Wind farms-need some science help.

[Silurian]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

For comparison, England is about the size of the state of Alabama. You have prevailing winds along your entire coastline.
We don’t have prevailing winds in Alabama, let alone 90% of our country.
Hardly comparable logistically and from a cost effective standpoint, incomparable when you consider what it would cost to accomplish the same results in the U.S.
Folly.

I completely agree that the UK has advantageous conditions for wind power. But even in the US wind accounts for 7% of electricity generation (42 % of renewables) no one would suggest that this a solution, simply one in a basket of technologies.


Of course any technology has to be subjected to a cost / benefit analysis. That doesn't just include construction cost but also de-commissioning. Nuclear and fossil aren't particularly cheap.

From an aesthetic point of view, I've never seen a pretty mine or shale gas site.

[Gitfiddlemann]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

For comparison, England is about the size of the state of Alabama. You have prevailing winds along your entire coastline.
We don’t have prevailing winds in Alabama, let alone 90% of our country.
Hardly comparable logistically and from a cost effective standpoint, incomparable when you consider what it would cost to accomplish the same results in the U.S.
Folly.

That's the thing. It's not windy everywhere, nor is it sunny 24 hours a day.
In this country, it should be obvious to everyone that we need reliable power 24/7, even if some states don't seem to think so.
It would be wonderful if we had reliable power from all clean sources, but we don't. Technology is nowhere near there yet.
And until they discover a source of power that is reliably there 24/7, we should not throw out any eggs in our basket prematurely and we should make sure we have a backup plan at all times.
Let the science continue, but keep the lights on please.

[Mr. Jelly]

I used to work right up the road from a coal powered power plant. Every morning as I traveled down the freeway to my plants I'd see the colored discharge in the sky coming right out of the smoke stacks of the power plants. I knew exactly what they were doing as I had to deal with the same issues as they did. They let the residue go at night as it couldn't be seen and turn on the scrubbers in the morning. The few regulators we had in our state would only check issues out if they were reported or they saw it. Even then if things were correct when they showed up there wasn't anything to talk about. I wonder how that effected people and birds down wind?

[Dirk Hofman]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

For comparison, England is about the size of the state of Alabama. You have prevailing winds along your entire coastline.
We don’t have prevailing winds in Alabama, let alone 90% of our country.
Hardly comparable logistically and from a cost effective standpoint, incomparable when you consider what it would cost to accomplish the same results in the U.S.
Folly.

One doesn’t generate power for land, one generates power for people. England has a population is 55 million compared to 5 million in Alabama. Do you need to generate power in Alabama to get power to 20% of the US? No. Does the US, with its massive and variable geography have the ability to generate wind power for 20% of the population. Of course. Scale is an advantage for the US, not a limitation. Europe, a rational comparison in terms of population (actually larger at over 450 million) and land mass for what it’s worth, already gets 15% of its power from wind.

This thread has the most disinformation per post I’ve seen in open mic since March, and that’s saying something. In one thread we see complaints of no new industries and at the same time a list of utterly bogus reasons why a new industry won’t work. We even get the old “things that work in Europe won’t work in the US because...reasons” canard. “Folly” indeed.

[Slothead56]

Originally Posted by hairpuller

Pretty sure birds aren't making their minds up to commit hara-kiri by flying through wind turbines. I can do sarcasm, too.

scott

Let me fix my comment:
Bird deaths by any cause are way down in my list.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by Dirk Hofman

One doesn’t generate power for land, one generates power for people. England has a population is 55 million compared to 5 million in Alabama. Do you need to generate power in Alabama to get power to 20% of the US? No. Does the US, with its massive and variable geography have the ability to generate wind power for 20% of the population. Of course. Scale is an advantage for the US, not a limitation. Europe, a rational comparison in terms of population (actually larger at over 450 million) and land mass for what it’s worth, already gets 15% of its power from wind.

This thread has the most disinformation per post I’ve seen in open mic since March, and that’s saying something. In one thread we see complaints of no new industries and at the same time a list of utterly bogus reasons why a new industry won’t work. We even get the old “things that work in Europe won’t work in the US because...reasons” canard. “Folly” indeed.

You missed the whole point and I refuse to argue over this... it’s too subjective. I’m sure you would disagree. I never said windmills wouldn’t work in the U.S. Go back and read what I did say.
I do stand by my statement about the windmills all over that valley in California.
They are ugly and half of them don’t even work anymore.
That is folly. YMMV.

[Acousticado]

I have a serious question. A number of posts have stated that many of the windmills are seen as not working. How do you know...because the blades weren’t turning? I’ve passed wind farms in the past where some were turning, others not. I never assumed the latter was because they were non-functional, rather that it was part of operational management. What’s the truth?

[Dirk Hofman]

Originally Posted by Acousticado

I have a serious question. A number of posts have stated that many of the windmills are seen as not working. How do you know...because the blades weren’t turning? I’ve passed wind farms in the past where some were turning, others not. I never assumed the latter was because they were non-functional, rather that it was part of operational management. What’s the truth?

They need a constant wind velocity of 9 mph in most cases to operate. They also go down for maintenance. But a significant issue is “curtailment”. Basically, transmission lines take longer to build than wind farms and the ability to deliver power is limited until the infrastructure catches up. This is what is meant by the industry needing investment...it’s at the infrastructure level. Too much power too quickly available. Ironic, no?

https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...rbines-turning

[H165]

No one knows if they actually kill a lot of birds. It happens but I believe it is wildly exaggerated. abcbirds.org admits there is no data whatsoever on bird deaths from windmills, only guesses.

Windmill bird strikes have been studied for decades. There is TONS of data.

In light of this forum, it's interesting that Ross Landry (picture), one of the world's best bluegrass mandolin players, was working on these studies with the Museum of Natural History. We shared an office for a while back in the late 1980s.

A related website:

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthu...d-turbines.php

[loco gringo]

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...-energy-blades

[Cypress Knee]

Here is a pic from the Vox article - the new GE wind turbines will max out at 853 feet and be the tallest in the world.

[nitram]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

If you are going to throw around pejoratives, it would be nice to at least get them right. NIMBY is an acronym ("Not In My Back Yard"), used to negatively describe people who don't want things that are unpleasant or hazardous near them but are perfectly willing to allow them elsewhere.

Bob

Whether it's true or not.

[nitram]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

You missed the whole point and I refuse to argue over this... it’s too subjective. I’m sure you would disagree. I never said windmills wouldn’t work in the U.S. Go back and read what I did say.
I do stand by my statement about the windmills all over that valley in California.
They are ugly and half of them don’t even work anymore.
That is folly. YMMV.

Ugly is subjective just as "a Martin sounds better than a Gibson" is. Emotion versus rationale.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by nitram

Ugly is subjective just as "a Martin sounds better than a Gibson" is. Emotion versus rationale.

True enough but to me hundreds and hundreds of these giant unnatural metal monstrosities placed in an otherwise pristine valley over a stretch of 10-15 miles ain’t emotion, it’s butt ugly.
If it that look appeals to you, feel free to make that drive sometime.

[guitar george]

Factories run using fossil fuels are ugly and unhealthy.
Factories run using wind turbines are ugly.