installs a wind-farm that produces 1 exajoule/year off the atlantic coast, then I know intuitively that it provides about 1% of the US energy usage, since we use about 105 exajoules each year.

It's not a word we should use to make fun of each other with. It's a conceptual tool we can all use to help each other better understand what the hell is going on.

Who's with me!

[Dead_Parrot]

5. They'll say, "Where's all the fucking ice gone!?" nt

[phantom power]

6. Or maybe "please, more soylent-green, sir?"

[jpak]

7. Or

Where is that make believe molten salt breeder reactor that will save the world????