India’s wind power boom is failing to deliver [National Wind Watch]

To all appearances, wind energy in India is booming – but it could very well be nothing but an optical illusion. For despite rising installed capacity and huge investments, India only uses a small proportion of the potential wind energy that has been installed.

In more technical terms, India does not manage to generate enough power from wind because of lower than average plant load factors (PLF).
...
“But our review of wind energy in the country finds that there is an urgent need to reassess the current policies and incentives, so that the business of wind gets serious about generating power, and not just installing wind farms and reaping benefits from fiscal incentives,” says Narain.

The study found that wind energy - while accounting for 6 per cent of the total installed power capacity in the country - only contributes 1.6 of the country’s power. On average, across the country, the PLF of wind energy has increased marginally from 13.5 per cent in 2003-04 to 15 per cent, but there are states such as Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, where wind energy is functioning at a PLF of less than 10 per cent.

Maharashtra has more than tripled its wind capacity in the past few years, but has actually decreased it in terms of its PLF. Today, in this energy-starved state, wind energy functions at a PLF of 11.7 per cent – a pathetically low figure compared to other states like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, and certainly compared to global averages of 25-30 per cent.

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Pelosi's Ploy

Energy Policy: After calling plans to drill for more oil a "hoax," Speaker Nancy Pelosi now says she'll allow a vote on drilling for more crude to reach the floor of the House. We'll believe it when we see it.

Climate Skeptic: Backcasting with Computer Climate Models

Even after these tweaks, the backcasts were still coming out too high. So, to make the forecasts work, they asked themselves, what would global temperatures have to have done without CO2 to make our models work? The answer is that if the world naturally were to have cooled in the latter half of the 20th century, then that cooling could offset over-prediction of temperatures in the models and produce the historic result. So that is what they did. Instead of starting with natural forcings we understand, and then trying to explain the rest (one, but only one, bit of which would be CO2), modelers start with the assumption that CO2 is driving temperatures at high sensitivities, and natural forcings are whatever they need to be to make the backcasts match history.