Talk:Wind power by country

1980s data
something appears to be with the data here. According to this source and our chart both Sweden and Denmark produce 10 times the electricity of the U.S. in 1985. However, this source says that just the installation at Altamont Pass in California was producing half the wind power in the world. For 1986 Altamont alone was projected to produce 0.55 Tw/hr (or ten times more than Denmark or Sweden on the chart) but we are only crediting the entire U.S. with 0.004 Tw/hr. How do we reconcile these data? Rmhermen (talk) 17:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * notes that California had 90% of world capacity in the mid-80s. but our chart show the whole U.S. with about 10%. Rmhermen (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

New data from GWEC
GWEC has published new data. The page is being updated with the same.Windstats (talk) 03:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dangerous Climatic Consequences of Wind-Energy-Farms and Tidal Power Plants: And their Alternatives
Dangerous Climatic Consequences of Wind-Energy-Farms and Tidal Power Plants: And their Alternatives Hasmukh K. Tank Indian Space Research Organization, 22/693 Krishna Dham-2, Ahmedabad-380015 India e-mail: tank.hasmukh@rediffmail.com, hasmukh.tank1@gmail.com Date: March 9, 2016. Abstract: This article attempts to draw attention of global scientific community and political leaders that when natural flow of wind or ocean-waters gets obstructed by wind-mills or tidal-power-stations, it applies a recurring torque to the globe of our earth; and can change the current 23o angle of inclination of the earth’s axis with the plane of orbit, leading to unimaginable and unbearable climate-change. In addition to these, high-rise buildings too obstruct the natural flow of wind, and can contribute to climate-change. Even launching of satellites can apply some torque to the globe, whose cumulative effect can be sizable. Introduction: When our attention is focused on what we will get, then we tend to overlook the consequences. But we need to understand that in this world nothing is free. Just as, when the inventor of motor-car must have demonstrated his car for the first time, if someone had pointed out about air pollution, then people must have treated him as a jealous person; but today we know how serious is the problem of vehicular air-pollution. So exactly, the leaders who consider wind-energy-farms as environment friendly, would find it difficult to believe that wind-mills can change the climatic pattern of the earth for all the future; making the earth inhabitable for mankind. We need far-sighted planners with un-selfish mind. Calculations: Firstly, collect the data of how-many million mega-watts of energy is expected to be globally produced by wind-energy-farms and tidal-power-plants. Multiply these watts by the number of seconds of one year, to get the number of ergs. Find the mass and radius of the earth, and finally the torque applied per year. Offer from this writer: There are ways of producing perfectly clean and safe power-plants, but they will not strike to the minds of people who want things free. Leaders should approach this writer with honest offer of consultation fees. Why an inventor should make electricity cheaper for the rich when he himself is living in poverty? 117.229.59.235 (talk) 15:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC) Hasmukh K. Tank Indian Space Research Organization, 22/693 Krishna Dham-2, Ahmedabad-380015 India e-mail: tank.hasmukh@rediffmail.com, hasmukh.tank1@gmail.com Date: March 9, 2016.


 * Junk Science. Any torque capable of changing the earth's rotation has to come from beyond the earth, i.e. other celestial bodies. 74.38.73.235 (talk) 00:35, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

LATEST DATA FOR 2016 IS AVAILABLE - GWEC
http://www.gwec.net/global-figures/graphs/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.69.10.77 (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Reorganize tag Jan 2018
Could we discuss what and how to "reorganize" the article, specifically? A shot-gun tag at the top of the article hardly every has any effect and could sit here for years unless we figure out what it means. --Wtshymanski (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Scotland
Last month wind plants in Scotland produced more electricity than the country needed, 109%. This was a first for Scotland, though the figure has been hovering just under the 100% for quite some time. I take it this is also a first for the world - has any other country ever covered it's electricity needs purely with wind? I'm not sure where to put this, so I will leave it for those of you working here to do so, but if nobody does, I'll try it myself. Here is the citable source: https://stv.tv/news/scotland/1433612-record-month-for-renewables-as-109-of-energy-demands-met/?fbclid=IwAR2jiJEeMgUy7m9hgHQ31J-EIIl_L0icD6nNt8tWzLeqBkV7aOZN2qfUi90. --Doric Loon (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, then I will have to add this myself. If I put it in the wrong place, I would be glad to have someone fix it. --Doric Loon (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Dispatched energy a better metric
With wind, installed capacity doesn't tell us much about real world performance since we have the combined issues of capacity factor and dispatchability. It would be more useful to know how much actual energy delivered to the Grid in TWh in each country came from wind, per year. There are some energy production figures, but they seem to be very out of date. --Anteaus (talk) 19:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree, unfortunately it is generally harder to find actual up to date generation data than installed capacity data. You can find some more information in List of countries by electricity production from renewable sources. The table in section "Annual wind power generation" in this article could be updated with the references found there (data for 2016 from IRENA). --Ita140188 (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Graphs
There's been some pessimism from me and some optimism from another editor about the graph situation. I have some more pessimism to throw down, another delay:. Seems like it could be a while.

However, I like making graphs in R and could make some for this page.

Based on the code to make them, the current broken graphs on this page seem to represent:

A pie chart of the ten largest countries by added wind capacity

A pie chart of the ten largest countries by total wind capacity

A stacked bar chart of the number of countries with wind capacities exceeding different exponential amounts

I think these options are not very good, and would propose some alternatives that could also replace the historical data in the table. My ideas:

A stacked area chart with the largest current countries on top would show the growth of the largest countries over time, removing the desire for historical data to be displayed in such a raw form. This could be for either capacity, generation, or both. It wouldn't show the number of countries exceeding certain benchmarks, but in my opinion that criteria doesn't take into account each country's size.

A treemap could show the current state of affairs better than a pie chart. It could be grouped by continent similar to this image:.

As far as per-capita generation, the map already at the top of the page seems to do a good job of comparing large and small countries fairly. Wizmut (talk) 21:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)


 * As promised I have added my two ideas. I removed the two (non-functioning) pie charts, as I believe their data are now well-represented by the figures and table.
 * I did keep the two maps of course, as well as the graph which somehow counts the number of countries which have passed a certain threshold. The idea seems too interesting to give up for right now. Wizmut (talk) 00:21, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

New table style
I removed all of the old years and added many new columns for the most recent year that data are available (2022).

I included actual generation for the first time, per a suggestion from a few years ago. I also included the percent of each country that is wind. Rather than including the previous year or absolute change, I added percentage change, because each country is a different size. And I also added capacity factor, which is a measure of how much of available capacity was actually used.

Capacity itself is now third billing, but the table is sortable of course. The default sort is actual generation.

Let me know if there are any comments. I make these tables with R and Excel, so changes don't require much manual labor on my part. Wizmut (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)