Wind Power Has A Profitability Problem

[iBaba]

Negative profitability territory is a more politically correct designation for the billion-dollar losses that the US wind power giants have been suffering for several years, despite the political importance of the climate change agenda and generous government subsidies in the campaign to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels.

What I noticed is that the government have scaled back subsidies for renewable energy developers to make them more competitive which caused a decrease in turbine prices and frustrated some manufacturers.

Despite many manufacturers developing bigger turbines to capture more winds, the inventories became more costly to introduce. Energy storage banks for the wind-turbines can help make it a more sustainable alternative to fossil fuels due to the greater damage caused by fossil fuels to the ozone layer depletion.

What I’m seeing is a colossal market failure.

Against the backdrop of growing economic problems in the United States, this green environmental movement is becoming more and more like a large-scale scam to develop budget funds for an initially economically unviable idea.

Share your opinion on this matter.

You see, in the end, I believe that many independent manufacturers and wind power giants in the United States and other European countries will need to fall back on Bitcoin technologies to maintain some level of market control in the face of the government's controlled market.

For OEMs and other developers, adoption of the Bitcoin trade could at the very least mitigate the effects of market product value loss, among other deficits caused by the market crisis.

[1715164487]

1715164487

[1715164487]

1715164487

[Ultegra134]

All "renewable energy" has a profitability problem. The pitch the elites gave us was that we must pay higher prices for energy in order to save the planet while they were allowed to emit more pollution than some small countries.

Against the backdrop of growing economic problems in the United States, this green environmental movement is becoming more and more like a large-scale scam to develop budget funds for an initially economically unviable idea.

I've seen this complacency happen before. People become so comfortable with the state of affairs they actively seek matters to complain about for the sake of activism. Climate change activism is a career for some people. Greta Thunberg has the climate change grift down to a science so much so the UN asked her to give a speech.

It's funny and ironic that citizens are supposed to pay the price for pretty much everything regarding the environment, whether it is a green tax on single-use plastics, car emissions, or electricity. I'm all in to preserving the environment, but I'm also careful myself and try not to waste resources or be ignorant and throw trash around.

I always recycle, try not to use my car as often, and walk around, whenever possible. However, everything that is environmentally friendly is expensive, from disposable bags to paper straws to other kinds of packaging that isn't plastic. Why must these eco-friendly products be more expensive than the regular ones? Why am I supposed to pay the incentive of being thoughtful about the environment when large corporations are doing what they please, not caring at all, when they're the ones creating the issue in the first place?

[moneystery]

It's very funny to see a business run without thinking about the losses from their operations, even without shame they still ask for donations from the government for their vision for environmentally friendly renewable energy. Even though it's not only wind, there are still other renewable energy sources that offer better energy output at a much cheaper cost compared to what is offered by wind turbines. The dream of renewable energy seems to be a great business to exploit and businesses in the wind energy industry see it as an opportunity and are not wasting it

[coolcoinz]

Honestly I have no idea why someone would choose to build an electric generator that relies on wind. The only thing that comes to mind is a business that need constant power flow both during day and night so they add these generators to increase nighttime production, but then, why not just add more solar panels and more batteries to accumulate a greater amount during the day? The difference in cost must be marginal and wind generators require much more maintenance.

Wind power generators are expensive to build, prone to failure due to mechanical parts, can destroy themselves completely if the breaking system fails during strong wind, are hard to maintain and fix because all important components are located very high and you have to climb a ladder to get there. The cost of these things is so high that ROI is much worse than with solar panels.

[Myleschetty]

In this 21st century, I don't think the idea of Wind power is something people should consider when there are the best alternatives like solar power not to mention the drawback of the noise pollution that the wind turbines will generate noise which raises concern for residents living close to the turbines another is the wind speeds will also vary at some point.

[umbara ardian]

Must acknowledge the potential drawbacks of any energy source, including wind power, and ensure that we are taking a comprehensive and balanced approach to energy production and consumption. Wind power is limited to regions with suitable wind conditions, and its performance can be affected by changes in weather patterns and other factors. Additionally, wind power alone may not be able to meet all of our energy needs, and a mix of different renewable energy sources may be necessary to achieve a sustainable energy future.

[jossiel]

It's very funny to see a business run without thinking about the losses from their operations, even without shame they still ask for donations from the government for their vision for environmentally friendly renewable energy.

That's true that these business probably have anticipated their potential loss already before they continue after having that analysis that they might experience losses and not even close to break-even. But with their noble business as they say as it's helping the environment, that's what they're capitalizing as business and have to offer to the people. It's like having that psychological conscious buying for their customers as strategy.

Even though it's not only wind, there are still other renewable energy sources which offer better energy output at a much cheaper cost compared to what is offered by wind turbines.

The dream of renewable energy seems to be a great business to exploit and businesses in the wind energy industry see it as an opportunity and are not wasting it.

What you've said are facts, it's actually a great business that these have foresee it before they go into actual business. But the respond of the market, for their target customers didn't go well as of now.

Maybe soon when all of these crises are nearing to its end or showing signs of recovery, they'll get up again and their sales will bump.

[Sayeds56]

Obtaining energy from wind is one of the most fastidious branches of energy. Special wind conditions are needed in order for wind turbines to pay off and bring profit. And judging by this news, they didn't bring her either. And it worked only for the future, rather as an experiment. It seems to me that it is necessary to develop this direction, it is eco-friendly, but to strengthen supervision over the appropriation and sale of funds allocated by the state.
Because in any case, in the future it will be a profitable project.

You are correct  that wind energy is echo friendly and sustainable source of energy. However, its profitability a a project is a challenge due to specific requirement for wind pressure and maintenance issue that arise during the operation. Despite these challenges, I remain optimistic that as the technological development advances with continued government funding for research based projects, wind energy  will become viable source of green energy in future.

[summonerrk]

Obtaining energy from wind is one of the most fastidious branches of energy. Special wind conditions are needed in order for wind turbines to pay off and bring profit. And judging by this news, they didn't bring her either. And it worked only for the future, rather as an experiment. It seems to me that it is necessary to develop this direction, it is eco-friendly, but to strengthen supervision over the appropriation and sale of funds allocated by the state.
Because in any case, in the future it will be a profitable project.

You are correct  that wind energy is echo friendly and sustainable source of energy. However, its profitability a a project is a challenge due to specific requirement for wind pressure and maintenance issue that arise during the operation. Despite these challenges, I remain optimistic that as the technological development advances with continued government funding for research based projects, wind energy  will become viable source of green energy in future.

Nevertheless, science does not stand still and the design of wind turbines is constantly being improved. The School of Technical and Industrial Engineering of the University of Oregon made a comparative analysis of the payback of air installations. And at the moment, the result is amazing, it's only 7 months! The main thing is just to find a good place for wind turbines.
Therefore, everything is not as bad as OP wrote.

[Mauser]

Against the backdrop of growing economic problems in the United States, this green environmental movement is becoming more and more like a large-scale scam to develop budget funds for an initially economically unviable idea.

Share your opinion on this matter.

I am no expert on green energy, but I looked into solar energy for my dad who thought about putting some panels on our roof. The main problem with green energy is that it all depends on the location where you put them. In our case it just didn't make sense to put down solar panels because they wouldn't profitable long term, the amount of sun we are getting is not enough and once the government substitutions run out it wouldn't make sense anymore. In wind energy it's very similar, the wind turbine need to be placed in areas with the most wind. The best place for them is actually in the ocean, as there can be much bigger turbines than on land. The problem is that most people don't live near an ocean. The best would be if we can transfer energy over large areas without any loss, unfortunately technology is not ready yet to store large quantities of electricity. 

[darkangel11]

In this 21st century, I don't think the idea of Wind power is something people should consider when there are the best alternatives like solar power not to mention the drawback of the noise pollution that the wind turbines will generate noise which raises concern for residents living close to the turbines another is the wind speeds will also vary at some point.

They also kill birds.

More or less it's the same situation we have with electric cars, where they aren't cheap, efficient, have inadequate range, aren't easy to make or fix, are actually more combustible and prone to failure than traditional cars, yet we are told that they're somehow better.
Wind power sucks because it's completely unpredictable, unless you use VAWT generators, but these are even bigger and slower moving. They can work with very weak winds, but their efficiency doesn't go up much in strong winds.

[spectre71]

Lot's of morons in here. Wind is a shit source of energy. You can't schedule it and it's often produced when unneeded and the power has to be dumped. Sure it seems cool when your using other peoples money.

Solar, problem is it's unavailable during peek demand.

If someone says batteries they get a throat punch.

Nuclear power is the only way. 24/7/365 100%

[Iadegbola34]

While it is true that some wind power companies in the US have faced financial difficulties, it is also important to consider the long-term benefits of renewable energy sources in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Additionally, the economic viability of wind energy may vary depending on factors such as location, government policies, and technological advancements.
It is also important to note that subsidies for fossil fuels have been a longstanding practice in many countries, which can skew the market in favor of non-renewable energy sources. Ultimately, the question of whether wind energy is economically viable depends on a range of factors and can be subject to debate.

[southerngentuk]

Nuclear power is the only way. 24/7/365 100%

No energy source is perfect, not even nuclear power. The benefits of economic activity may be good, but the harm is no less than an exploding nuclear bomb. For example, in the earthquake and tsunami that caused a serious nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011, the amount of damage was estimated at several hundred billion dollars, not including the loss of life or the way to overcome it. Besides, if you leave it in the war, maybe one fine day a rocket will launch directly there, and the end will be known. So compared to the above two sources of energy, at least in terms of limitations, it is still better than nuclear energy.

[panganib999]

Are people using this wind power still? There must be enough wind to get the exact result they wished for.

I have never liked this wind power of a thing right from the day one when I was trying to build my first set of mining rigs, years ago some of my friend advised me to use wind power and from my own research I've got to know that the negative impacts on wind power is the climate change, you have to make sure that you're getting a lot of wind in your area before setting up a wind power.

The disadvantage is too high and I don't like it and from my own area I think that using the energy from the sun is far more better than using wind power I have some friends outside country in United State of America from Texas and I hear that it's a good place to set up a wind power generator, because it's always windy.

Enough wind yes, enough equipment to get around and actually make it sustainable? No.

Which is also why it's a failing industry as we speak. Demand is so unrealistically low despite the fact that it's one of the most safest and most efficient energy resource out there by space covered alone. Sure you could argue that solar energy is more efficient and I would say it is but compared to wind energy it is far more underdeveloped for some reason. Feels like someone is actively undermining the progress to capitalize on the profit that fossil fuels and other non-renewable sources of energy provides, but I digress.

There has to be some way we could efficiently rally the use of more renewable choices over their more dangerous counterparts. We're running on borrowed time and if things don't get better until 2030-2050 we're fucked royally.

[serveria.com]

Meanwhile, a very strange paradox has emerged in the US wind energy market:

The wind energy market is stuck in this very strange paradox right now. We have the best long-term climate policy certainty ever, across all the largest markets, but we’re struggling through a period where the whole industry, particularly the supply chain, has been hit by issues that have culminated in destroying profit margins and running many of the top OEMs [original equipment manufacturers] and their component vendors into negative profitability territory.

Negative profitability territory is a more politically correct designation for the billion-dollar losses that the US wind power giants have been suffering for several years, despite the political importance of the climate change agenda and generous government subsidies in the campaign to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels.

What I’m seeing is a colossal market failure.

Against the backdrop of growing economic problems in the United States, this green environmental movement is becoming more and more like a large-scale scam to develop budget funds for an initially economically unviable idea.

Share your opinion on this matter.

Profitability of green energy and wind energy in particular depends on many factors: like location for example. In some places if can be profitable in other not so much. Flat or almost flat countries with access to the sea/ocean have more chances in becoming profitable in wind energy. 

It is also possible, that wind park operators are heavily investing in new wind turbines which are known to be ridiculously expensive. So, if you're running a wind energy park of say 100 turbines and buy/install 10 more you're suffering losses and in most countries you don't have to pay taxes but it doesn't mean your business in not profitable.

[macson]

People are still making the use of wind power supply but you can't compare the percentage of its output and utilization to that in hydroelectric power supply, solar and any other renewable means of power supply such bio gas organic power supply and many more, the capacity to which all these could provide us individuals is vert little compared to an industrial application which more demands for power, this makes it more common today that the best in use is with the hydroelectric power supply, wind power supply probably could be applicable in some certain levels on research purposes or where the demand in limited to high voltage supply.

for the maintenance costs incurred, hydro energy is said to have a greater cost than wind energy but there is something even cheaper, that is solar energy;

The energy the earth absorbs from the sun in just 1 hour is enough to power the planet for a year. Why, then, is the world not taking greater advantage of this renewable energy source?

Fossil fuel infrastructure is well-established and difficult to phase out. On top of that, humans have only recently managed to harness the sun’s energy in a way that is also efficient, scalable, and relatively affordable. About 80% of the world’s energy still comes from fossil fuels like oil, coal, and natural gas.

Solar energy capacity in the United States is made up of large- and small-scale systems. Solar energy at utility scale — large facilities that generate at least 1 megawatt of power for the grid — represents the largest solar market in the U.S. The second largest market is residential, followed by commercial and community.

[1] https://www.rocketsolar.com/learn/energy-efficiency/how-cost-solar-panels-has-fallen

is still a complicated issue, why does the U.S. Govt focus on ^(renewable) wind energy whereas based on data and facts, it will only make them pay more than other renewable energy developments. 

[Argoo]

Lot's of morons in here. Wind is a shit source of energy. You can't schedule it and it's often produced when unneeded and the power has to be dumped. Sure it seems cool when your using other peoples money.

Solar, problem is it's unavailable during peek demand.

If someone says batteries they get a throat punch.

Nuclear power is the only way. 24/7/365 100%

Governments are doing absolutely the right thing by betting on alternative energy sources that do not pollute the environment and do not pose a serious danger to others. It should be taken into account that we are at the stage of dramatic climate change, which will be accompanied by large and powerful natural disasters, which is very dangerous for Nuclear Power Plants. We can see this in the example of the accident at the Japanese nuclear power plant "Fukushima-1". Each nuclear power plant is, in fact, a nuclear bomb inside the country, which, for various reasons, can be activated.
In my opinion, it is better to pay more attention to solar panels, which continue to improve and become cheaper.

[asyakashi]

I think the green movement is also not much different from green energy which used to be quite popular but none of them really made it to the success of making bitcoin energy efficient or environmentally friendly. it's all just bullshit voiced only they want to take advantage of people's investment in projects with bullshit. forget it, even now there are no projects with "green energy".