Wind energy

[BigBen]

My little town's energy board just passed a plan to invest $20,000 into researching the feasibility of wind power. I'm so proud:loveya:

Any DU experts care to chime in to discuss the pros and cons of such a system? I've heard it's very expensive to initiate. And what candidate do you think is most capable of leading an American alternative energy revolution? Kerry? (I hope I'm not breaking the GD rules by asking that :) )

-scott

[Virgil]

1. For $20,000 they could build a windmill

Why don't they just build one and study that?

[BigBen]

4. well...

the type of turbines they're looking at cost upwards of $1 million. :shrug:

[Serenity-NOW]

7. Needs to talk to Scandinavians at it for centuries

"invest $20,000 into researching the feasibility of wind power."

Wouldn't it be easier to look at the clear experts? $20k is a lotta phone calls and fedex info.

[sweetheart]

8. here off the cost of norway

in north scotland, the feasability is basically setting up an "anemometer" (sp) which measures the wind speeds over the course of a year to see what power generation potential there is.

As far as putting up those million dollar animals, its just 400 cubic yards of cement... and a big crane and a few trucks come and erect a big tube... like a 100 yard tall pipe 2-3 yards in diameter... then they hang the big blades and generator and walk away... payback is over 30+ years... no jobs are created... and the things make a high pitched noise for anyone living within a kilometer... most local communities fight against them, as they are not only noisy, but cause flicker and reduce house values and such.

This site can hook you up to the real issues communities face when introducing wind farms:

http://www.localprotest.org/

[KFC]

6. That is exactly what they do

They erect test windmills at various locations to determine the optimal placement of the wind farm.

[K-W]

2. I wont comment on candidates,

but I think that first and foremost we need to cut energy usage. Renewable sources are the power of the future, but they are not an immediate solution to the problem. The US could retain its standard of living and use remarkably less power. Once we have done that, we will be less reliant on oil and the oil industry will be less powerful. Then we can start to shift our reliance off of fossil fuels and onto renewable sources.

[Solon]

14. Not nearly as optimistic...

You say that the US can retain are standard of living using alternative sources of energy. I say that is largely impossible, and the reason is that we are woefully unprepared for it. Also, for the record their are no such thing as "renewable" sources, as there are no perpetual motion machines. You can only convert energy not produce it, that is impossible. I would say that we need a comprehensive plan and implementation in all alternatives, before it is too late.

BTW we are apparently closer than we think:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011704_weather.html

[Serenity-NOW]

3. Hey that's very cool!

You should go downtown when they are talking about it and make sure they don't forget that Scandinavians have this down cold in case they are short on experience.

Only 'negative' things I've heard is that sometimes birds get bopped and the tin foil theory that it screws up wind patterns. As if buildings don't already do both those things as they idly sit and consume power.

I'm trying to get my County to dial into straw bale construction and industrial hemp as ways to employ folk and lessen logging. Habitat for Humanity built a couple of nice s/b houses dirt cheap a couple counties away- that's what I call progress. Jimmy Carter is a personal hero.

[sweetheart]

5. wind energy is a white elephant

I wholly respect the green good ideas behind it, just the realiy.

Because you can't count on wind, it actually is only a supplemental power source... and you still need all the other systems, even if you have 100% wind on some days.

A better investment is individual grants for houses to increase insulation and cut the power losses... as well, solar roofs. The latter increase employment as it takes 1000's of projects to do so, and once in place, the improvements are forever, and constantly reduce power consumption.

Wind energy is, in britain, a farce, and these 100 yard tall turbines are being erected, yet the statistics of power production are being kept secret as they are below the forecasts... unpredictable, and the payback is a lie... but big money has taken over from green interests and wind is being abused like other power forms. All the while countries who have tried such schemes are taking the turbines down, like holland and germany... not quite what they expected.

Energy saved is energy generated. Best to create jobs AND save/generate energy through wise use of grassroots conservation.

[maggrwaggr]

10. vanadium batteries

there is new technology being used to store the power from wind turbines, using vanadium batteries.

Of course that means mining a whole ton of vanadium.

We have wind farms in Southern California, and I'm not real crazy about them. They're huge and ugly, they go on for miles.

[sweetheart]

11. i researched all this considering taking the house off-grid

As i would very much like not to be a net-power consumer, or to at least be independent of the grid if power goes out... (my nuclear war survivalist paranoia).

My most inspiring discovery are a new sort of roofing slate that "is" a photocell roof... that the entire roof surface generate electricity in all light conditions... just its expensive.

Then i thought about the dark days... and figured that wind was usually blowing more at night and when storms blocked light, so that the two, solar and wind would complement each other.

Then on further research, i discovered that i would have to put up a battery shed, and keep these hazardous metals and acids around... like having 40 car batteries in a shed.. a fire hazard and all sorts of stuff... and as well, having to have a petrol generator in a soundproof shed... another toxic fire hazard.

I was still not deterred until i discovered how BIG a windmill it would take to generate the electricity it takes to heat the house... and the blades are like 30 feet long! The windmill specs also point out that the windmill shuts down with wind speeds over 40mph... and that the electricity generated varies depending (obviously on reflection) on wind speed... so basically, i'd end up with varying current generation, and could not get away without the battery bank, and as well, the transformer to convert to AC... uuugghh!!

The final straw in this analysis was a month with no wind. Then i'd be on petrol generation, or solar anyways.

After the long harangue with these approaches, i've been spending the resources on insulation, as most energy goes towards heat, and when the house is perfectly insulated, then its just computers and light bulbs. Solar would cover me for that... Eventually i will reroof with the slates i mentioned, and based on the surface area, generate enought to run the consumption we use, and when not using, sell the excess back to the grid as a micro-power generator.

This is why i think it best that the focus goes towards solar electric generation and re-roofing... with tax subsidies. Then the economiclly wise thing to do when roofing a building, or re-roofing would be to use solar generation gear, and turn every building in the world in to a micro-power generation station. With the proper grid switching equiptment, the excess power in one sunny area can shift to anotehr area where it is dark and net consuming power.

The batteries are only necessary when you're not on the grid... and since i hate lead, acid and nasty chemicals... no way.

Green power is really possible, and i really believe in it, just the windmills are a poor substitute for more realistic measures. I also believe that if those measures were inspired through tax subsidies to building owners (and a property tax levied based on a building's energy efficiency to get people ispired) this would create more jobs than there are poeple to do them... and boost the economy... so i don't buy for a second that going towards kyoto would hurt the economy... that is republican crap.

[Aidoneus]

12. do you have any links on hand about the roof-cells?

I've heard of that, but don't have any resources on it on hand.. thanks.

[sweetheart]

13. solar roofing tiles link

http://www.sunpowered.co.uk/solar_roof_tiles.htm

[Aidoneus]

15. thanks

:toast:

[Oggy]

21. Energy Efficency

re: "A better investment is individual grants for houses to increase insulation and cut the power losses... as well, solar roofs. The latter increase employment as it takes 1000's of projects to do so, and once in place, the improvements are forever, and constantly reduce power consumption."

The UK government does part finance such an investment. follow link to website:-

http:\\www.est.co.uk

Or if this link fails try

http:\\www.est.org.uk

[PaDUer]

9. Google...

Waymart, PA..Windmills....they've got LOTS of them...they supply the energy for Phila and FL..
However, people are upset because a lot of birds are being killed.

[Kazak]

16. Kucinich, for sure.

That is in large part why I plan to vote for him in my state's primary (not that it'll do any good). Oklahoma (where I live) recently implemented a wind energy option for subscribers. It's a tad more expensive, but it seems to work just fine.

[Kazak]

18. Where the wind comes sweeping down the plain...

I think it's a step in the right direction.

[9215]

17. Here is another DU topic on this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=748688

[laura888]

19. Denmark has invested heavily in this energy source

http://www.iisd.org/greenbud/winden.htm

<snip>
Description: Denmark's wind energy program is a leading example of how government support can make an alternative energy source commercially viable. Subsidies for privately owned wind turbines stimulated demand and created a customer base for a wind energy industry, while government funded R & D led to more reliable and cost effective wind turbines. The program created a thriving new industry in wind turbines Administering Institutions: Ministry of Energy and National Energy Research Centre Key Stakeholders: Ministry of Energy, National Energy Research Centre, power generating companies, private investors including some 50,000 Danish families.
</snip>

Not sure about candidates - but probably Kucinich because he seems the most progressive by far.

[sweetheart]

20. Be careful of propaganda and lies of big power Enronomics

I posted on this thread links to some real community protests against these wind power generators. Some european projects have been deemed "failed" and they have been removed. The protestors are right, IMO, having seen this battle very close up.

Before singing the wind power swansong, consider:

1. They only run if there is wind. This means that they can't be trusted as a serious power source, and that 100% of the load must be supplied from other sources... like nuclear.. and a lotta folks who support wind power are secretly nuclear power supporters.

2. This community projects (financing) are backed by large generation companies, just like oil drilling. They tried to do it to my little scottish villiage. These slick londoner's came in to the villiage hall, talked of putting up 50 100 meter tall pilons in the common grazing and bribing the local farmers (crofters) to take payments based on power generation statistics that, to this day, the UK government will not make public (as the real generation numbers are at least 1/3rd lower than the dossier). It reduces tourism, reduces house values in areas where the turbines sit, as well as the other environmentalist concerns. The big power companies perfer on-shore as it is cheaper than offshore... where the public has been told that they are to be sited.

3. local democracy - Finally, the local people came through... "You suits always come up here from london when you want something, promising money and cheap trinkets." "Well, every time you do this, its a lie." and "you can take that back to london with you." YEAAA!

4. job creation - The wind generation companies talk about job creation, but this is a myth. The things go up in a jiffy with a bunch of concrete and some lorries (trucks). The manufacturers are somewhere else, often overseas. Maintenance is negligible.


Now consider that the same money invested in insulation, solar electricity, solar water heating, and replacing antique energy systems for heating CREATES 1000's of JOBS and permanently cuts the energy usage demand.

This area of scotland is very liberal, and green, yet there has not yet been a single community willing to accept the bribes from the big energy developers based on vaporous promises.... the facts are your house value goes way down... it effectively removes tourism and that part of the land from recreation and creates noise pollution in natural areas.. as well hideous eyesores that move forever blight the landscape.

I think dennis kucinich is for green energy supplies, but i have a feeling that he is not a huge suporter of big power companies stomping in and telling people what to put up based on huge government subsidies to shift towards renewable resources.

This website is funded by huge power companies http://www.bwea.com/

Here is a real protest site: http://www.wind-farms.co.uk/whyobject.htm

This one for the isle of skye
http://home.btconnect.com/SWAG/protest.htm
(If you've ever been a tourist to the isle of skye, putting a windfarm there, anywhere on that island is like putting one in monument valley, or yellowstone, or the grand canyon.)