WIND ENERGY Interesting point, Georges, but wind turbines will produce vastly more energy than is needed for their construction and maintenance, provided of course that they are positioned at locations where there is sufficient wind.
Sure, wind energy isn't the only alternative, there's also solar, geothermal, wave, tide, biomass, hydro, etc. My motto is global commitment and local implementation, i.e. areas should each decide what technologies to choose, provided they do reach greenhouse gas reduction targets. In conclusion, we should urge local areas to each implement appropriate policies, and in my view a framework of feebates is the most effective way to achieve the shift that needs to take place. So, to also comment on some other issues brought up at your page, Georges, I don't expect France to replace all power plants by wind turbines. Solar power, in particular from the Sahara also seems an attractive alternative, but I do understand that the politics behind this are delicate and should be worked out in multinational agreements. I further see enormous potential for geothermal energy, passive solar energy, pyrolysis of biowaste and, as you mentioned, Georges, tide and wave power can also be very attractive. COST Cost comparisons can be selective in the data they use to make their calculations. Often, the full cost of coal isn't incorporated in such calculations. As a result, some reports present wind energy as more expensive than coal. Other reports, however, do confirm that wind energy is already more than price-competitive. When looked at in isolation, the technologies associated with electric cars, solar energy, wind turbines and wave power may each not seem commercially attractive at the moment. Combined, however, they can be more viable, e.g. surplus power from wind turbines can recharge the batteries of electric cars at night. Overall, there's little or no doubt about the following: Innovation and economies of scale will keep decreasing the cost of wind energy and other renewables, while concerns over harm to our health and the environment will keep increasing the price of coal. The infrastructure to supply coal to the power plants and to handle the waste will also be getting more and more expensive. Nobody owns the wind, the sun or the waves. Renewable energy doesn't get depleted by using it. Also, there's no need for a massive infrastructure to supply scarce resources, like is the case for fossil fuel and nuclear energy. Harnessing the energy from the Earth, the sun, the wind and the sea can avoid erosion and thus be beneficial both from an economical and environment perspective. The fact that the wind doesn't blow constantly and that sunshine doesn't reach us constantly 24 hours a day is often brought up in regard to wind and solar power. However, electric grids, when interconnected, can draw power from where it is available, while surplus power can be stored or used by industrial applications that aren't time-critical. Such storage adds little extra cost and can ensure energy to be available on demand. NOISE AND BIRD DEATHS In the past, some wind turbines were noisy, but newer designs are less so. In new designs, the rotors turn slower and are mounted in front of (not behind) the towers. Some wind turbines produce noise levels that are actually lower than the noise produced by the wind that powers them. Further innovation will result in even quieter designs. In the past, wind turbines have been built in areas populated or visited by many birds, while the turbines were all too often mounted on lattice towers that attracted birds seeking nesting or resting places. Also, old wind farms had rotors low to the ground and the turbines were located close together. In areas with taller turbines, spread further apart, and with rotors that turn slower, fewer bird deaths are reported. Large offshore wind turbines cause fewer damage to birds compared to numerous small turbines with fast spinning blades. Furthermore, studies show that many more birds die colliding with cars and buildings than die in turbine blades. Most birds are actually killed by collisions with buildings, in particular when flying against windows. For some statistics, have a look at the graph at: sibleyguides.com/mortality.htm Note also that the wind turbines replace coal-fired power plants that are polluting the air. Wind turbines can also power an electrified fleet, without the pollution that's now blown into the air from the exhausts of gasoline vehicles. This pollution kills many more birds than wind turbines do. Birds would thus benefit from a switch to wind turbines in several ways. Furthermore, spills from oil tankers kill many birds, penguins and fish. Many birds are also killed by collisions with trains and vehicles - including the big trucks and trains now carrying oil, gasoline and other fossil fuel - and by planes. If you take all this in account, birds are far better off with a shift away from fossil fuel towards wind power. Granted, there could be even less bird damage when switched entirely to other renewables, but the urgency to shift swiftly and effectively to clean and safe power in the light of global warming means that we shouldn't exclude wind energy. MICROPOWER There are now also smaller turbines for installation in residential areas that have the shape of spheres and cylinders, making them more visible to birds, less noisy and more effective at low wind speeds, without the need to mount them on high towers. Such small wind turbines can supply electricity to homeowners who live off-the-grid. Currently, the need to store the electricity in batteries makes off-the-grid wind and solar power expensive. However, the advent of the electric car can overcome this problem, as the car battery can store such micropower and supply electricity on demand for household purposes. In my view, this means there's a good chance that your next car will be an electric car powered by solar panels on the rooftops of the buildings where it will be parked. Why solar panels? Well, utilities may purchase electricity at a few cents per kWh, but currently peak rates for the end-user with, say, Pacific Gas and Electric Company can be as high as $0.35/kwh. At such rates, it becomes a lot more attractive to use rooftop solar panels to power your car, as I discussed in an article at: http://is.gd/I9G3 Cheers! Sam Carana On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 2:45 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The essay "WIND ENERGY" in > http://findgeorges.com/ROOT/WRITINGS/ESSAYS/wind_energy.html > has been updated. > It has been known that the wind energy is one of the > biggest frauds of our time, based upon political > corruption and mass manipulation. > However, the section "Internal energy consumption" with > its details in Appendix points to a downright theft. > The technical evidence seems to indicate that wind > turbines have drawn - unpayed for - heavy > MegaWattHours from the grid. Exact estimation is difficult > due to the details of internal consumption kept > undisclosed by wind turbine manufacturers. However, > manufacturers' secrecy in face of the technical evidence > seems to call for a criminal investigation. > Georges. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
