Wind farms 'are failing to generate the predicted amount of electricity'

telegraph.co.uk ^ | 10/12/2006 | Charles Clover

[Youngman442002]

DUH.......wind energy is expensive..and it has to be backed up with convential generation...so it really costs twice as much..but it makes the Greenies feel good..that is if it isn't in their back yard.....

[DB]

I wonder what happens to the weather when you suck energy out of the atmosphere? There has to be some consequence. Nothing is really free.

[Jazzman1]

the great LIBERAL folly laid bare. WHEN will people stop listening to these NITWITS?

[sportutegrl]

If all they want is 'renewable' energy, why don't they just burn wood? (Of course, I know the problems with burning wood, I am just trying to show how silly this all is.)

[Always Right]

I really don't think they are sucking energy out of the atmosphere. They are impeding the movement of air, but not much different than putting up a building or growing a tree for that matter.

[DBrow]

I have wondered about this too, not from any "reality" but from the viewpoint of a moonbat enviro (who always seem to oppose alternatives to oil, odd, eh?).

If a wind stream consists of a hundred million watts of energy as it blows along, what's the consequence of peeling off ten percent (reducing a large air mass's kinetic energy to near zero).

[DBrow]

I really don't think they are sucking energy out of the atmosphere.

Yes, they do. Teh eneregy the wind plant turns into electricity comes from the kinetic ennergy of the moving air. It is not very windy in back of a wind farm, the velocity has been reduced by the turbine blades.

[AD from SpringBay]

Makes as much sense as global warming. You should write a book and try to get it published as serious piece of writing. I'll help edit.

[LIConFem]

So, blow harder!

[SampleMan]

Its probably all of the birds slowing down the turbine blades, that is making it less effecient.

[Kozak]

Bush's Fault.

[Always Right]

Yes, they do. Teh eneregy the wind plant turns into electricity comes from the kinetic ennergy of the moving air. It is not very windy in back of a wind farm, the velocity has been reduced by the turbine blades.

But how is that different than a tree? Are we to worry about planting too many trees? Of all the problems with wind energy, that is nonsensical.

[DB]

Sure it is.

Whether or not it is enough to make any significant (or even measurable) change is unknown.

[HEY4QDEMS]

Just another example of what happens when you inject emotion into science.

[DB]

Trees change the local climate. Simple fact.

Change isn't necessarily bad. Its just change...

Also, when wind blows (drags) on trees the energy has to go somewhere. In the case of trees it is likely heat. The wind farms take that energy and transport it somewhere else where it is turned into heat (for the most part).

[palmer]

Global Warming for starters. Reduction in air transfer to/from poles to tropics and thus the tropics will bake while the poles freeze a bit more than now. On a smaller scale a reduction in clouds will also cause warming, although not as clear cut. The biggest argument for warming is the huge amount of fossil fuels required to create and maintain a "PR" windmill.

[atomicpossum]

You'd think Britain would be in an ideal situation to look at tapping the power of ocean waves.

[TKDietz]

Maybe someday there will be enough of these things to balance out the effect from having billions fewer large trees than were present on the Earth a few thousand years ago. Slowing down what amounts to a tiny percentage of all the wind in the atmosphere couldn't hurt anything except possibly having an adverse effect within a few hundred yards of the turbine. The Earth is huge and then there is a windy atmosphere that goes up several miles from ground level. I doubt we could ever build enough wind turbines to have more than a negligible impact on the weather.

[PeterPrinciple]

A spokesman for the British Wind Energy Association accused the Renewable Energy Foundation of having an "anti wind agenda" and said it was "deeply suspicious" of the findings.


You know this has to be true when the only rebuttal is the "race" card.