{"id":396780,"date":"2025-08-21T19:18:39","date_gmt":"2025-08-21T17:18:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=396780"},"modified":"2025-08-21T19:18:42","modified_gmt":"2025-08-21T17:18:42","slug":"australian-wind-plants-only-working-at-27-of-full-capacity-and-the-long-term-trend-is-down","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=396780","title":{"rendered":"Australian wind plants only working at 27% of full capacity and the long-term trend is down"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

JoNova<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Jo Nova<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Don\u2019t mention that capacity factor\u2026<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The media and wind industry always sells the biggest, best new generators at their full imaginary capacity. The\u00a0newest largest wind farms are said to be \u201c1 GW\u201d,\u00a0<\/a>even though they will almost never supply that. The real percentage they supply of the advertised \u201ccapacity\u201d is called the \u201ccapacity factor\u201d and it rarely gets a mention.\u00a0 The average reader, not paying attention, won\u2019t notice that the $2b cost doesn\u2019t stack up at all.\u00a0It\u2019s like buying a brand-new car without knowing it only gets 7 miles per gallon (and only when the wind blows).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We need to know \u2018the mileage\u2019<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

The latest GenCost report uses the term \u201ccapacity factor\u201d literally 100 times (I counted), so obviously it\u2019s central in calculating the value of a generator, yet it is that which shall-not-be-named in public discussions. And when they do say it, it\u2019s often worse than they say, and that bad number is also shrinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2019 the CSIRO Blob Experts bravely assumed<\/em> that the modeled average capacity factor of onshore wind would be 44.4%.<\/a> Years later, in the latest GenCOST report they assume, like an addict, that it would between 29% \u201cand 48%\u201d \u2014 still fantasizing that a miracle is about to come. So their modeled prediction of the cost of onshore wind power is ridiculously generous. Even after reality doggedly stayed around 30% for six years, a google search shows the NSW government \u201cfact sheet\u201d says it\u2019s around 35%<\/a>  and the Google AI overview says it\u2019s 30% \u201cto 45%<\/a>\u201c.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How imaginary homes are powered by imaginary capacity factors<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Anton Lang, also known as TonyfromOz<\/a> is yet another volunteer creating the graphs<\/a> that the CSIRO, AEMO, ARENA, ABC, and AER get billions of dollars to provide, but don\u2019t want us to see. For years Tony noticed that the paperwork advertising wind \u201cfarms\u201d didn\u2019t mention the capacity factor.  It seemed like a strange gap in the documentation. Tony noticed they usually converted their output to the fantasy fairy-thousand-homes it would supply which is a pure marketing ploy. They pretend, deceptively, that wind turbines are capable of powering any homes at all. When Tony back-converted the number of homes, he realized all the companies marketing wind turbines were assuming a capacity factor of 38% to create the imaginary homes value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So he used his collected data to calculate the capacity factor of all Australian wind plants, and discovered, that averaged over the last seven years, it is just under 30%. It started out at about 31% in 2019 but has declined, and over the last year, the rolling 12 month weekly average capacity factor has often been close to 27%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks to Angus McFarlane for the graph where we can see the slide in wind turbine capacity:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

During this time the total nameplate capacity grew from 5.3GW to 13.5GW. Despite improvements in design, and the young age of this fleet, the capacity factor is getting slightly worse, not better.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Graph
TonyFromOz at PaPundits<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

As Angus McFarlane points out GenCost uses the highest possible capacity factor on the upside, but calculates the \u201clow option\u201d a different way to hide how low it really is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

GenCost uses a low value for capacity factor that is \u201c10% below the averag<\/em>e\u201d. This is contrary to normal engineering practice, which would be to use the 5th<\/sup> percentile for the low value. For example, IRENA use 5th <\/sup>percentiles for low values of capacity factor. Furthermore, using the 5th<\/sup> percentile for Australian wind would result in a low capacity factor of 19.5%, which might explain CSIRO\u2019s aversion to using it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If only we had a scientific institution paid by taxpayers that gave unbiased scientific advice, eh?!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Three reasons the weekly capacity factor is headed downwards<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n