And when there is no wind to turn the turbines, they turn with electricity. Makes sense, don't it/sarc
Posted on 07/02/2009 2:43:01 AM PDT by Scanian
The idea of wind generated electric energy is being sold by environmentalists as an overlooked opportunity to reduce greenhouse gasses. Global warming advocates claim that this discounted treasure could be a major part of an effort to reduce the burning of fossil fuels and eliminate the need for some of our nuclear power plants.
Is it true that we are passing up on a gold mine of renewable energy in favor of unnecessary and harmful fossil and nuclear fuels?
Let's start by looking at what we use to generate the power we use today. Renewables, such as wind, solar, biomass, etc, provide 2.4% of our electricity. The bulk of our power, 51%, comes from coal, followed by natural gas at 20% and nuclear at 19%.
Included below in the category "other renewables", wind energy is currently supplying about 1% of our electricity (snip)
Can we replace coal and natural gas with renewable energy sources? Let's examine the facts.
Wind energy is harnessed by windmills that are similar to the types that have been around for centuries. The windmills that produce electricity are called wind turbines; they employ fan blades that turn when the wind is blowing. These blades are connected to electric generators.
Keep in mind that sometimes the wind blows slowly or not at all, and windmills don't produce any power until the wind reaches about 8 MPH. A location for a windmill is not considered viable unless wind speeds average 14 MPH.
The percentage of its rated power that a windmill can actually produce, given the variation of wind speeds at the installation site, is called its capacity factor. A realistic capacity factor is 25%. That means that over time, the windmill actually delivers 25% of its rated power.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Here’s another excellent debunking article, from about a year ago at Family Security Matters. It provides quick and fact-based overviews of the absurdities of ethanol, sugar cane, biodiesel, switchgrass, green algae, and electric cars:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.506,css.print/pub_detail.asp
No new coal plants, no new nukes = severe power shortages in a couple of decades. Obama’s Hope Energy Policy.
It’s the California Plan.
>>>>>B******t. Go to the Department of Agriculture and look up the crop statistics for the last few years. <<<<<
Ethanol to take 30 pct of U.S. corn crop in 2012: GAO
Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:18pm EDT
By Tom Doggett
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Almost a third of the U.S. corn crop will be used in five years to produce fuel ethanol, possibly raising animal feed costs for farmers and meat prices for consumers, a new government report warned on Monday.
Assuming U.S. ethanol production continues to expand to the Energy Department’s projected 11.2 billion gallons by 2012, about 30 percent of the corn crop will be needed for the fuel supply, according to the Government Accountability Office.
“Using more corn for energy production will likely exert additional upward pressure on corn prices, potentially influencing livestock feed markets and meat prices,” the GAO said in a report to Congress.
About 27 percent of this year’s corn crop will be used to make ethanol, according to the Agriculture Department. Corn prices are projected to average between $3 and $3.40 a bushel, making up an estimated 74 percent of the cost of producing ethanol, the GAO said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSN1149215820070611
They are not only 25% efficient, (of their rated capacity at best) but the maintenance on them is extremely expensive and excessive. they are also very difficult and costly to tie into the main grid. What little power they produce and the unrealistic land area they require, creates incredible instability in the main grid. The more of them there are, the more problems they represent.
The same goes for Solar Power, which is beyond ridiculous when even compared to Wind. the statistical facts are this; For every standard Coal plant, it takes 1,750 times the land area of Wind Turbines (10,000 turbines) to equal the output of just one Coal, Nuclear, or Natural Gas plant. In regards to Solar, it takes 177,000 times the land area to equal one Standard electrical plant.
These ridiculous facts are not even remotely being published to the public, who still believes that these energy sources will soon replace the old Planet killing methods and far surpass all of our energy needs. The only thing that has kept that from happening in the past, was that those evil Republicans and greedy Oil/Coal companies have kept the Democrats from giving it to us. Which is what even the media has reported.
And the brain dead public keeps on buying it.
Fact:”producing ethanol takes more energy than it produces”.
Ethanol is a loser.
From Environment News Service:
” Corn Ethanol Takes More Energy Than It Makes
BERKELEY, California, July 13, 2005 (ENS) - Using ethanol as an additive to make gasoline burn cleaner does more harm than good to the environment, finds a new report by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley. The study concludes that the cumulative energy consumed in corn farming and ethanol production is six times greater than the power the ethanol provides in a car engine.
The paper, published in the journal “Critical Reviews in Plant Science,” comes as Congress debates a provision in the energy bill that would double the amount of ethanol to be used as a gasoline additive to five billion gallons a year by 2012.”
The rest of the article explains how they arrived at their conclusion.
The potential ban could be a big blow to the U.S. chicken industry, which has been struggling with high grain prices and a price-depressing oversupply of chicken. Exports had been a bright spot for the industry..."
Gee. Which grain prices? Corn? The grain being used for Ethanol production, the stupid, useless enterprise which isn't supposed to increase the cost of any food because "we don't eat that kind of corn"?
What happens when there is too much wind? A tornado would not be too good for windmills.
You are correct,
Another statistic taken from close study, shows that it takes 1 gallon of fuel to produce 1.2 gallons of Ethanol. This also does not take into account the reduced fuel economy that ethanol burning vehicles suffer because of the low flash point of ethanol.
The equivalent energy yield compared to fossil fuels easily pushes the yield of Ethanol below a 1 to 1 ratio.
Bookmark
And when there is no wind to turn the turbines, they turn with electricity. Makes sense, don't it/sarc
But just think of all that electricity it produced! (up til it quit, that is)
Amazing how unterly stupid the American public is, but I blame George Bush, an Oil man, for not articulating this clearly to every classroom in the country.
I’ve seen these coal firing plants in Illinois. They’re hidden, but each day...train loads of coal come in, and train empty load goes out. Day in and day out... so people are comfortable year round..
And when there’s a power outage...it’s restored quickly.
Nuclear is the best way to reduce harmful emissions... We have an abundance of coal...
These liberals think that wind and solar etc can produce energy... Not only are they naive but they don’t know that the energy produced is more costly and less efficient than coal.
redone
Go nuclear, Save the Raptors : (
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/24/new-data-shows-bird-kills-up-in-altamont/
http://www.windaction.org/documents/13936
http://www.nationalwind.org/publications/wildlife/avian98/03-Hunt-Golden_Eagles.pdf
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/NRELBirdReport04.html
Only if talking about PV (photovoltaics). Thermal gain from solar can save the average household 30-50% of their utility bills. HOT WATER is free from solar systems. The startup costs are usually recovered within 5-7 years, with no additional cash outlay. You just pay the bank instead of the utility costs, until the system is amortized, then (almost) FREEEEEEEEEEEE heat for your dihydrogen monoxide! You just circulate and use it.
The whole ethanol fuel notion is just objectionable in so many ways. But hey! If you want to make your own corn whiskey there should be some real bargains in bankrupt distilleries.
Windmills are a blight on the land. They arent the quaint windmills of the Dutch, they are ugly modern scars on the landscape.
The make noise, they kill birds, they do little to relieve our energy problems.
Who ants to look out on God’s green earth and see it blighted by thousands of the things littering the landscape.
And consider how long the payback time is going to be. If ever.
Oh Yeah? What happens when the sun’s not out? Get a warm blanket?
Why is it that they never want to talk about nuclear power? Never want to include it in any solutions. They cannot agree with one another, on where to build wind, or solar farms. They want them built even though they are inefficient, for the square area being used. Nuclear does not have that inefficiency, but they refuse it all together. Does that make any sense? NOPE!!!
In NE, we had cloud cover and rain for most of the month of June. I have some solar-powered lights along the driveway - they stopped working the first week of June because there hasn’t been enough sunlight to charge them! I’m sure glad I don’t depend on them for anything important.
On the other hand, if I lived in Austin - and the wind didn’t blow any dust on the solar cells and I owned a couple of acres - I might be able to generate enough power to air condition one room for a couple of hours to what? 80 degrees instead of the 100+ outdoor temperature?
Excellent explanation of the engineering realities of wind power. Thanks for posting it!
What I don’t understand is how the same people that toss a fit over the ‘footprint’ of a refinery or pipeline will embrace windfarms which cover many square miles with hundreds of huge unsightly windmills.
Suppose you lived in Rochester, NY. Do you think the sun shines there? It does. 61 average days per year. Yet, people install solar heating systems. Hmmmmm.
The sun generates heat. Clouds can block some of it, but not all. Clouds are predominately WATER. They diffuse the light. The energies needed for heat are not the same as visible light. Within a few minutes after sunrise, snow will melt from roof-mounted solar panels, even with complete cloud cover. They will generate hot water, though at a reduced rate. Proper design provides for that.
If you don't believe me, go lay on a blanket for two hours in Rochester on a cloudy day...
What do you think a flock of them would do to a wind farm?
What effect on the environment would be caused by the shift in the path of migratory birds?
Do we need a 10-year impact study?
Yeah, a couple of bucks per light doesn't get you much. A properly designed SYSTEM could accomplish it, but the cost is more than it's worth. We still get energy fairly cheaply.
But, see my previous post. You can heat your house in New Hampshire by circulating water to your roof and then distributed under your floors, or by air ducts. It's very simple and pays for itself. Those "stupid" Chinese heat more than 70% of their domestic hot water with the sun.
Just wait until the O/Dim "energy" bills start coming due. Your utility bills will be through the roof. Prepare now, or be prepared to have a colder home later.
WW,
10+ years on FreeRepublic and your response is to make offensive false statements and issue challenges that take less than five minutes to refute with credible sitations...
Just curious, what was the point of that?
Have you been near one?
I spent a weekend at a lodge near Davis, WV. They have a large install of those GE monstrosities along some ridges northwest of there. I awoke during the night to pee, and walked out to enjoy the night. I had been sealed inside the place, with ambient noises from inside, I thought.
But, to my surprise, the noise was coming from those ridges. Those spinners generate a lot of racket/HMMMMMMMMM. I can't imagine a bird getting close to them.
Wind power is good as an adjunct power system. There is a farm near me in Ohio that has 3 of these beautiful windmills and they work fine. They are connected to the grid and the result is his dairy farm electricity costs are only 20% of what they were even when considering the amortized cost of building, connecting and maintaining the system.
Windmills are a good thing, but they should always be an adjunct. You don’t like the look of windmills? I think they are monuments to modern technology.
Never been near one. But I couldn’t imagine a flock of birds flying close to an airplane either.
Forget about the liberal ‘reduce greenhouse gases’ part of the diatribe against windmills. They are cost effective and produce lots of jobs. Turbine production has sprung up in the northern plains. Its too expensive to ship turbine blades all the way from Europe so they are now building them here. Jobs are created to build the towers and maintain them. Farmers make extra money by leasing part of their land to the company who operates the windmills. Normal farming goes on right around the windmills, very little land is lost from farm production.
And at the same time we are ripping down hydro-electric dams.
I haven’t heard that....do you have any articles?
Glad you like the post. I think that people who want windmills should be able to have them and make whatever money they can with them but it is a mistake to think of wind power as a mainstay of an energy program. I think they mar the landscape, personally. They’re all over Sweden and they are not popular with the people at all, either for their appearance or for the results they produce.
Simple answer, though the engineering to make it happen is a bit tricky: Below 2-3 mph, there isn’t enough wind to rotate the blades. Between 3 and 8 mph, the blades turn, but cannot produce power.
Between 8 and 14 mph, they can begin to produce power, but if (when) the turbine is engaged, the blades stall out, can't keep up speed consistently, and the output current can't be sent to the grid. (Imagine your car trying to go up a hill with nothing on the accelerator - at idle, there isn't enough power to go “up” a hill, but you can coast down the same hill easily.)
Between 14 and 35 mph, you can produce power, the generator can be connected to the grid, and (some of the time) you can produce some of the rated power of the unit. Full rated power is ONLY possible at the top end of the wind curve: below 30 mph, you can't get 100 % power out of the generator.
Above 35 mph, you MUST secure the turbine and the generator: The blades explode and throw parts of the blades and generator and tower 1-2 miles as they shred the tower, power lines, and nearby people and buildings if they are not shutdown.
“Jobs” are ARTIFICIALLY sponsors BY the government socialists at EVERY windmill plant and at every windmill site BECAUSE the actual power returned from the windmills do NOT, and CANNOT, actually pay for the actual costs of building the generator, rotor, power lines, and the maintenance.
Without the artificial subsidies, NO windmill can pay for itself.
There is some talk that Hussein may play the “nuclear card” to win RINO support for cap&tax. Cornyn is on the Beck show right now promoting nukes.
Even with nuclear included they should not agree. That can all be done without the tax aspect of the program. If they want energy policy without taxing, then that is something else. If they want energy policy with any taxing NO!!!!!
I doubt that you have seen a flock of birds traveling at upwards of 200 mph, either. Airplanes fly into flocks, not vice versa. But, I guess you lack enough imagination!
Google is your friend!
“The blades explode and throw parts of the blades and generator and tower 1-2 miles as they shred the tower, power lines, and nearby people and buildings if they are not shutdown.”
That’s good. I thought maybe something serious might happen.
How much did each of these windmills cost?
Sorry, but NOT true. I've taken the time to study this in depth, and your statement is flatly wrong. Virtually all the peer-reviewed energy balance studies show a positive energy balance for ethanol. The ONE author that shows a significant negative energy balance is a "deep ecologist" from Cornell. Since when do you expect the truth from a green weenie???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.