Balance of power: Wind fluctuations complicate energy distribution through grids

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


When temperatures rose into the triple digits in the Pacific Northwest last week, breaking local heat records, electricity use also skyrocketed. Most grids can handle such events, but there was a problem in this case, Reuters reported. Just as A-C demand went up, winds slowed to nearly a halt. The calm air wasn’t turning turbines, a growing component of the region’s suite of energy sources. 

Electricity operators are learning more about how fluctuating winds complicate energy distribution in a region that is becoming more dependent on wind power. For instance, over the course of just one hour this June, energy generated from wind farms on the eastern end of the Columbia River Gorge jumped 1,000 megawatts—or “enough to power some 680,000 homes,” reported the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. To balance out the rise, operators had to quickly divert water around hydroelectric dams—the region’s primary power source—to keep the system from overloading. When the winds calmed again, operators could let the water flow back through. (A secondary issue arises here: whereas holding water behind dams creates more potential energy for use after winds die, it is harmful for fish trying to make their way down river.)

But last week, while the hot air stood still, water levels in the rivers also dropped—putting extra strain on a system that continues to rely more heavily on water than wind for its power.

The wind-generating capacity within the 15,238 square miles controlled by the federal Bonneville Power Administration, including the farms on the Columbia River Gorge, is now at 2,105 megawatts—up from 25 in 1998. “It’s enough to power two cities the size of Seattle,” according to the Seattle PI. And this capacity is expected to nearly triple in size within four years.

When wind’s contributions to the grid were small compared to more traditional—and consistent—energy sources, its natural unpredictability was not an issue. As wind power’s contribution has grown, however, wind’s erratic nature comes to the fore. The BPA estimates the system will no longer have enough flexibility to adjust for wind variability by 2011.

Scientists are currently looking into options to help mitigate the issues that arise with what should be a very good thing—a growth in clean, renewable energy. One strategy getting a lot of attention is better wind forecasting. The U.S. Department of Energy is currently collaborating with INESC Porto, a research institution in Portugal, on a project to reduce the margins of error in forecasts from 20 to 15 percent.

Meanwhile, the BPA will add 16 wind-monitoring stations and will soon schedule power realignments on the half hour rather than the hour. “The more accurately we can forecast, the less reserves we have to have and that will lower the cost,” Kim Randolph, a BPA power operation specialist told the Seattle PI.

Lower costs will appeal to consumers; fewer riparian traffic jams might please the fish.

Picture of wind turbine by ianmunroe via Flickr

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe