Say Anything Blog

Gene had mentioned this earlier on his site and had linked to this article.
With 20% wind power as the endgame, I would wager a guess that many more fossil fuel burning peaking stations will have to be built to cover for the wind energy.  Sounds expensive.

They left out that fact that there probably wouldn’t be one single wind mill in the country if they weren’t HEAVILY subsidized by the federal government.

I’ve heard it said and I heartily agree that the environmental movement in this country should be at least the second biggest concern for Americans. A case could be made that it should occupy the number one spot.

Wind energy, if backed up with storage capability is fine (but expensive) for rural individuals, but for communities and business it is unrealistic and foolhardy.

“To love is not to stare steadfast at one another...it is to look forward, in the same direction.”
Saint-Exupéry

PGandE is committed to getting 20% of its power from renewable sources by 2010. It has a bank of windmills already in place in Altamont Pass just east of Livermore serving both rural and metropolitan areas. One of these windmills will power 500 homes. California generates about 11% of the world’s wind energy at this point.

The American Wind Energy Assoc. has a very informative website with links to other sites.

From this list you can find just about any size wind power system that you need whether it’s to power your home or city. You could get a small one to power your lights in your cabin, barn or chicken coup.

A friend in Oklahoma converted an old stone barn into a home. There were no power lines running to it so he put up a windmill and has a battery pack about the size of a washer for when the wind doesn’t blow. He has lived there for 3 years and has not been without power. If he has to, he waits for a day to do his washing, drying, and vacuuming. Otherwise, he watches TV, leaves the lights on, and plays on his computer all he wants. His son also uses an XBox. He does have a butane powered generator as a backup but hasn’t had to sue it yet. It cost just under $9,000 for the entire system. His pool is solar heated. He uses another windmill to pump water from his well into a holding tank. He was averaging $215 per month for heating and power in Tulsa.

The government has allowed tax breaks for PG&E but they have not subsidized the installation of the windmill sites they have in three locations. Most of the problems still existing are technical issues which could be solved with an influx of investment. This is always the case with technology.

If Kansas would put the money for the coal powered plants that were just vetoed by the governor into wind, Kansas could have a cleaner state plus more jobs. If the government would simply put $20 billion into the RUS for distribution to wind power implementations, this would get done a lot sooner and do a lot more for the economy than the $140 billion worth of tax rebates. There are only about 120,000 jobs in wind energy right now but this could easily turn into 500,000 in a year.

Unless there is a massive technological break through in wing turbine design/efficiency this is all pie in the sky. As for Kansas committing themselves to wind power, that would be insane at the current technological level. No Wind turbine designed or proposed can survive tornado force winds, much less the tower that it is placed on.

The coal plants proposed for western Kansas are high efficiency with the latest emission trapping/convert systems. The question that needs asked is, why are environazis blocking the very technologies that they screech endlessly for?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

The government has allowed tax breaks for PG&E but they have not subsidized the installation of the windmill sites they have in three locations

Both California and the Feds had massive tax breaks for wind power in the ‘80s. Wind farms became virtual tax shelters.
I’d venture that most of the windmills in the Altamont were built in the eighties.

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Most of the problems still existing are technical issues which could be solved with an influx of investment.

Having driven past those windmills many times and watched many (not all) of them sitting motionless: How is an influx of investment going to generate the wind to turn the windmills?
(Maybe if you threw the money at the windmill, the breeze it caused in passing would make the blades spin?)
Global warming might help the wind farms! As the Central Valley heats up, it draws cooler air through the Altamont Pass. More SUVs and hot tubs for PG&E execs! Heh.

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

The US Department of Energy has spent time and effort on “chasing the wind.” As a result, they have mapped each state for wind density and the favorability fo wind farm placement. It sound like it’s something that would be hard, but it’s not. Most of the wind caused by convection cooling adjacent to the mountainous areas and large bodies of water is fairly consistent.

http://survivaldealer.com/survival-downloads/wind-maps.html

Another thing to consider is that T Boone Pickens is currently planning the largest wind farm in the world in Texas. Considering that he knows energy and he knows how to make money, I’d consider it less of a pipe dream.

OK. So we can just stop using petroleum right now then.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Pickens also makes massive amounts of money through tax write offs. Which route ya think this will follow?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

You also have to make massive amounts of money to have tax writeoffs that are, well, massive.

Besides, the question is no can we stop using oil today. It won’t happen, too many plastics and other industrial fluids are generated to ever stop petroleum drilling forever. The question is can we find a more efficient way to use stationary power generation to cover our electrical needs while allowing hydrocarbons to be reserved for transportation usage, where kenetics, hybrids and electric can make them more effective?

I’m in oil, I have a vested interest and make money every time the price jumps and even I understand that peak oil isn’t a myth, our energy policy in America is near non-existent and that government leadership is going to be important to cut through the red tape and provide the infrastructure that will allow private investment to maximize power generation in the future.

Wind isn’t consistent? Either you don’t golf or Minot has some awesome wind barriers because it’s been a downright bitch out on the golf course all spring! Hate it when the wind blows your ball off the green just as you’re about to putt. I know how those guys felt during The Players this past weekend.

Renni, I think you should always refer to facts before you speak. 

This year has certainly seemed to be a VERY windy one.

It appears according to Minnkota’s website that they’ve only been able to generate 37.67% and 41.33% of the time.  Are you willing to sit in the dark when the wind isn’t blowing.

Let’s not forget that when it’s hot and humid there is often no wind at all.  I’m not willing to do without air conditioning.  But if you want to go ahead and turn it off for yourself. 

These wind advocates need to quit living in a dreamworld and actually pay attention to the facts.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

A couple of thoughts:

1.  Given that we’ve been working with motors for over a century, and the Bernoulli effect (sails, airplane wings) for millenia, it’s pretty doubtful that there will be big advances in efficiency of windmills.  There are only so many tricks you can pull to get more energy out of a breeze without killing every bird and destroying every radio in the vicinity.

2.  Given that wind energy costs something around 10c/kwH, I can’t see it being cost effective for a while--even with more use of coal in China and India.  The only thing that would make it compete well with coal & natural gas is a carbon tax.

3.  Given the large cost, it’s doubtful IMO that you really prevent much carbon emissions with windmills; you simply use the energy to make the darned things, instead of operating them.

4.  However, I can see windmills performing a very valuable service; they can distribute electrical production to the point where a disruption in load in Ohio doesn’t darken all of New York and Pennsylvania.  Not quite as easy to do that with a coal fired plant.  Concentrated generation and distribution generates the bottlenecks that create mass blackouts.

Still, I think that the wave of the future, if it can be done, would be electrical generation on a “micro” scale--where a large factory generates its own electricity and gets its heat and even A/C out of the deal.  In doubling the Carnot efficiency, that would halve carbon emissions.

Wind farms will fill a fine niche in a diverse energy policy.  China recently came up with a fine design using magnetic repulsion instead of bearings.  More power and lower minimum wind speed, that combined with some improvemnents in batteries and (slobber) super-capacitors makes for some reasonable level of power production. 

That said, we aren’t getting 20% from wind without dropping our total useage by 70 - 90%.  Short answer:  Nope.

Wind generated power is good for low power, niche applications, and there are quite a number of different generators out there, not just the sci-fi movie versions most commonly seen.

Largescale, high power demand being met with wind generation is just not realistic. As Fly points out, the only way wind is going to work is by massively reducing electric consumption.

Do you want to be the one walking around with a gun and forcing people to live without electricity?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2hotel9:  Both you and I have seen the huge wind generators on the south side of the east-bound turnpike between Pittsburg and Harrisburg.

If those monstrosities blotting out the horizon are the future, count me out.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

When going to DC or other points east/south we go 22 from Kittaning to Holidaysburg, and get on the Bud Schuster Porkway(99) and go on down to Bedford, and there is a set of towers along there, too. And some in Maryland. We go on down the two lane from Bedford to I-68 and then east. Somewhere, not far past Hagerstown, I believe I have seen several towers to the south of 68.

The appearance of them is not really my gig. It is the attempt to apply them to largescale, high power systems. Like a public grid. That is simply not how to use wind generation. And you can not get that very basic point across to some people.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

that would be kewl, too bad it wwill probably never happen