Wind Power Could Produce Electricity to Meet Global Energy Needs -Stanford

[JohnWxy]

Study shows.

http://www.nirs.org/alternatives/factoid3.htm

Wind Power Could Generate More Than Enough Sustainable Electricity to Meet Global Energy Needs:


Stanford University researchers have produced a new study and corresponding map that pinpoints where the world's winds are fast enough to produce power.

After analyzing more than 8,000 wind-speed measurements to identify the world's wind-power potential for the first time, Cristina Archer, a former postdoctoral fellow, and Mark Z. Jacobson, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering, suggest that wind captured at specific locations, if even partially harnessed, can generate more than enough power to satisfy the world's energy demands.

The authors found that the locations with sustainable Class 3 winds could produce approximately 72 terawatts. A terawatt is 1 trillion watts, the power generated by more than 500 nuclear reactors or thousands of coal-burning plants. Capturing even a fraction of those 72 terawatts could provide the 1.6 to 1.8 terawatts that made up the world's electricity usage in 2000. Converting as little as 20 percent of potential wind energy to electricity could satisfy the entirety of the world's energy demands. The study, supported by NASA and Stanford's Global Climate and Energy Project, may assist in locating wind farms in regions known for strong and consistent breezes.

~~
"The main implication of this study is that wind, for low-cost wind energy, is more widely available than was previously recognized," said Archer, now a researcher at the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
(more)

[HereSince1628]

1. So, what is the general effect of harvesting that energy?

The energy for pushing turbines isn't moving other things. Has anyone modelled that for an environmenal assessment?

Does the effect, whatever it is, translate to changes in the energy content higher in the weather bearing atmosphere?

There must be a sci-fi flick in there somewhere.

[hedgehog]

4. Hmm- Global climate change is a result of more energy in the system

Wind energy to electricity is one way to harvest that energy. Wind energy to electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen would provide fuel for automobiles. Sounds like a worthwhile research path to me.

[HereSince1628]

5. You conservatives...you never want change especially if it's global

:crazy:

[texastoast]

2. How much did they spend?

to figure this out.

"(W)ind, for low-cost wind energy, is more widely available than was previously recognized" said Archer, now a researcher at the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Maybe this guy should go outside.

[donsu]

3. this is good news - thanking Stanford for not being afraid to speak up

nt

[MikeDuffy]

6. Would widespread wind turbines not help moderate global warming

effects on severe weather by this extraction of energy?

[soothsayer]

7. yes, plus they are just like big fans, so will aid global cooling!

ok, just kidding

[DLnyc]

8. In terms of physics, I'm sure the answer is yes.

A basic law of physics is that energy is conserved, so the wind energy in the atmosphere would have to be decreased.

In practical terms, though, my guess is that the percentage of total energy you would be extracting would not have much effect on the volatility of the atmosphere. (I'm assuming that the 72 terawatts they're talking about are available near the surface of the earth, and so form only a small percentage of the total energy in the atmosphere.)

[JohnWxy]

9. The idea is generating electric power with no Green House Gases

This means with Wind Power expanding as fast as it is, in several years you can shut down all the coal plants (big green house gas generators). Green House gases, such as Carbon Dioxide are whats causing Global Warming.

The other important point to this is you do not have to restart the nuclear energy industry by building new nuclear reactors. Nuclear devotees would have you believe they can build new nukes fast enough to eliminate coal fired plants just as quickly as Wind will. But there ain't enuogh construction workers in the world to build nukes fast enough to eliminate Coal as fast as Wind Power is going to. (I think we have 3 Nuclear Reactor builders in the U.S. (GE, Westinghouse , Bechtel) - not just anybody can build a nulear power plant (actually, even those who claim to be able to, can't build them so they don't have accidents happening with unnerving frequency).


See?