Posted on 02/27/2014 7:02:32 AM PST by shove_it
Edited on 02/27/2014 7:13:41 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Research from Stanford University in California holds out hope for hurricane protection that's better and cheaper than a seawall. The study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature Climate Change, uses computer models to estimate the reduction in hurricane winds and storm surge that results from installing huge wind turbine farms. For example, had there been 78,000 turbines spread across a wide swath of Louisiana coastline when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005, the turbines would have reduced the wind speed by between 80 and 98 mph and the storm surge by 79 percent, the study showed. For Hurricane Sandy, which hit New York and New Jersey in 2012, the model projected a wind speed reduction of 78 to 87 mph and up to 34 percent decrease in storm surge.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
“I bet they did a back-of-the-napkin calculation”
OT: That made me chuckle because the local town here decided they “needed” to buy a private water supply company. So, after finding a “suitable” outside appraiser, one who agreed with their idea, he miraculacy agreed with the asked for sales price through an off hand calculation on the back of a napkin while having lunch. See the town figured they could use the water company to fund all their pet projects while raping the customers. Of course they ended up paying about twice what the asset was worth and have not paid one dime on the corpus of the bonds in 12 years while running the system into the ground financially. So guess what? They now need raise taxes or increase the already sky high water rates. Where did the money go? No one seems to know as it went into the pit called “general revenue” and money is fungible.
“Puny humans.”
Louisiana has 397 linear miles of coastline. They have much more if you measure all the inlets and tidal areas but thats no really accurate for this purpose.
So they want to spread 78,000 turbines over 397 miles. Thats 196.4 wind turbines per mile. They cost $2 million each plus land acquisition and maintenance costs.
Why aren’t idiots like this run out of town covered in tar and feathers.
Probably??? Well, hell, if you're THAT sure.
Not an expert but the jet stream is not near the ground, up in the stratosphere I think.
They would have suffered an additional $234 billion in losses, when the wind turbines ($3 million a pop) were destroyed.
Hasn’t PETA shut down these ‘windmills’ yet because of the stupid birds that keep flying into them.
The BIRDS must be the stupid ones here because I know ‘our’ Government would NEVER do anything to harm people or animals.
Do ‘birds’ come under the ‘animal’ category in the eyes of PETA?
Kind of like NAACP being ticked at the word Negro and the usage of ‘you people by one Ross Perot’, yet both words are in their title.
Almost like the group NWA (’N’ With Attitude) being upset with the ‘N’ word.
Like Amy Carter was told ‘Pick a cause and stick to it. You are NOT allowed to protest any or everything that comes down the pike while you are a student here’.
Windmills won’t break if you make them out of unobtainium.
Now, during a serious hurricane, multiply that picture by the thousands. Quite a vision for the future that this study has.
And once again the computer models predicted it so we should pay attention. Reminds me of the following section from Michael Crichton's lecture called Aliens Cause Global Warming (highly recommended reading).
To an outsider, the most significant innovation in the global warming controversy is the overt reliance that is being placed on models. Back in the days of nuclear winter, computer models were invoked to add weight to a conclusion: "These results are derived with the help of a computer model." But now large-scale computer models are seen as generating data in themselves. No longer are models judged by how well they reproduce data from the real world—increasingly, models provide the data. As if they were themselves a reality. And indeed they are, when we are projecting forward. There can be no observational data about the year 2100. There are only model runs.
78,000 windmills are cheaper and better than a seawall? {sigh} Only a study from the moronic geniuses Stanford could come up with a conclusion like that.
Probably bitter clingers. We're better off without them.
And they don’t like the sight of drill rigs WAAAAAAY out in the distance on a clear day?
This is Louisiana. The oil & gas platforms are all over the area. They like jobs and cash flow.
this is satire? Wind mills will stop a hurricane?
If I put space heaters outside will it stop a snow storm?
My first thought also ;o)
Ever been in Louisiana in late summer/fall? Some/most days you can’t buy a breeze. Dead calm is the normal, just hot and hotter.
Sure, lets put wind farms all over! Spending tax money to support a boondoggle that free enterprise would turn down because its a money looser.
Stupid is as stupid does.......
“For example, had there been 78,000 turbines spread across a wide swath of Louisiana coastline when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005, the turbines would have reduced the wind speed by between 80 and 98 mph and the storm surge by 79 percent, the study showed.”
Only 78,000? Hell, we could put those up in an afternoon. These people are insane.
In a related story:
Bridges for sale real cheap!
This sale won’t last long, as supplies are limited.
A better idea and entirely doable is to put the entire United States on a lazy Susan and turn it so the Rocky Mountains face the hurricane to block it. Then just turn it back after it passes.
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.