The current situation of Wind Energy
Arauco Valley ; ; ;
Since January 16, 1992 date of the enactment of Law 24065 of electricity privatization, anyone who meets the requirements of the emerging rules of the Act is authorized to generate electricity on the network of public service and is entitled to receive the service. The price per Kw hour what CAMMESA fixed and variable, variable whimsically, to the extent that the energy crisis is intimately linked to that whim. Before the infamous devaluation of 3 to 1, the price paid Kw hours was $ 0.026 / kW hour and the result account profitability depended on the source of generation. At that time joined a quarantine of generators, grouped in a house, most of which generated by gas turbines or other alternative heat. Then came the debacle and all commodities, of course, they tripled their prices in dollars, ignoring the promises of then interim president Eduardo Duhalde was unaware of the most elemental of the economy intended to keep the peso price of fuel. However, with electricity, not so comodity when its source is hydroelectric and nuclear power, was not the case and given the critical social and economic situation, the price electricity fell in dollar value to the third party, stopping all investment in the sector. All the infrastructure maintained their prices in dollars but, if by that date, the investment in wind energy was so questionable that only justify those for whom there were no financial costs or maintenance operations, reduced revenue by 30% was adamant. I only know one case, General Acha, in which the installation was completed following the fulfillment of the contract that was already underway. However, to understand the seriousness of the problem may be noted that facilities fully operational for over 10 years, for example Mayor Buratovich two Bonus 600 kW turbines and Punta Alta with 3 of the same size and brand, remained inactive for a long time that income is not justified maintaining the state took the necessary subsidy to reduce the impact - economic. The latest measures are intended to recover the position and are reflected in the adjusted prices Cammesa. A quick glance through the Internet allows us to appreciate the values \u200b\u200bof the day are now $ 0.120 / kW hour, no less than 4.6 times more than those held for more than 6 years after the devaluation At first glance it would seem that the 4.6 fold increase of the spot price would justify a new analysis of profitability. In dollars Kw hours price is slightly higher than the difference in the 1 to 1. But let's see what happens today with the price of wind turbines. At that time the unit price of a wind turbine grid connection (network-attached) was 1000 u $ s per kW installed, with a tendency au $ s 800 indicated by the manufacturers of that time as today is 3370 (?) as published by the reports in the press LAWEA and in relation to the planned investment in the valley of Arauco, La Rioja. IMPSA, even with its sad history of having spent more than 15 million U.S. $ s that all taxpayers pay a prototype installed in
Commodore in June 2006 and fell before having generated a single KW hour, is the happy winner.
ROI . As background to show a return, highlighted in blue, part of a speech of just five years old and which shall, as of the date is the same with the exception of the item for wind energy ( highlighted in red) as shown in the following form to come to occupy two places behind nuclear energy surpassing the phosphoric acid cell. Day date, the actual investment unit for a wind turbine, taking into account the values \u200b\u200bof Arauco, ranging from 8300 to 13400 u $ s / kW depending on whether an area with a utilization rate of 40 % or 25% respectively. For
grocer numbers are not necessary accurate measurements. There is no fear of mistakes by saying that our coastline has excellent wind energy with a utilization rate of around 30%. What does this mean? That if we install a turbine of a kW of power, we will after one year, 2628 kW hours arising from multiplying the year 8670 hours by 0.3, at 0, 030 u $ s / kw hours Cammesa we will pay u $ s 78.8 of gross annual revenue that will have to subtract the operating expenses, financial, maintenance and add the benefits of 25019 law that rewards with 0.01 u $ s / kW hour generated via wind. Recall that the unit investment is $ 3373, so the gross investment return of 3.1% is insufficient to cover even expenses, but there is another consideration, further analysis under the rule of Resolution 2006 of the Ministry of Energy, "Energy Plus", better known as "Arréglense as possible between you" that forces large industries to obtain their own coverage of the largest power-consuming demands on 2005. That's why ... "must undertake the challenge of changing the consumption pattern, as this is what will give a solution to avoid the punishments that will implement the government ...." (The quotation marks are the preamble to the regulations) if the state does not serve to provide us with more essential services are their leaders should realize they are in breach of the duties of his function.
is not surprising that these attitudes we bring memories of some very similar, the difference is only the means used to dodge the responsibilities of the package acquired with institutional oath. Some used a helicopter ... others a ridiculous, shameful unusual and regulations, as shameful as the proposal suggested, and obviously failed to modify the typical value of generation reduced by 10% (instead of 220 is 200) or "master "lecture to 2000 people in the finance ministry explaining the need for refrigerators" economic "of 130 watts instead of 180-130-ignoring that works 38% more time than the 180 and spending depends of and never use the power of the engine, why is not supposed to continue our presence in the evening we had enough reasons to feel that we took for jerks
.
The form above shows the "progress" of real investment in the wind field, highlighted in green.
Operating and maintenance expenses . We enclose a chart as one typical of the results that show the reality. Note that after 6 years begin maintenance costs, which are reiterated to 8.10, 15, 16 and 18. The graph shows that the investment was 1.2 and that if there is no maintenance costs, at age 20 would have had to return 1.6 units, excluding financial expenses and depreciation. But the 1.6 has been reduced to 0.4 and thus the difference 1.2 (1.6 -0.4) was absorbed by the expenses. For those not accustomed to working in relative values, do an actual calculation for Arauco Valley eros. Each aircraft costs of 2.1 Megaw 7,000,000 or $ s (are previstos12 total) Brought to absolute values, in 20 years will be $ 8.4 million of operating and maintenance costs. (1.2 x 7) Apportioned annually, would be 0.42 million per year for each airport
depreciation costs, amortized over 20 years the airport will be 0.05 x 7mm = 0 35 million u $ s annual depreciation
Interest expense: It is the subject of my devotion and perhaps most vulnerable to my knowledge, but suppose to 0.05 in per unit, including well Libor, the bank guarantee commission of BCRA that would be another 0.35 million. Ultimately the total cost would be 1.12 million per year against an income of $ s 220,000, (Flashing 0.30) a total of $ 10,800,000 in annual losses s ;
Infografia entry:
While the subject we have explained in the original notes who have completed 10 years and are known for our regular readers should reiterate the learning mechanism. The idea is to explain briefly the energy sources that can compete in the electricity supply. Prices are unit for all alternatives, including renewable and non renewable and competitive alternatives represent only given in the form of reference. Column 4 shows the actual values \u200b\u200bof investment that are apparent values \u200b\u200b(column 3) affected by the utilization rate or intermittent (column 2). Wind Example rates ranging from 25% to 40% from areas with moderate winds to the Patagonia. It is reasonable that the investment is done with a Francis turbine, which will operate full while the flow of the river that feeds it does not change, has a rate not less than 80%. Or a photovoltaic cell at night or in time does not generate, has a rate as poor as 8 to 25%, objective result of universally accepted measurements of the bodies. The last column shows the relationship over the cheaper alternatives. Note that in the case of wind the ratio of 4 to 80 has become 13.5 to 90 in less than a decade. The reasons are at the discretion of the reader. We have already spread widely enough in similar cases such as APIPA or Yaciretá-Atucha II even more scandalous in the memo that gave rise at present.
With an installed annual production Kw Kw hours in 8760 will Kw hour spot price paid CAMMESA gives us to this day u $ s 350 per year, including the subvention of Law 25019 to be compared against real investment in each of the alternatives. If fuel costs are zero, you only need to charge depreciation, maintenance, operational and financial costs, as they have done, and represent an estimated 0.16 per one, bringing the balance point will be 350 / 0, 16 = u $ s 2190 .- In the event that the renewable source is no need to consider fuel costs whose value depends on the target system but is not subject to this consideration. What is the meaning of the u $ s 2190? Is the maximum investment in any of the alternatives to balance income with expenses. The entry includes the total annual hours and return analysis is performed against the amount of real investment. In other words, and already talking about our alternative wind, all economically justifiable investment should not exceed 2190 u $ s / kW., That if the wind is from 8400 to 13500 depending on whether the extreme of Patagonia or the coastline (0.4 to 0.25 of utilization rate.) Nothing more and nothing less than 6.16 to 3.83 times more than required as a equilibrium. . Note that the difference with the 2190 would enable, for example, earn between 2.5 to 7.5 times more energy in a hydroelectric investment or between 1.4 and 4.5 times more if the investment is nuclear. Also remember the importance of the contribution negligible compared to the hydroelectric wind 12 wind farms The mean baseline, to 0.3 of intermittency index only 7.56 Mega Watt. For reference, one of the 4 turbines Piedra del Aguila is 46 times more power or nuclear plant in Rio Tercero 80 times.
recommend reading the note "Wind Energy - Photovoltaic - Hidroelectrica" \u200b\u200bpart of the blog.
All rights reserved
recommend access to Google search by entering the search word followed by enrique nielsen. Eg energy enrique nielsen
Mr. Enrique O. Nielsen
http://www.windywest.com.ar/
windywest@ssdnet.com.ar
All rights reserved
recommend access to Google search by entering the search word followed by enrique nielsen. Eg energy enrique nielsen
Mr. Enrique O. Nielsen
http://www.windywest.com.ar/
windywest@ssdnet.com.ar